MEETING NOTICE
AND AGENDA JOINT MEETING OF THE REGIONAL ENERGY WORKING GROUP AND THE REGIONAL PLANNING TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP The Regional Energy Working Group and the Regional Planning Technical Working Group may take action on any item appearing on this agenda.
Thursday, November 9, 2017
1:15 to 3 p.m.
SANDAG, 7th Floor Board Room 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101
Please take the elevator to the 8th floor to access the meeting room.
Staff Contacts: Regional Energy Working Group Anna Lowe (619) 595-5603 [email protected] Regional Planning Technical Working Group Carolina Ilic (619) 699-1989 [email protected]
AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS
• PATHWAYS TO 100 PERCENT RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY
• REGIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR CLIMATE ACTION PLANNING
• SAN DIEGO FORWARD: DEVELOPMENT OF THE 2019 REGIONAL PLAN
PLEASE SILENCE ALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES DURING THE MEETING
MISSION STATEMENT The 18 cities and county government are SANDAG serving as the forum for regional decision-making. SANDAG builds consensus; makes strategic plans; obtains and allocates resources; plans, engineers, and builds public transit; and provides information on a broad range of topics pertinent to the region's quality of life.
Welcome to SANDAG. Members of the public may speak to the Working Group on any item at the time the Working Group is considering the item. Please complete a Request to Comment form and then present the form to the Working Group coordinator. Members of the public may address the Working Group on any issue under the agenda item entitled Public Comments/Communications/Member Comments. Public speakers are limited to three minutes or less per person unless otherwise directed by the Chair. The Working Group may take action on any item appearing on the agenda.
Both agenda and non-agenda comments should be sent to SANDAG via [email protected]. Please include the Working Group name and meeting date, agenda item, your name, and your organization. Any comments, handouts, presentations, or other materials from the public intended for distribution at the Working Group meeting should be received by the Working Group coordinator no later than 12 noon, two working days prior to the meeting. All public comments and materials received by the deadline become part of the official project record, will be provided to the members for their review at the meeting, and will be posted to the agenda file as a part of the handouts following each meeting.
In order to keep the public informed in an efficient manner and facilitate public participation, SANDAG also provides access to all agenda and meeting materials online at www.sandag.org/meetings. Additionally, interested persons can sign up for e-notifications via our e-distribution list either at the SANDAG website or by sending an email request to [email protected].
SANDAG operates its programs without regard to race, color, and national origin in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. SANDAG has developed procedures for investigating and tracking Title VI complaints, and the procedures for filing a complaint are available to the public upon request. Questions concerning SANDAG nondiscrimination obligations or complaint procedures should be directed to the SANDAG General Counsel, John Kirk, at (619) 699-1997 or [email protected]. Any person who believes himself or herself or any specific class of persons to be subjected to discrimination prohibited by Title VI also may file a written complaint with the Federal Transit Administration.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), SANDAG will accommodate persons who require assistance in order to participate in SANDAG meetings. If such assistance is required, please contact SANDAG at (619) 699-1900 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. To request this document or related reports in an alternative format, please call (619) 699-1900 or (619) 699-1904 (TTY), or fax (619) 699-1905.
SANDAG agenda materials can be made available in alternative languages. To make a request, call (619) 699-1900 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting.
Los materiales de la agenda de SANDAG están disponibles en otros idiomas. Para hacer una solicitud, llame al (619) 699-1900 al menos 72 horas antes de la reunión.
如有需要, 我们可以把SANDAG议程材料翻译成其他語言.
请在会议前至少 72 小时打电话 (619) 699-1900 提出请求.
SANDAG offices are accessible by public transit. Phone 511 or visit 511sd.com for route information. Bicycle parking is available in the parking garage of the SANDAG offices. To access the meeting room, please arrive on the 8th floor.
2 102717
JOINT MEETING OF THE REGIONAL ENERGY WORKING GROUP AND THE REGIONAL PLANNING TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP Thursday, November 9, 2017 ITEM NO. RECOMMENDATION
1. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS
Members of the public shall have the opportunity to address the Regional Energy Working Group (EWG) and Regional Planning Technical Working Group (TWG) on any issue within the jurisdiction of SANDAG that is not on this agenda. Anyone desiring to speak shall reserve time by completing a “Request to Speak” form and giving it to the meeting coordinators prior to speaking. Public speakers should notify the meeting coordinators if they have a handout for distribution to EWG/TWG members. Public speakers are limited to three minutes or less per person. EWG/TWG members also may provide information and announcements under this agenda item.
CONSENT
+3. SAN DIEGO REGIONAL ELECTRIC VEHICLE REBATE STATISTICS INFORMATION
The electric vehicle market in the San Diego region is rapidly growing. SANDAG has committed to provide the EWG with monthly updates on regional Clean Vehicle Rebate Program statistics. Statewide rebate statistics also have been provided for comparison.
REPORTS
4. PATHWAYS TO 100 PERCENT RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY INFORMATION (Jack Clark, City of San Diego; Dan King, City of Solana Beach; Frank Urtasun, Sempra Services)
Many public agencies in the San Diego region and throughout California are developing strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and achieve the targets identified in their climate action plans, including targets for 100 percent renewable electricity. The City of San Diego, City of Solana Beach, and Sempra Services will discuss strategies, opportunities, and challenges associated with meeting a 100 percent renewable electricity target.
+5. REGIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR CLIMATE ACTION PLANNING DISCUSSION (Allison Wood, Katie Hentrich)
Staff will present an update on the development of a Regional Framework for Climate Action Planning (Regional Framework). The Regional Framework is a guidance document for member agencies that will identify best practices for the preparation of local climate action plans, including emissions inventories and projections, emission reduction calculations, monitoring and evaluation, benefit-cost analysis, and California Environmental Quality Act considerations.
3
+6. SAN DIEGO FORWARD: DEVELOPMENT OF THE 2019 REGIONAL PLAN INFORMATION (Phil Trom)
SANDAG is updating San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. The updated plan will be known as “2019 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan” and is anticipated for adoption by the SANDAG Board of Directors in fall 2019. Staff will report on recent Board actions on the vision, goals, and policy objectives and on the approach to developing the revenue constrained transportation network scenarios.
7. UPCOMING MEETINGS INFORMATION
The next EWG meeting is scheduled for Thursday, December 28, 2017, at 11:30 a.m. The next TWG meeting is scheduled for Thursday, December 14, 2017, from 1:30 to 4:30 pm.; however, pending weather considerations the meeting could potentially be rescheduled to Wednesday, December 20, 2017, from 1:30 to 4:30 p.m. The meeting will be an off-site meeting to showcase Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program projects in South County.
8. ADJOURNMENT
+ next to an agenda item indicates an attachment
4 Agenda Item No. 3 Regional Energy Working Group Regional Planning Technical Working Group San Diego County Rebate Statistics November 9, 2017 CVRP Rebate Statistics
Filter by: CVRP Rebates by Month Consumer Type All 400 PHEV BEV FCEV Other
Rebate Type*
All 350 C riteria m od.* LM I incom e criteria* 300 Vehicle Category* All 250 Make All 200
Air District N um ber of R ebates All 150
Electric Utility All 100
County 50 San Diego
California Senate District* 0 All 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
California Assembly District* March 18, 2010 to August 31, 2017 All Filter by Application Date*:
Vehicle Category Disadvantaged Community* Rebates Issued or Approved to Date* (All) Highway capable, four-wheeled, plug-in PHEV hybrid electric vehicle (electricity & PHEV 33.9% gasoline) Highway capable, four-wheeled, all-battery BEV 65.4% Funding Source* BEV All electric vehicle FCEV 0.2% Grant Number* FCEV Fuel-cell electric vehicle All Other 0.5% Non-highway, motorcycle & commercial Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% BEVs Percent of Filtered Total Rebates Rebates & Rebate Funding Issued or Rebates & Rebate Funding Issued Approved to Date* - Life of Project or Approved to Date* - Filtered Rebates Funding Rebates Funding PHEV 83,032 $128,180,376 PHEV 5,639 $8,742,767 BEV 125,548 $323,288,747 BEV 10,891 $28,411,381 FCEV 2,202 $11,115,500 FCEV 33 $176,000 Other 814 $1,712,250 Other 79 $74,800 Grand Total 211,596 $464,296,873 Filtered Total 16,642 $37,404,948
Increased Rebates for Rebates 5,290 Low-/Moderate-Income (LMI) Consumers (since March 29, 2016*) Funding $21,011,500
Data is updated monthly. Last updated: November 01, 2017
Click here to download the entire dataset in Excel format: CVRPStats.xlsx
* Please select the *Notes tab of this dashboard for additional details and links to related information. Please cite use of these data and images. For example: Center for Sustainable Energy (2017). California Air Resources Board Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, Rebate Statistics. Data last updated November 01, 2017. Retrieved [insert date retrieved] from https://cleanvehiclerebate.org/rebate-statistics
5 State Rebate Statistics CVRP Rebate Statistics
Filter by: CVRP Rebates by Month
Consumer Type All PHEV BEV FCEV Other
Rebate Type* 5K
All C riteria m od.* LM I incom e criteria* 4K Vehicle Category* All
Make All 3K
Air District N um ber of R ebates All 2K
Electric Utility All 1K County All
California Senate District* 0K All 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
California Assembly District* March 18, 2010 to August 31, 2017 All Filter by Application Date*:
Vehicle Category Disadvantaged Community* Rebates Issued or Approved to Date* (All) Highway capable, four-wheeled, plug-in PHEV hybrid electric vehicle (electricity & PHEV 39.2% gasoline) Highway capable, four-wheeled, all-battery BEV 59.3% Funding Source* BEV All electric vehicle FCEV 1.0% Grant Number* FCEV Fuel-cell electric vehicle All Other 0.4% Non-highway, motorcycle & commercial Other 0% 20% 40% 60% BEVs Percent of Filtered Total Rebates Rebates & Rebate Funding Issued or Rebates & Rebate Funding Issued Approved to Date* - Life of Project or Approved to Date* - Filtered Rebates Funding Rebates Funding PHEV 83,032 $128,180,376 PHEV 83,032 $128,180,376 BEV 125,548 $323,288,747 BEV 125,548 $323,288,747 FCEV 2,202 $11,115,500 FCEV 2,202 $11,115,500 Other 814 $1,712,250 Other 814 $1,712,250 Grand Total 211,596 $464,296,873 Filtered Total 211,596 $464,296,873
Increased Rebates for Rebates 5,290 Low-/Moderate-Income (LMI) Consumers (since March 29, 2016*) Funding $21,011,500
Data is updated monthly. Last updated: November 01, 2017
Click here to download the entire dataset in Excel format: CVRPStats.xlsx
* Please select the *Notes tab of this dashboard for additional details and links to related information. Please cite use of these data and images. For example: Center for Sustainable Energy (2017). California Air Resources Board Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, Rebate Statistics. Data last updated November 01, 2017. Retrieved [insert date retrieved] from https://cleanvehiclerebate.org/rebate-statistics
6 San Diego Association of Governments JOINT MEETING OF THE REGIONAL ENERGY WORKING GROUP AND THE REGIONAL PLANNING TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP
November 9, 2017 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 5
Action Requested: DISCUSSION
REGIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR CLIMATE ACTION PLANNING File Number 3201100
Introduction
The Regional Framework for Climate Action Planning (Regional Framework) is a guidance document intended as a resource for SANDAG member agencies that will identify best practices for the preparation of local climate action plans (CAPs). At the last joint Regional Energy Working Group (EWG) and Regional Planning Technical Working Group (TWG) meeting in November 2016, EWG and TWG members provided input on the topics to be addressed in the Regional Framework. This report provides an update on the Regional Framework development.
Discussion
The goal of the Regional Framework is to ensure that local climate planning activities have consistency in methodologies and use the best available data for the San Diego region. The Regional Framework will guide climate planning services, available through the Roadmap Program, and include technical components that offer guidance to local jurisdictions as they develop and implement CAPs.
Guiding Principles
To ensure the goals of the Regional Framework are met throughout the document, a set of guiding principles were established with the local jurisdictional staff in mind, as they will be the primary users of the Regional Framework. The guiding principles are:
Transparency – methodologies and assumptions used in the Regional Framework should be clear
Causation-based – the Regional Framework incorporates relevant and accurate scientific data into its methodologies and models
Regional consistency – the Regional Framework should be consistent with other regional planning documents
Use of accepted methods – the Regional Framework should be developed with consensus on methodology from local jurisdictions
Local relevancy – the Regional Framework should be a helpful resource for local staff
7
• Flexibility and adaptability – climate action planning is iterative, and the Regional Framework should reflect that
Regional Framework Development
The Regional Framework will focus on five aspects of climate planning:
• Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventories and Projections
• Quantification of GHG Reductions
• Benefit-Cost Analysis of GHG Reduction Measures
• Monitoring and Evaluating CAP Progress
• California Environmental Quality Act and Climate Planning
Each topic will have an affiliated technical appendix that includes information on data sources, methodologies, and emerging issues. Data management will be discussed throughout the document, as well. The Regional Framework also will include templates and outlines for use by jurisdictional staff.
Earlier in the year, a series of workshops were held for public agencies to provide input and ask questions on the five Regional Framework topics. The feedback provided by workshop attendees is being incorporated into the Regional Framework.
Energy Roadmap Program Climate Planning Services
SANDAG will follow the methodologies included in the Regional Framework when it provides climate planning services to member agencies through the Energy Roadmap Program, including GHG inventories and CAP monitoring reports for SANDAG member agencies every two years. These reports will complement the regional GHG inventory developed every four years in conjunction with the update of San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. Outside of the Energy Roadmap Program, the templates and guidance included in the Regional Framework will offer consistent approaches to climate planning activities for use by member agencies.
Next Steps
SANDAG staff plans to finalize the Regional Framework in the coming months, then present the document to the Regional Planning Committee and the Board of Directors for acceptance in 2018.
Key Staff Contacts: Allison Wood, (619) 699-1973, [email protected] Katie Hentrich, (619) 595-5609, [email protected]
8 Agenda Item No. 6 Regional Energy Working Group Regional Planning Technical Working Group November 9, 2017
AGENDA ITEM NO. 17-10-17 BOARD OF DIRECTORS OCTOBER 27, 2017 ACTION REQUESTED: ACCEPT
2019 SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE REGIONAL PLAN – File Number 3102000 PROPOSED REVENUE CONSTRAINED NETWORK SCENARIOS DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Introduction Recommendation
At its October 13, 2017, meeting, the Board of The Transportation Committee Directors reviewed and took action on the vision, recommends that the Board of Directors goals, and policy objectives for the 2019 San Diego accept the proposed process to develop Forward: The Regional Plan (Regional Plan). the Revenue Constrained Network Additionally, the Transportation and Regional Scenarios for use in the development of Planning Committees have discussed the proposed 2019 San Diego Forward: The Regional process to develop the Revenue Constrained Network Plan, including the existing project Scenarios for the 2019 Regional Plan. This report includes the updated vision for the Regional Plan as evaluation criteria; project rankings; and approved on October 13, 2017, and shares the Unconstrained Transportation Network, feedback received from the Transportation and with the addition of Skyways; from the Regional Planning Committees earlier this month on 2015 Regional Plan. the development of the Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios.
Discussion
The Regional Plan is a federally and state-mandated document that presents the overall vision for how the San Diego region will grow through 2050, including all the transportation-related investments that will be needed to support that vision. It is updated every four years, and must be fiscally constrained, meaning the cost of projects and programs included must be supported by current revenue sources as well as reasonably expected new sources. The Regional Plan also is required to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy that demonstrates how the plan will address greenhouse gas emissions reductions related to cars and light trucks set by the California Air Resources Board. In addition, for the 2019 Regional Plan, SANDAG is required to complete a Regional Housing Needs Assessment.
Vision, Goals and Policy Objectives
On October 13, 2017, the Board of Directors took action to amend the vision for the 2019 Regional Plan to read as follows:
9
To provide innovative mobility choices and planning facilitate the efficient movement of people and goods to support a sustainable and healthy region, a vibrant economy, and an outstanding quality of life for all.
In addition, feedback on the Policy Objectives from the Transportation and Regional Planning Committees was incorporated into the Mobility Choices and Environmental Stewardship objectives as follows (new language in underlined italics). At its October 20, 2017, meeting, the Transportation Committee considered this change, and expressed support for innovation to continue to be a guiding principle for the development of the Regional Plan.
• Provide safe, secure, healthy, affordable, and convenient travel choices between the places where people live, work, and play.
• Take advantage of new technologies to make the transportation system more efficient and environmentally friendly. • Ensure system preservation, asset management, and State of Good Repair.
• Make transportation investments that result in cleaner air, environmental protection, conservation, efficiency, and sustainable living and address climate change.
• Support energy programs that promote sustainability.
10 Regional Plan Development
In order for the Board of Directors to determine the final combination of projects to fulfill the vision of the Regional Plan, several networks are developed for evaluation and consideration. Development of the transportation networks are guided by the Plan’s vision, goals, and policy objectives.
The following flowchart visually depicts the development process, beginning with the Unconstrained Transportation Network, followed by Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios, and culminating with the Preferred Revenue Constrained Transportation Network.
The first step of the development process is defining the Unconstrained Transportation Network, which identifies the region’s needs for transit, highway, active transportation, goods movement, arterial improvements, and operations to meet travel demand through 2050. The Unconstrained Transportation Network also includes intermodal transit centers, rail grade separations, and strategies to manage the overall transportation system, including transportation technologies as well as demand management and systems management solutions. Although not required by state or federal regulations, SANDAG utilizes project evaluation criteria to rank transportation projects in the Unconstrained Transportation Network by mode. These rankings then are used to help create various Revenue Constrained Transportation Network Scenarios that could be implemented with anticipated revenues.
The Board of Directors will be asked to determine (based on available funding and project/program costs) the range of Revenue Constrained Transportation Network Scenarios it would like to consider in developing the Regional Plan. Each Revenue Constrained Transportation Network Scenario can provide a different combination of projects and programs (e.g., transit, highway, rail, active transportation) that could be implemented with the revenues that are reasonably expected through 2050.
