TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AGENDA Friday, December 12, 2003

Members

Joe Kellejian, Chair Mayor, Solana Beach (Representing North County Coastal) Dick Murphy, Vice Chair Mayor, City of San Diego Mickey Cafagna Mayor, Poway (Representing North County Inland) TRANSPORTATION Vacant (Representing East County) COMMITTEE Jerry Rindone Deputy Mayor, Chula Vista AGENDA (Representing South Bay) Ron Roberts Supervisor, County of San Diego Bob Emery Friday, December 12, 2003 Metropolitan Transit Development Board 9 a.m. – 12 Noon Judy Ritter, Chair SANDAG Board Room North San Diego County th Transit Development Board 401 B Street, 7 Floor Terry Johnson San Diego, CA 92101-4231 San Diego County Regional Airport Authority

Alternates Christy Guerin Councilmember, Encinitas (Representing North County Coastal) AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS Jim Madaffer Councilmember, City of San Diego • STIP FUND ESTIMATE Corky Smith Mayor, San Marcos (Representing North County Inland) • POTENTIAL NEW NORTH-SOUTH FACILITY Jack Dale Councilmember, City of Santee (Representing East County)

Phil Monroe Mayor Pro Tem, City of Coronado (Representing South Bay) PLEASE TURN OFF Dianne Jacob/Bill Horn Supervisor, County of San Diego CELL PHONES DURING THE MEETING

Leon Williams, Chair Metropolitan Transit Development Board YOU CAN LISTEN TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Ann Kulchin/Jack Feller North San Diego County MEETING BY VISITING OUR WEB SITE AT WWW.SANDAG.ORG Transit Development Board Mary Sessom San Diego County Regional Airport Authority MISSION STATEMENT Advisory Member The 18 cities and county government are SANDAG serving as the forum for regional decision-making. Pedro Orso-Delgado SANDAG builds consensus, makes strategic plans, obtains and allocates resources, and provides District Director, District 11 California Department of information on a broad range of topics pertinent to the region’s quality of life. Transportation San Diego Association of Governments ⋅ 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101-4231 Gary L. Gallegos (619) 595-5300 ⋅ Fax (619) 595-5305 ⋅ www.sandag.org Executive Director, SANDAG

Welcome to SANDAG! Members of the public may speak to the Transportation Committee on any item at the time the Committee is considering the item. Please complete a Speaker’s Slip which is located in the rear of the room and then present the slip to Committee staff. Also, members of the public are invited to address the Committee on any issue under the agenda item entitled Public Comments/Communications/Member Comments. Speakers are limited to three minutes. The Transportation Committee may take action on any item appearing on the agenda.

This agenda and related staff reports can be accessed at www.sandag.org under meetings on SANDAG’s Web site. Public comments regarding the agenda can be forwarded to SANDAG via the e-mail comment form also available on the Web site. E-mail comments should be received no later than 12:00 p.m., two working days prior to the Transportation Committee meeting.

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) 595-5300 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. To request this document or related reports in an alternative format, please call (619) 595-5300, (619) 595-5393 (TTY), or fax (619) 595-5305.

SANDAG offices are accessible by public transit. Phone 1-800-COMMUTE or see www.sdcommute.com for route information.

2 TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AGENDA Friday, December 12, 2003

ITEM # RECOMMENDATION

+ 1. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 14, 2003 MEETING MINUTES (pp. 6-15) APPROVE

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS

Members of the public will have the opportunity to address the Transportation Committee on any issue within the jurisdiction of the Committee. Speakers are limited to three minutes each. Committee members also may provide information and announcements under this agenda item. Note: A letter is to be received from Caltrans re: I-15 Express Lanes Weekend Operations Status Report (Joe Hull/CT, Derek Toups)

CONSENT ITEMS (3 through 7)

+ 3. 2002 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (RTIP) APPROVE QUARTERLY AMENDMENT (Resolution #2004-09) (Sookyung Kim) (pp. 16-26)

The SANDAG Board, at its meeting on June 28, 2002, adopted the 2002 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), the five-year program of major transportation projects in the San Diego region covering the period from FY 2003 to FY 2007. During the course of the two-year RTIP cycle, SANDAG processes amendments on a quarterly basis. Amendment No. 16 includes requests for changes submitted by local agencies for various projects. The Transportation Committee is asked to adopt Resolution 2004-09 approving Amendment No. 16 to the 2002 RTIP.

+ 4. PILOT PROGRAM FOR TROLLEY TICKETING PROGRAMS (James Dreisbach- APPROVE Towle) (pp.27-33)

In support of the April 2004 opening of PetCo Park, SANDAG staff and operations representatives from the Metropolitan Transit Services (MTS) have been exploring potential new fare programs that would benefit transit riders, the MTS operators, and the Padres. The two proposed fare programs are being reviewed by the MTS Board and are now forwarded to the SANDAG Transportation Committee for a finding of consistency with the overall regional transit fare policy. The first proposed fare program are a first half and second half-season pass with pricing based upon the existing expected day rate of the adult MTS regional pass and would be good on the day of Padres home games. The second proposed fare program is targeted to capitalize on the under-utilized downtown Trolley loop before and after games at PetCo Park. The pricing for this program is being based on the expected day rate of the former downtown Trolley monthly pass. Both programs are expected to reach new target markets and increase the overall awareness of mass transit.

+ 5. TRANSFER OF EXCESS LANDS TO GROSSMONT COLLEGE (Dean Hiatt) APPROVE (pp. 34-49)

The Grossmont-Cuymaca Community College District (GCCCD) has submitted a letter requesting SANDAG to participate in their Life/Safety Entrance Road project. The request is to have SANDAG authorize Caltrans to transfer a parcel of land at little or no cost to Grossmont College. The parcel, located at the entrance of Grossmont College was originally purchased with TransNet highway funds and would be used for their Life/Safety Entrance Road project. The project would serve to relieve congestion both entering and exiting the college, allow for safe travel from the adjoining neighborhood through the college to State Route 125, improve operation of the MTS bus service, Routes 854 and 858, and provide unencumbered access to the school for emergency vehicles. Transfer of the excess lands to Grossmont College would allow GCCCD to obtain funding for the improvement of their Life/Safety Entrance Road project.

+ 6. INTERSTATE 15 (I-15) MANAGED LANES/ BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT) INFORMATION PROJECT STATUS (Dave Schumacher; Kathy Donnelly) (pp. 50-54)

This report provides a quarterly progress update and a discussion of current issues related to project implementation.

+ 7. SENIOR/ACCESSIBLE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES (Nan Valerio) (pp. 55-58) RECOMMEND

The Subcommittee for Accessible Transportation (SCAT) has several proposals for improving transportation services to senior citizens.

REPORTS

+ 8. NORTH - SOUTH TRANSPORTATION FACILITY CORRIDOR STUDY UPDATE APPROVE (Mike Hix) (pp. 59-60)

The Working Group for the North - South Transportation Facility Corridor Study has met four times, discussing constraints and travel demand in the study area, and reviewing historical studies and actions affecting area circulation. Given the obstacles to providing a new north-south corridor in North County, the group requests policy guidance from the Transportation Committee regarding a more focused approach on localized improvements or connections.

+ 9. DRAFT REGIONAL SHORT-RANGE TRANSIT PLAN (RSRTP) (Conan Cheung) ACCEPT FOR (pp. 61-63) DISTRIBUTION The Regional Short-Range Transit Plan (SRTP) supports the vision of MOBILITY 2030 by providing a short-term (five-year) plan for transit system adjustments and enhancements. As such, it proposes how the region should balance the short-term needs of maintaining and optimizing existing services, while beginning to implement the long- term vision identified in MOBILITY 2030. The Regional SRTP will be presented for public hearing in January 2004 and adoption in February 2004.

+ 10. 2004 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (STIP): INFORMATION PRELIMINARY FUNDING SCENARIO AND CALENDAR (Jose Nuncio) (pp. 64-68)

The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is a five year transportation funding program that is updated biennially. Each new STIP typically carries forward remaining commitments from the previous STIP and adds two new years of funding capacity. For the 2004 STIP, however, no new funding capacity will be available. This report outlines the preliminary funding levels recently released by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) as part of the Draft 2004 Fund Estimate. Over the next few months, the region will need to review and approve the set of projects that will be funded out of the 2004 STIP, which will cover Fiscal Years 2004/05 through 2008/09. This report also presents the proposed calendar for review, discussion and approval of the 2004 STIP by the Board of Directors to be completed prior to the April 12, 2004 deadline. The CTC is scheduled to adopt the 2004 STIP by August 2004.

+ 11. TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (Kim York) (pp. 69-89) INFORMATION

The Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and the North County Transit District (NCTD) have developed their The MTS Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) for FY 05. The CIPs will form the basis for updating the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and based on the CIPs, SANDAG will apply for the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 Urbanized Area formula funds and the Section 5309 Rail Modernization funds for the all MTS projects and for those NCTD expansion construction projects which fall within SANDAG's construction responsibilities. NCTD will continue as grantee for its local and minor improvement projects and preventive maintenance

+ 12. SOFAR AGREEMENT ANALYSIS (Rob Rundle) (pp. 90-110) INFORMATION

SANDAG and SOFAR signed a settlement agreement in July 2003 in order to avoid litigation regarding the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The settlement agreement requires SANDAG to analyze another RTP alternative that eliminates proposed improvements on rural highways and reprograms the funds to transit service in San Diego's urban core. The initial analysis as required by the settlement agreement is being provided for the Transportation Committee's information.

13. UPCOMING MEETINGS INFORMATION

The next Transportation Committee meeting will take place on Friday, January 16, 2004.

14. ADJOURNMENT

+ next to an agenda item indicates an attachment

5 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 1

Action Requested: APPROVE

APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 14, 2003 MEETING MINUTES

The meeting of the Transportation Committee was called to order by Chair Joe Kellejian (North County Coastal) at 9:03 a.m. See attached attendance sheet for Transportation Committee member attendance.

1. APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 17, 2003, TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES

Chair Morrison indicated that the second paragraph on page 8 of the minutes from October 17, 2003, has been revised to better explain the approach to resolving the funding needs for the current fiscal year.

Action: Upon motion by Corky Smith (North County Inland) and Jack Feller (North County Transit District [NCTD]), the minutes from October 17, 2003, as revised were unanimously approved

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS

Bill Ferguson, representing COMPACT (Community Planners Advisory Committee on Transportation) provided a policy statement related to the ultimate strategy for infrastructure planning. He reviewed their six guiding principles, and noted that we have to pay for what we need. He expressed concern about the light rail transit (LRT) alignment north to University Towne Centre (UTC). He thought it should be extended into Sorrento Valley.

Chuck Lungerhausen, a member of the public, provided information from a column written by Jodie T. Allen contained in the November 17, 2003, issue of the U.S. and Worlds News Report magazine regarding the level of taxes. He said that you get what you pay for with regard to funding “public goods” like fire protection, safe streets, open spaces, and clean air and water. He added that he will continue to encourage others to support a one percent sales tax for public transportation because it is a needed “public goods” investment.

CONSENT ITEMS (3 through 6)

3. PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION-RELATED POLICIES (RECOMMEND)

Last month staff provided two new procurement policies for review and comment by the Transportation Committee. Additionally, in September staff provided four draft

6 construction-related polices for review and comment. No changes were requested by Transportation Committee members, staff, or the general public to any of the policies during the comment period. If the Transportation Committee recommends approval of the policies, the policies will be brought to the Board for final approval on November 21, 2003.

4. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) CLAIM AMENDMENTS (Resolution #2004-07) (APPROVE)

Amendments to TDA allocations for two pedestrian bridges in the City of Solana Beach are recommended for approval. This action would approve Resolution 2004-07 to increase the allocation for the Rosa Street pedestrian bridge by $211,126, and decrease the allocation for the Cliff Street Bridge by $177,573.

6. ROUTE 11 BUS STOP CONSOLIDATION DEMONSTRATION (INFORMATION)

Route 11 is one of the most productive routes in the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) but has poor on-time performance and slow travel times due to the large number of bus stops along the route. SANDAG and San Diego Transit Corporation (SDTC) are planning to implement a Bus Stop Consolidation Demonstration on Route 11 to improve its reliability, speed up service, and attract new riders without increasing operating costs for the route. This report describes the demonstration project and schedule.

Public comment:

Chuck Lungerhausen, a member of the public, said that he uses Route 11 quite often and conceded that bus stop consolidation may be helpful, but some patrons may not see it that way. He commented that increased traffic in downtown San Diego and in the Hillcrest area can only be resolved with an elevated right-of-way and stops at both locations, though he didn’t think that option was feasible.

Robert Hoffman, a member of the public, stated that if you delete the number of bus stops you will find that ridership will drop due to the lack of convenience. He didn’t think this was the right solution.

Action: Upon a motion by Jack Dale (East County) and a second by Leon Williams (MTDB), the Transportation Committee approved Consent Items 3, 4, and 6, including Resolution 2004-07.

5. DOWNTOWN BALLPARK DEFICIENCY PLAN STATUS REPORT (INFORMATION)

This item was removed from the Consent Agenda to clarify the fact that additional lanes on Interstate 1-5 (I-5) through Centre City must be accompanied by some type of ramp improvements to allow widening the freeway.

SANDAG, Caltrans, National City, and the City of San Diego have prepared a Freeway Deficiency Plan for the Central I-5 Corridor that identifies improvements and an implementation plan to alleviate freeway congestion. The Plan will go first to the two city councils before coming to the SANDAG Board in November or December. The

7 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the new Padres ballpark requires that the Plan be accepted by the SANDAG Board before the Certificate of Occupancy for the ballpark facility is issued by the City of San Diego.

Action: Upon a motion by Vice Chair Dick Murphy (City of San Diego) and a second by Judy Ritter (NCTD) the Transportation Committee recommended that the SANDAG Board of Directors accept the Freeway Deficiency Plan.

REPORTS

7. MID-COAST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT (LRT) ALIGNMENT SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY (RECOMMEND)

Staff indicated that several letters on this matter have been received and will be incorporated into the record.

Last month staff provided a status report and the result of an evaluation of an LRT alignment in the Mid-Coast corridor. Today’s focus was on the alignment in the University of California, San Diego (UCSD)/University City area. Since 1995 a number of changes have occurred in this area, necessitating a review of the alignment alternatives. Staff reviewed three alternatives, an East side and two West side options, with variations by projected ridership, preliminary construction cost estimate, construction cost effectiveness, and total project cost from Old Town to University Towne Centre (UTC). The preferred light rail routing matrix was also discussed. Staff mentioned the community involvement efforts related to the alignment alternatives. The conclusions to date indicate that the West alignment would have higher ridership, directly serve the UCSD main campus, serve the UTC activity center, coordinate with existing and planned transit services, and have fewer environmental impacts. However, staff recommended that both the East and West alternatives be pursued for further analysis.

The next steps are to take a recommendation to the SANDAG Board in December, obtain Federal Transit Administration (FTA) approval to begin preliminary engineering and environmental work, begin the preliminary engineering/environmental analysis, and then final design and construction (if TransNet is reauthorized).

Staff indicated that this project had been placed on hold due to the ongoing construction of the Mission Valley East project. Staff is considering the implementation of the whole project from Old Town to UTC rather than using a phased approach.

Chair Kellejian asked if Committee members had questions of staff:

Councilmember Jack Feller asked about the difference in length between the two alignments. Staff replied that the East alignment is about one mile shorter than the West alignment.

Councilmember Feller asked about environmental impacts. Staff responded that both alignments go through canyons, but the East side has more biological impacts and goes

8 through a mitigation area. There are more issues with regard to traffic/noise on the West alignment, but they are mitigable.

Supervisor Ron Roberts (County of San Diego) asked several questions related to the cost per rider and whether there is sufficient room at Scripps to be able to operate a shuttle system. Staff responded that the answers to those questions will not be available until further analysis is conducted.

Public Comments:

Leslie Caspe, representing the Lawrence Family Jewish Community Center, expressed support for the Genesee Avenue alignment, as the alignment that would go through Executive Drive would negatively impact the Center. She said that the route through Executive Drive will disrupt their operations with noise, vibration, and circulation impacts for at least two years. She urged the Committee to consider the Genesee alternative forr the West side alignment (1b).

Milton Phegley, UCSD Campus Community Planner, supported staff’s recommendation and stated that this is an important step to create a focus for one alignment for further planning work.

Board discussion:

Vice Chair Murphy asked if we would face any significant political objections to pursuit of the Genesee alternative. Staff replied that they have not received any objections to date, but the alternative analysis on this alignment has not yet been conducted. One alignment alternative would elevate the right-of-way along Genesee Avenue, which may result in concerns. Staff will continue to work with the Jewish Community Center on the concerns related to that facility.

Vice Chair Murphy said that he was troubled with pursuing the Executive Drive alignment. Staff stated that further analysis will focus on this alignment first.

Supervisor Roberts asked if staff had considered Eastgate Mall in the analysis. Staff replied that it has not been considered but will be during further analysis between Campus Point and La Jolla Village Drive. Councilmember Rindone (South County) suggested that staff look at options on Genesee Avenue that can be at grade.

Chair Kellejian expressed his support for this project. He noted that when it is completed, it will fulfill one the obligations to the voters in the County of San Diego. He asked how the extension of TransNet can help both this project and the State Route (SR) 76 project. The Executive Director responded that the extension of TransNet would provide the funding flexibility to build the entire Mid-Coast project all at once, which would provide a significant time savings.

9 Chair Kellejian asked about the completion of the Mid-Coast project if all of the funding were available. Staff answered that with a phased implementation, the current schedule calls for completion in 2013. If everything fell into place and we moved this project along with federal support, we could save up to three years.

Action: On a motion by Supervisor Roberts (County of San Diego) and a second by Vice Chair Murphy, the Transportation Committee recommended that the SANDAG Board of Directors approve the UCSD West LRT alignment (with both the Regents Road/Executive Drive and Genesee Avenue variations) in the University City area as the Locally Preferred Alternative for federal consideration and begin preliminary engineering and environmental document preparation.

Chair Kellejian called a five-minute break at 10:13 a.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:18 a.m.

9. SAN DIEGO AND ARIZONA EASTERN (SD&AE) RAILWAY REOPENING ACTIVITIES (APPROVE)

Chair Kellejian indicated that the action on this item changed from approve to recommend.

Representatives from the Carrizo Gorge Railway provided an update on their efforts and funding needs to complete repairs and reopen the rail link between San Diego and Imperial Valley. To assist in the reopening and to prepare a busines plan for the railway, the Transportation Committee is asked to recommend to the SANDAG Board that it authorize the Executive Director to accept up to $1.6 million of Transportation Efficency Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) demonstration funds, amend the FY04 Overall Work Program and Budget, and contract for consultant services related to the SD&AE Railway.

Public Comments:

Byron Wear, representing the Carrizo Gorge Railway, provided an overview of the benefits of reopening the SD&AE Railway including future import/export opportunities and a number of other significant regional economic benefits. He also provided a brief history of the SD&AE Railway.

Geoff Scheuerman, representing the Carrizo Gorge Railway, invited members to a train ride at 9 a.m. on December 6. He spoke about the unification of the line for smooth operation that requires the blending of jurisdictional segments under one operator, the work that has already been completed, key operating agreements, and the work that still needs to be done.

Kurt Karlsgodt, representing the StoneCreek Company, described the plan for the San Diego International Railport, a 59-acre multimodal facility, under 24-hour operation, with large warehousing capacity, which would relieve the trolley/freight line merge bottleneck in San Ysidro.

Mr. Scheuerman reviewed the timetable of the entire process. He also explained the immediate action plan using the $10 million in Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) funds, to be administered by SANDAG. The first phase, costing

10 $1.6 million, would include initial line improvements and development of a business plan. The next phase, for the remaining $8.4 million, would include track rehabilitation/curve realignment/drainage, a Gamma Ray machine at Campo, and RailPort site entitlement funds.

Public Comments

Congressman Bob Filner stated that reopening of the SD&AE Railway would provide the opportunity for San Diego to become a maritime center with goods directly to the East Coast and through the Mexican National Rail Line. The maritime industry has incredible possibilities for jobs in the San Diego region and this railroad is the key to it. This $10 million needs to be used, and an adequate business plan is necessary in order to do that. SANDAG’s assistance with the business plan is a way to complete the track improvements and reimburse Carrizo Gorge for some of the work it has done. The building to transform San Diego into a maritime center will be a key to economic prosperity in our region.

Leon Williams clarified that MTDB is the owner of the SD&AE Railway and there needs to be concurrence from that agency in this process.

Public Comment

Robert Hoffman, a member of the public, said that this item has been around for years. He did not agree that this would be a worthwhile investment.

Board Comments

Chair Kellejian stated that reopening of this line will create jobs for San Diego County.

Vice Chair Murphy stated that what is important is that Congressman Filner has diligently obtained federal funding and Carrizo Gorge has done a great job to restore the line. This proposal is our best chance to accomplish something with this railroad.

Several Board members sited other benefits of reopening this rail line including bringing in sand for sand replenishment efforts, reducing truck traffic on the highways, and finding appropriate disposal sites for trash.

Councilmember Dale asked about further funding from the public sector. Congressman Filner responded that this is a private sector venture. Our job is to jumpstart this with funds for transportation infrastructure. Then it is up to the private sector to make it successful.

Action: Upon a motion by Vice Chair Murphy and a second by Chair Kellejian, the Transportation Committee recommended that the SANDAG Board authorize the Executive Director to accept up to $1.6 million of Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century

11 (TEA-21) demonstration funds, amend the FY 04 Overall Work Program and Budget, and contract for consultant services related to the SD&AE Railway.

10. SAN DIEGO/LOS ANGELES MAGLEV PROJECT CONCEPT REPORT (INFORMATION)

Staff reported that this project is a proposal by a nonprofit corporation based in San Diego that is interested in developing a high-speed magnetic levitation (maglev) passenger train system between downtown San Diego/Lindbergh Field and the Los Angeles International Airport.

Sandor Shapery with the San Diego/Los Angeles Maglev Project described the need for a high-speed maglev train through the use of demographics, air demand growth, and freeway congestion. He reviewed four essential components of the solution to these problems: the creation of a multimodal transportation center; a very high-speed/low-cost transportation system connecting the major metropolitan areas of Southern California and their airports; utilizing the Connected Airport Strategy; and using a low-cost, convenient “last 10 mile” conveyance system.

Tom Palmer from Lockheed Martin described the maglev technology, which is an electric current that generates a traveling electromagnetic field in the windings, which pulls the vehicle along by way of its levitation magnets. He reviewed the advantages of maglev technology including: very high speed, congestion relief, airport connector, low operation and maintenance costs, no subsidies required, environmentally friendly, freight carrying capacity, safety, and increased security. He showed a short video of a maglev system in Shanghai, China, and noted other projects under development in the United States.