Once the scenarios are developed, network performance measures are used to evaluate the various combinations. The performance measures help provide a “scorecard” to compare and contrast the different Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios. The Board then will be asked to select a
11 Preferred Transportation Scenario, which is the final mix of projects and programs that will be used as the basis of the Regional Plan.
Proposed Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios Development Process
Unconstrained Transportation Network
For development of the 2019 Regional Plan, the Unconstrained Transportation Network has been updated to take out projects that have been fully implemented since the adoption of the 2015 Regional Plan in October 2015 or that currently are under development, as shown in Attachment 1. Preliminary analysis of Department of Finance population projections show trends similar to those included in the 2015 Regional Plan. Additionally, employment growth has been relatively stable since the 2015 Regional Plan projections were developed. The Regional Planning Committee proposed no other changes to the Unconstrained Transportation Network. The Transportation Committee requested that the Unconstrained Transportation Network include Skyways. Skyways could be evaluated along with light rail, Rapid or streetcar/shuttle for certain short- distance trips.
Attachments 2 through 5 illustrate each modal component of the Unconstrained Transportation Network (Transit, Highway, Active Transportation, and Goods Movement).
Project Evaluation Criteria/Rankings
The Transportation Committee recommends that the 2015 Regional Plan evaluation criteria and rankings be used to begin the complex Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios development process in order to devote more time to determine what the mix of projects by mode and location should be for the 2019 Regional Plan. This also was the feedback received from the Regional Planning Committee.
An extensive effort was conducted to develop the project evaluation criteria with input from the Active Transportation Working Group, Cities/County Transportation Advisory Committee, community-based organization partners, Freight Stakeholders Working Group, Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee, Public Health Stakeholders Working Group, Regional Planning Technical Working Group, and the Tribal Transportation Working Group. Input also was sought from partner agencies including Caltrans, the Metropolitan Transit System, the North County Transit District, and at the Regional Plan workshops held throughout the region. Additionally, a peer review panel was convened to review and assess the criteria, and to consider feedback and input that was incorporated into the criteria. The panelists, which included experts from academia, other Metropolitan Planning Organizations, and the private sector, provided recommendations for revision and enhancement to the draft criteria.
Attachment 6 includes the evaluation criteria and project rankings by mode from the 2015 Regional Plan.
Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios
In addition to the project rankings, there are many new themes to consider in the development of the Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios. The incorporation of new transportation technologies, considerations from the TransNet Ten-Year Review, the need to meet potentially more stringent Air Resources Board greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, overall network efficiency, project readiness, funding availability, and policy considerations will continue to guide the development of
12 the scenarios. Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios also would be designed to support local land uses as reflected in local land use plans.
In addition, Transportation and Regional Planning Committee members cited the need to better understand the impacts of major emerging transportation opportunities (such as autonomous vehicles, ridesourcing companies such as Uber and Lyft, and electric vehicles) and identifying different, and more diverse, options for the Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios.
Next Steps
Pending approval by the Board of Directors, the existing Unconstrained Transportation Network, project evaluation criteria, and project rankings from the 2015 Regional Plan will be used to help develop Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios for the 2019 Regional Plan.
As the Regional Plan development process moves forward, the Policy Advisory Committees and Board of Directors will be asked to provide feedback on several other important steps in the coming months, including the update of network performance measures (see Attachment 7 for the network performance measures used for the 2015 Regional Plan), updates to project cost estimates, and future revenue projections in order to fully develop and evaluate the Revenue Constrained Network Scenarios.
KIM KAWADA Chief Deputy Executive Director
Key Staff Contact: Phil Trom, (619) 699-7330, [email protected]
Attachments: 1. Draft Projects Completed and Under Development since the 2015 Adoption of San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan – October 2017 2. Draft 2050 Unconstrained Transit Network – October 2017 3. Draft 2050 Unconstrained Managed Lanes and Highway Network – October 2017 4. Draft 2050 Unconstrained Regional Bike Network – October 2017 5. Draft Unconstrained Goods Movement Strategy – October 2017 6. 2015 Regional Plan: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 7. Network Performance Measures from the 2015 Regional Plan
Key Staff Contact: Phil Trom, (619) 699-7330, [email protected]
13 Attachment 1 Map Area San Diego Region Pauma and Yuima Reservation Pala Reservation Camp Pendleton
5 15
Rincon 76 Reservation La Jolla Reservation
76
Oceanside Vista San Pasqual 78 San Reservation Marcos County of San Diego
Santa Ysabel Carlsbad Reservation Escondido
Mesa Grande 78 Reservation
78
Encinitas 67 5 Solana Beach Poway
Del Mar 56 Barona Reservation
15 Capitan Grande Reservation
DRAFT Projects 805 Santee 52 67 Completed and 52 Under Development 8 since the 2015 5 Adoption of San 125 Diego La Sycuan San Diego Forward: Mesa Reservation El Cajon The Regional Plan 163 8 October 2017 15 Transit 94 Lemon Managed Lanes and Highway Grove 125 Jamul Indian Bike Village 282 Freeways and Highways Regional Arterials Coronado 54 Managed Lane Connector National Intermodal Transit Center City 125 94 805 MILES 75 Chula Vista
KILOMETERS San Diego 5 Imperial 905 UNITED STATES Beach MEXICO 2-D 2 1-D 1
Tijuana, B.C. 4288 14 Attachment 2 Map Area San Diego Region Pauma and Yuima Reservation Pala Reservation Camp Pendleton
5 15
Rincon 76 Reservation La Jolla Reservation
76
Oceanside Vista San Pasqual 78 San Reservation Marcos County of San Diego
Santa Ysabel Carlsbad Reservation Escondido
Mesa Grande 78 Reservation
78
Encinitas 67 5 DRAFT Solana Unconstrained Beach Transit Network Poway October 2017 Del Mar 56 High Speed Rail Barona Reservation COASTER/AMTRAK/Metrolink Trolley/SPRINTER1 15 Capitan Grande Trolley/SPRINTER Express Reservation Rapid Transit2 Express Rapid Transit 805 Streetcar/Shuttle3 Santee 52 67 Airport Express 52 Local Bus 8 5 Existing/Under Development San 125 Transit Network Diego La Sycuan San Diego-Coronado Ferry Mesa Reservation El Cajon Intermodal Transit Center 163 8 Existing Intermodal Transit Center Safe Routes to Transit 15 Lemon including retrofits 94 Grove 125 Jamul Indian 1 Potential Skyways from: Village • UTC to COASTER Connection 282 • Pacific Beach from I-5 to Mission Blvd. 2 Potential Skyway from Coronado 54 Convention Center to Airport 3 Potential Skyway from Balboa Park National to Downtown San Diego City 125 94
75 805 MILES Chula Vista
KILOMETERS San Diego 5 Imperial 905 11 UNITED STATES Beach MEXICO 2-D 2 1-D 1
Tijuana, B.C. 4286 15 Attachment 3 Map Area San Diego Region 2C+OPS Pauma and Yuima Reservation Pala Reservation Camp Pendleton 4C 4C/6C+OPS
5 15
Rincon Reservation 76 8F+4T 8F+4T La Jolla 6E Reservation
76 6E Oceanside 6F+2ML Vista 8F+4ML San Pasqual 78 San Reservation Marcos County of San Diego
Santa Ysabel Carlsbad Reservation Escondido
10F+4ML 4F Mesa Grande 8F+4ML 78 Reservation
78
Encinitas 10F+4ML 67 5 Solana 8F+4ML DRAFT Beach Unconstrained Poway 6F+2ML Managed Lanes and Del 4C Highway Network Mar 56 October 2017 Barona Reservation 8F/14F+4ML Existing/Under Development 15 Capitan Grande Managed Lanes Network Reservation Managed Lanes 8F/14F+ 8F+4ML General Purpose Lanes 4ML 805 6F+3ML(R) 4C Toll Lanes Santee 6F 6F+2ML 52 67 52 6F+3ML(R) Operational Improvements 6F 6F 6F/8F 8 Existing Facility 5 8F+ 2ML 8F+2ML 6F+2ML 6F/8F Freeway Connectors San +OPS 6F 8F/10F+ Diego Sycuan 8F+ La 125 ML Connectors 2ML 4ML 8F/10F+OPS Mesa Reservation El Cajon Freeway & ML Connectors 163 8F+2ML 8 Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements 8F+2ML 8F+OPS 10F+2ML at Freeway Interchanges 15 8F/10F 6F+ 8F+OPS +2ML C = Conventional Highway 2ML Lemon 6F 94 Grove 6C F = Freeway 125 Jamul Indian 8F+ 8F+2ML 4C Village ML = Managed Lanes 282 2ML 6F/8F+ 8F+2ML 2ML T = Toll Road 8F+ 4ML 2C R = Reversible Lanes Coronado 10F+2ML 54 8F OPS = Operational Improvements National 8F+2ML E = Expressway City 125 94
75 805 MILES 8F+ Chula 8F 2ML Vista 8F+ KILOMETERS 2ML 8F San Diego 5 8F 905 UNITED STATES Imperial 11 4T Beach MEXICO 2-D 2 1-D 1
Tijuana, B.C. 4287 16 Attachment 4 Map Area San Diego Region Pauma and Yuima Reservation Pala Reservation Camp Pendleton
5 15
Rincon 76 Reservation La Jolla Reservation
76
Oceanside Vista San Pasqual 78 San Reservation Marcos County of San Diego
Santa Ysabel Carlsbad Reservation Escondido
Mesa Grande 78 Reservation
78
Encinitas 67 5 Solana Beach Poway
Del Mar 56 Barona Reservation
Capitan Grande Reservation
5 15 805 Santee 52 67 52 DRAFT 8 Unconstrained 163 Regional Bike 125 Network La Sycuan San Mesa Reservation October 2017 El Cajon Diego 8 Existing/Under Development Bike Network Class I - Bike Path 94 Lemon Cycle Track 15 Grove 125 Jamul Indian Bike Boulevard Village 282 Enhanced Class II - Bike Lane
Enhanced Class III - Bike Route Coronado 54 Freeways and Highways National Regional Arterials City 125 94 805 MILES 75 Chula Vista
KILOMETERS San Diego 5 Imperial 905 11 UNITED STATES Beach MEXICO 2-D 2 1-D 1
Tijuana, B.C. 4288 17 Attachment 5 Map Area San Diego Region Pechanga Reservation
Camp Pendleton
15 County of San Diego Pauma and Yuima Reservation Pala Reservation Key Project Locations Air Cargo San Diego International 1 Airport Access Improvements 76 Rincon Border Reservation Southbound Truck Route 5 Improvements 76 Oceanside SR 11/Future Otay Mesa East Vista Border Truck Crossing San Pasqual 13 78 Reservation SR 125 San Santa Ysabel Marcos Maritime Reservation Port Terminal and Access Carlsbad Improvements Harbor Drive Escondido Rail 8 LOSSAN/SPRINTERMesa Grande DRAFT Unconstrained 78 Burlington NorthernReservation Santa Fe Goods Movement Railroad (BNSF) 78 Strategy 5 Baja California Railroad, Inc. (BJRR) in Mexico/Desert Line in USA October 2017 Encinitas 67 Freeway/Highway Poway 8 I-5 Commercial/Industrial Solana Beach Land Use 9 I-15 2012 San Diego Data and 2013 Baja California Data Del 56 10 I-805 Mar Barona 11 SR 94/125, I-8 Highway/Road/Managed Lanes 12 9 Reservation 12 SR 52/54/56/94 Freight Rail Burlington Northern Santa Fe 15 13 SR 78 Capitan Grande Railway (BNSF) shared with COASTER/SPRINTER 805 San Diego and Imperial Valley Santee 67 Viejas Railroad (SDIY) 52 12 52 Reservation shared with MTS Trolley 8 Baja California Railroad, Inc. (BJRR) San 125 in Mexico/Desert Line in USA Diego La Air Cargo Mesa El Cajon Sycuan 163 11 5 8 Reservation Port of San Diego 11 12 Land Port of Entry 1 12 94 San Ysidro Rail Port of Entry 94 125 15 Otay Mesa Truck Port of Entry Coronado 282 Jamul San Diego Tecate Truck Port of Entry 12 Indian 94 54 Village 94 188 UNITED STATES Otay Mesa East Tecate MEXICO Future Truck Port of Entry National City 125 Tecate Logistics Center/Yard (Concept) 805 not location-specific 75 Chula 94 Vista 10 Potential Truck Rest Stops (Concept) not location-specific San Diego 5 905 11 UNITED STATES MILES Imperial MEXICO 0 5 10 Beach 2-D 2 1 0 5 10 KILOMETERS 1-D Tijuana, B.C. 4289 18 Attachment 6
Appendix M Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings
Appendix Contents Introduction Background Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria Development Process Highway Corridors Transit Services Active Transportation Managed Lane Connectors Freeway-to-Freeway Connectors Rail Grade Separations Regional Arterial System Federal Guidance
19 Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings
Introduction This Appendix describes the process for developing evaluation criteria for prioritizing highway, Managed Lanes and Managed Lane connectors, freeway connectors, transit service, active transportation, and rail grade separation projects for inclusion in the Preferred Revenue Constrained Transportation Scenario of San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. This Appendix also includes information on the screening criteria for the regional arterial system.
In past Regional Transportation Plans (RTP), SANDAG utilized transportation project evaluation criteria informed by the plan goals as elements of a multistep process to prioritize and evaluate transportation projects in the development of the preferred revenue constrained transportation network. For the Regional Plan, an extensive update effort was undertaken, which included a comprehensive review of the 2050 RTP criteria, efforts to streamline the criteria, incorporate new goals and policy objectives, and input from the public and a peer review panel.
The Board of Directors approved the transportation project evaluation criteria at its October 11, 2013, meeting. Project evaluation criteria were applied to each modal category of projects in the Unconstrained Transportation Network.
Background Vision and goals In early 2013, the Board of Directors provided input to frame questions for a statistically significant telephone survey intended to gauge public opinion and to inform the development of the vision and goals as the policy foundation for the Regional Plan. Based on the results of the telephone survey, the broad categories with the most support, in order of overall preference, included:
• Improving the regional economy, business climate, and local job opportunities
• Maintaining what we’ve built, including streets, highways, and public facilities
• Protecting the environment, reducing air pollution, and making better use of renewable energy sources
• Improving the transportation system to improve the flow of people and goods
• Locating future housing and new businesses near major employment centers and transit services to reduce commute times and traffic congestion
After discussion of the survey results, the Board crafted the vision and three goals for the plan: (1) Innovative Mobility and Planning, (2) Healthy Environment and Communities, and (3) Vibrant Economy. The Board of Directors accepted the vision and goals for the San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan on May 10, 2013. The vision and goals guide all elements of the Regional Plan, including the project evaluation criteria.
Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria Development Process Using the evaluation criteria from the 2050 RTP and Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as a starting point, staff initiated the review and refinement of the transportation project evaluation criteria for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan in February 2013. A consultant team with strong technical expertise assisted in the development of the draft criteria. Revisions to the criteria and methodologies were made to align them with the vision and goals accepted for the Regional Plan and to take advantage of the enhanced modeling tool: the Activity Based Model. 20 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 1 Transportation project evaluation criteria The project evaluation criteria for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan is organized within the three goals established by the Board: (1) Innovative Mobility and Planning, (2) Healthy Environment and Communities, and (3) Vibrant Economy. Each individual criterion is nested into one of the three goals. The Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria are included in Tables M.1, M.3, M.5, M.7, M.9, and M.11.
The refinements that were incorporated into the project evaluation criteria for the Regional Plan can be organized into three broad areas: (1) model enhancement-related, (2) new criteria, and (3) reorganized criteria. The majority of proposed changes to the criteria have resulted from newer capabilities of the model enhancements, which allow greater analysis of household travel. Project evaluation criteria that have benefited from model enhancements include: provides congestion relief, serves daily trips, facilitates FasTrak®/carpool/transit, pedestrian and bike mobility, serves Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) Smart Growth areas, provides accessibility, serves goods movement, and project cost-effectiveness. Other new modal criteria are incorporated, including physical activity, and access to schools, recreational areas, and beaches.
Active transportation criteria were also included as a modal category for the first time in the Regional Plan and were developed through similar combined efforts with local jurisdictions, partner agencies, SANDAG working groups, other stakeholders, consultants, and the general public. The majority of the criteria are consistent with other modal categories, including serves daily trips, safety, greenhouse gas and pollutant emissions, serves RCP Smart Growth areas, physical activity, accessibility, and cost-effectiveness, greenhouse gas reductions, disadvantaged communities1 served by the project, and cost-effectiveness criteria were added to the rail grade separation category to provide greater consistency of analysis across modal categories.
SANDAG has been developing active transportation enhancements to the Activity-based Model (ABM). The Active Transportation criteria were intended to be used with the active transportation-enhanced ABM. However, these enhancements were not completed in time to be used in application of the Active Transportation criteria, so the project rankings from Riding to 2050: The San Diego Regional Bike Plan was utilized.
Cost-effectiveness and jobs criterion A more comprehensive cost-effectiveness and jobs criterion was included that builds upon the 2050 RTP/SCS method, which evaluated the person hours saved or ridership of the project relative to its capital costs and operating and maintenance costs. For the Regional Plan, the cost-effectiveness criterion monetized a number of factors such as fuel costs, greenhouse gas emissions, smog-forming pollutants, physical activity, travel time savings, safety, and the value of jobs created by the project, which were compared to the capital, operating, and maintenance cost of the project. While analyses such as the project cost-effectiveness criterion attempt to capture the economic effects of the projects as comprehensively as possible, such analyses may not fully reflect the importance of individual factors to the project prioritization process. As a result, some components of the project cost-effectiveness criterion also are reflected in other evaluation criteria to capture the relative importance of these factors.
Public outreach SANDAG received input on the project evaluation criteria from regional stakeholders at meetings of the Active Transportation Working Group, Cities and County Technical Advisory Committee, community-based organization partners, Freight Stakeholders Working Group, Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC), Public Health Stakeholders Working Group, Regional Planning Technical Working Group, and the Tribal Transportation Working Group. Staff also sought input from other partner agencies including Caltrans, the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS), and the North County Transit District (NCTD). Input on the prioritization of transportation projects also was solicited from the public at the San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan workshops held throughout the region and at Caltrans 21 2 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan in June 2013. In addition to the workshop series, a public workshop was held on August 5, 2013, with more than 75 participants. More than 400 comments were collected from local jurisdictions, partner agencies, stakeholders, and the general public. This feedback provided valuable information that was considered in development of the final project evaluation criteria.