Mr. Shapery indicated that there are three proposals in the San Diego to Los Angeles corridor that should be studied further: San Diego to Imperial County, San Diego to John Wayne Airport, and San Diego to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). He explained that the “Connected Airport Strategy” results in a decrease in the number of airplane flights and an increase in the number of larger airplanes which will carry more passengers on each flight. He reviewed a comparison between maglev and high-speed rail, which showed that maglev has half of the operating cost and three times the speed of high speed rail. He said that they are looking for the Transportation Committee to establish a study committee and apply for government funding to further study this concept.

Leon Williams asked if the maglev technology takes more energy to go over mountains or if gravity affects energy consumption. Mr. Palmer replied negatively on both accounts.

Chair Kellejian clarified that SANDAG already has a High Speed Rail Task Force and didn’t see the need for another committee.

Supervisor Roberts said that we should consider this technology for the future. Transportation connections are paramount to the visitor industry. He encouraged this committee to make the proper recommendations to the Board on this matter. He agreed that the SANDAG High-Speed Rail Task Force would be the most appropriate place to review this.

12 Mayor Terry Johnson (San Diego County Regional Airport Authority) requested that this presentation also be made to the Airport Authority Board.

Councilmember Guerin (North County Coastal) said that the coastal rail corridor needs improvements in order to enhance connections; however, she was not sure that this would be possible with the current state budget situation. In addition, hard rail is not compatible with coastal topography.

The Executive Director mentioned that there will be a $10 billion high-speed rail bond on the November 2004 ballot.

Staff clarified that the High Speed Rail Authority’s decision not to pursue maglev technology resulted from the fact that it cannot share track with commuter and interregional rail and it wanted a direct connection to the Bay Area.

Action: Upon a motion by Supervisor Roberts and a second from Councilmember Rindone, the Transportation Committee referred this matter to the SANDAG High Speed Rail Task Force for consideration.

10. SAN DIEGO SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES (SD SAFE) UPDATE (INFORMATION)

Eddie Castoria, Executive Director of SD SAFE, explained that SAFE is the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies and it was established in 1986 with operations beginning in 1988. He provided a list of the SAFE Board of Directors and explained that management and staff for this authority is provided through a contract with TeleTran Tek Services. Mr. Castoria provided information related to SAFE call box operations, funding, the FY 03-04 budget, SAFE cost effectiveness, SAFE calls by call type, San Diego region motorist aid data, SAFE special projects, and potential alternative motorist aid projects.

Board comments:

Supervisor Roberts said that there are a couple of lessons learned through this process. One is that the SAFE Board is providing more services for less money as a result of privatization. The good news is that there is money available to assist SANDAG with providing more freeway patrol services.

Action: Upon a motion by Supervisor Roberts and a second by Councilmember Rindone, the Transportation Committee accepted this report, and directed staff to continue discussions with the SAFE Board and staff on a possible partnership related to funding for the Freeway Service Patrol.

8. 2003 REGIONAL TRANSIT PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY (INFORMATION)

This item was trailed to the next meeting.

13 11. UPCOMING MEETINGS

The next meeting of the Transportation Committee is scheduled for Friday, December 12, 2003.

13. ADJOURNMENT

Vice Chair Murphy adjourned the meeting at 12 noon.

14 ATTENDANCE SANDAG TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING NOVEMBER 14, 2003

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA/ORGANIZATION JURISDICTION NAME MEMBER/ALTERNATE ATTENDING COMMENTS

North County Coastal City of Solana Beach Joe Kellejian (Chair) Member Yes

City of Encinitas Christy Guerin Alternate Yes

North County Inland City of Poway Mickey Cafagna Member No

City of San Marcos Corky Smith Alternate Yes

East County Vacant Member

City of Santee Jack Dale Alternate Yes

South County City of Chula Vista Jerry Rindone Member Yes

City of Coronado Phil Monroe Alternate No

City of San Diego City of San Diego Dick Murphy (Vice Chair) Member Yes

City of San Diego Jim Madaffer Alternate No

County of San Diego County of San Diego Ron Roberts Member Yes

County of San Diego Dianne Jacob Alternate No

County of San Diego Bill Horn Alternate No

Metropolitan Transit City of Poway Bob Emery Member No Development Board MTDB Leon Williams Alternate Yes

North County Transit City of Vista Judy Ritter Member Yes Development Board City of Oceanside Jack Feller Alternate Yes

City of Carlsbad Ann Kulchin Alternate No

San Diego County Regional City of Oceanside Terry Johnson Member Yes Airport Authority City of Lemon Grove Mary Sessom Alternate Yes

ADVISORY/LIAISON ---- Pedro Orso-Delgado Member No Caltrans ___ Bill Figge Alternate Yes

15 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA REPORT NO.: 3

Action Requested: APPROVE

2002 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (RTIP) QUARTERLY AMENDMENT

Introduction

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Transportation Committee adopt Resolution 2004-09 approving Amendment No. 16 to the 2002 RTIP, as shown in Table 1.

Discussion

This quarterly amendment includes minor changes to existing projects and the addition of new projects funded with TransNet. Each of the projects is briefly described below (Table 1 provides further details).

City of Chula Vista

Pavement Rehabilitation Program (CHV06): Increase local TransNet funds by $1.8 million. The City inadvertently requested the decrease of $1.8 million in Amendment No. 14; this amendment reverses the previous change. The total project cost increases to $5,351,000.

City of Encinitas

Coast Highway 101 Overlay (ENC25): This new project provides overlay and pavement treatment on Highway 101 from San Elijo Lagoon bridge to southern limits of the city. The total project cost is $455,000 in local TransNet funds.

City of Lemon Grove

Street Drainage and Sidewalks (LG03): The City has identified additional street repair and improvement needs for the current year prompting a need to increase its local TransNet funds by

$170,000 in FY 2004. The amendment also adds ‘sidewalks’ to the project description. The total project cost increases to $570,000 in TransNet funds.

City of San Diego

Division Street (SD04): The project cost has been refined resulting in a need to reduce its local TransNet funds by $508,000 in FY 2006. The total project cost decreases to $5,613,000.

Sidewalks (SD09): Adds another sidewalk project (Paradise Hills) to this lump sum project increasing the local TransNet funds by $100,000 in FY 2004. The total project cost increases to $4,230,000.

Storm Drains (SD23): Adds another storm drain project (Z Street) to this lump sum project increasing the local TransNet funds by $165,000 in FY 2004. The total project cost increases to $5,120,000.

Lisbon-Imperial (SD43): The project cost has been refined resulting in a need to increase the local TransNet funds by $250,000 in FY 2004. The total project cost increases to $977,000.

National Avenue (SD48): The project cost has been refined resulting in a need to reduce the local TransNet funds by $508,000 in FY 2005. The total project cost decreases to $6,077,000.

SR 163/Clairemont Mesa Boulevard Interchange (SD90): This project has been divided into two phases: Phase 1 includes ramp and bridge widening on the eastern side of the interchange and Phase 2 includes ramp widening on the western side. This amendment increases local funds by $1.5 million in order to fully fund Phase 1. Phase 2 is scheduled for FY 2008 (outside the scope of this RTIP cycle). The total project for Phase 1 increases to $10,300,000.

Reo Drive Widening (SD104): This new project provides improvements to Reo Drive such as relocation of bus stops, restriping, and installation of catch basins. The total project cost is $500,000 in local TransNet funds.

Vista Sorrento Parkway Bike Lanes: (SD105): The City of San Diego received $207,500 in Transportation Development Act funds to add bike lanes to Vista Sorrento Parkway between Sorrento Valley Boulevard and Lusk Boulevard in Sorrento Valley. As part of the construction associated with the I-5/I-805 freeway widening project, a slope was created that impinges on the area planned to for the bike lanes. To regain the area needed for the bike lane, a retaining wall is required that adds $142,000 to the cost of the project. Funding from the TransNet bicycle program reserve is recommended by the Bicycle-Pedestrian Working Group to cover this additional cost. The total project cost is $350,000.

County of San Diego

South Santa Fe Avenue (CNTY14): The County wishes to de-federalize this project in order to expedite project completion. This amendment proposes to exchange $9.2 million of federal Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds with a like amount of TransNet-Highway funds from the Forester Creek Channelization Project (see below). The total project cost remains $33,515,000.

City of Santee

Forester Creek Channelization (SNT02): The City has agreed to exchange $9.2 million in TransNet- Highway funds with like amount of RSTP funds from the County of San Diego’s South Santa Fe Project. The total project cost remains $29,919,000.

Caltrans

SR 76 West (Airport Rd to Old Grove Rd and College Avenue to Jeffries Ranch Road): $400,000 in unexpended, previously obligated RSTP funds are being transferred from the right of way phase to the construction phase for settlement of final construction claims. There are approximately $2.6 million dollars in unexpended construction phase funds that will be used towards payment of the claims. However, an additional $400,000 are needed to pay in full the region’s share of the final settlement costs. Construction of this project was completed in 1999. This is for information purposes only.

Air Quality Analysis

On March 28, 2003, SANDAG adopted the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), including the air quality conformity finding, and re-determined conformity of the 2002 RTIP in conformance with the Regional Air Quality Strategy/ State Implementation Plan for the San Diego region.

Projects in Amendment No.16 have been demonstrated to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 93.118 and 93.119 without a new regional emissions analysis in accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR 93.122(e)(2)(ii). The capacity increasing projects in Amendment No.16 were included in the regional emission analysis of the 2030 RTP with design, concept, and scope adequately detailed to determine their contribution to the RTP’s regional emissions at the time of conformity determination. The design concept, scope, and implementation schedule of the projects are not significantly different from that described in the 2030 RTP. Other projects identified in Amendment No. 16 are either noncapacity increasing or exempt from the requirement to determine conformity according to §93.126 of the Transportation Conformity Rule. SANDAG followed interagency consultation procedures to determine that these projects were exempt. The funding for the projects in Amendment No. 16 will not delay the implementation of the RTIP. The 2002 RTIP, including Amendment No. 16, remains in conformance with the air quality program.

RENÉE WASMUND Director of Finance

Key Staff Contact: Sookyung Km, (619) 595-5350; [email protected]

RESOLUTION

NO. 2004-09 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 595-5300 • Fax (619) 595-5305 www.sandag.org

APPROVING AMENDMENT NO.16 TO THE 2002 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

WHEREAS, on June 28, 2002, SANDAG adopted the 2002 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), including the air quality conformity finding with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality; and

WHEREAS, on March 28, 2003, SANDAG made a finding of conformity of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and re-determined conformity of the 2002 RTIP with the SIP and the 1998 Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS); and

WHEREAS, various agencies have requested project revisions for inclusion into the 2002 RTIP as shown in Table 1; and

WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is consistent with the 2030 RTP; and

WHEREAS, the regionally significant capacity increasing projects have been incorporated into the quantitative air quality emissions analysis and conformity findings conducted for the 2030 RTP and the 2002 RTIP Amendment No. 16; and

WHEREAS, projects in Amendment No. 16 have been demonstrated to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 93.118 and 93.119 without a new regional emissions analysis in accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR 93.122(e)(2)(ii); and

WHEREAS, the capacity increasing projects in Amendment No. 16 were included in the regional emission analysis of the 2030 RTP with design, concept, and scope adequately detailed to determine their contribution to the RTP’s regional emissions at the time of conformity determination; and the design concept, scope, and implementation schedule of these projects are not significantly different from that described in the 2030 RTP.

WHEREAS, all other projects included in Amendment No. 16 are either noncapacity increasing or exempt from the requirements to determine conformity; and

WHEREAS, the SANDAG Board of Directors delegated the authority for RTIP amendments including findings of air quality conformity, to the Transportation Committee; NOW THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Transportation Committee does hereby approve the attached Table 1 as Amendment No. 16 to the 2002 Regional Transportation Improvement Program.

Resolution 2004-09 Page 2 of 2

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that SANDAG finds the 2002 RTIP, including Amendment No. 16, in conformance with the SIP and RAQS for the San Diego region.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Amendment No. 16 to the 2002 RTIP is consistent with SANDAG Intergovernmental Review Procedures.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Amendment No. 16 to the 2002 RTIP is consistent with SANDAG Public Participation Policy.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of December 2003.

______ATTEST: ______CHAIRPERSON SECRETARY

MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista, and County of San Diego. ADVISORY MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Transit Development Board, North San Diego County Transit Development Board, Imperial County, U.S. Department of Defense, S.D. Unified Port District, S.D. County Water Authority, and Baja California/Mexico.

Table 1 2002 Regional Transportation Improvement Program Amendment No. 16 San Diego Region (in $000s)

City of Chula Vista MPO ID: CHV06 CAPACITY STATUS: NCI TITLE: Pavement Rehabilitation Program DESCRIPTION: Rehabilitate city streets Change Reason: Increase funding

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $5,351 $5,351 $160 $5,191 TOTAL: $5,351 $5,351 $160 $5,191

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $3,551 $3,551 $90 $3,461 TOTAL: $3,551 $3,551 $90 $3,461

City of Encinitas MPO ID: ENC25 CAPACITY STATUS: NCI TITLE: Coast Highway 101 Overlay DESCRIPTION: From San Elijo Lagoon bridge to southern limits of city - provide overlay and pavement treatment Change Reason: New Project

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $455 $455 $455 TOTAL: $455 $455 $455

City of Lemon Grove MPO ID: LG03 CAPACITY STATUS: NCI TITLE: Street Drainage and Sidewalks DESCRIPTION: Citywide - provide drainage and sidewalk repairs Change Reason: Increase funding in FY 2004

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $570 $80 $250 $80 $80 $80 $570 TOTAL: $570 $80 $250 $80 $80 $80 $570

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $400 $80 $80 $80 $80 $80 $400 TOTAL: $400 $80 $80 $80 $80 $80 $400

CI= Capacity Increasing NCI=Non-capacity Increasing 21 Table 1 2002 Regional Transportation Improvement Program Amendment No. 16 San Diego Region (in $000s)

City of San Diego MPO ID: SD04 CAPACITY STATUS: CI TITLE: Division Street DESCRIPTION: I-5 to Division Street - Phase I: signal additions, drainage rehabilitation and minor street improvements; Phase II: widen to 4 lanes Change Reason: Reduce TransNet funding in FY 2006

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $4,363 $228 $265 $3,870 $4,363 City Funds $1,250 $50 $1,200 $1,250 TOTAL: $5,613 $278 $1,465 $3,870 $5,613

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $4,871 $228 $265 $4,378 $228 $265 $4,378 City Funds $1,250 $50 $1,200 $50 $1,200 TOTAL: $6,121 $278 $1,465 $4,378 $278 $1,465 $4,378

MPO ID: SD09 CAPACITY STATUS: EXEMPT TITLE: Sidewalks DESCRIPTION: At various locations - Replace and reconstruct sidewalks (CIP: 52-715, 52-336, 52-517, 52-002, 52-327) Change Reason: Increase funding in FY 2004

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $4,230 $900 $930 $800 $800 $800 $40 $4,190 TOTAL: $4,230 $900 $930 $800 $800 $800 $40 $4,190

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $4,130 $900 $830 $800 $800 $800 $4,130 TOTAL: $4,130 $900 $830 $800 $800 $800 $4,130

MPO ID: SD23 CAPACITY STATUS: NCI TITLE: Storm Drains DESCRIPTION: Lump sum for storm drain projects (CIP: 18-001, 11-307, 12-090, 12-091, 17-001, 13-005, 12-127, 11-306, 52-338.8) Change Reason: Increase TransNet funding in FY 2004

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $4,990 $50 $1,771 $1,369 $600 $600 $600 $249 $16 $4,725 City Funds $130 $130 $130 TOTAL: $5,120 $50 $1,901 $1,369 $600 $600 $600 $249 $16 $4,855

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $4,825 $50 $1,771 $1,204 $600 $600 $600 $84 $16 $4,725 City Funds $130 $130 $130 TOTAL: $4,955 $50 $1,901 $1,204 $600 $600 $600 $84 $16 $4,855

CI= Capacity Increasing NCI=Non-capacity Increasing 22 Table 1 2002 Regional Transportation Improvement Program Amendment No. 16 San Diego Region (in $000s)

City of San Diego (contin.) MPO ID: SD43 CAPACITY STATUS: NCI TITLE: Lisbon-Imperial DESCRIPTION: 217' east of 71st Street - improve traffic flow by adding left turn pocket Change Reason: Increase funding in FY 2004

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $977 $427 $550 $977 TOTAL: $977 $427 $550 $977

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $727 $427 $300 $727 TOTAL: $727 $427 $300 $727

MPO ID: SD48 CAPACITY STATUS: CI TITLE: National Avenue DESCRIPTION: From SR 15 to 43rd Street - Widen to modified 4-lane major street (CIP: 52-436) Change Reason: Reduce funding in FY 2005

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $6,077 $583 $2,795 $2,699 $2,795 $3,282 TOTAL: $6,077 $583 $2,795 $2,699 $2,795 $3,282

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $6,585 $583 $1,004 $1,791 $3,207 $2,795 $3,790 TOTAL: $6,585 $583 $1,004 $1,791 $3,207 $2,795 $3,790

MPO ID: SD90 CAPACITY STATUS: CI TITLE: SR 163/Clairemont Mesa Boulevard Interchange DESCRIPTION: From Kearny Mesa Road to Kearny Villa Road - widen from 4 to 6 lane prime arterial. This project has been divided into two phases: Phase 1 includes ramp and bridge widening on the eastern side of the interchange; Phase 2 includes ramp widening on the western side of the interchange. This amendment fully funds phase I Change Reason: Increase local funds in FY 2005 to fully fund Phase I

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON RSTP $4,400 $4,400 $4,400 Local Funds $5,900 $2,100 $3,800 $2,100 $3,800 TOTAL: $10,300 $2,100 $8,200 $2,100 $8,200

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON RSTP $4,400 $4,400 $4,400 Local Funds $4,400 $2,450 $1,950 $2,450 $1,950 TOTAL: $8,800 $2,450 $6,350 $2,450 $6,350

CI= Capacity Increasing NCI=Non-capacity Increasing 23 Table 1 2002 Regional Transportation Improvement Program Amendment No. 16 San Diego Region (in $000s)

City of San Diego (contin.) MPO ID: SD104 CAPACITY STATUS: NCI TITLE: Reo Drive Improvement DESCRIPTION: Between Albermarle and Cumberland Street - provide improvements including relocating bus stops, restriping, installing catch basins, replacing curb & gutter, etc. Change Reason: New Project

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TransNet-L $500 $500 $500 TOTAL: $500 $500 $500

MPO ID: SD105 CAPACITY STATUS: EXEMPT TITLE: Vista Sorrento Parkway Bike Lanes DESCRIPTION: Sorrento Valley Boulevard to Lusk Boulevard - widen roadway to construct retaining wall and add bike lanes Change Reason: New Project

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON TDA-B $208 $208 $208 TransNet-L $142 $142 $142 TOTAL: $350 $208 $142 $350

County of San Diego MPO ID: CNTY14 CAPACITY STATUS: CI TITLE: South Santa Fe Avenue DESCRIPTION: Vista City limits to San Marcos City limits - Reconstruct & widen from 2 to 4 lanes including bicycle lanes Change Reason: Exchange $9.2m in RSTP funds with TransNet-H funds (see SNT02)

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON Private Funds $450 $200 $250 $450 TransNet-L $9,764 $763 $3,955 $1,683 $3,363 $4,718 $1,683 $3,363 TransNet-L* $5,201 $948 $3,600 $653 $4,548 $653 TransNet-H $18,100 $10,700 $7,400 $18,100 TOTAL: $33,515 $763 $3,955 $13,531 $11,250 $4,016 $4,718 $24,781 $4,016 *Local TransNet funds from the Cities of Vista & San Marcos PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON RSTP $9,200 $9,200 $9,200 Private Funds $450 $200 $250 $450 TransNet-L $9,764 $763 $3,955 $1,683 $3,363 $4,718 $1,683 $3,363 TransNet-L* $5,201 $948 $3,600 $653 $4,548 $653 TransNet-H $8,900 $1,500 $7,400 $8,900 TOTAL: $33,515 $763 $3,955 $13,531 $11,250 $4,016 $4,718 $24,781 $4,016

CI= Capacity Increasing NCI=Non-capacity Increasing 24 Table 1 2002 Regional Transportation Improvement Program Amendment No. 16 San Diego Region (in $000s)

City of Santee MPO ID: SNT02 CAPACITY STATUS: CI TITLE: Forester Creek Channelization DESCRIPTION: Construct new flood control channel along Forester Creek (in coordination with SR-52 New Freeway project) Change Reason: Exchange $9.2m in TransNet-H funds with RSTP funds (see CNTY14)

FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON RSTP $10,166 $10,166 $966 $9,200 Local Funds $7,375 $4,077 $2,616 $682 $2,844 $267 $4,264 TransNet-L $810 $200 $275 $335 $200 $610 Water Bond $4,768 $4,768 $4,768 TransNet-H $6,800 $6,800 $6,800 TOTAL: $29,919 $9,045 $2,891 $17,983 $3,044 $1,233 $25,642 PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT FUND TYPE TOTAL PRIOR 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 PE RW CON RSTP $966 $966 $966 Local Funds $7,375 $4,077 $2,616 $682 $2,844 $267 $4,264 TransNet-L $810 $200 $275 $335 $200 $610 Water Bond $4,768 $4,768 $4,768 TransNet-H $16,000 $16,000 $16,000 TOTAL: $29,919 $9,045 $2,891 $17,983 $3,044 $1,233 $25,642

CI= Capacity Increasing NCI=Non-capacity Increasing 25 RTIP Fund Types

BTA = Bicycle Transportation Account (State) CMAQ = Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (Federal) CBI = Corridors and Borders Infrastructure Program (Federal) CDBG = Community Development Block Grants (Local) DEMO = Demonstration (Federal) HBRR = Highway Bridge Repair & Replacement (Federal) IBRC = Innovative Bridge Research & Construction (Federal) JARC = Jobs Access Reverse Commute (Federal) PLH = Public Lands Highway (Federal) RSTP = Regional Surface Transportation Program (Federal, administered regionally) RTP = Recreational Trails Program (Federal) SHOPP = State Highway Operation & Protection Program (for Caltrans use only) STIP-IIP = State Transportation Improvement Program - Interregional Program (State) STIP-RIP = State Transportation Improvement Program - Regional Improvement Program (State) = Surface Transportation Program under FHWA Administrative Program (congressionally STP directed FY 2003 appropriations)

TCI = Transit Capital Improvement Program (State, no longer exists) TCRP = Traffic Congestion Relief Program (State) TCSP = Transportation & Community & System Preservation (Federal) TSM = Transportation Systems Management (State) TDA = Transportation Development Act (State) TDA-B = Transportation Development Act-Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities (State) TEA = Transportation Enhancement Activities Program (Federal, administered regionally) TransNet -H = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Highway (Local) TransNet -L = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Local Streets & Roads (Local) TransNet -T = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Transit (Local) Section 5307 = Federal Transit Administration Urbanized Area Formula Program

Section 5309 = Federal Transit Administration Discretionary Program

Section 5309 NS = Federal Transit Administration Discretionary - New Starts Program

Section 5309 FG = Federal Transit Administration Discretionary - Fixed Guideway Modernization (Rail)

Section 5311 = Federal Transit Administration Rural Program

Section 5310 = Federal Transit Administration Elderly & Disabled Program

26 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 4

Action Requested: APPROVE

PILOT PROGRAM FOR TROLLEY TICKETING PROGRAMS

Introduction

On December 4, 2003, staff proposed to the Metropolitan Transit Services (MTS) Executive Committee several ticketing programs in association with and in support of the April 2004 opening of PetCo Park in East Village. The proposed pilot program, described below, was recommended to be in place for the first season of Padres baseball in the new ballpark and includes evaluation at the end of the season.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Transportation Committee find the attached Ordinance amendment consistent with the existing MTS Fare Policy which is being applied in lieu of a regional fare policy (note: A regional fare policy is being developed for subsequent Board action. This action is consistent with provisions in the “Initial Transition Plan” as related to SANDAG’s responsibilities in setting regional fares).