Peer review A five-person peer review panel was created to review and assess the criteria, and to consider feedback and input that was proposed to be incorporated into the criteria. Panelists included staff from the San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission in Oakland, California and the Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle, Washington. Experts from academia and the private sector included: Jennifer Dill, Professor, Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning Director; Oregon Transportation Research & Education Consortium; Portland State University; Marty Wachs, Senior Principal Researcher at RAND, Distinguished Professor Emeritus in Urban Planning, University of California Los Angeles Luskin School of Public Affairs; and Joel Freedman, Manager, Systems Analysis Technical Resource Center, Parsons Brinckerhoff.
Based on the panel’s review and comments received from working groups and the public, several refinements were made to the initial draft criteria. Additionally, individual criterion weightings were adjusted to provide greater consistency of common measures across modal categories.
Project evaluation criteria weightings The project evaluation criteria weighting allocates roughly one-third of the total possible points for each of the goal focus areas. These proposed weightings reflect the highest regional priority areas, which are nested in the goals.
All mode categories have a 100-point scale, with each individual criterion allocated a specified maximum score. Feedback from the ITOC, as well as other SANDAG working group members, stakeholders, and the general public, was considered during the development of the proposed criteria weightings. As a result, additional weight was given to the greenhouse gas and pollutant emissions and cost-effectiveness criteria in the active transportation evaluation criteria, providing greater consistency with weighting of these criteria across modes.
Highway Corridors SANDAG has used criteria for evaluating and ranking highway corridor projects since 1997. Using the 2050 RTP criteria as a starting point, a set of revised criteria which reflect the Board-adopted goals were developed.
The eleven highway evaluation criteria presented in Table M.1 quantify congestion relief, project safety, provides access to evacuation routes, facilitates FasTrak/carpool/transit, pedestrian and bike mobility, minimizes habitat and residential impacts, greenhouse gas and pollutant emissions, serves RCP smart growth areas, physical activity, accessibility, serves goods movement and relieves freight system bottlenecks/capacity constraints, and project cost- effectiveness. The approved highway criteria incorporates a number of refined or new elements including the daily person hours saved for disadvantaged communities; reduction in smog forming pollutants; increase in physical activity; and an expanded accessibility measure which quantifies access to jobs, schools, and recreation.
The highway network corridor evaluation was used to develop the Revenue Constrained Network alternatives and project phasing included in the Regional Plan. The 37 unconstrained highway corridors evaluated for the 2050 Regional Plan are listed in priority order in Table M.2.
The prioritized list of highway projects was used as a tool in assembling logical transportation networks of highway projects that complement transit and arterial projects. Priority order is not necessarily strictly followed. Rather, emphasis is placed upon developing meaningful networks in accordance with the Regional Plan goals and objectives. 22 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 3 Table M.1 Project Evaluation Criteria Highway Corridors
No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Max Total Policy Objectives Score Percent
Innovative Mobility & Planning
1 Provides Congestion A) What is the number of daily Change in daily person-hours 10 35 Mobility Choices Relief person-hours saved from saved implementing the project?*
B) What is the number of daily Change in daily person-hours 5 person-hours saved for saved for disadvantaged disadvantaged communities? communities population
2 Project Safety How does the project compare Project percentage of collisions 5 Preservation and Safety of the against the statewide average for measured against statewide Transportation System collisions?* average
3 Provides Access to How will the project provide Proximity analysis of hazard areas 5 Preservation and Safety of the Evacuation Routes evacuation access for regional (dam failure, earthquake, flood, Transportation System, Partnerships hazard areas? landslide, liquefaction, tsunami, and Collaboration, Binational and wildfire), weighted by Collaboration with Baja California population and employment
4 Facilitates FasTrak/ How will the project facilitate Projects will receive points if they 10 Mobility Choices, Complete Carpool/Transit, FasTrak/carpool/Managed Lane include FasTrak/carpool/Managed Communities Pedestrian and Bike facilities and/or regional or corridor Lane facility, and/or regional or Mobility transit services and/or pedestrian corridor transit services, and/or and bike access? pedestrian and bike facilities, which is then weighted by combined carpool person volume + transit person volume
4 23 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.1 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Highway Corridors
Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Policy Objectives Score Percent
Healthy Environment & Communities
5 Minimizes Habitat and How will the project minimize Proximity analysis of preserve 5 30 Habitat and Open Space Residential Impacts negative habitat and residential areas, native habitats, and housing Preservation, Environmental impacts?* (more than two dwelling units per Stewardship acre)
6 Greenhouse gas and A) What is the reduction in CO2 Reduction in CO2 emissions 5 Environmental Stewardship, Energy Pollutant Emissions emissions from implementing the and Climate Change Mitigation and project?* Adaptation
B) What is the reduction in smog Reduction in smog-forming 5 forming pollutants from pollutants implementing the project?*
7 Serves RCP Smart What is the share of trips on the Share of trips on facility serving 10 Complete Communities, Regional Growth Areas facility serving RCP Smart Growth existing/planned or potential Economic Prosperity, Habitat and Areas (Metropolitan Center, Urban Metropolitan Center, Urban Open Space Preservation Center, and Special Use Center)?* Center, and Special Use Center is calculated, using select link analysis
8 Physical Activity What is the increase in physical Increase in time engaged in 5 Mobility Choices, Complete activity? moderate transportation-related Communities physical activity
Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 24 5 Table M.1 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Highway Corridors Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Policy Objectives Score Percent Vibrant Economy
9 Accessibility A) What is the improved access to Weighted average number of jobs 4 35 Mobility Choices, Regional jobs and schools? and school enrollment accessible in Economic Prosperity 30 minutes by auto
B) How will the project support Acres of parkland/recreational 4 Complete Communities, Habitat access to recreational areas and areas and beaches within 1/4 mile and Open Space Preservation beaches? of project
C) What percentage of users of the Select link used to determine 2 Mobility Choices, Partnerships and project access Indian reservations? origins and destinations served, Collaboration total trips to/from Indian reservation areas
10 Serves Goods What is the improved average Total travel time savings for 5 Mobility Choices, Regional Movement and Relieves travel time for freight?* medium and heavy truck classes Economic Prosperity, Binational Freight System Collaboration with Baja California Bottlenecks/ Capacity Constraints
11 Project Cost- What is the cost-effectiveness of Enhanced cost-effectiveness 20 Mobility Choices, Regional Effectiveness the project?* measure incorporates the Economic Prosperity, Complete following components: Communities, Binational - Project cost Collaboration with Baja California, - Generalized delay costs Preservation and Safety of the - Fuel costs Transportation System, - greenhouse gas emissions Environmental Stewardship, Energy - Smog-forming pollutants and Climate Change Mitigation and -Physical activity Adaptation - Safety * Provides dual evaluation for both passenger vehicles and trucks.
6 25 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.2 Highway Corridor Project Rankings TransNet, Early Freeway/ Unconstrained Cost Total Regional Plan Action Program From To Existing With Improvements Highway ($2014) (millions) Score Project Rank (EAP) EAP (Env) I-5 La Jolla Village Dr Vandegrift 8F/10F+2HOV 8F/10F+4ML $3,045.2 57.7 1
EAP (Transit/Env) I-805 SR 905 Carroll Canyon Rd 8F+2HOV 8F+2ML/8F+4ML $3,419.0 54.1 2
TransNet SR 78 I-5 I-15 6F 6F+2ML/Operational $959.5 51.4 3
TransNet I-5 SR 905 SR 15 8F 8F/10F+2HOV $651.5 45.2 4
n/a SR 15 SR 94 I-805 6F 6F+2HOV $30.3 45.0 5
TransNet SR 54 I-5 SR 125 6F 6F/8F+2HOV $232.3 37.2 6
TransNet I-5 I-8 La Jolla Village Dr 8F/10F 8F/10F+2HOV $555.5 36.7 7
TransNet I-5 SR 15 I-8 8F 8F+Operational $1,176.7 33.2 8
EAP (Transit) I-15 I-8 SR 163 8F 8F+2HOV $55.6 31.6 9
EAP (Transit) SR 94 I-5 I-805 8F 8F+2HOV $484.8 31.3 10
n/a I-8 Los Coches Dunbar Rd 4F/6F 6F $131.3 30.5 11
TransNet SR 94 I-805 SR 125 8F 8F/10F+2ML $469.7 30.5 11
n/a SR 76 I-15 Couser Canyon 2C 4C/6C+Operational $131.3 29.8 13
TransNet I-8 2nd St Los Coches 4F/6F 6F $35.4 29.2 14
TransNet SR 125 SR 54 SR 94 6F 8F+2HOV $146.5 29.2 14
n/a SR 125 SR 94 I-8 8F 10F+2HOV $292.9 29.1 16
n/a I-8 SR 125 2nd St 6F/8F 6F/8F+Operational $166.7 28.9 17
n/a I-15 Viaduct 8F 8F+2HOV $843.4 28.1 18
TransNet SR 94 SR 125 Avocado Blvd 4F 6F $111.1 27.5 19
n/a SR 52 I-5 I-805 4F 6F $111.1 26.5 20
Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 26 7 Table M.2 (continued) Highway Corridor Project Rankings TransNet, Early Freeway/ Unconstrained Cost Total Regional Plan Action Program From To Existing With Improvements Highway ($2014) (millions) Score Project Rank (EAP) n/a SR 15 I-5 SR 94 6F 8F+2HOV $136.4 26.3 21
n/a SR 163 I-805 I-15 8F 8F+2HOV $333.3 25.9 22
n/a SR 52 SR 125 SR 67 4F 6F $252.5 25.8 23
n/a SR 125 SR 905 SR 54 4F 8F $232.3 25.2 24
n/a SR 76 Couser Canyon SR 79 2C 2C+Operational $632.8 25.1 25
n/a SR 125 I-8 SR 52 6F 6F+2HOV $262.6 24.8 26
TransNet SR 94 Avocado Blvd Melody Ln 4C/2C 6C/2C+Operational $419.2 24.2 27
n/a SR 905 I-5 I-805 4F 8F $156.6 23.6 28
TransNet SR 56 I-5 I-15 4F 6F+2HOV $303.0 23.4 29
n/a SR 15 Lake Hodges SR 78 8F/10F 10F $232.3 21.7 30
TransNet SR 67 Mapleview St Dye Rd 2C/4C 4C $575.7 21.1 31
n/a I-8 I-5 SR 125 8F/10F 8F/10F+Operational $666.6 20.7 32
n/a SR 76 I-5 Melrose Dr 4E 6E $232.3 20.6 33
n/a SR 52 I-805 I-15 6F 6F+2HOV $90.9 20.2 34
n/a SR 67 I-8 Mapleview St 4F/6F 6F/8F $141.4 19.2 35
TransNet (2ML(R)) SR 52 I-15 SR 125 4F/6F 6F+3ML(R) $454.5 14.5 36
n/a SR 905 I-805 Mexico 6F 8F $202.0 13.5 37
Table M.2 Legend C = Conventional Highway Lanes ML = Managed Lanes F = Freeway Lanes ML(R) = Managed Lanes (Reversible) HOV = High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes T = Toll Lanes
8 27 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Transit Services With key input from MTS and NCTD staff, updated criteria was created to prioritize transit service projects. The transit services category incorporates several new or refined criteria which includes providing access to evacuation routes, an expanded accessibility criterion which quantifies access to jobs, schools, and amenities, as well as the percentage of disadvantaged community users, and an expanded project cost-effectiveness criterion. Table M.3 includes the detailed criteria and weighting for prioritizing transit service projects. The 51 unconstrained transit routes evaluated for the Regional Plan are listed in priority order in Table M.4.
28 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings Table M.3 Project Evaluation Criteria Transit Services
Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Innovative Mobility & Planning
1 Provides Time Competitive/ Reliable What is the percentage of the Analysis of percentage of transit 10 35 Mobility Choices, Transit Service route located in priority route within dedicated transit Complete Communities treatment? guideway; dedicated arterial lane, interrupted rail, or Managed Lane; or HOV lane or arterial spot treatment
2 Serves Daily Trips What is the number of Change in daily transit linked trips 15 Mobility Choices, additional daily transit trips Complete Communities resulting from the project?
3 Provides Access to Evacuation Routes How will the project provide Proximity analysis of hazard areas 5 Mobility Choices, evacuation access for regional (dam failure, earthquake, flood, Partnerships and hazards? landslide, liquefaction, tsunami, and Collaboration, wildfire), weighted by population Binational and employment Collaboration with Baja California, Preservation and Safety of the Transportation System
4 Daily System Utilization What is the daily transit Daily passenger miles/ daily service 5 Mobility Choices, utilization? seat miles (system wide) Complete Communities
29 10 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.3 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Transit Services
Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Healthy Environment & Communities
5 greenhouse gas and Pollutant A) What is the reduction in Reduction in CO2 emissions 5 30 Environmental
Emissions CO2 emissions from Stewardship, Energy implementing the project? and Climate Change Mitigation and B) What is the reduction in Reduction in smog forming 5 Adaptation smog forming pollutants from pollutants implementing the project?
6 Serves RCP Smart Growth Areas What is the share of trips on Share of trips on transit service 10 Complete the transit service serving RCP serving all existing/planned or Communities, Regional Smart Growth areas? potential Smart Growth Areas is Economic Prosperity, calculated, using select link analysis Habitat and Open Space Preservation
7 Physical Activity What is the increase in Increase in time engaged in 10 Mobility Choices, physical activity? moderate transportation-related Complete Communities physical activity
Vibrant Economy
8 Accessibility A) What is the increase in job Change in daily transit linked work 4 35 Mobility Choices, and school trips by transit? and school trips Regional Economic Prosperity
B) How will the project support Acres of parkland/ recreational areas 3 Complete Communities, access to recreational areas and and beaches within 1/4 mile of Habitat and Open Space beaches? project Preservation
30 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 11 Table M.3 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Transit Services
Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Vibrant Economy (continued)
C) What is the increase in transit Change in total transit trips by 3 Mobility Choices, trips by disadvantaged disadvantaged communities Partnerships and communities? population Collaboration
D) How will the project facilitate Project located within 1/4 mile of 3 Mobility Choices, pedestrian and bike access? pedestrian and bike facilities Complete Communities
E) What is the increase in transit Change in total transit trips to/from 2 Mobility Choices, trips to federally recognized Indian reservations Partnerships and Indian reservations? Collaboration
9 Project Cost-Effectiveness What is the cost-effectiveness of Enhanced cost-effectiveness measure 20 Mobility Choices, the project? incorporates the following Regional Economic components: Prosperity, Binational Collaboration with Baja - Project cost California, Preservation - Fuel costs and Safety of the - greenhouse gas emissions Transportation System, - Smog forming pollutants Environmental - Physical activity Stewardship, Energy and - Safety Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation
31 12 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.4 Transit Service Project Rankings
TransNet/ Unconstrained Regional Total Early Action Service Route Project Description Cost ($2014) Plan Project Score Program (millions) Rank (EAP)
Trolley 562 Carmel Valley to San Ysidro via Kearny $2,632.5 95.9 1 Mesa
Trolley 550 SDSU to Palomar Station via East $1,581.5 65.2 2 San Diego, SE San Diego, National City
Trolley 560 SDSU to Downtown via El Cajon $2,389.9 64.5 3 Blvd/Mid-City (transition of Mid-City Rapid to LRT)
TransNet/ COASTER 398 Double Tracking (includes all COASTER $2,901.6 63.7 4 EAP improvements, positive train control, extension to National City, and Camp Pendleton)
Trolley 563 Pacific Beach to El Cajon Transit Center $1,297.7 61.9 5 via Kearny Mesa, Mission Valley, SDSU
BRT 650 Chula Vista to Palomar Airport Rd $81.9 51.6 6 Business Park via I-805/I-5 (peak only)
TransNet SPRINTER 399 Double Tracking (includes all SPRINTER $945.5 51.5 7 improvements and extension to South Escondido)
Rapid 28 Point Loma to Kearny Mesa via Old $49.8 49.4 8 Town, Linda Vista
Rapid 103 Solana Beach to Sabre Springs BRT $66.8 47.4 9 station via Carmel Valley
Rapid 10 La Mesa to Ocean Beach via Mid-City, $87.7 44.9 10 Hillcrest, Old Town
Trolley 561 UTC to Mira Mesa via Sorrento $1,167.4 42.1 11 Mesa/Carroll Cyn (extension of route 510). Includes connection with COASTER at Scranton Rd
TransNet BRT 680 Otay Mesa/San Ysidro to Sorrento $457.9 42.0 12 and Mesa via I-805 Corridor, Otay 688/ Ranch/Millenia, National City, 689 Southeastern San Diego, Mid-City, Kearny Mesa
32 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 13 Table M.4 (continued) Transit Service Project Rankings
TransNet/ Unconstrained Regional Total Early Action Service Route Project Description Cost ($2014) Plan Project Score Program (millions) Rank (EAP)
Trolley 522 Orange Line Express - El Cajon to $197.2 41.6 13 ITC/Airport
Rapid 30 Old Town to Sorrento Mesa via Pacific $104.9 40.6 14 Beach, La Jolla, UTC
Trolley 564 Otay Mesa East Border Crossing to $1,000.7 40.5 15 Western Chula Vista via Otay Ranch/Millenia
Rapid 41 Fashion Valley to VA Hospital via $55.4 40.2 16 SR 163, Genesee, La Jolla Village Dr
BRT 940 Oceanside to Sorrento Mesa via I-5, $39.0 40.0 17 Carlsbad, Encinitas (peak only)
Rapid 473 Oceanside TC to UC San Diego via $129.7 38.4 18 Pacific Hwy, Del Mar Heights, El Camino Real and UTC
Trolley 540 Blue Line Express - Santa Fe Depot to $390.6 38.3 19 San Ysidro via Downtown
Rapid 2 North Park to Downtown San Diego via $38.9 35.6 20 30th St / Broadway
Trolley 566 Palomar St Trolley Station to UTC via $334.9 35.5 21 Mid-City, Kearny Mesa (Route 562 Express)
Rapid 477 East Camp Pendleton to Carlsbad $80.0 33.7 22 Village via Vandergrift, College Blvd, Plaza Camino Real
BRT 430 Oceanside to Escondido via SR 78 $239.6 33.3 23
Rapid 910 Coronado to Downtown via Coronado $25.7 31.9 24 Bridge
Rapid 11 Spring Valley to SDSU via SE $113.2 31.5 25 San Diego, Downtown, Hillcrest, Mid- City
BRT 905 Iris Trolley Station to East Otay Mesa $0.00 30.6 26 via Otay Mesa
33 14 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.4 (continued) Transit Service Project Rankings
TransNet/ Unconstrained Regional Total Early Action Service Route Project Description Cost ($2014) Plan Project Score Program (millions) Rank (EAP)
Streetcar 553 Downtown San Diego: Little Italy to $139.4 30.6 26 East Village
Streetcar 554 Hillcrest/Balboa Park/Downtown $285.2 30.3 28 San Diego Loop
Rapid 440 Carlsbad Pointsettia to Escondido TC to $51.3 30.3 28 UC San Diego via Palomar Airport Rd, San Marcos Blvd, Mission Rd
SPRINTER 588 SPRINTER Express. Escondido Transit $243.9 30.2 30 Center - Oceanside Transit Center
BRT 652 Downtown to UTC via Kearny Mesa $2.8 29.7 31 Guideway/I-805
BRT 653 Mid-City to Palomar Airport Rd via $10.5 29.4 32 Kearny Mesa/I-805/I-5
Streetcar 565 Mission Beach to La Jolla via Pacific $246.0 29.0 33 Beach
Rapid 709 H St Trolley to Millenia via H St $37.0 28.2 34 Corridor, Southwestern College
Streetcar 555 30th St to Downtown San Diego via $256.1 28.1 35 North Park/Golden Hill
Rapid 120 Kearny Mesa to Downtown via $77.9 27.9 36 SR 163/Fashion Valley. No guideway.
Rapid 635 Eastlake/EUC to Palomar Trolley Station $55.3 27.4 37 via Main St Corridor
Streetcar 557 El Cajon Downtown $164.5 26.7 38
Rapid 639 Iris Trolley Station to North Island via $54.2 26.2 39 Imperial Beach and Silver Strand, Coronado
Rapid 636 SDSU to Spring Valley via East $39.5 25.1 40 San Diego, Lemon Grove, Skyline
Rapid 637 North Park to 32nd St Trolley via $32.6 24.9 41 Golden Hill
34 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 15 Table M.4 (continued) Transit Service Project Rankings
TransNet/ Unconstrained Regional Total Early Action Service Route Project Description Cost ($2014) Plan Project Score Program (millions) Rank (EAP)
BRT 870 El Cajon to Campus Point via Santee, $7.7 24.4 42 SR 52, I-805
Rapid 471 Downtown Escondido to East $31.7 24.3 43 Escondido
Rapid 474 Oceanside to Vista via Mission $50.4 23.8 44 Ave/Santa Fe Rd Corridor
BRT 692 Grossmont Center to Otay Town $4.5 23.4 45 Center/Millenia via Southwest College, SR 125, Spring Valley
BRT 890 El Cajon to Sorrento Mesa via SR 52, $12.7 23.1 46 Kearny Mesa
Streetcar 551 Chula Vista Downtown $137.8 22.5 47
Streetcar 558 Escondido Downtown $51.2 22.4 48
Rapid 638 Iris Trolley to Otay Mesa via Otay, $38.2 21.6 49 SR 905 Corridor
Streetcar 559 Oceanside Downtown $45.7 21.4 50
Streetcar 552 National City Downtown $41.2 21.3 51
Active Transportation For the first time, active transportation criteria were developed. These criteria were developed through similar combined efforts with local jurisdictions, partner agencies, SANDAG working groups, other stakeholders, consultants, and the general public. The majority of the active transportation evaluation criteria is consistent with other modal categories, including and pollutant emissions and serves RCP smart growth areas. SANDAG has been developing active transportation enhancements to the Activity-based Model (ABM). The Active Transportation criteria were intended to be used with the active transportation-enhanced ABM. These enhancements were not completed in time to be used to apply the Active Transportation criteria, so the project rankings from Riding to 2050: The San Diego Regional Bike Plan were utilized. The detailed criteria developed as part of the Regional Plan effort are shown in Table M.5. A list of ranked active transportation projects can be seen in Table M.6.
35 16 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.5 Project Evaluation Criteria Active Transportation Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Innovative Mobility & Planning 1 Serves Daily Trips What is the change in the number Change in active transportation 15 35 Mobility Choices of active transportation trips? mode trips or transit accessed by active transportation mode trips
2 Project Safety Is the project located in an area Number of bike and pedestrian 5 Preservation and Safety of the with a high bike and pedestrian traffic incidents within 1/4 mile of Transportation System traffic incident rate? project
3 System Connectivity A) Does the project provide Project located within 1/4 mile of 5 Mobility Choices, Complete enhanced connectivity to/from transit, highway, or rail grade Communities transit station/stop areas, highway separation project areas project areas, or rail grade separations?
B) Does the project provide Project provides direct access to 5 multimodal connections? other transit, highway, rail grade separation, or active transportation projects
4 Consistency with local Is the improvement identified in a Project is in a locally adopted plan 5 Partnerships and Collaboration plans locally adopted plan?
36 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 17 Table M.5 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Active Transportation Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Healthy Environment & Communities 5 Reduced Bike/Pedestrian Does the project result in a safer Project area is currently unsafe for 10 35 Mobility Choices, Preservation Stress Level facility for people biking and pedestrian and bike activity due to and Safety of the Transportation pedestrians? speeds, vehicular traffic volumes, System conflict points such as freeway on/off-ramps, etc.
6 greenhouse gas and A) What is the reduction in CO2 Reduction in CO2 emissions 5 Environmental Stewardship, Pollutant Emissions emissions from implementing the Energy and Climate Change project? Mitigation and Adaptation
B) What is the reduction in smog Reduction in smog forming 5 forming pollutants from pollutants implementing the project?
7 Serves RCP Smart Growth Is the project located near Population and employment in all 5 Complete Communities, Regional Areas population and employment? smart growth areas within 1/4 Economic Prosperity, Habitat and mile distance of project Open Space Preservation
8 Physical Activity What is the increase in physical Increase in time engaged in 5 Mobility Choices, Complete activity? moderate transportation-related Communities physical activity
9 Range of Users/Skill Levels For major arterial street, are Project results in route attractive 5 Mobility Choices, Preservation Served alternative routes attractive to all to all riders and Safety of the Transportation riders considered, or are the System arterial or alternative routes traffic calmed?
37 18 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.5 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Active Transportation Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Vibrant Economy
10 Accessibility A) Does the project support access Employment and schools within 4 30 Mobility Choices, Regional to jobs and schools? 1/4 mile of project Economic Prosperity
B) Does the project support access Acres of parkland/recreational 3 Complete Communities, Habitat to recreational areas, parks, and areas and beaches within 1/4 mile and Open Space Preservation beaches? of project
C) What percentage of the project Disadvantaged communities 3 Mobility Choices, Partnerships users are from disadvantaged population within 1/4 mile of and Collaboration communities? project
11 Project Cost-Effectiveness What is the cost-effectiveness of Enhanced cost-effectiveness 20 Mobility Choices, Regional the project? measure may incorporate the Economic Prosperity, Binational following components: Collaboration with Baja California, Environmental - Project cost Stewardship, Energy and Climate - Generalized delay costs Change Mitigation and - Fuel costs Adaptation, Preservation and - greenhouse gas emissions Safety of the Transportation - Smog forming pollutants System - Health and physical activity - Safety
38 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 19 Table M.6 Regional Bike Plan Network Corridor Rankings Early Action Program (EAP)
EAP Funding Through Cost Project Jurisdiction(s) Priority Project Phase ($2014) 1 Uptown - Fashion Valley to Downtown San Diego Const. $22,889,000 San Diego 2 Uptown - Old Town to Hillcrest San Diego Const. $17,979,000
3 Uptown - Hillcrest to Balboa Park San Diego Const. $2,579,000
4 North Park - Mid-City - Hillcrest to Kensington San Diego Const. $5,727,000
5 North Park - Mid-City - Hillcrest to City Heights San Diego Const. $5,775,000 (Hillcrest-El Cajon Corridor) 6 North Park - Mid-City - City Heights San Diego Const. $2,688,000
7 North Park - Mid-City - Hillcrest to City Heights San Diego Const. $4,869,000 (City Heights - Old Town Corridor) 8 North Park - Mid-City - City Heights to Rolando San Diego Const. $4,319,000
9 San Diego River Trail - Qualcomm Stadium San Diego Const. $829,000
10 San Diego River Trail - Father Junipero Serra Trail Santee ROW $2,816,000 to Santee 11 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Rose Creek San Diego Const. $20,636,000
12 Bayshore Bikeway - Main St to Palomar Chula Vista/ Const. $2,959,000 Imperial Beach 13 Coastal Rail Trail Encinitas - Chesterfield to G Encinitas Const. $6,885,000
14 Coastal Rail Trail Encinitas - Chesterfield to Encinitas Eng. $100,000 Solana Beach 15 to Inland Rail Trail (combination of four projects) San Marcos, Const. $32,691,000 18 Vista, County of San Diego 19 Coastal Rail Trail Oceanside - Wisconsin to Oceanside Const. $200,000 Oceanside Blvd. 20 Plaza Bonita Bike Path National City Const. $400,000
21 Bayshore Bikeway - National City Marina to 32nd San Diego/ Const. $1,503,000 St National City 22 I-15 Mid-City - Adams Ave to Camino Del Rio S San Diego Const. $9,341,000
23 Bayshore Bikeway - Barrio Logan San Diego ROW $4,604,000
24 Pershing and El Prado - North Park to Downtown San Diego Const. $7,282,000 San Diego 25 Pershing and El Prado - Cross-Park San Diego Const. $613,000
26 Downtown to Southeast connections - East San Diego ROW $787,000 Village 27 Downtown to Southeast connections - San Diego ROW $3,045,000 Downtown San Diego to Encanto 39 20 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.6 (continued) Regional Bike Plan Network Corridor Rankings Early Action Program (EAP) (continued)
EAP Funding Through Cost Project Jurisdiction(s) Priority Project Phase ($2014) 28 Downtown to Southeast connections - San Diego ROW $2,825,000 Downtown San Diego to Golden Hill 29 San Ysidro to Imperial Beach - Bayshore Bikeway Imperial Beach/ ROW $1,726,000 Connection (Border Access) San Diego 30 San Ysidro to Imperial Beach - Bayshore Bikeway Imperial Beach/ ROW $860,000 Connection (Imperial Beach Connector) San Diego 31 Terrace Dr/Central Ave - Adams to Wightman San Diego Const. $1,407,000
32 San Diego River Trail - I-805 to Fenton San Diego Const. $1,741,000
33 San Diego River Trail - Short gap connections San Diego Const. $1,370,000
34 Coastal Rail Trail Encinitas - Leucadia to G St Encinitas Const. $4,763,000
35 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - UTC San Diego ROW $791,000
36 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Rose Canyon San Diego ROW $2,508,000
37 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Pacific Hwy San Diego Const. $4,050,000 (W. Washington St to Laurel St) 38 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Pacific Hwy San Diego Const. $7,628,000 (Laurel St to Santa Fe Depot) 39 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Encinitas Encinitas Const. $127,000 Chesterfield to Solana Beach 40 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego – Pacific Hwy San Diego Const. $3,994,000 (Taylor St to W. Washington St) 41 San Ysidro to Imperial Beach - Bayshore Bikeway Imperial Beach/ Const. $6,204,000 Connection San Diego 42 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Pacific Hwy San Diego Const. $7,270,000 (Fiesta Island Rd to Taylor St) 43 San Diego River Trail - Father Junipero Serra Trail Santee Const. $7,412,000 to Santee 44 Bayshore Bikeway - Barrio Logan San Diego Const. $13,591,000
45 Downtown to Southeast connections San Diego Const. $17,015,000
46 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - UTC San Diego Const. $2,691,000
47 City Heights /Encanto/Lemon Grove Lemon Grove/ Const. $7,045,000 San Diego 48 City Heights/Fairmount Corridor San Diego Const. $12,216,000
49 Rolando to Grossmont/La Mesa La Mesa/ Const. $2,469,000 El Cajon/ San Diego 50 La Mesa/Lemon Grove/El Cajon connections Lemon Grove/ Const. $5,458,000 La Mesa
40 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 21 Table M.6 (continued) Regional Bike Plan Network Corridor Rankings Early Action Program (EAP) (continued)
EAP Funding Through Cost Project Jurisdiction(s) Priority Project Phase ($2014) 51 Coastal Rail Trail - Rose Canyon San Diego Const. $8,433,000
52 San Diego River Trail - Qualcomm Stadium to San Diego Const. $1,568,000 Ward Rd 53 San Diego River Trail - Rancho Mission Road to San Diego Const. $263,000 Camino Del Rio North 54 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Rose Creek Mission San Diego Const. $3,990,000 Bay Connection 55 Coastal Rail Trail Carlsbad - Reach 4 Cannon to Carlsbad Const. $5,084,000 Palomar Airport Rd 56 Coastal Rail Trail Carlsbad - Reach 5 Palomar Carlsbad Const. $2,738,000 Airport Rd to Poinsettia Station 57 Coastal Rail Trail Encinitas - Carlsbad to Leucadia Encinitas Const. $6,634,000
58 Coastal Rail Trail Del Mar Del Mar Const. $396,000
59 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Del Mar to Del Mar/ Const. $411,000 Sorrento via Carmel Valley San Diego 60 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Carmel Valley to San Diego Const. $867,000 Roselle via Sorrento 61 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Roselle Canyon San Diego Const. $4,958,000
62 Chula Vista National City connections Chula Vista/ Const. $10,516,000 National City 63 Pacific Beach to Mission Beach San Diego Const. $9,509,000
64 Ocean Beach to Mission Bay San Diego Const. $23,815,000
65 San Diego River Trail - Bridge connection San Diego Const. $7,259,000 (Sefton Field to Mission Valley YMCA) 66 San Diego River Trail - Mast Park to Lakeside Santee Const. $10,335,000 baseball park 67 I-8 Flyover San Diego Const. $9,914,000 (Camino del Rio South to Camino del Rio North) 68 Coastal Rail Trail Oceanside - Broadway to Eaton Oceanside Const. $445,000
69 El Cajon - Santee connections El Cajon/ Const. $12,289,000 La Mesa/ Santee 70 San Diego River Trail - Father JS Trail to West San Diego Const. $2,883,000 Hills Parkway 71 Inland Rail Trail Oceanside Oceanside Const. $18,786,000
72 Coastal Rail Trail Carlsbad - Reach 3 Tamarack to Carlsbad Const. $4,814,000 Cannon 73 Clairemont Dr (Mission Bay to Burgener) San Diego Const. $7,688,000
41 22 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.6 (continued) Regional Bike Plan Network Corridor Rankings Early Action Program (EAP) (continued)
EAP Funding Through Cost Project Jurisdiction(s) Priority Project Phase ($2014) 74 Harbor Dr (Downtown to Ocean Beach) San Diego Const. $6,980,000
75 Mira Mesa Bike Blvd San Diego Const. $3,751,000
76 Sweetwater River Bikeway Ramps National City Const. $8,883,000
77 Coastal Rail Trail Oceanside - Alta Loma Marsh Oceanside Const. $4,684,000 bridge 78 Coastal Rail Trail San Diego - Mission Bay San Diego Const. $3,092,000 (Clairemont to Tecolote) 79 Bayshore Bikeway Coronado - Golf course Coronado Const. $2,817,000 adjacent Non-Early Action Program (EAP)
Non- EAP Corridor Corridor Limits Jurisdiction Priority 80 Coastal Rail Trail Del Mar segments Del Mar
81 Central Coast Corridor Coastal Rail Trail, Del Mar to Bayshore Bikeway Del Mar, San Diego 82 Kearny Mesa-Beaches Corridor Central Coast Corridor, Pacific Beach to I-15 Bikeway San Diego
83 San Diego River Bikeway Segments west of I-805 San Diego
84 SR 125 Corridor San Diego River Bikeway, Santee to Otay Mesa Santee, Border Crossing County, San Diego, Chula Vista 85 Mira Mesa Corridor Coastal Rail Trail to I-15 Bikeway San Diego
86 Mid-County Bikeway Coastal Rail Trail, Del Mar to Inland Rail Trail Del Mar, County, Escondido 87 Bay to Ranch Bikeway Bayshore Bikeway to Chula Vista Greenbelt Chula Vista
88 Escondido Creek Bikeway I-15 Bikeway, Escondido to Valley Centre Rd Escondido
89 Chula Vista Greenbelt Bayshore Bikeway, San Diego to SR 125 Corridor Chula Vista
90 SR 52 Bikeway Coastal Rail Trail to San Diego River Bikeway San Diego
91 Sweetwater River Bikeway Bayshore Bikeway to SR 125 Corridor National City, Chula Vista 92 Vista Way Connector San Luis Rey River Trail to Inland Rail Trail Vista, County
93 SR 905 Corridor Border Access Corridor to Future SR 11 Border San Diego, Crossing County
42 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 23 Table M.6 (continued) Regional Bike Plan Network Corridor Rankings Non-Early Action Program (EAP) (continued)
Non- EAP Corridor Corridor Limits Jurisdiction Priority 94 Carlsbad-San Marcos Corridor Coastal Rail Trail, Carlsbad to Inland Rail Trail, Carlsbad, San Marcos San Marcos 95 I-15 Bikeway Northern boundary of County to City Heights - Escondido, Old Town Corridor City of San Diego 96 San Luis Rey River Trail Coastal Rail Trail Oceanside to I-15 Bikeway (County) Oceanside, County 97 Camp Pendleton Trail Northern boundary of County to San Luis Rey River USMC Trail 98 Encinitas - San Marcos Coastal Rail Trail, Inland Rail Trail Encinitas, Corridor San Marcos 99 I-8 Corridor SR 125 Corridor to Japatul Valley Rd County of San Diego 100 SR 56 Bikeway Coastal Rail Trail to I-15 Bikeway San Diego
101 El Camino Real San Luis Rey River Trail to Coastal Rail Trail, Encinitas Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas 102 East County Northern Loop SR 125 Corridor, La Mesa to SR 125 Corridor, El Cajon, County La Mesa, County 103 East County Southern Loop East County Northern Loop, El Cajon to SR 125 County Corridor Bike Plan EAP Estimated Cost (Priorities 1-79) $460.5 M
Regional Bike Plan Non-EAP Estimated Cost (Priorities 80-103) $276.7 M
Regional Bike Plan Estimated Cost $737.2 M
Managed Lane Connectors Managed Lane connectors will facilitate direct Managed Lane to Managed Lane access and allow for continuous movement on the HOV or Managed Lanes network. The six criteria and weighting for the Managed Lanes Connectors are shown in Table M.7. The 22 Managed Lane connectors evaluated for the Regional Plan are listed in priority order by pairs in Table M.8.