Discussion

In preparation for the opening of the new ballpark, SANDAG, MTS, and the Padres have been working on special event ticketing programs to promote the use of transit services for both fans and ballpark employees. To that end, staff has proposed two programs including (1) a multi-day MTS bus and trolley pass and (2) the use of under-utilized trolley capacity in the downtown loop during and after baseball games at PetCo Park.

Fare Option One: Game Day Pass

The Padres estimate that they have approximately 9,000 Full Season ticket holders who represent about 24 percent of the 2004 season projected attendance. MTS research shows that only 13 percent of past riders were Season ticket holders, so this market presents an opportunity for ridership growth. This group of customers typically purchases parking and season tickets in advance.

A Game Day Pass could be an attractive alternative that would be less expensive than the cost of parking a car at one of the most economically priced downtown parking lots and offer the convenience of transportation as close to the ballpark as the most expensive parking lots.

The product would be sold as a First Half-Season and Second Half-Season Game Day Pass. The first half would be sold for the 37 games played between April and June 2004. The second half would be sold for the 44 games played between July and September 2004. Each game day would be priced according to the expected daily equivalent rate of the MTS Adult Monthly $58 pass1, which is $2.64. The pricing for the two passes would be as follows: $98 for the first half (37 game days) and $116 for the second half (44 game days).

The Half-Season Passes would provide the user unlimited rides on MTS bus and trolley routes on game day, in the same way that a monthly pass provides unlimited rides. In addition, the pass could be produced as a “Smart Card” allowing MTS to introduce the new technology to this group and gain experience. This partnership assumes that the Padres would provide “added value” for pass holders.

The primary markets for this product would be to the 9,000 Full Season ticket holders and 1,500 game-day ballpark employees. In addition, there are 2,000+ employees who work at other businesses in the downtown area who would be more receptive to taking public transit on game day when most available on-street and low priced parking will be in short supply.

To summarize, the Half-Season Game Day pass would:

Be valid on all game days on all MTS Bus and Trolley routes with a base fare of $2.25 Include Smart Card technology features Possibly offer “added value” through the San Diego Padres and/or a Third Party sponsor

Fare Option 2: Downtown Shuttle Using Available Seat Inventory

Before the game, Blue and Green Line San Diego Trolley trains are expected to be at capacity going into and leaving downtown. However, Orange Line trains, while at capacity coming into downtown, are expected to drop off most riders at the ballpark area stations. This will result in available seating on trains moving past the 12th & Imperial Station through downtown, along the C Street corridor and then heading for the Convention Center and Imperial Station.

The Padres’ most economical parking facilities are located in the northwest quadrant of downtown (i.e., around the America Plaza area). The Padres have asked San Diego Trolley (SDTI) to explore ways to use its existing service to shuttle fans to the ballpark. The Orange Line trains (moving counter-clockwise through downtown) would be a candidate for this type of service. The Padres have expressed interest in partnering with MTS to use this residual capacity by sponsoring this “shuttle” service. Specifically, the proposed “shuttle” would be offered for fans parking at “Green Zone” parking lots (Attachment A) located at the northwest quadrant of downtown. Fans could board at the Orange Line trains at the Fifth Avenue, Civic Center, and America Plaza Stations. During the 90 minutes before and after the game, SDTI estimates that the Orange Line seating availability for this service ranges from 2,000 to 2,400.

The related challenge for this service is to arrive at a pricing structure for using the “shuttle.” In developing a proposed pricing structure staff took the following factors into consideration:

1 On average, a monthly pass is used 22 days per month. Therefore the daily equivalent rate of $2.64 ($58/22) would be used to calculate the price of this fare instrument spanning 30 or more days outside a calendar month.

Approximately 16 percent of fans attending games are Seniors and/or Disabled. Not all fans may choose to ride the Trolley even though it is “free” to them, preferring to walk one-way or both ways. Children five and under ride free at all times; two children, twelve and under, ride free with each adult on weekends. The Padres demographic profile shows that 16 percent of fans attend with children 12 and under. On major holidays, the “Friends Ride Free” rider appreciation programs let two people ride for one.

Based upon the above, plus SDTI’s experience with special events like Street Scene that show light use for trolley riders who park in downtown, staff concluded that on game days there will be an average of 1,000 trips using this service. Using the same pricing formula as with the Half-Season Passes, we use as a base the former Downtown Monthly Pass2 and arrive at a daily equivalent of $1.32 for a season-long sponsorship price of $106,920 ($1.31 per day x 1,000 average riders x 81 games). Operationally, this would work with fans who parked at the designated parking lots receiving a proof of payment ticket to show when riding.

In exchange for this fee, essentially the Padres would have on any given game day 2,400 trolley seats available for “park-and-ride” fans riding the shuttle. As part of this program staff proposes that SDTI would monitor the Orange Line shuttle usage in order to refine the pricing model for the following year.

The benefits of this program are that:

Fans would not have to queue up at downtown station ticket vendomats to purchase tickets, saving access time and frustrations. There would be faster vehicle boarding for the fans, SDTI could assign its ticket booth sales staff to suburban stations rather than downtown stations. It supports our Board’s adopted Regional Transit Vision to acquaint first-time riders with public transit.

Consistency with SANDAG Board Policy

The fare programs as described above are consistent with SANDAG Board Policy 18, section 1.8, which states:

Develops the Regional Fare Policy which incorporates a uniform fare structure, a transfer policy, and agreement for revenue sharing of regional tickets, tokens, and passes, while also allowing the consolidated agency to adopt specialized fare procedures for travel within each operator’s service area. Additionally, adopt the Comprehensive Fare Ordinance setting forth all fares for all operators, including their special fares.

2 The downtown monthly pass was priced at fifty percent of the regular Adult Monthly Pass. This product was discontinued because of low demand. If this product were to be on the market today it would be priced at $29 and the daily equivalent would be $1.32 ($29/22).

The two proposed fare programs would be in affect on in the MTS operational are and therefore are covered under Policy 18.

MTS Executive Committee

The MTS Executive Committee has reviewed and now forwarded the item to the MTS Board of Directors with their recommendation to adopt the two fare programs.

Proposed Ordinance Amendment

The proposed ordinance amendment (Attachment B) would amend the existing MTS Fare Ordinance Number 4.

JACK BODA Director of Mobility Management and Project Implementation

Key Staff Contact: James Dreisbach-Towle, (619) 557-4502; [email protected]

30 The attachment to this Agenda Item may be obtained by contacting SANDAG’s Clerk of the Board at (619) 595-5602. Attachment B

SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT BOARD

AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 4

An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 4 to Allow for Issuance of Padres Game Day Tickets and Passes

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT BOARD AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1

Section 4.3.1.l is added as follows:

Section 4.3.1.l San Diego Padres Game Day Pass

The Padres Game Day Pass is valid as a general public Day Tripper Pass, as defined is Section 4.3.1.d of this Ordinance, for the entire transit operating service day on days when a San Diego Padres baseball club regular season home game is played at PETCO PARK. The Pass is valid for up to a $2.25 one-way fare. For trips requiring a higher fare, the appropriate upgrade is required. The Pass is valid on any day that a regular season home game has been rescheduled at PETCO PARK. No refunds or discounts are provided for cancelled games or any game rescheduled as a doubleheader. The Pass is not valid on playoff game days or on World Series game days. The Padres Game Day Pass price is calculated by the number of days of validity, multiplied by the Daily Equivalent Rate of the Adult Monthly Pass (Adult Monthly Pass Price divided by 22). The Padres Game Day Pass may be sold as a single pass for an entire baseball season or MTS may sell as two separate passes, each valid for approximately one half of a baseball season. This pass is available for a pilot program ending on September 30, 2004.

SECTION 2

Section 4.3.1.m is added as follows:

Section 4.3.1.m Centre City San Diego Trolley Only Round-Trip Tickets Pilot Program

A sponsor may purchase bulk (1,000 or more) quantities of Centre City San Diego-only round-trip trolley tickets for distribution to trolley riders. The rate is determined by the advance payment of $1.32, multiplied by the number of tickets. This rate is available for a pilot program ending on September 30, 2004. Passengers attending a San Diego Padres regular season home game at PETCO PARK may ride the San Diego Trolley between any Centre City San Diego trolley station on any day when a San Diego Padres baseball club regular season home game is played at PETCO PARK.

SECTION 3: Public Notice

Before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage, a summary of this Ordinance shall be published once with the names and members voting for and against the same in a newspaper of general circulation published in the County of San Diego.

32 -- Attachment B

SECTION 4: Effective Date Of Ordinance

This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from and after the date of its final passage.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS ______day of ______2003.

Chairman San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board

This Ordinance amendment was adopted by the following vote:

AYES:

NAYES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINING:

ATTEST my hand and the seal of the Metropolitan Transit Development Board this ______day of ______2003.

Office of the Clerk of the Board San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board

Approved as to form:

Office of the General Counsel San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board

DDarro/RV-ORD4-DEC11.DDESMO/12/4/03

33 -- San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 5

Action Requested: APPROVE

TRANSFER OF EXCESS LANDS TO GROSSMONT COLLEGE

Introduction

The Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District (GCCCD) has submitted a letter of request (Attachment 1) to acquire a parcel of land at the entrance of Grossmont College for their Life/Safety Entrance Road project. The original 4.43 acre parcel was purchased for the State Route 125 highway project in Caltrans name with TransNet funds in the amount of $447,000. A remaining portion of the parcel, shown in Attachment 2 was not needed and is now excess land. Proceeds from the sales of excess land originally purchased with TransNet funds come back to SANDAG therefore Caltrans must obtain SANDAG approval to release the remaining parcel of land for anything less than the appraised value of $100,000.

The Grossmont College Life/Safety Entrance Road project would serve to relieve congestion both entering and exiting the college, allow for safe travel from the adjoining neighborhood through the college to State Route 125, improve operation of the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) bus service (Routes 854 and 858), and provide unencumbered access to the school for emergency vehicles.

The Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges has approved the Grossmont College Life/Safety Entrance Road project for $3,119,520, pending acquisition of the property by the GCCCD and voter approval of the March 2004, or subsequent, statewide Educational Facilities Bond Measure.

The remaining parcel is not necessary for further improvement of State Route 125 and there are no other uses available to SANDAG or Caltrans for the parcel. The Grossmont College Life/Safety Entrance Road project will provide benefit for local streets and roads and improve two MTS bus routes that access Grossmont College. Since the transfer of the parcel will leverage $3,119,520 for these improvements SANDAG staff supports waiving the sale of the remaining parcel of excess land.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Transportation Committee approve the transfer of land from Caltrans to the Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District without monetary compensation to leverage funding for the Grossmont College Life/Safety Entrance Road project.