43 24 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.7 Project Evaluation Criteria Managed Lane Connector Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Innovative Mobility & Planning 1 Provides Congestion Relief What is the number of daily person- Change in daily person-hours 15 35 Mobility Choices hours saved from implementing the saved project?
2 Provides Access to Evacuation How will the project provide Proximity analysis of hazard 5 Preservation and Safety of Routes evacuation access for regional hazard areas (dam failure, earthquake, the Transportation System, areas? flood, landslide, liquefaction, Partnerships and tsunami, and wildfire), Collaboration, Binational weighted by population and Collaboration with Baja employment California
3 Facilitates FasTrak/Carpool/ How will the project facilitate FasTrak/ Projects will receive points if 15 Mobility, Complete Transit, Pedestrian and Bike carpool/Managed Lane facilities they include FasTrak/carpool/ Communities Mobility and/or regional or corridor transit Managed Lane facility, and/or services and/or pedestrian and bike regional or corridor transit access? services, and/or pedestrian and bike facilities, which is then weighted by combined carpool person volume + transit person volume
44 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 25 Table M.7 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Managed Lane Connector Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Healthy Environment & Communities 4 Minimizes Habitat and How will the project minimize Proximity analysis of preserve 15 30 Habitat and Open Space Residential Impacts negative habitat and residential areas, native habitats, and Preservation, Environmental impacts? housing (more than two Stewardship dwelling units per acre)
5 greenhouse gas and Pollutant A) What is the reduction in CO2 Reduction in CO2 emissions 10 Environmental Stewardship, Emissions emissions from implementing the Energy and Climate Change project? Mitigation and Adaptation
B) What is the reduction in smog Reduction in smog forming 5 forming pollutants from implementing pollutants the project?
Vibrant Economy 6 Project Cost-Effectiveness What is the cost-effectiveness of the Enhanced cost-effectiveness 35 35 Mobility Choices, Regional project? measure incorporates the Economic Prosperity, following components: Binational Collaboration with Baja California, - Project cost Preservation and Safety of - Generalized delay costs the Transportation System, - Fuel costs Environmental Stewardship, - greenhouse gas emissions Energy and Climate Change - Smog forming pollutants Mitigation and Adaptation -Physical activity - Safety
45 26 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.8 Managed Lane Connector Project Rankings Intersecting Unconstrained Regional Freeway/ Total TransNet Freeway/ Movement Cost ($2014) Plan Project Highway Score Highway (millions) Rank
TransNet I-15 SR 78 East to South and North to West $106 62.4 1
TransNet I-5 I-805 North to North and South to South $101 61.6 2
I-805 SR 52 West to North and South to East $91 56.8 3
SR 15 I-805 North to North and South to South $81 53.2 4
I-5 SR 15 North to North and South to South $197 52.4 5
I-15 SR 52 West to North and South to East $131 49.5 6
I-15 SR 56 East to North and South to West $172 48.4 7
I-5 SR 78 South to East and West to North, $253 47.8 8 North to East and West to South
I-805 SR 94 North to West and East to South $101 46.1 9
I-5 SR 56 South to East and West to North $177 41.1 10
I-15 SR 163 North to North and South to South $162 40.5 11
I-805 SR 94 West to South and North to East $217 37.4 12
SR 94 SR 125 North to North and South to South $146 37.3 13
I-5 SR 56 North to East and West to South $152 35.3 14
I-805 SR 163 North to North and South to South $192 33.5 15
I-15 SR 52 West to South and North to East $141 33.0 16
I-805 SR 54 North to West and East to South $157 30.6 17
I-805 SR 94 East to North and South to East $212 26.4 18
I-5 SR 54 West to South and North to East $121 24.8 19
SR 52 SR 125 North to West and East to South $111 23.4 20
I-5 SR 54 South to East and West to North $121 22.3 21
TransNet SR 15 SR 94 South to West and East to North $71 16.1 22
46 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 27 Freeway-to-Freeway Connectors Freeway Connectors provide “missing link” connections between freeways. Many of the criteria from the highway corridor criteria are also utilized in this category. There are seven criteria for the Freeway Connectors, which are shown in Table M.9. The list of nine freeway-to-freeway connector projects evaluated for the Regional Plan can be seen in Table M.10 in priority order.
47 28 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.9 Project Evaluation Criteria Freeway Connector Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Innovative Mobility & Planning 1 Provides Congestion What is the number of daily Change in daily person-hours 20 35 Mobility Choices Relief person-hours saved from saved implementing the project?*
2 Project Safety How does the project Project percentage of crash 5 Preservation and Safety of the Transportation compare against the statewide rates measured against System average for collisions?* statewide averages
3 Provides Access to How will the project provide Proximity analysis of hazard 10 Preservation and Safety of the Transportation Evacuation Routes evacuation access for regional areas (dam failure, System, Partnerships and Collaboration, hazard areas? earthquake, flood, landslide, Binational Collaboration with Baja California liquefaction, tsunami, and wildfire), weighted by population and employment
Healthy Environment & Communities
4 Minimizes Habitat and How will the project minimize Proximity analysis of preserve 15 30 Habitat and Open Space Preservation, Residential Impacts negative habitat and areas, native habitats, and Environmental Stewardship residential impacts?* housing (more than two dwelling units per acre)
5 greenhouse gas and A) What is the reduction in Reduction in CO2 emissions 10 Environmental Stewardship, Energy and
Pollutant Emissions CO2 emissions from Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation implementing the project?*
B) What is the reduction in Reduction in smog forming 5 smog forming pollutants from pollutants implementing the project?*
48 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 29 Table M.9 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Freeway Connector Max Total No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Score Percent Policy Objectives
Vibrant Economy
6 Serves Goods What is the improved average Total travel time savings for 15 35 Mobility Choices, Regional Economic Movement and travel time for freight?* medium and heavy truck Prosperity, Binational Collaboration with Baja Relieves Freight System classes California Bottlenecks/Capacity Constraints
7 Project Cost- What is the cost-effectiveness Enhanced cost-effectiveness 20 Mobility Choices, Regional Economic Effectiveness of the project?* measure incorporates the Prosperity, Binational Collaboration with Baja following components: California, Preservation and Safety of the Transportation System, Environmental - Project cost Stewardship, Energy and Climate Change - Generalized delay costs Mitigation and Adaptation - Fuel costs - greenhouse gas emissions - Smog forming pollutants -Physical activity - Safety
* Provides dual evaluation for both passenger vehicles and trucks.
49 30 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.10 Freeway Connector Project Rankings Regional Intersecting Unconstrained Freeway/ Total Plan TransNet Freeway/ Movement Cost ($2014) Highway Score Project Highway (millions) Rank East to North and South to I-5 I-8 $326 88.4 1 West South to East and West to TransNet I-5 SR 78 $275 50.1 2 South
TransNet SR 94 SR 125 South to East $61 46.4 3
TransNet SR 94 SR 125 West to North $82 34.2 4
West to North and South to TransNet I-5 SR 56 $275 32.7 5 East
I-5 SR 94 North to East $133 27.6 6
I-15 SR 56 North to West $102 19.0 7
South Bay Expressway Connector Projects SB 125 to EB 905 & WB 905 SR 905 SR 125 $20 85 1 to NB 125 SB 125 to WB 905 & EB 905 SR 905 SR 125 $77 39 2 to NB 125
Rail Grade Separation Criteria The evaluation criteria for rail grade separation projects were initially developed by the San Diego Regional Traffic Engineers Council (SANTEC) composed of the local jurisdictions’ traffic engineers. These criteria have been refined over the years when developing RTPs. The criteria approved by the SANDAG Board for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan includes two new elements: the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from implementing the project and project cost-effectiveness. These elements were added to provide consistency with evaluation criteria for other modes or project types. In addition, the pedestrian benefits criterion was refined for the Regional Plan as pedestrian and bike/disadvantaged communities benefits to be more inclusive of benefits to cyclists and to consider the share of disadvantaged communities (low-income, minorities, and seniors 75+) within a half mile of the project.
Projects were prioritized based on two criteria categories: project-specific criteria and Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) housing production. The project-specific criteria are worth 75 percent, and the RHNA housing production criteria comprises 25 percent of the total project score. The criteria and weightings are shown in Table M.11. The final rankings are included in Table M.12.
50 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 31 Table M.11 Project Evaluation Criteria Rail Grade Separations San Diego Forward: No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Max Total Policy Objectives The Regional Plan Score Percent Goals
Innovative Mobility & 1 Peak-Period Exposure Product of the existing high Calculation based on vehicle 11 34 Mobility Choices Planning Index (PPEI) Factor directional traffic and the total traffic during a selected three- measured blocking delay during hour period, total blocking the same three hours of the day delay during same period, and experiencing the highest mathematical constant for time congestion at the crossing period 2 Peak-Day Total Delay Product of the existing average Calculation based on average 11 Mobility Choices Exposure Index (PDEI) daily traffic (ADT), the total daily traffic, total number of Factor number of trains, and an average trains, train crossing delay train crossing delay time factor factor, and mathematical constant 3 Pedestrian and Bike/ A) Number of pedestrians and Grade separation pedestrian 4 Mobility Choices, Disadvantaged people biking served in top 4 bike crossing counts Complete Communities Benefits hours Communities B) What is the share of Ratio of disadvantaged Mobility Choices, disadvantaged communities communities share of Partnerships and population in the proximity of the population within 1/2 mile of Collaboration project? project compared to disadvantaged communities share of regional population 4 Bus Operations Number of buses served an hour, Number of buses served by the 4 Mobility Choices, Benefits as well as proximity to transit grade separation Complete center Communities 5 Benefit to Emergency Proximity to emergency service Proximity analysis based on 4 Mobility Choices, Services provider and lack of nearby emergency service providers Complete alternative grade-separated and alternative grade Communities crossing separation crossing
51 32 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.11 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Rail Grade Separations (continued) San Diego Forward: No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Max Total Policy Objectives The Regional Plan Score Percent Goals
Healthy Environment 6 Accident History Accident history in the past five Number of qualifying accidents 11 26 Mobility Choices, & Communities years involving vehicles, pedestrians, Preservation and and bikes with trains, not Safety of the including accidents involved in Transportation attempted suicides System
7 Proximity to Noise Proximity to sensitive receptors Proximity analysis based on rail 4 Complete Sensitive Receptors crossing located within 200-500 Communities, feet of sensitive receptors Partnerships and Collaboration
8 greenhouse gas What is the reduction in CO2 Reduction in CO2 emissions 4 Environmental Emissions emissions from implementing the Stewardship, project? Energy and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation
9 Serves RCP Smart Is the project located near RCP Population and employment in 7 Complete Growth Areas Smart Growth Areas? all smart growth areas within Communities, 1/4 mile distance of project Regional Economic Prosperity, Habitat and Open Space Preservation
52 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 33 Table M.11 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Rail Grade Separations (continued) San Diego Forward: No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Max Total Policy Objectives The Regional Plan Score Percent Goals
Vibrant Economy 10 Truck Freight Percentage of daily truck traffic Percentage of daily traffic of 3 15 Mobility Choices, Operations Class 4-Class 13 (as defined by Regional Economic FHWA) Prosperity, Binational Collaboration with Baja California 11 Funding Request Percentage of total project costs Percentage of local contribution 4 Partnerships and contributed by the local agency Collaboration including funds already committed from state, federal, or other source 12 Project Cost- What is the cost-effectiveness of Enhanced cost-effectiveness 8 Mobility Choices, Effectiveness the project? measure incorporates the Regional Economic following components: Prosperity, - Number of trains per day Binational - AADT Collaboration with - Gate down time Baja California, - Percent truck traffic Environmental - Safety Stewardship, Energy and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation, Preservation and Safety of the Transportation System
53 34 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.11 (continued) Project Evaluation Criteria Rail Grade Separations (continued) San Diego Forward: No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation Max Total Policy Objectives The Regional Plan Score Percent Goals
Regional Housing 13 Regional Housing RHNA-related criteria as described Based on Board Policy No. 033 25 25 Complete Needs Assessment Needs Assessment in Board Policy No. 033. Eligibility Criteria: RHNA Share Taken; Communities, (RHNA) (RHNA) (per Board for Policy 33 points requires Regional Share of Cumulative Partnerships and Policy No. 033 housing element compliance and Total of Lower-Income Units Collaboration adopted January submittal of Annual Housing Produced; Total Number of 2012) Element Progress Reports to Affordable Housing Units; SANDAG. Percent of Lower Income Households
54 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 35 Table M.12 Rail Grade Separation Project Rankings Unconstrained Average Trains Total Regional Rail Name City Cost ($2014) Daily Per Score Plan Rank Designation (millions) Traffic Day
Palomar St Chula Vista $41 44,364 206 62.63 1 Light Rail Broadway/ Lemon Grove $82 40,403 144 60.19 2 Light Rail Lemon Grove Ave Ash St San Diego $103 30,575 195 59.81 3 Light Rail
H St Chula Vista $41 41,861 206 59.63 4 Light Rail
Washington St San Diego $41 30,345 195 58.81 5 Light Rail
E St Chula Vista $41 39,783 206 58.63 6 Light Rail
Broadway San Diego $113 27,845 150 55.81 7 Light Rail Light/Heavy Taylor St San Diego $113 42,670 195 55.81 7 Rail Euclid Ave San Diego $41 37,000 144 50.81 9 Light Rail
28th St San Diego $41 33,225 206 49.81 10 Light Rail
32nd St San Diego $41 32,470 206 46.81 11 Light Rail
Civic Center Dr Vista $41 34,916 68 44.44 12 Light Rail Auto Parkway and Escondido $36 27,623 68 42.13 13 Light Rail Mission Ave Sorrento Valley Blvd San Diego $134 37,990 51 40.81 14 Heavy Rail
Allison Ave/University Ave La Mesa $103 24,700 144 40.50 15 Light Rail
North Dr Vista $31 8,793 68 39.94 16 Light Rail
Vista Village Dr/Main St Vista $62 24,927 68 39.44 17 Light Rail
Severin Dr La Mesa $41 8,311 288 37.94 18 Light Rail
El Camino Real Oceanside $41 38,000 68 36.06 19 Light Rail Grand Ave/ Carlsbad $113 21,113 51 35.00 20 Heavy Rail Carlsbad Village Dr Melrose Dr Vista $41 25,921 68 31.94 21 Light Rail
Mar Vista Dr Vista $31 9,665 68 29.94 22 Light Rail
Los Angeles Dr Vista $31 4,291 68 29.94 22 Light Rail
Guajome St Vista $31 4,152 68 26.94 24 Light Rail
Leucadia Blvd Encinitas $93 34,000 51 18.50 25 Heavy Rail
Tamarack Ave Carlsbad $93 10,568 51 18.00 26 Heavy Rail
Cannon Road Carlsbad $93 6,416 51 12.00 27 Heavy Rail
* Downtown heavy rail trench in San Diego (Washington, Laurel, Hawthorn, Ash and Broadway Streets) excluded from rankings due to construction feasibility issues.
55 36 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Regional Arterial System The Regional Arterial System (RAS) constitutes that part of the local street and road network which, in conjunction with the system of highways and transit services, provides for a significant amount of mobility throughout the region. The RAS includes roads eligible for the Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Program (RCTIP) included in the TransNet Ordinance and other funding. The RAS was last updated through an extensive process as part of the 2030 RTP. Minor adjustments were requested by some local jurisdictions for the 2050 Regional Plan. A Regional Arterial System has been included as part of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) since 1989 and includes 1,090 miles of roads.
Regional arterials are considered to be longer contiguous routes that provide accessibility between communities within the region and which also may allow subregional trips to avoid freeway travel. Regional Plan RAS modifications and additions to the RAS are shown in bold in Table M.13.
Regional arterial system screening criteria In order to qualify for the updated Regional Arterial System (RAS), arterials must meet at least one of four approved criteria shown below. The first criterion is that the arterial is already included in the existing RAS. Any additions to the network must meet one of the remaining three criteria:
• Provides parallel capacity in high-volume corridors to supplement freeways, state highways, and/or other regional arterials (Corridor)
• Provides capacity and a direct connection between freeways or other regional arterials, ensuring continuity of the freeway, state highways, and arterial network throughout the region without duplicating other regional facilities (Cross-corridor)
• Provides all or part of the route for existing or planned regional and/or corridor transit service that provides headways of 15 minutes or less during the peak-period.
There are certain design characteristics that can help facilitate regional trip movements on the Regional Arterial System. These characteristics can help to facilitate trip movement and include:
• Interconnection and systems management of traffic signals
• Raised or striped medians
• Limitation and separation of left-turn movements
• Limited driveway access and other access controls
• Grade separations at rail crossings
• Shoulders and bikeways to accommodate bike movement
• Pedestrian treatments at intersections
• Priority traffic signal systems for transit service
• Bypass or “queue-jumper” lanes for transit service at critical intersections
• Enhanced transit stops
• Pedestrian facilities designed according to the Regional Pedestrian Design Guidelines
• Modern roundabouts and alternate intersection design where appropriate
• Freeway interchange modifications in accordance with Caltrans standards
56 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 37 A complete listing of the Regional Arterial System is provided in Table M.13 and shown in Figure M.1. All freeway interchanges are considered part of the Regional Arterial System.
Table M.13 Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
1 Cannon Rd Carlsbad Blvd to Buena Vista Dr Carlsbad
2 Carlsbad Blvd Eaton St to La Costa Ave Carlsbad
3 Carlsbad Village Dr Interstate 5 to Coast Blvd/Coast Highway Carlsbad
4 College Blvd City of Oceanside to Palomar Airport Rd Carlsbad
5 El Camino Real (S-11) State Route 78 to Olivenhain Carlsbad
6 Faraday Ave Melrose Dr to College Blvd Carlsbad
7 La Costa Ave Interstate 5 to El Camino Real Carlsbad
8 Melrose Dr City of Vista to Rancho Santa Fe Rd Carlsbad
9 Olivenhain Rd Los Pinos Circle to Rancho Santa Fe Rd Carlsbad
10 Palomar Airport Rd Carlsbad Blvd to Business Park Dr Carlsbad
11 Poinsettia Lane Carlsbad Blvd to Melrose Dr Carlsbad
12 Rancho Santa Fe Rd Melrose Dr to Olivenhain Rd Carlsbad
13 Bay Blvd E St to Stella St Chula Vista
14 Beyer Way Main St to City of San Diego Chula Vista
15 Bonita Rd 1st Ave to Interstate 805 Chula Vista
16 Broadway C St to Main St Chula Vista
17 E St H St to Bonita Rd Chula Vista
18 East H St Hilltop Dr to Mount Miguel Rd Chula Vista
19 H St E St to Hilltop Dr Chula Vista
20 Hunte Parkway Proctor Valley R to Eastlake Parkway Chula Vista
21 J St Marina Parkway to Broadway Chula Vista
22 L St Bay Blvd to Interstate 805 Chula Vista
23 La Media Rd Telegraph Canyon Rd to Main St Chula Vista
24 Main St West City limits to Eastlake Parkway Chula Vista
25 Marina Parkway H St to J St Chula Vista
26 Olympic Parkway Interstate 805 to Hunte Parkway Chula Vista
27 Orange Ave Palomar St to Interstate 805 Chula Vista
28 Otay Lakes Rd Bonita Rd to Wueste Rd Chula Vista
29 Otay Valley Rd) Main St to East of State Route 125 Chula Vista
57 38 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
30 Palomar St Bay Blvd to Orange Ave Chula Vista
31 Paseo Ranchero (Heritage Rd) East H St to City of San Diego Chula Vista
32 Proctor Valley Rd Mt. Miguel Rd to Hunte Parkway Chula Vista
33 Telegraph Canyon Rd Interstate 805 to Otay Lakes Rd Chula Vista
34 Willow St Sweetwater Rd to Bonita Rd Chula Vista
35 State Route 75 City of San Diego to City of Imperial Beach Coronado
36 Via de la Valle Highway 101 to Jimmy Durante Blvd Del Mar
37 2nd St Greenfield Dr to Main St El Cajon
38 Avocado Ave Main St to Chase Ave El Cajon
39 Avocado Blvd Chase Ave to Dewitt Court El Cajon
40 Ballantyne St Broadway to Main St El Cajon
41 Bradley Ave Cuyamaca St to County of San Diego El Cajon
42 Broadway State Route 67 to East Main St El Cajon
43 Chase Ave El Cajon Blvd to Rancho Valle Court El Cajon
44 Cuyamaca St City of Santee to Marshall Ave El Cajon
45 E Main St Broadway to Lavala Lane El Cajon
46 El Cajon Blvd Chase Ave to West Main St El Cajon
47 Fletcher Parkway City of La Mesa to State Route 67 El Cajon
48 Greenfield Dr Ballantyne St to Interstate 8 El Cajon
49 Jamacha Rd Main St to Grove Rd El Cajon
50 Marshall Ave Cuyamaca St to Fletcher Parkway El Cajon
51 Marshall Ave Fletcher Parkway to West Main St El Cajon
52 Marshall Ave West Main St to Washington Ave El Cajon
53 Navajo Rd State Route 125 to Fletcher Parkway El Cajon
54 Washington Ave El Cajon Blvd to Granite Hills Dr El Cajon
55 West Main St Interstate 8 to Marshall Ave El Cajon
56 Coast Highway City of Carlsbad to City of Solana Beach Encinitas
57 El Camino Real Olivenhain to Manchester Ave Encinitas
58 Encinitas Blvd Coast Highway 101 to El Camino Real Encinitas
59 La Costa Ave Coast Highway 101 to Interstate 5 Encinitas
60 Leucadia Blvd Coast Highway 101 to El Camino Real Encinitas
58 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 39 Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
61 Manchester Ave El Camino Real to Interstate 5 Encinitas
62 Olivenhain Rd El Camino Real to Los Pinos Circle Encinitas
63 Barham Dr Los Amigos to Mission Rd Escondido
64 Centre City Parkway Country Club Lane (Interstate 15) to South Escondido Escondido Blvd/South Centre City Parkway (Interstate 15)
65 Citracado Parkway Centre City Parkway to State Route 78 Escondido
66 East Valley Parkway Broadway to Valley Center Grade Rd Escondido
67 East Via Rancho Parkway Broadway to Sunset Dr Escondido
68 El Norte Parkway Nordahl Rd to Washington Ave Escondido
69 El Norte Parkway Woodland Parkway to Rees Rd Escondido
70 Felicita/17th Ave Interstate 15 to State Route 78 Escondido
71 Grand Ave/2nd Ave/Valley Blvd West Valley Parkway to East Valley Parkway Escondido
72 Hale Ave Washington Ave to Interstate 15 Escondido
73 Lincoln/Ash Parkway Broadway to Washington Ave Escondido
74 Mission Ave Andreason Dr to Centre City Parkway Escondido
75 Mission Rd Barham Dr to Andreason Dr Escondido
76 Via Rancho Parkway Del Dios Highway to Sunset Dr Escondido
77 Washington Ave State Route 78 to East Valley Parkway Escondido
78 West Valley Parkway Claudan Rd to Broadway Escondido
79 State Route 75 City of Coronado to City of San Diego Imperial Beach
80 70th St University Ave to Colony Rd La Mesa
81 70th St Saranac St to Interstate 8 La Mesa
82 El Cajon Blvd 73rd St to Interstate 8 La Mesa
83 Fletcher Parkway Interstate 8 to City of El Cajon La Mesa
84 Grossmont Center Dr Interstate 8 to Fletcher Parkway La Mesa
85 Jackson Dr La Mesa Blvd to North City limits La Mesa
86 La Mesa Blvd University Ave to Interstate 8 La Mesa
87 Lake Murray Interstate 8 to Dallas St La Mesa
88 Massachusetts Ave State Route 94 to University Ave La Mesa
89 Spring St Interstate 8 to State Route 125 La Mesa
90 University Ave 69th St to La Mesa Blvd La Mesa
59 40 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
91 Broadway Spring St to Lemon Grove Ave Lemon Grove
92 College Ave Livingston St to Federal Blvd Lemon Grove
93 Federal Blvd College Ave to State Route 94 Lemon Grove
94 Lemon Grove Ave Viewcrest Dr to State Route 94 Lemon Grove
95 Massachusetts Ave Broadway to State Route 94 Lemon Grove
96 Massachusetts Ave Lemon Grove Ave to Broadway Lemon Grove
97 Sweetwater Rd Broadway to Troy St Lemon Grove
98 30th St National City Blvd to 2nd St National City
99 Euclid Ave Cervantes Ave to Sweetwater Rd National City
100 Harbor Dr City of San Diego to Interstate 5 National City
101 National City Blvd Division St to 30th St National City
102 Palm Ave Interstate 805 to 18th St National City
103 Paradise Valley Rd 8th St to Plaza Blvd National City
104 Plaza Blvd National City Blvd to 8th St National City
105 Sweetwater Rd 2nd St to Plaza Bonita Center Way National City
106 Coast Highway Interstate 5 to Eaton St Oceanside
107 College Blvd North River Rd to State Route 78 Oceanside
108 El Camino Real Douglas Dr to State Route 78 Oceanside
109 Melrose Dr State Route 76 to Rancho Santa Fe Rd Oceanside
110 Mission Ave Coast Highway to Frazee Rd Oceanside
111 North River Rd Douglas Dr to State Route 76 Oceanside
112 North Santa Fe Ave State Route 76 to Melrose Dr Oceanside
113 Oceanside Blvd Coast Highway to Melrose Dr Oceanside
114 Rancho del Oro Dr State Route 78 to State Route 76 Oceanside
115 Vandegrift Blvd North River Rd to Camp Pendleton Oceanside
116 West Vista Way Jefferson St to Thunder Dr Oceanside
117 Camino del Norte World Trade Dr to Pomerado Rd Poway
118 Community Rd Twin Peaks Rd to Scripps Poway Parkway Poway
119 Espola Rd Summerfield Lane to Poway Rd Poway
120 Pomerado Rd Stonemill Dr to Gateway Park Rd Poway
121 Poway Rd Springhurst Dr to State Route 67 Poway
60 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 41 Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
122 Scripps Poway Parkway Springbrook Dr to Sycamore Canyon Rd Poway
123 Ted Williams Parkway Pomerado Rd to Twin Peaks Rd Poway
124 Twin Peaks Rd Pomerado Rd to Espola Rd Poway
125 1st Ave Harbor Dr to Interstate 5 San Diego City
126 4th Ave Market St to Washington St San Diego City
127 5th Ave Market St to Washington St San Diego City
128 6th Ave Ash St to State Route 163 San Diego City
129 10th Ave State Route 163 to Imperial Ave San Diego City
130 11th Ave G St to State Route 163 San Diego City
131 32nd St Harbor Dr to Wabash Blvd San Diego City
132 47th St State Route 94 to Interstate 805 San Diego City
133 54th St El Cajon Blvd to Euclid Ave San Diego City
134 70th St Colony Rd to Saranac St San Diego City
135 A St 11th Ave to Kettner Blvd San Diego City
136 Adams Ave Park Blvd to Interstate 15 San Diego City
137 Aero Dr State Route 163 to Interstate 15 San Diego City
138 Airway Rd Caliente Ave to State Route 125 San Diego City
139 Ash St Harbor Dr to 10th Ave San Diego City
140 Auto Circle Camino del Rio North to Camino del Rio South San Diego City
141 Balboa Ave Mission Bay Dr to Interstate 15 San Diego City
142 Barnett Ave Lytton St to Pacific Highway San Diego City
143 Bernardo Center Dr Camino del Norte to Interstate 15 San Diego City
144 Beyer Blvd Main St to East Beyer Blvd San Diego City
145 Beyer Way Main St to Palm Ave San Diego City
146 Britannia Blvd Otay Mesa Rd to Siempre Viva Rd San Diego City
147 Black Mountain Rd Del Mar Heights Rd to Carroll Canyon Rd San Diego City
148 Broadway Harbor Dr to 11th Ave San Diego City
149 Cabrillo Memorial Dr Cochran St to Cabrillo National Monument San Diego City
150 Camino del Norte Camino San Bernardo to World Trade Dr San Diego City
151 Camino del Rio North Mission Center Rd to Mission Gorge Rd San Diego City
152 Camino Ruiz Mira Mesa Blvd to Miramar Rd San Diego City
61 42 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
153 Camino Ruiz State Route 56 to Camino del Norte San Diego City
154 Camino Santa Fe Ave Sorrento Valley Blvd to Miramar Rd San Diego City
155 Canon St Rosecrans St to Catalina Blvd San Diego City
156 Carmel Mountain Rd Camino del Norte to Rancho Peñasquitos Blvd San Diego City
157 Carmel Mountain Rd Sorrento Valley Rd to El Camino Real San Diego City
158 Carmel Valley Rd North Torrey Pines Rd to El Camino Real San Diego City
159 Catalina Blvd Canon St to Cochran St San Diego City
160 Clairemont Dr Clairemont Mesa Blvd to Interstate 5 San Diego City
161 Clairemont Mesa Blvd Interstate 15 to Regents Rd San Diego City
162 College Ave Navajo Rd to Livingston St San Diego City
163 Collwood Blvd Montezuma Rd to El Cajon Blvd San Diego City
164 Convoy St Linda Vista Rd to State Route 52 San Diego City
165 Cesar E. Chavez Parkway Interstate 5 to Harbor Dr San Diego City
166 Dairy Mart Rd State Route 905 to Interstate 5 San Diego City
167 Del Dios Highway Via Rancho Parkway to Claudan Rd San Diego City
168 Del Mar Heights Rd Interstate 5 to Carmel Valley Rd San Diego City
169 El Cajon Blvd Park Blvd to 73rd St San Diego City
170 El Camino Real Via de la Valle to Carmel Mountain Rd San Diego City
171 Euclid Ave 54th St to Cervantes Ave San Diego City
172 F St State Route 94 to 10th Ave San Diego City
173 Fairmount Ave Interstate 8 to State Route 94 San Diego City
174 Friars Rd Sea World Dr to Mission Gorge Rd San Diego City
175 Front St Interstate 5 to Market St San Diego City
176 G St State Route 94 to 10th Ave San Diego City
177 Garnet Ave Balboa Ave to Mission Bay Dr San Diego City
178 Genesee Ave North Torrey Pines Rd to State Route 163 San Diego City
179 Gilman Dr La Jolla Village Dr to Interstate 5 San Diego City
180 Grand Ave Mission Blvd to Mission Bay Dr San Diego City
181 Governor Dr Interstate 805 to Regents Rd San Diego City
182 Grape St North Harbor Dr to Interstate 5 San Diego City
183 Harbor Dr Pacific Highway to City of National City San Diego City
62 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 43 Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
184 Hawthorn St Interstate 5 to North Harbor Dr San Diego City
185 Heritage Rd Otay Mesa Rd to Siempre Viva Rd San Diego City
186 Heritage Rd Otay Valley Rd to City of Chula Vista San Diego City
187 Imperial Ave Park Blvd to Lisbon St San Diego City
188 Ingraham St Sunset Cliffs Blvd to Grand Ave San Diego City
189 Kearny Villa Rd Pomerado Rd to Aero Dr San Diego City
190 Kettner Blvd Interstate 5 to India St San Diego City
191 La Jolla Blvd Pearl St to Turquoise St San Diego City
192 La Jolla Parkway Torrey Pines Rd to Interstate 5 San Diego City
193 La Jolla Shores Dr Torrey Pines Rd to North Torrey Pines Rd San Diego City
194 La Jolla Village Dr North Torrey Pines Rd to Interstate 805 San Diego City
195 La Media Rd Otay Mesa Rd to Siempre Viva Rd San Diego City
196 Lake Murray Blvd Dallas St to Navajo Rd San Diego City
197 Laurel St North Harbor Dr to Interstate 5 San Diego City
198 Lemon Grove Ave Lisbon St to Viewcrest Dr San Diego City
199 Linda Vista Rd Morena Blvd to Convoy St San Diego City
200 Lytton St Rosecrans St to Barnett Ave San Diego City
201 Market St Harbor Dr to Euclid Ave San Diego City
202 Mercy Rd Black Mountain Rd to Interstate 15 San Diego City
203 Mesa College Dr Interstate 805 to Marlesta Dr San Diego City
204 Midway Dr West Point Loma Blvd to Barnett Ave San Diego City
205 Mira Mesa Blvd Interstate 805 to Interstate 15 San Diego City
206 Miramar Rd Interstate 805 to Interstate 15 San Diego City
207 Mission Blvd Loring St to West Mission Bay Dr San Diego City
208 Mission Bay Dr Grand Av to Interstate 5 San Diego City
209 Mission Center Rd Camino del Rio North to Friars Rd San Diego City
210 Mission Gorge Rd Interstate 8 to Highridge Rd San Diego City
211 Montezuma Rd Fairmount Ave to El Cajon Blvd San Diego City
212 Morena Blvd Balboa Ave to Interstate 8 San Diego City
213 Navajo Rd Waring Rd to Fanita Dr San Diego City
214 Nimitz Blvd Interstate 8 to Harbor Dr San Diego City
63 44 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
215 North Harbor Dr Rosecrans St to Grape St San Diego City
216 North Torrey Pines Rd (S-21) Carmel Valley Rd to La Jolla Village Dr San Diego City
217 Ocean View Hills Parkway Interstate 805 to State Route 905 San Diego City
218 Otay Mesa Rd State Route 905 to State Route 125 San Diego City
219 Pacific Highway Sea World Dr to Harbor Dr San Diego City
220 Palm Ave State Route 75 to Interstate 805 San Diego City
221 Paradise Valley Rd Plaza Blvd to Meadowbrook Dr San Diego City
222 Park Blvd Imperial Ave to Adams Ave San Diego City
223 Picador Blvd Palm Ave to Interstate 905 San Diego City
224 Pomerado Rd Interstate 15 (north) to Interstate 15 (south) San Diego City
225 Poway Rd Interstate 15 to Springhurst Dr San Diego City
226 Qualcomm Way Intestate 8 to Friars Rd San Diego City
227 Rancho Bernardo Rd Interstate 15 to Summerfield Lane San Diego City
228 Rancho Carmel Dr Carmel Mountain Rd to Ted Williams Parkway San Diego City
229 Rancho Peñasquitos Blvd State Route 56 to Interstate 15 San Diego City
230 Regents Rd Genesee Ave to Clairemont Mesa Blvd San Diego City
231 Rosecrans St Interstate 8 to Canon St San Diego City
232 Ruffin Rd Kearny Villa Rd to Aero Dr San Diego City
233 Sabre Springs Parkway Ted Williams Parkway to Poway Rd San Diego City
234 San Ysidro Blvd Dairy Mart Rd to East Beyer Blvd San Diego City
235 Scripps Poway Parkway Interstate 15 to Springbrook Dr San Diego City
236 Sea World Dr West Mission Bay Dr to Morena Blvd San Diego City
237 Siempre Viva Rd Heritage Rd to State Route 905 San Diego City
238 Sorrento Valley Blvd Sorrento Valley Rd to Camino Santa Fe Ave San Diego City
239 Sports Arena Blvd Interstate 8 to Rosecrans St San Diego City
240 Sunset Cliffs Blvd Interstate 8 to West Mission Bay Dr San Diego City
241 Ted Williams Parkway Interstate 15 to Pomerado Rd San Diego City
242 Texas St Interstate 8 to University Ave San Diego City
243 Torrey Pines Rd Girard Ave to La Jolla Parkway San Diego City
244 University Ave State Route 163 to City of La Mesa San Diego City
245 Valencia Parkway Market St to Imperial Ave San Diego City
64 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 45 Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
246 Via de la Valle Jimmy Durante Blvd to El Camino Real San Diego City
247 Vista Sorrento Parkway Sorrento Valley Blvd to Carmel Mountain Rd San Diego City
248 Wabash Blvd 32nd St to Interstate 5 San Diego City
249 Washington St Pacific Highway to Park Blvd San Diego City
250 Waring Rd College Ave to Interstate 8 San Diego City
251 West Bernardo Dr Interstate 15 to Bernardo Center Dr San Diego City
252 West Mission Bay Dr Mission Blvd to Sunset Cliffs Blvd San Diego City
253 Woodman St State Route 54 to Imperial Ave San Diego City
254 Alpine Blvd Interstate 8/Dunbar Lane to Interstate 8/Willows Rd San Diego County
255 Avocado Blvd Dewitt Court to State Route 94 San Diego County
256 Bear Valley Parkway City of Escondido (north) to City of Escondido (south) San Diego County
257 Bonita Rd Interstate 805 to San Miguel Rd San Diego County
258 Borrego Springs/Yaqui Pass Rd Palm Canyon Dr (S-22) to State Route 78 San Diego County (S-3)
259 Bradley Ave Wing Ave to Winter Garden Blvd San Diego County
260 Buckman Springs/Sunrise Highway State Route 94 to State Route 79 San Diego County (S-1)
261 Buena Creek Rd South Santa Fe Ave to Twin Oaks Valley Rd San Diego County
262 Camino del Norte Rancho Bernardo Rd to City of San Diego San Diego County
263 Campo Rd Spring St to Sweetwater Springs/State Route 54 San Diego County
264 Citracado Parkway Greenwood Place to Interstate 15 San Diego County
265 Cole Grade Rd State Route 76 to Valley Center Rd San Diego County
266 Deer Springs Rd Twin Oaks Valley Rd to Interstate 15 San Diego County
267 Dehesa Rd Jamacha Rd to Harbison Canyon Rd San Diego County
268 Dehesa Rd* Harbison Canyon Rd to Sycuan Rd San Diego County
269 Del Dios Highway Via Rancho Parkway to Paseo de Delicias San Diego County