Discussion

Previously the GCCCD had contacted Caltrans with a request to acquire a parcel of land immediately adjacent to the entrance of Grossmont College for no monetary consideration. Since the original parcel was purchased with TransNet sales tax revenue, Caltrans responded (Attachment 3) by informing the college that Caltrans is required to obtain SANDAG’s concurrence to release the property for anything less that the appraised fair market value.

The GCCCD has the opportunity to receive a grant of $3,119,520 pending the approval of the statewide Educational Facilities Bond Measure and the ability to show ownership of right-of-way necessary for their Life/Safety Entrance Road project improvements. The layout of the college traffic circulation is such that the proximity of the two entrances to the college is within 250 feet of one another with no direct roadway connecting them. The main access is located at the Grossmont College Drive interchange with State Route 125 and the secondary access is adjacent to an adjoining neighborhood in the City of San Diego at Highwood Drive. Many neighborhood residents use a route through the college campus to access State Route 125 freeway causing additional congestion and safety concerns. A plan showing the proposed improvements is included in the letter from GCCCD (Attachment 1). Proposed improvements would connect the two college entrance locations with a functional roadway, including signalized intersections to relieve congestion for both ingress and egress at Grossmont College Drive, provide the MTS bus service more efficient and safer access to the college transit station, allow safer movement of traffic through the parking area, and provide for an emergency access and evacuation route. In addition, improvements to the entrance of the college at Grossmont College Drive will attract traffic away from the residential street access at Highwood Drive, reducing trips on Navajo Road, Lake Murray Road, and local residential roads.

The college has received many letters in support of the project. Support letters received include the City of El Cajon Police and Fire Departments, the City of San Diego’s Traffic Division of the Police Department, Caltrans Project Manager for SR 125, MTS, and Navajo Community Planners, Inc. These letters are also included as a part of Attachment 1.

JACK BODA Director of Mobility Management and Project Implementation

Key Staff Contact: Dean Hiatt, (619) 595-5378; [email protected]

35 The attachment to this Agenda Item may be obtained by contacting SANDAG’s Clerk of the Board at (619) 595-5602. San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 6

Action Requested: INFORMATION

INTERSTATE 15 (I-15) MANAGED LANES/ BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT) PROJECT STATUS

Introduction

Caltrans and the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) have been jointly managing implementation of the I-15 Managed Lanes/BRT project in the north I-15 corridor. The planning, development, and implementation of the BRT project components became the responsibility of SANDAG in October 2003. Caltrans is responsible for all activities within its right- of-way, including construction of the four-lane, bi-directional managed lanes and a movable barrier, and the direct access ramps to the five BRT stations along the 20-mile project corridor.

SANDAG has assumed responsibility from MTDB for development of the three BRT stations that will be built as part of the Middle Segment (Phase 1) Managed Lanes Project between State Route (SR) 56 and Centre City Parkway (see Attachment 1). These stations will be located at SR 56/Ted Williams Parkway (Sabre Springs/Penasquitos), Rancho Bernardo, and Via Rancho Parkway (Del Lago/South Escondido). Future phases would extend the I-15 Managed Lanes south to SR 163 (reconfiguring the existing Express Lanes) and north to SR 78 and include the two remaining BRT stations at Escondido and Mira Mesa.

We last brought a status report to the Transportation Committee on September 19, 2003. This report provides a quarterly progress update and a discussion of current issues related to project implementation.

Discussion

To date, our work has focused on the Middle Segment (Phase 1) Managed Lanes/BRT project. Future project phases are dependent on funding for additional planning and engineering studies.

Middle Segment (Phase 1) BRT Stations (Del Lago, Rancho Bernardo, and Sabre Springs/Penasquitos)

Budget Status

Much of the environmental, right-of-way acquisition, and design work on the BRT stations was put on hold earlier this year when the California Transportation Commission (CTC) suspended allocations of Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) funding. To help ensure that the environmental, preliminary engineering, final design, and right-of-way acquisition for the BRT stations could be completed in accordance with the project schedule, the MTD Board of Directors

(April 24, 2003) and the SANDAG Transportation Committee (June 20, 2003) directed staff to use federal Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) vehicle acquisition funds for the BRT station development. Issues regarding federal Obligation Authority (OA) would have further delayed awarding the final design contract for the three stations, however, these issues have been resolved by exchanging CMAQ monies for transit TransNet funds sufficient to free up cash flow for the I-15 BRT station design. The CMAQ, once available, will repay the transit project(s) from which the TransNet funds are being diverted. Remaining CMAQ funds are expected to carry the project through construction.

Milestones Since Last Quarter

Attachment 2 illustrates the I-15 BRT project schedule and progress. The schedule ensures that the BRT stations will be complete and ready to open concurrent with the opening of the managed lanes in December 2007. All tasks are on schedule. Since the September 2003 quarterly progress update, the following milestones have occurred:

Completed Rancho Bernardo Transit Center environmental documentation (September 2003)

Received United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) approval on the Sabre Springs/Penasquitos Station Section 7 informal consultation, which was needed before the environmental document could be completed (October 2003)

Completed the draft environmental documentation for the Sabre Springs/Penasquitos Station (November 2003). Expect Federal Transit Administration (FTA) approval by December 2003.

Completed and circulated among SANDAG, Caltrans, and City of San Diego staff the Rancho Bernardo Station Preliminary Engineering plans and cost estimates (October 2003)

Awarded landscape and property maintenance contracts for the Sabre Springs/Penasquitos and Rancho Bernardo Station properties (October 2003).

Completed Del Lago/South Escondido Station environmental documentation (November 2003)

Began preliminary engineering on the Del Lago/South Escondido and the Sabre Springs/Penasquitos Stations and final design on the Rancho Bernardo Station (November 2003).

Issues

Right-of-way—The Sabre Springs/Penasquitos access road (connects the Caltrans Direct Access Ramp to the Sabre Springs/Penasquitos Station) temporary construction easements and permanent property acquisitions will need approximately $2.1 million in funding by March 2004. The CMAQ cash-flow issues will need to be resolved in time to make an offer so as to not adversely impact Caltrans’ managed lanes right-of-way certification or construction schedules. At this time, we expect to resolve this issue by exchanging CMAQ monies for TransNet funds and repaying the transit project(s) from which the TransNet funds are being diverted.

Vehicle acquisition—Vehicle acquisition is on hold indefinitely until TCRP funding becomes available again. This is not currently a critical issue, but funding will need to be secured by 2006 to have BRT vehicles by opening day in 2007.

Middle Segment (Phase 1) Managed Lanes

In late March 2003, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approved the environmental document for the full I-15 Managed Lanes project from SR 163 to SR 78. Final design by Caltrans of the Middle Segment between SR 56 and Centre City Parkway is well underway, and construction of the first unit of this phase started in November 2003. The current schedule calls for completion and opening of the Middle Segment, including the three direct access ramps to the BRT stations, in December 2007. Caltrans intends to have an interim single northbound high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) lane across Lake Hodges open by late 2006.

Future Phases of the Managed Lanes/BRT Project

As noted above, work on the southern and northern segments of the Managed Lanes/BRT project is dependent on future funding for advanced planning/environmental/engineering studies, with two exceptions:

Mira Mesa Transit Center – Development of the Mira Mesa Transit Center BRT station in the southern segment is being pursued as a short-range project given the need for an off-street transit center to accommodate existing transit services in the Mira Mesa/Scripps Ranch communities. Environmental and preliminary engineering studies are currently underway. The transit center could be completed in the 2005-2006 timeframe, assuming funding availability, and be open before the Managed Lanes in this segment.

Mira Mesa/Scripps Ranch Direct Access Ramps – As part of the southern segment of the Managed Lanes project, a direct access ramp is proposed to connect the managed lanes with the Mira Mesa Transit Center. Questions have been raised by the community groups in the area on the possible need for a second direct access ramp connection to serve the Scripps Ranch community as well. Caltrans and SANDAG have agreed to conduct a feasibility study on a second direct access ramp in FY 2005.

BOB LEITER Director of Land Use and Transportation and Planning

Key Staff Contact: Kathy Donnelly, (619) 557-4545; [email protected]

52 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 7

Action Requested: RECOMMEND

SENIOR/ACCESSIBLE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES

Introduction

At its August 2003 meeting, the Transportation Committee heard a presentation from Councilmember Jack Feller and staff of the City of Oceanside regarding the need for transportation for the city’s senior citizens. The Transportation Committee referred the matter to the Subcommittee for Accessible Transportation (SCAT), requesting a report on the issue. The Transportation Committee also heard an item at its September meeting regarding Unmet Transit Needs Hearings to be conducted in October by SCAT throughout the region with persons who are transit dependent. This item reports on both matters, as they are closely related.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Transportation Committee:

1. Consider the SCAT request for additional funding for community transportation services during the FY 2005 SANDAG budget process; and

2. Refer the SCAT recommendations to include specific senior and persons with disabilities transportation services and funding in a TransNet extension program of projects to the Ad Hoc Working Group on TransNet.

Discussion

SCAT recommends that the Transportation Committee implement the following strategies to address the Findings from the Unmet Transit Needs Hearings, and the Oceanside survey results as described below:

Strategy 1: Consider Funding for Community Transportation Services in the FY 2005 Budget

SCAT proposes that the Transportation Committee allocate transit operating funds as part of the annual budget process for FY 2005 for community transportation services to be provided by public and nonprofit organizations in a competitive grant process. Programs to be considered could be modeled on the Vista “Out and About” service being successfully duplicated in Escondido, Del Mar, and the Peninsula area of the City of San Diego and other successful programs. SCAT proposes that a minimum of $200,000 per year be allocated, which could fund about four such programs. (Out &

About employs a part-time coordinator to run a weekly morning shuttle and organize volunteers in a mileage reimbursement program. Annual cost of the program averages $56,000.)

Strategy 2: Future TransNet Proposals

SCAT proposes that the Transportation Committee, when setting the future programs for the renewal of the TransNet sales tax program, consider allocations of up to $10 million a year specifically for transportation for seniors and persons with disabilities, as follows.

1. The Senior/Disabled (S/D) transit pass for seniors and persons with disabilities is currently priced at 75 percent off the regular fare. The amount of available subsidy is limited to $5.5 million a year. This subsidy should be retained, but it should be flexible enough to permit growth in demand for this important service to those who use it. The S/D Pass provides a low-cost option and an incentive to the seniors who are able to use public transit, rather than the limited Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit services.

2. SCAT recommends that the new TransNet funding be a minimum of $2.5 million a year for ADA paratransit services, which would fund just three months’ worth of ADA services at today’s prices. Currently, 1 percent of the transit one-third allocation from TransNet helps to fund the ADA paratransit service for those unable to use public transit – this is only about $450,000 a year. This service, too, is valuable to the senior citizens and persons with disabilities who are able to use it for necessary medical and other trips and live within the service areas.

3. SCAT proposes that about $2 million in TransNet funds be reserved for annual awards to public and nonprofit community organizations, through a competitive mini-grant process, to provide transportation services to seniors and persons with disabilities. Many seniors and persons with disabilities live outside the areas served by transit. The Unmet Transit Needs Hearings and the Oceanside survey showed this is the population that is in great need. Community nonprofit services can be less expensive than fixed-route transportation, and could serve areas that cannot be served efficiently by public transit. In addition, the grants could support travel-training programs to teach seniors and persons with disabilities how to use transit to meet their travel needs.