270 Dye Rd State Route 67 to San Vicente Rd San Diego County
271 Dye St State Route 67 to Dye Rd San Diego County
272 East Vista Way State Route 76 to City of Vista San Diego County
273 El Norte Parkway Rees Rd to Nordahl Rd San Diego County
274 Euclid Ave City of National City to City of National City San Diego County
275 Gamble Lane Eucalyptus Ave to City of Escondido San Diego County 65 46 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
276 Gopher Canyon Rd East Vista Way to Old Highway 395 San Diego County
277 Jamacha Rd City of El Cajon to State Route 94 San Diego County
278 Jamacha Rd State Route 125 to State Route 94 San Diego County
279 Keyes Rd (Southern Traffic Bypass) San Vicente Rd to State Route 78 (Julian Rd) San Diego County
280 Lake Jennings Park Rd State Route 67 to Interstate 8 San Diego County
281 Lake Wohlford Rd Valley Center Rd (north) to Valley Center Rd (south) San Diego County
282 Las Posas Rd City of San Marcos to Buena Creek Rd San Diego County
283 Lone Star Rd City of San Diego to Loop Rd San Diego County
284 Mapleview St State Route 67 to Lake Jennings Rd San Diego County
285 Mar Vista Drive City of Oceanside to City of Vista San Diego County
286 Melrose Dr City of Oceanside to City of Vista San Diego County
287 Mission Rd (S-13) Interstate 15 to State Route 76 San Diego County
288 Mountain Meadow Rd Interstate 15/Deer Springs Rd to Valley Center Rd San Diego County
289 Montezuma Valley/Palm Canyon State Route 79 to Imperial County Line San Diego County (S-22)
290 Nordahl Rd El Norte to City of San Marcos San Diego County
291 Old Highway 80 Buckman Springs Rd to Interstate 8 (In-ko-pah) San Diego County
292 Old Highway 80 State Route 79 to Sunrise Highway San Diego County
293 Old Highway 395/Champagne/ East Mission Rd to City of Escondido San Diego County North Centre City
294 Otay Lakes Rd Wueste Rd to State Route 94 San Diego County
295 Otay Mesa Rd City of San Diego to Loop Rd San Diego County
296 Paradise Valley Rd City of San Diego to Sweetwater Rd San Diego County
297 Paseo Delicias El Camino del Norte to Via de la Valle San Diego County
298 Rancho Bernardo Rd City of San Diego (west) to City of San Diego (east) San Diego County
299 San Felipe Rd/Overland Route County Route S-22 to Imperial County Line San Diego County (S-2)
300 San Vicente Rd/10th St State Route 67 (Main St) to Wildcat Canyon Rd San Diego County
301 Scripps Poway Parkway Sycamore Canyon Rd to State Route 67 San Diego County
302 Siempre Viva Rd City of San Diego to Loop Rd San Diego County
303 South Santa Fe Ave City of Vista to City of San Marcos San Diego County
304 Sunrise Highway State Route 79 to Interstate 8 San Diego County
66 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 47 Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
305 Sweetwater Rd (Bonita) Willow St to City of National City San Diego County
306 Sweetwater Rd (Spring Valley) Jamacha Blvd to Broadway San Diego County
307 Sweetwater Springs Blvd Jamacha Blvd to State Route 94 San Diego County
308 Valley Center Rd State Route 76 to City of Escondido San Diego County
309 Valley Center New Northern E to Cole Grade Rd to Old Highway 395 San Diego County W Rd
310 Via de la Valle City of San Diego to Paseo Delicias San Diego County
311 Via Rancho Parkway Del Dios Highway to City of Escondido San Diego County
312 Wildcat Canyon Rd* Mapleview St to San Vicente Rd San Diego County
313 Willow Glen Dr Jamacha Rd to Dehesa Rd San Diego County
314 Willows Rd Interstate 8 to Viejas Casino San Diego County
315 Winter Gardens Blvd State Route 67 to 2nd St San Diego County
316 Barham Dr Twin Oaks Valley Rd to Los Amigos San Marcos
317 Borden Rd Las Posas Rd to Woodland Parkway San Marcos
318 Buena Creek Rd Twin Oaks Valley Rd to Sunny Vista Lane San Marcos
319 Discovery St San Marcos Blvd to Twin Oaks Valley Rd San Marcos
320 Las Posas Rd West San Marcos Blvd to North City Limits San Marcos
321 Mission Rd Pacific St to Barham Dr San Marcos
322 San Elijo Rd Twin Oaks Valley Rd to Rancho Santa Fe Rd San Marcos
323 Rancho Santa Fe Rd Mission Rd to Melrose Dr San Marcos
324 San Marcos Blvd Business Park Dr to Mission Rd San Marcos
325 South Santa Fe Ave Smilax Rd to Pacific St San Marcos
326 Twin Oaks Valley Rd Deer Springs Rd to Questhaven Rd San Marcos
327 Woodland Parkway Barham Dr to El Norte Parkway San Marcos
328 Cuyamaca St Mission Gorge Rd to City of El Cajon Santee
329 Magnolia Ave Mast Blvd to Prospect Ave/State Route 67 Santee
330 Mast Blvd State Route 52 to Magnolia Ave Santee
331 Mission Gorge Rd City of San Diego to Magnolia Ave Santee
332 Woodside Ave Magnolia Ave to State Route 67 Santee
333 Coast Highway City of Encinitas to City of Del Mar Solana Beach
334 Lomas Santa Fe Ave Interstate 5 to Coast Highway Solana Beach
67 48 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table M.13 (continued) Regional Arterials by Jurisdiction
Arterial Limits Jurisdiction
335 Bobier Dr North Melrose Dr to East Vista Way Vista
336 Cannon Rd (Mar Vista Dr) South Melrose Dr to State Route 78 Vista
337 East Vista Way Escondido Ave to County of San Diego Vista
338 Emerald Dr Sunset Dr to State Route 78 Vista
339 Escondido Ave State Route 78 to East Vista Way Vista
340 North Melrose Dr State Route 78 to Bobier Dr Vista
341 North Santa Fe Ave Main St to North Melrose Dr Vista
342 Olive Ave Emerald Dr to Vista Village Dr Vista
343 South Melrose Dr City of Carlsbad to State Route 78 Vista
344 South Santa Fe Ave Main St to County of San Diego Vista
345 Sycamore Ave South Santa Fe Ave to South Melrose Dr Vista
346 Thibodo Rd Mar Vista Dr (Cannon Rd) to Sycamore Ave Vista
347 Vista Village Dr State Route 78 to Escondido Ave Vista
348 West Vista Way Thunder Dr to Vista Village Dr Vista * Included in the Regional Arterial System contingent upon being designated as a four-lane arterial by the County of San Diego.
68 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 49 Map Area San Diego Region Pauma and Yuima Reservation Pala Reservation Camp Pendleton
5 15
Rincon 76 Reservation La Jolla Reservation
76
Oceanside Vista San Pasqual 78 San Reservation Marcos County of San Diego
Santa Ysabel Carlsbad Reservation Escondido
Mesa Grande 78 Reservation
78
Encinitas 67 5 Solana Beach Poway
Del Mar 56 Barona Reservation
15 Capitan Grande Reservation
805 Santee 52 67 52 8 5 San 125 Diego La Sycuan Mesa Reservation El Cajon 163 8
15
Figure M.1 94 Lemon Grove Regional Arterial 125 Jamul Indian Village System 282 October 2015 Coronado 54
Freeways and Highways National City Regional Arterials 125 94
75 805 MILES Chula Vista
KILOMETERS San Diego 5 Imperial 905 UNITED STATES Beach MEXICO 2-D 2 1-D 1
Tijuana, B.C. 2889 69 50 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Federal Guidance The Regional Plan considers projects and strategies that support the eight areas described in 23 U.S. §134(h). Many of these topics have been incorporated into the evaluation criteria as highlighted in the sections below. Additional consideration is included in the performance measures which are discussed in Appendix N.
Economic vitality Each project category includes a project cost-effectiveness criterion. The transit, highway, and connector cost-effectiveness criterion compare the project cost to the monetized benefits/dis-benefits of: fuel costs, greenhouse gas emissions, smog-forming pollutants, physical activity, safety, generalized delay costs (highway and connectors), as well as the value of jobs created by the construction of the project.
Transportation safety The evaluation of transportation safety is included in the Highway Corridor criteria where the percentage of collisions is compared against the statewide average. This approach is consistent with the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). The value of the reduction or increase in injury and fatal accidents is also included in the cost- effectiveness criterion in the Highway Corridor, Transit Services, Freeway and HOV Connectors criteria, and is also incorporated into the Rail Grade Separations criteria.
Transportation security Transportation security is specifically addressed under the evaluation of proximity analysis of hazard areas (dam failure, earthquake, flood, landslide, liquefaction, tsunami, and wildfire), weighted by population and employment. This criterion is included under both the Highway Corridor and Transit Services project evaluation.
Accessibility and mobility Accessibility and mobility are incorporated into a number of the project evaluation criteria. Accessibility to jobs, school, recreational areas and beach, and Indian reservations is evaluated. Travel time savings is also included in the highway and connector criteria. The active transportation and transit criteria evaluate the system wide increase in the respective active transportation or transit trips resulting from the project.
Environment and quality of life Preservation of the environment is incorporated into a number of criteria including reduction in greenhouse gas and smog forming pollutants, and minimizing habitat and residential impacts. The value of greenhouse gas and smog forming pollutants emissions are also monetized and included in the cost-effectiveness criterion.
The criteria also awards points to projects which serve smart growth areas as identified in the Regional Comprehensive Plan. For the first time, a specific measure for public health was integrated into the evaluation criteria, which measures the increase in time engaged in moderate transportation-related physical activity. Access to jobs and amenities, cleaner air and preserved habitats, travel time savings, and physical activity all help to improve the quality of life in the San Diego region.
Integration and connectivity The project evaluation criteria evaluates enhanced integration of the transportation system for both people and freight. A goods movement criterion quantifies the total travel time savings for medium and heavy trucks for highway and freeway connector projects.
Multimodal integration of the transportation system for people is also evaluated by the project’s provision of access to other transit, highway, rail grade separation, or active transportation projects.
70 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 51 Promote efficient system management The Regional Plan strives to provide an efficient transportation system for the movement of people and goods. Criteria are included which quantify the travel time savings for people and goods and also award points for highway projects which include Managed Lanes, which can be optimally operated to serve transit, carpools, and, when capacity is available, single occupant vehicles (for a fee). The Regional Plan also funds projects and programs including Transportation Systems Management and other strategies to assure efficient management and operation of the transportation system. Additional information and funding levels for these and all transportation projects can be viewed in Chapter 3.
Preserve existing transportation system The Regional Plan funds projects and programs to assure the maintenance and operation of the transportation system. Additional information and funding levels for these and all transportation projects can be viewed in Chapter 3.
71 52 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Endnotes
1 Working with the San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan community-based organization network, “Disadvantaged Communities” are defined as low-income (200 percent of Federal Poverty Rate), minority, seniors (75+), and single-parent households with children under 18 years of age.
72 Appendix M :: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria and Rankings 53 Network Performance Measures from the 2015 Regional Plan Attachment 7
Table N.1 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan: Performance Measures
Policy Goals Key Questions Performance Measure Objectives
Innovative Mobility 1. Are travel times reduced? 1A. Average peak-period travel time to work (drive alone, carpool, transit, bike, and walk) Mobility and Choices (Communities of Concern and Non-Communities of Concern) Planning 1B. Daily vehicle delay per capita (minutes)
2. Are more people walking, 2A. Increase in walk, bike, transit, and carpool mode share biking, using transit and sharing rides?
3. Is the transportation 3A. Annual projected number of vehicle (driver/passenger) injury/fatal collisions per vehicle miles system safer? traveled (VMT)
3B. Annual projected number of bike/pedestrian injury/fatal collisions per bike/pedestrian miles traveled (BPMT)
Vibrant Regional 4. Do the transportation 4A. Benefit/Cost Ratio of transportation investments Economy Economic investments help to 4B. Average truck/commercial vehicle travel times to and around regional gateways and distribution Prosperity, improve the regional hubs (minutes) Partnerships economy? and 5. Are the relative costs of 5A. Change in percent of income consumed by transportation costs (communities of Concern and Collaboration transportation changing Non-Communities of Concern) similarly for all communities?
6. Are connections to 6A. Average travel times to/from tribal lands (minutes) neighboring counties, 6B. Average travel times to/from Mexico (minutes) Mexico, tribal lands, and military bases/ installations 6C. Average travel times to/from neighboring counties (Imperial, Orange, Riverside) (minutes) improved? 6D. Average travel times to/from military bases/installations (minutes)
73 4 San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Table N.1 (continued) San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan: Performance Measures
Policy Goals Key Questions Performance Measure Objectives
Healthy Complete 7. Does the transportation 7A. Percentage of population/employment within 0.5 miles of high frequency (<=15 min peak and Environment Communities, network support smart midday) transit stops (Communities of Concern and Non-Communities of Concern) and Habitat and growth? 7B. Percentage of population/employment within 0.5 miles of a transit stop (Communities of Concern Communities Open Space and Non-Communities of Concern) Preservation, Environmental 7C. Percentage of population/employment within 0.25 miles of a bike facility (class I and II, cycletrack, Stewardship and bike boulevard) (Communities of Concern and Non-Communities of Concern)
7D. Average travel distance to work (drive alone, carpool, transit, bike, and walk) (miles)
7E. Total time engaged in transportation-related physical activity per capita (minutes)
7F. Percent of population engaging in more than 20 minutes of daily transportation related physical activity
8. Is access to jobs and key 8A. Percent of population within 30 minutes of jobs and higher education (Communities of Concern destinations improving for and Non-Communities of Concern) all communities? 8B. Percent of population within 15 minutes of goods and services (retail, medical, parks, and beaches) (Communities of Concern and Non-Communities of Concern)
9. Is the region’s air quality 9A. On-road smog-forming pollutants (pounds/day) per capita improving?
10. Are GHG emissions 10A. On-road CO2 emissions (pounds/day) per capita and regionwide reduced?
74 Appendix N :: Evaluating the Performance of the Transportation Network 5 11/16/2017
100% Renewable Energy Pathway Update
Jack Clark, Deputy Director Energy & Sustainability City of San Diego
Strategy 2 ‐ Clean & Renewable Energy
Goal Achieve 100% renewable energy city‐wide by 2035.
Action Present to City Council for consideration a Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) or another program that increases the renewable energy supply.
1 11/16/2017
Research Pathways
3rd party peer CCA RFP for Awardee review/staff CCA FS selected CCA FS review CCA FS released Community Outreach/Input
DEC 2017/ APRIL SEPT NOV JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT 2016 2017 JAN 2018 Staff Recommend‐ ation to rd 100% RFI 100% RFP 3 party peer Committee and Renewables follow‐up Renewables issued review/staff Council RFI RFSQ Other review Program(s) RFI responses received
Energy Source Options
ELECTRIC DELIVERY SDG&E Utility Service CCA Utility
ELECTRIC DELIVERY SDG&E Utility Service
2 11/16/2017
Current CCA Landscape
Apple Valley Choice Energy and Silicon Valley Clean Energy became operational in April 2017. Redwood Coast Energy Authority became operational in May 2017. Mendocino County became part of Sonoma Clean Power in June 2017. The remaining CCAs scheduled to launch in 2017 appear to be delayed until 2018 as of the date of this report.
Goals of CCA Feasibility Study
1. Determine how a CCA will help achieve the City’s renewable energy policy, 2. Identify solutions to any potential barriers to CCA implementation, and 3. Provide option(s) as to how a City CCA could be successfully implemented.
3 11/16/2017
Scope of CCA Feasibility Study • Assumptions • Results • Benefits • Risks • CCA Implementation • Study Conclusions and Recommendations
Assumptions • No unbundled Renewable Energy Credits • Load Forecast • Cost of Power Procurement • Revenue Requirement • Exit fees • Financial structure of CCA
4 11/16/2017
Pathway to 100% Renewable Energy
Risks Power Credit Procurement
Regulatory Opt out
Exit Fees Renewable Generation
Possible risk mitigation strategies are provided in detail in the Study.