4. An additional recommendation is that transit could permit local cab companies to provide “jitney” service within appropriately designated areas, such as Senior Communities, linking consumers to public transit. A small subsidy may be needed from future TransNet funding; this proposal needs further study and evaluation.

Strategy 3: Access to Transportation

SCAT proposes that SANDAG again urge its jurisdictions to implement the actions of the Regional Transportation Plan, MOBILITY 2030, to provide paved transit stops and sidewalks along transit routes and red curbs at transit stops. SCAT also urges jurisdictions to require sidewalks in all residential developments of greater density than one dwelling unit per acre. Transit is not usable if it is not accessible for those who need it. Many seniors could walk to transit stops if there were sidewalks. In addition, SANDAG should urge transit operators to arrange for seating at transit stops for seniors who cannot stand for periods of time.

Findings

City of Oceanside Survey Results Identifying Senior Transportation Needs

Finding. The City of Oceanside conducted a survey of its senior citizens to identify the needs for transportation by those who were transit dependent, isolated, and in need for cross-jurisdictional transportation. The City found that there was a need for funding of transportation programs to serve these residents, a need for further definition of the transportation problems that seniors face, and a need for further study into resolution of these problems. (Oceanside city staff are reviewing community transit services in the Los Angeles area for possible replication.)

Unmet Transit Needs Hearings

SCAT conducted Noticed Unmet Transit Needs Hearings during the month of October at four locations throughout the region, accepting comments in person, in writing, by fax, and by e-mail. Comments were received from more than 75 persons and organizations on the need in the region for transit and paratransit services (ADA complementary services provided by the transit operators in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended).

Finding 1. There is a growing population of senior citizens in the region, which currently is about 14 percent of the population. Seniors will comprise 25 percent of the population in 2030. These population shares are based upon the definition of seniors as people 60 and older. (The comparable shares at 65 and older are 11 percent and twenty percent, respectively.) The region’s population of persons with serious disabilities is estimated to be about 7 percent of the total population; the service agencies report that this population is growing at about 6 percent per year.

Finding 2. Many lower income persons, especially senior citizens and persons with disabilities, live in rural and suburban areas where public transit is nonexistent or very minimal. Approximately 15 percent of the seniors can no longer drive and many of the persons with disabilities are unable to drive at all. Family members are working and their jobs do not allow them the flexibility to take the senior or person with a disability to midday medical or other care. Because transit does not serve these areas, ADA paratransit is not available either.

Finding 3. Because of state and local budget cuts, many nonprofit agencies are no longer able to provide transportation for their clients and have retreated to providing core services only. In addition, the American Red Cross terminated its transportation programs, which had served several thousand persons a day. Other nonprofit agencies in the region did not have sufficient size or the financial ability to assume the service. Some agencies, in all parts of the region, closed their doors

because of financial problems, thus ending active transportation programs. Jurisdictions that previously awarded Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to nonprofit agencies for transportation services now allocate their CDBG funds to other needs because of their own budget requirements.

Finding 4. Nonemergency Medi-Cal Transportation once was provided by a wide range of for-profit and social service transportation agencies. However, the current trend is that these Medi-Cal certified-transportation providers have moved away from serving private “individual trips” and now work only with nursing homes and/or dialysis centers on a contract basis. This leaves a huge gap in service for those individuals too frail for transit and unable to even afford the subsidized ADA paratransit service.

Finding 5. Many passengers of the ADA services were dissatisfied with the quality of the ADA service, the timeliness of the services, the attitude of drivers, the reliability of the vehicle and related equipment, and other service-related matters that greatly affect the transportation experience of the seniors and persons with disabilities. Many passengers of fixed-route service also had complaints about vehicle and accessible equipment reliability, driver attitudes, failure to announce stops, transit passing up passengers in wheelchairs, and other matters. These concerns have been transmitted to the transit operators, as they are beyond the purview of SCAT.

Finding 6. Many agencies are constrained in coordinating services because of restrictions placed on them by the federal or state funding programs. Many government programs, to preserve funds for their designated clients, cannot, under the authorizing legislation, permit non-clients to use the transportation programs. For example, transportation funded by a federal agency serving seniors may not be used to transport nonsenior disabled adults to another agency’s program. This problem has been well-described in a recent Government Accounting Office (GAO) report to Congress. Some federal agencies have begun discussions on how to resolve this problem and become more efficient users of tax funds. SANDAG’s Coordinated Transit Services Agency (CTSA) coordinator is working with other organizations across the country advising the federal agencies on this matter.

Finding 7. Public comments were received on the Regional Transportation Plan, MOBILITY 2030, at the Unmet Transit Needs Hearings, and at other public meetings about the need for access to transit. Many seniors and persons with disabilities need to have sidewalks in order to get to transit stops as they cannot walk on grass or dirt, and it is unsafe walking in streets. Meeting this need is an Action listed in the Regional Transportation Plan. Seniors and persons with disabilities also need shelter and seating at transit stops. Finally, many seniors lack knowledge of existing transit services and how to use them. Thus, education and marketing to seniors is an important need and is noted in the RTP.

BOB LEITER Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Key Staff Contact: Nan Valerio, (619)595-5365; [email protected]

58 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 8

Action Requested: APPROVE

NORTH - SOUTH TRANSPORTATION FACILITY CORRIDOR STUDY UPDATE

Introduction

The Working Group for the North/South Transportation Facility Corridor Study is evaluating future options for improved north/south mobility in North County. The study area stretches from Interstate 5 (I-5) to east of Interstate 15 (I-15), and north of State Route (SR) 52. The group has discussed future travel demand; environmental and development constraints; historical studies; and past actions affecting the existing and planned arterial freeway and transit networks. Although staff has documented the constraints in building any new corridors in this area, the Working Group would like to initially identify and compare potential new corridor options with other types of less impacting improvements in the study area. Therefore, before proceeding with detailed analysis of any alternative, we propose an evaluation strategy that would involve an initial evaluation (Phase I) of:

new corridor options east or west of I-15 a re-evaluation of previously identified and deleted arterial transportation improvements enhancements to existing and planned transportation (including transit) facilities and services evaluation of inland rail corridor options

An initial assessment of the environmental and development impacts, as well as the costs and benefits of identified options may lead to a more effective focused evaluation approach during a Phase II evaluation.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Transportation Committee endorse a Phase I screening process for the North/South Transportation Facility Study that compares the environmental and development impacts, as well as the costs and benefits of potential transportation improvement options under four categories: (1) new corridors either east or west of I-15, (2) arterial corridor improvements considered and not pursued in the past, (3) enhancements to existing and planned transportation facilities and services, and (4) inland commuter rail options.

Discussion

The Working Group for the North/South Transportation Facility Corridor Study has met four times since June 2003. Twenty-seven agencies or organizations responded to SANDAG’s invitation to participate on the Working Group. The mission statement of the Working Group is to “Evaluate transportation needs and recommend a program of actions for the SANDAG Transportation

Committee to enhance north-south mobility east or west of Interstate 15 while minimizing impacts to developed land and sensitive habitat.”

The Working Group first looked at environmental and development constraints in the study area. The distribution of existing and planned development was reviewed along with Habitat Protection Planning Areas such as the Multiple Species Conservation Program, Multiple Habitat Conservation Program, and the County’s Multiple Habitat Conservation and Open Space Program. Members discussed the impacts of a new alignment through these areas, including the potential conflict of induced growth into areas outside planned urbanizing areas. The group also reviewed historical studies and actions affecting area circulation, and the recent travel demand forecasts and planned improvements from the MOBILITY 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

The travel demand analysis indicates that while the planned improvements in MOBILITY 2030 would result in acceptable levels of service, many corridor facilities would be at or close to congested conditions. Long-range improvements beyond the “Reasonably Expected Revenue” scenario in MOBILITY 2030 would be needed for specific locations or along major corridors. The North/South study will explore transportation system additions or enhancements that would improve the level of service on the 2030 Mobility Network in North County.

The Working Group also wishes to explore commuter rail service along I-15. The High Speed Rail Authority is looking into an inland alignment in the I-15 corridor. The study would evaluate the potential for the line to double as an intra-regional commuter service, similar to the Coaster. The commuter service would be more frequent with more stops than the high-speed rail.

Development of a new north/south freeway or highway corridor through sensitive habitat or developed land appears extremely difficult. It may also be in direct conflict with the goals and objectives of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and local general plans. Given these obstacles, the Working Group wishes to reevaluate potential corridors that contain connections that were deleted from past circulation elements. While some of these may have similar environmental, development, or cost constraints as a new north/south corridor, their relative impacts and costs and benefits compared to other options should be re-examined to provide a comprehensive evaluation of options. Linking several arterials together may not provide large corridor benefits, but the analysis may reveal that certain localized improvements can provide congestion relief at key bottlenecks in the study area.

If the suggested study methodology is approved, staff intends to conduct an initial assessment of potential transportation improvement options that compares environmental and development impacts, including preliminary costs and benefits of these alternatives from the four categories of potential improvements identified above. With the participation of the Working Group, staff will present the results and a recommendation for a more detailed Phase II analysis on a reduced set of transportation improvement alternatives.

BOB LEITER Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Key Staff Contact: Michael Hix (619) 595-5377; [email protected]

60 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 9

Action Requested: ACCEPT FOR DISTRIBUTION

DRAFT REGIONAL SHORT-RANGE TRANSIT PLAN (SRTP)

Introduction

The Regional SRTP supports the vision of MOBILITY 2030 by providing a short-term plan for transit system adjustments and enhancements regionwide. Previously, the North San Diego County Transit Development Board (NCTD) and the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) prepared separate SRTPs for their respective jurisdictions. As a result of Senate Bill (SB) 1703 (Peace), the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has assumed the transit planning, programming, and construction responsibilities for the region, including the preparation of a consolidated SRTP. As the first Regional SRTP for San Diego County, the FY 2004-2008 SRTP provides an opportunity for consolidated transit planning throughout the region, reflecting the goals and direction for service development as described in MOBILITY 2030. Under Board Policy No. 18, SANDAG prepares the Regional SRTP and the Transportation Committee is responsible for its approval each year.

As a revenue-constrained plan, the SRTP recommends specific service, operational, and capital improvements that balance the goals of maintaining an accessible, productive, and cost-effective transit system with implementing enhancements envisioned in MOBILITY 2030. The short-term nature of the SRTP allows SANDAG the opportunity to annually adjust investment priorities between maintenance and enhancements based on system monitoring, available funding, and operational constraints.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Transportation Committee accept the Draft FY 2004-2008 Regional SRTP1 for distribution for public comment and review.

Discussion

MOBILITY 2030, San Diego’s blueprint for a transportation system that will support our future mobility needs, envisions a truly multimodal transportation network. With a heavy emphasis on developing a world-class transit system to support “smart growth” principles of higher density and mixed-use development, nearly one-half of the region’s transportation investments over the next 30 years will help fund projects that improve the regional transit system.

1 To obtain a copy of the FY 2004-2008 Regional SRTP, call SANDAG’s Publications Hotline at (619) 595-5309 or visit www.sandag.org/publications.

While it is important to develop new transit services to support the region’s growth, it is equally important to maintain and optimize the existing transit system to improve the quality of service for our existing riders. In this era of fiscal deficit and increasing operating costs, we are faced with hard decisions on how best to balance the vision of transit in the future with the fiscal and operational reality of today.