5 11/16/2017
Average PCIA Fee Increase Across All Customer Classes from 2017‐2035
0.20 1040%
0.15 kWh
0.10 per
$
0.05 105%
0.00 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 Base Case (SDG&E PCIA Projection) Sensitivity 3 (incremental 10% increase beginning in 2020)
Study Conclusions • Have electric rates that are competitive with the incumbent utility • Be reliably solvent and financially feasible • Generate enough net margins to make substantial investments in high priority energy initiatives and/or increase renewable portfolio content of procured power • Have positive economic impact
6 11/16/2017
Research Pathways
3rd party peer CCA RFP for Awardee review/staff CCA FS selected CCA FS review CCA FS released Community Outreach/Input
DEC 2017/ APRIL SEPT NOV JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT 2016 2017 JAN 2018 Staff Recommend‐ ation to rd 100% RFI 100% 3 party peer Committee and Renewables follow‐up Renewables review/staff Council RFI RFSQ Other review Program(s) RFI responses received
San Diego Distributed Solar Adoption
Solar Interconnections in SDGE Territory
120000 2013 – 2015 100000 2008 – 2011 Expectations of expiring PPAs beginning Federal Tax Credit 80000 2007 to gain popularity CSI program launched 2012 2015 Interconnections 60000 CSI Program saw a 334% annual
of NEM2 preceding opened,
growth in Thirdspurring‐Party market Owned uncertainties 40000 2008 systems (leasesfor the and future PPAs value of NEM 2005 PACE Number Federal Tax established 20000 Credit established
0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Year Residential Commerical & Industrial Other
7 11/16/2017
Self Generation Incentive Program
3500 Wind Turbine
Waste Heat to Power 3000 Response to program modification; 2/3 of Pressure Reduction Turbine 2500 storage applications in 2017 have been Photovoltaic residential 2000 Microturbine
applications (2000/3000) of
Program modified to Internal Combustion 1500 allocate 75% of incentive budget to storage Gas Turbine Number technologies, with 1000 residential carve out Fuel Cell Electric
500 Fuel Cell CHP
Electrochemical 0 Storage 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Program year
San Diego County: EV Cumulative Volume
Includes content supplied by R.L. Polk & Co.; Copyright © R.L. Polk & Co., 2015. All rights reserved
8 11/16/2017
100% Renewable Energy Pathway Update
www.sandiego.gov/sustainability/clean‐and‐renewable‐energy
9 11/16/2017
City of Solana Beach CCA Update
SANDAG Joint TWG/EWG Meeting 11/9/17
What is a CCA?
Community Choice Aggregation is a local, not‐for‐profit governmental program that buys and may generate electrical power on behalf of its residents, businesses, and governmental entities.
2
1 11/16/2017
CCA Benefits
• Choice – Currently, customers have no choice but to use SDG&E
• Local Control – CCA’s are run by a Board of Directors (City Council) o Rate setting process is held locally and with transparency/public involvement o City Council is beholden to the rate payers, not shareholders o Allows programs to be tailored to specific needs of the community
• Higher % of Renewable Energy Content o Investor owned utilities (IOUs) respond to mandates (RPS), CCAs respond to local needs/desires. o One of the top mitigation measures in the City’s Climate Action Plan. Without a higher renewable energy content, City will not meet CAP goals
3
Statewide CCAs To date, there are thirteen (13) operational CCA programs in California:
• Marin Clean Energy Sonoma Clean Power • Projected that CCA’s will account for • Lancaster Choice Energy (City-only CCA) approximately 70% of total energy load • CleanPowerSF in entire State by 2020 • Peninsula Clean Energy • Redwood Coast Energy Authority • Silicon Valley Clean Energy • Apple Valley Choice Energy (City-only CCA) • East Bay Community Energy • Los Angeles County Choice Energy • Monterey Bay Community Power • Pioneer Community Energy • Pico Rivera Innovative Municipal Energy (PRIME)
There are another six (6) emerging CCA programs actively being developed:
• San Jose Clean Energy • South Bay Clean Power • Western Riverside Association of Governments (WRCOG), Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) • San Jacinto Power • King City 4 • Valley Clean Energy Alliance
2 11/16/2017
Current Operational Member* Overview
Customer Peak Minimum Unbundled Annual Load Member Accounts Load MW RPS RECs 2017 GWh Apple Valley Clean 29,000 70 35% 8% 235 Energy** CleanPowerSF** 76,000 95 40% 0 535 Lancaster Choice Energy 52,000 198 35% 8% 590 Los Angeles County 285,000 877 50% 0 3,470 Community Energy*** MCE** 260,000 520 55% 0 ‐ 3% 2,900 Monterey Bay 307,000 680 TBD TBD 3,800 Community Power*** Peninsula Clean Energy 300,000 660 50% 0 3,800 Pico Rivera Innovative 17,000 50 50% 0 215 Municipal Energy Silicon Valley Clean Energy 240,000 680 50% 0 3,700 Redwood Coast Energy 60,000 140 40% 0 730 Authority** Sonoma Clean Power 227,000 510 43% 0 2,434 CalCCA Member Totals 1,853,000 4,480 MW 45% (avg) 1.8% (avg) 22,409 GWh
* East Bay Clean Energy and Pioneer Clean Energy are also Operational Members of CalCCA with data forthcoming in 2017/18 ** Represents partial enrollment with additional phases planned for 2018 *** Represents estimates for program launching in 2018
Current CCA state resources…
3 11/16/2017
CCA Accomplishments
Building California Renewables • Constructing renewables quickly • Takes 3-4 years of operations to create a diverse long-term portfolio • Over $1 billion in construction to date • Majority of spending on projects with project labor agreements
Job Creation • 2,800+ California jobs supported by MCE since 2010 • 80 jobs created by Lancaster Choice Energy since 2015 • 1.2 million union labor hours created through MCE renewable projects in 2016
Solana Beach Background
• 2012 – CCAs placed in the City Council Work Plan as an “Unprioritized” Environmental Sustainability Issue • 2013 – Elevated to a “Priority” Environmental Sustainability Issue in the City Council Work Plan • January 2015 – City became first jurisdiction in San Diego to adopt a Resolution of Support to continue studying the feasibility of CCA • May 2016 –CCA Technical/Feasibility Study presented to Council • June 2016 – Council authorized the release of a RFQ/P to solicit proposals for consultant assistance in the development, financing and ongoing administration of a CCA program • September 2016 – Staff updated Council on three (3) proposals and began evaluating the proposals with assistance from outside expert consultants • November 2016 – Council authorized City Manager to initiate negotiations with TEA/Noble to provide CCA-related services to the City.
8
4 11/16/2017
Where We Are Now
• May 24, 2017 - City Council authorized the execution of professional services agreements with The Energy Authority (TEA) and Calpine to enter into Phase 1 • October 11, 2017 – Council authorized entering into Phases 2 and 3 for final development and launch Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
9
Climate Action Plan
• July 12, 2017 – City adopted first ever CAP • Reduction Targets (alignment with State targets) o 15 percent below 2010 levels by 2020 o 50 percent below 2010 levels by 2035
10
5 11/16/2017
Climate Action Plan
Table 3-4 Summary of Electricity and Natural Gas Measures Table 3-3 Summary of Transportation Measures GHG Reductions GHG Reductions (MTCO e) Measure Measure Number Measure Description 2 Measure Description (MTCO2e) Number 2035 2035 T-1 Increase EVs and AFVs VMT to 30% of total VMT 17,495 Increase commuting by vanpools to 20% of labor Implement a Community Choice Aggregation T-2 608 E-1 10,466 force program, subject to City Council approval T-3 Reduce average commuter trip distance by 1 mile 464 Achieve 10.8 MW residential rooftop solar E-2 5,858 Increase commuting by mass transit to 10% of labor photovoltaic systems T-4 429 force Achieve 2 MW commercial rooftop solar E-3 1,085 Increase preferred parking for EVs and AFVs to 20% photovoltaic systems T-5 325 of eligible parking spots Solar hot water heating at 20% of existing E-4 2,811 T-6 Retime four traffic signals 144 commercial spaces T-7 Promote telecommuting to achieve 10% participation 86 Solar hot water heating at 25% of new homes and Convert municipal gasoline fueled vehicle fleet to EVs E-5 539 T-8 56 home retrofits to achieve 50% gasoline reduction Reduction in non-space/water heating residential E-6 359 T-9 Increase commuting by walking to 5% of labor force 16 natural gas use by 15% Increase commuting by bicycling by achieving T-10 11 Residential energy efficiency retrofits to achieve approximately 17 bike lane miles E-7 59 15% reduction Promote alternative work schedule to achieve T-11 9 Commercial energy efficiency retrofits to achieve participation from 1% of labor force E-8 37 15% reduction TOTAL 19,643 TOTAL 21,214 Notes: Columns may not add to totals due to rounding. AFV = alternative fuel vehicle; EV = electric vehicle; GHG = greenhouse gas; VMT = Notes: Columns may not add to totals due to rounding. vehicle miles traveled MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; MW = megawatts MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent Source: EPIC 2017. Source: EPIC 2017. 11
Financial Analysis • Base Scenario – 33% Renewable Energy (RPS Compliant)
• 50% Renewable Energy and 2% Rate Savings
• 100% Renewable Opt-Up (Voluntary) o Based on 50% default portfolio o Between $0.003/kWh - $0.010/kWh higher than 50% default rate
12
6 11/16/2017
CCA Structure
• Single-City CCA o Lancaster Choice Energy o CleanPowerSF o Apple Valley Choice Energy
• City remains engaged in discussions of potentially forming a JPA with other San Diego jurisdictions o North Coastal Region (Del Mar, Encinitas, Carlsbad and Oceanside) o City of San Diego
13
Next Steps
Task Date Finalize Implementation Plan and November 2017 Submit to Council for Approval File Implementation Plan with CPUC December 2017 CPUC Certifies Implementation Plan February/March 2018 Complete Initial Power Procurement February/March 2018 Finalize Program Budget, NEM Tariff March 2018 and Approve Rates Send First Enrollment Notices March/April 2018 Send Second Enrollment Notices April/May 2018 Program Launch June/July 2018
• Community Engagement/Outreach to occur throughout the process • Council/Board to be engaged in public meetings to determine program structure, rates, local programs, etc.
14
7 11/16/2017
Dan King, Assistant City Manager [email protected] 858-720-2477
8 11/16/2017
Sempra Services Corporation is not the same company as the California utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) or Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), and Sempra Services Corporation is not regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission. 1
• Sempra Services supports CCA as long as it is done the right way. Issues that must be considered in order to guarantee a successful CCA include:
• It must be equitable for the region’s electric customers – utility customers should not have to subsidize CCA customers
• It must provide real and additional environmental benefits beyond what would otherwise occur or already occurring
• It must reduce greenhouse gas emissions –new renewable energy projects must be built to create additional GHG emission reductions as the City pursues its goal of 100% renewable energy by 2035
Sempra Services Corporation is not the same company as the California utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) or Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), and Sempra Services Corporation is not regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
1 11/16/2017
• Assessment of the City of San Diego Draft Feasibility Study = Study is Not Conclusive, Complete
• The Draft Feasibility study does not conclude that it can achieve a 100% renewable energy portfolio
• It does not result in increased renewable energy resources and GHG Emission Reductions
• It recognizes, but appears to disregard, the risks associated with the likely increase in the PCIA in 2018 and future years
• The study relies on an unsupported IOU rate increase projection that is inconsistent with other analysis by the same authors
• Until these can be resolved, feasibility of CCA cannot be determined
Sempra Services Corporation is not the same company as the California utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) or Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), and Sempra Services Corporation is not regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
• The County of Santa Barbara has just released its own Feasibility Study of CCA and determined that it was INFEASIBLE due to the following:
• Concludes that rates of the proposed CCA were always higher than the utility
• CCA rates and utility rates increased over time at roughly the same rate in the Santa Barbara study, unlike in the San Diego study. Why the difference?
• Conclusion‐Costs would need to drop 40% or utility rates would need to increase 4% each year in order for CCA rates to be comparable to the utility’s rates
Sempra Services Corporation is not the same company as the California utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) or Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), and Sempra Services Corporation is not regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
2 11/16/2017
Sempra Services Corporation is not the same company as the California utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) or Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), and Sempra Services Corporation is not regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
Sempra Services Corporation is not the same company as the California utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) or Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), and Sempra Services Corporation is not regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
3 11/16/2017
Sempra Services Corporation is not the same company as the California utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) or Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), and Sempra Services Corporation is not regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
Sempra Services Corporation is not the same company as the California utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) or Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), and Sempra Services Corporation is not regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
4 11/16/2017
Sempra Services Corporation is not the same company as the California utilities, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) or Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), and Sempra Services Corporation is not regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission.
5 11/16/2017
1
Regional Framework for Climate Action Planning
Joint Regional Planning Technical Working Group and Regional Energy Working Group Meeting
November 9, 2017
Regional Framework Goals • Ensure local climate planning activities have consistency in methodologies and use best available data for the San Diego region • Provide guidance to local jurisdictions and climate planning services available through the Energy Roadmap Program
2
1 11/16/2017
Guiding Principles
Causation- Regional Transparency based consistency
Use of Flexibility Local accepted and relevancy methods adaptability
3
Regional Framework Structure
Quantifying Monitoring Benefit- GHG Reduction & Inventories CEQA Cost Measures Evaluation Analysis
Technical Technical Technical Appendix Appendix Technical Admin Appendix Appendix Costs
Reduction CAP Measure ‘Master List’ Outline Inventory Monitoring Public Report Summary Report Template Implementation Template Report Plan Outline Costs Template
Data Collection & Management of Master Data Matrix
2 11/16/2017
Local Government Workshops
• Subregional workshops on each framework topic • April-July 2017 • Opportunity for discussion on key issues and input on technical appendices
5
GHG Inventories, Projections, and Target Selection • Methods to Estimate GHG Emissions ▫ Electricity ▫ Natural Gas ▫ On-Road Transportation ▫ Water ▫ Wastewater ▫ Solid Waste • Projecting GHG Emissions • Selecting Emission Targets • Challenges/Limitations
6
3 11/16/2017
GHG Reductions for CAP Measures
• Role of GHG Reduction Estimates • California’s Policy Framework • Selecting GHG Reduction Measures • Methods to Estimate Reductions • Presenting Results • Emerging Issues
7
CEQA and Climate Action Planning
• Climate Action Planning Process • CEQA Guidelines for GHG Analysis • Requirements for a “Qualified” GHG Reduction Plan • Policy-Based GHG Reduction Plan • CEQA Documentation for a “Qualified CAP” • Project Streamlining Option • Legal Considerations
8
4 11/16/2017
CAP Monitoring and Reporting
• Considerations that Affect Monitoring/Reporting • Monitoring Framework • Data Collection and Management • Monitoring Other Aspects of the CAP • Communicating Progress
9
Estimating Cost to Local Jurisdiction to Implement CAP Measures • Purpose and Scope • Process and Method to Estimate Implementation Costs • Cost Categories • Level of Effort Estimates • Considerations ▫ Existing vs. new activities ▫ Funding ▫ Timeframe • Presenting Results • Limitations 10
5 11/16/2017
Benefit-Cost Analysis • Perspectives ▫ Administrator ▫ Participant ▫ Non-participant ▫ Measure ▫ Societal • Key Terms and Concepts • Methods • Presenting Results • Limitations
11
Energy Roadmap Program Climate Planning Support GHG Emissions Inventories and forecasts Every 2 years CAP Monitoring Reports
GHG Reduction Measure Analysis
CAP Development As needed Implementation Regional Framework
Benefit-Cost Analysis 12
6 11/16/2017
Next Steps • Finalize Regional Framework • Present to SANDAG Regional Planning Committee/Board of Directors
13
14
Allison Wood [email protected] (619) 699-1973
Katie Hentrich [email protected] (619) 595-5609
7 San Diego Forward: Development of the 2019 Regional Plan TWG/EWG Item 6 | November 9, 2017
2019 Regional Plan Development Process
Fall 2017 / Early 2018Spring 2018 Summer 2018 Spring / Fall 2019 Network Development (All Modes)
Define Unconstrained Network Apply Performance Measures Vision, Active Goals, and Transportation Policy and Draft/Final Objectives Roadways Revenue Evaluate Select Preferred 2019 RP/SCS, Constrained Revenue Transportation Air Quality Scenarios Constrained Scenario 2050 Scenarios Conformity, Regional Evaluate and EIR Growth Technologies Forecast Revenue and Cost Estimates
Draft/Final RHNA
Ongoing Public Involvement
2 2019 Regional Plan
Board of Directors Item 17 | October 27, 2017 1 Vision and Goals
3 2019 Regional Plan
Scenario Development Based on Revenue Constraints
Network Other factors: #1 Network efficiency Ranked lists of projects by Project Unconstrained Evaluation readiness Network mode (transit, Network criteria highway, etc.) Types of #2 1.‐‐ 2.‐‐ 3.‐‐ funding available Policy considerations Network #3
4 2019 Regional Plan
Board of Directors Item 17 | October 27, 2017 2 Network Selection Based on Performance Measures
Network #1
Board selects Network Performance preferred revenue #2 measures constrained Scenario
Network #3
5 2019 Regional Plan
Network Development Approach
• Start with existing unconstrained transportation network, with the addition of Skyways • Start with current lists of ranked projects – Transit rankings, Managed Lane/highway rankings, etc. • Update network performance measures
6 2019 Regional Plan
Board of Directors Item 17 | October 27, 2017 3 Network Development Process
• Incorporation of new technologies • TransNet ten‐year review – Look back – Look forward • Updated greenhouse gas reduction targets
7 2019 Regional Plan
Next Steps
• Late 2017/Early 2018 – Solicit input on performance measures – Solicit input on transportation technologies white paper – Develop transportation network scenarios for analysis Summer 2018 – Board of Directors to Select the preferred revenue constrained transportation scenario
8 2019 Regional Plan
Board of Directors Item 17 | October 27, 2017 4 SDForward.com
9
Board of Directors Item 17 | October 27, 2017 5