The SRTP proposes how the region should balance the short-term needs of maintaining and optimizing existing services, while beginning to implement the long-term transit vision identified in MOBILITY 2030. As such, the SRTP provides a framework for transit system development over the next five years. Specifically, the SRTP serves five primary purposes:

1. It outlines the goals and objectives for transit service planning and development, based on the SANDAG Board-adopted Regional Transit Vision (RTV);

2. It provides an evaluation of current and future travel demand, the existing transit system, and identifies deficiencies and gaps in service;

3. It identifies transit service improvements that would address travel demand, transit system deficiencies, and service gaps;

4. It supports SANDAG’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) as well as state and federal grant applications; and

5. It coordinates with and guides the Transportation Development Act (TDA) claims approval process, and the MTS and NCTD budget development processes.

What’s in the SRTP?

The contents of the Draft FY 2004-2008 Regional SRTP are as follows:

→ Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the SRTP, and describes the role of the SRTP in the regional planning process.

→ Chapter 2 presents SANDAG’s strategic vision for the future of transit in San Diego, and outlines the complementary goals and objectives guiding transit planning and development for the next five years.

→ Chapter 3 describes the existing and potential travel demand for transit in San Diego, including population and employment growth, major activity centers, travel patterns, and changing demographics.

→ Chapter 4 provides a description of the existing transit services in the region, and identifies challenges and opportunities facing transit provision in the region.

→ Chapter 5 presents an evaluation of the region’s transit system in meeting the travel needs of San Diegans, including an evaluation of the system based on the goals and objectives outlined in Chapter 2, and a discussion of unmet transit needs.

→ Chapter 6 identifies the short-, mid-, and longer-term service programs and policies that were implemented in the past year or that would address the remaining deficiencies identified in Chapter 5.

In addition to this document, a complementary Technical Appendix will present the information listed below. The appendix information is not available for the draft SRTP but will be provided in the final Regional SRTP:

History of SANDAG, MTDB, and NCTD Inventory of the existing transit system, including services, rolling stock, and capital facilities TDA Performance Improvement Recommendations FY 2003 operating statistics by route Historical operating statistics by transit operator FY 2005 draft capital and operating budgets Short range transit planning policies and agreements Title VI environmental justice analysis

Next Steps

The following is a tentative schedule for the adoption of the FY 2004-2008 SRTP:

December 2003 - Transportation Committee approves the distribution of the Draft SRTP for public comment and review.

January 2004 - Transportation Committee conducts public hearing on the Draft SRTP.

February 2004 - Transportation Committee approves Final SRTP. - Print and Distribute adopted FY 2004-2008 SRTP.

BOB LEITER Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Key Staff Contact: Conan Cheung (619) 557-4582; [email protected]

63 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 10

Action Requested: INFORMATION

2004 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (STIP): PRELIMINARY FUNDING SCENARIO AND CALENDAR

Introduction

The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is a five year transportation funding program that is updated biennially. Each new STIP typically carries forward remaining commitments from the previous STIP and adds two new years of funding capacity. For the 2004 STIP, however, no new funding capacity will be available. Over the next few months, the region will need to review and approve the set of projects that will be funded out of the 2004 STIP, which will cover Fiscal Year (FY) 2004/05 through FY 2008/09. This report outlines the preliminary funding levels recently released by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) as part of the Draft 2004 Fund Estimate (FE). This report also presents the proposed calendar for review, discussion and approval of the 2004 STIP by the Board of Directors to be completed prior to the April 12, 2004 deadline. The CTC is scheduled to adopt the 2004 STIP by August 2004.

Discussion

2004 STIP Funding - Statewide Scenario

The CTC released the Draft 2004 FE on November 18th, 2003. The FE is a five-year estimate of revenues and expenditures used to determine capacity to fund transportation projects in the next five years. Each new FE carries forward the previous commitments and adds two new years of capacity to the previous FE. The release of the Draft 2004 FE was delayed 90 days from its statutory adoption date in August because of uncertainties in the state and federal budgets. The CTC is scheduled to adopt the Final 2004 FE on December 11, 2003.

The Draft 2004 FE indicates that for the period FY 2004/05 through FY 2008/09, the State Highway Account needs to have $2.787 billion dollars worth of projects statewide removed, or deprogrammed, with nearly $2.6 billion from FY 2004/05 alone. Table 1 provides a distribution by fiscal year of the programming availability. This includes all unallocated STIP projects from FY 2002/03 and 2003/04 which have been rolled into FY 2004/05 in anticipation of the deprogramming. Both STIP and Caltrans’ State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) programs are included in this $2.787 billion figure.

Table 1 Statewide State Highway Account Funds Available for Programming ($ in millions)

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 5-Year Total -$278 -$2,591 $67 -$1,126 $487 $375 -$2,787

State Highway Account includes funds for both STIP and SHOPP 2004 Fund Estimate covers FY 2004/05 through FY 2008/09 Figures may not add up exactly due to rounding

The initial deprogramming is necessary due to a number of factors, including the condition of the State’s General Fund, reduced weight fee revenues, and delay in receipt of expected revenues. Additionally, the Draft 2004 FE relies on two critical assumptions subject to the outcome of pending federal actions. First, the current authorization bill, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century or TEA-21, has expired, and we are now operating under a continuing resolution in effect until the end of February 2004. Having nothing more specific from the federal government, the Draft 2004 FE assumes a federal funding level for FY 2003/04 equal to that of FY 2002/03, and the average of the House (HR 2989) and Senate (SR 1589) proposals for FY 2004/05, escalated at 2 percent annually thereafter. Second, the impact of California’s conversion to ethanol use on federal funds receipts is also estimated beginning in FY 2005/06. This impact is significant, reducing federal funds by $2.7 billion over the 5 year FE period. There is pending federal legislation that would address this issue by subjecting ethanol to the same levels of taxation as gasoline. However, for purposes of the Draft 2004 FE, Caltrans could not prudently make assumptions regarding a positive outcome for these legislative actions at this time.

The Draft 2004 FE identifies resources for the Public Transportation Account (PTA) totaling about $2.5 billion through the five-year period, an increase of about $230 million over the 2002 FE. Resources for the Draft 2004 FE include repayment of loans from the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund (TCRF) and the General Fund. Ongoing revenues in the account are derived from the state sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. The PTA funds the State Transit Assistance Program, supports costs for Caltrans Mass Transportation and Rail programs, provides funding for the state’s Intercity rail services operated by Amtrak, and funds STIP projects.

Resources for the Transportation Investment Fund (TIF) are estimated at $1.7 billion over the five-year period, an increase of about $800 million over the 2002 FE. The TIF was created by the Traffic Congestion Relief Act of 2000 and reaffirmed by voters with a constitutional amendment (Proposition 42) to dedicate the sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel to transportation purposes, but resources have been diverted to the General Fund since the TIF’s creation. This fund commits major resources to Traffic Congestion Relief Projects throughout the state, including seventeen projects in the San Diego region, and to repair and maintain local streets and roads. Funds are also made available to the PTA and for programming in the STIP.

It should be noted that as the Schwarzenegger administration considers and implements measures to address the budget deficit, some of the assumptions that were used to develop the Draft 2004 FE may no longer be valid. Although specific details are not available at this time, the preliminary proposals made by the Department of Finance to the Legislature indicate that budget cuts across various sectors of the economy, including transportation, will need to occur to balance the budget. These budget cuts are not included in the assumptions in the current draft of the Draft 2004 FE.

In order to minimize the impact to currently programmed STIP projects, the CTC is proposing an overall regional STIP target that precludes the need to deprogram any currently programmed projects. In order to help balance the State Highway Account $2.787 billion deficit over the next five years, the CTC is proposing that any unprogrammed STIP reserves not be included in the amount available for programming in the 2004 STIP. In other words, if a region had maintained an unprogrammed STIP reserve as part of the 2002 STIP, it would not be able to program that reserve as part of the 2004 STIP. The amount of unprogrammed reserves statewide is $782 million. This statewide figure is reduced by advances and prior commitments for FY 2007/08 such as GARVEE debt service to $200.4 million. The San Diego region does not have an unprogrammed STIP reserve.

The CTC also proposes to use new funds that are available over the course of the Draft 2004 FE period for currently programmed projects instead of for new programming. The formula distribution of new funds available in FY 2008/09 statewide is $1.430 billion. This amount is reduced by prior commitments, the amount of new Transportation Enhancement (TE, formerly TEA) program and increased by credits from lapsed programming, to $1.320 billion. The $1.320 billion figure is what is needed to maintain currently funded projects in the program, with no need to deprogram them. It will require, however, a significant amount of project delays, in order to balance the STIP on a year by year basis.

It should be noted that several regions that have significant amounts of unprogrammed reserves are in effect being asked to forego the use of their reserves in order to allow other regions that had programmed a large majority of their 2002 STIP available funds and had little or no reserves left to keep those projects funded. While this benefits those that were aggressive in programming their available 2002 STIP funds, including San Diego, it remains to be seen whether this proposal will be acceptable to the affected regions or whether a compromise proposal will need to be developed by the CTC. The outcome of a compromise proposal could potentially reduce the amount available to the San Diego region.

2004 STIP Funding - San Diego Region Scenario

The impact to the San Diego region is significant. As was discussed at the October 19, 2003 Transportation Committee meeting, the budget shortfall for transportation projects was likely not to be confined to FY 2003/04. At the time, the Draft 2004 FE had not been released and therefore only analysis and specific proposals for the current fiscal year were presented.

The Draft 2004 FE indicates that $125.9 million worth of San Diego projects (out of $203.8 million currently programmed) will need to be delayed from FY 2004/05-2006/07 (this also includes unallocated, rolled-over FY 2003/04 projects) to FYs 2007/08 and 2008/09. The total amount available will not change from the current $203.8 million that is programmed. The current annual distribution is shown in Table 2. The amount programmed in FY 2004/05, which includes unallocated FY 2003/04 projects, will need to be significantly reduced and spread over the next three to four years. The 2004 STIP targets are also shown in Table 2.

Table 2 STIP Annual Current Program and Targets ($000’s)

FY FY FY FY FY Total 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09

2002 STIP $113,280 $16,876 $73,693 $0 $0 $203,849 2004 STIP $4,133 $39,984 $33,825 $33,150 $92,757 $203,849 Delay ($109,147) $23,108 ($39,868) $33,150 $92,757 $0 Cumulative Delay ($109,147) ($86,039) ($125,907) ($92,757) $0

It should be noted that these funds correspond to the regional STIP (or STIP-RIP) only. In addition to the STIP-RIP, the state must also balance the interregional STIP (or STIP-IIP). As with the STIP-RIP, even though deprogramming will not be necessary, $777 million worth of projects will need to be delayed from FY 2004/05 through FY 2006/07 to FY 2007/08 and FY 2008/09. Although no specific proposals from Caltrans are available at this time, the project delays are very likely to impact regional projects partially funded with STIP-IIP funds, such as SR 905 and various interregional rail projects.

Staff will continue to analyze the impacts of the Draft 2004 Fund Estimate and 2004 STIP projections, and track the progress of and impacts from related federal legislation and state budget negotiations. A draft 2004 STIP will be prepared and presented to the Transportation Committee at its January 16, 2004 meeting based on the FE adopted by the CTC on December 11, 2003.

Calendar

The STIP funds are approved and allocated by the CTC. There are other federal funds that SANDAG receives directly such as Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP), Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ), various Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds and other federal discretionary funds. These federal programs, the STIP, and the local TransNet program must be included in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). Usually the RTIP process occurs after the STIP adoption; however, this year certain RTIP proceedings will need to occur concurrently with the STIP. Despite the delay in the FE adoption date, SANDAG is required to submit the 2004 RTIP to the state by August 1, 2004 (four days before STIP adoption). The following table shows the calendar of events leading to approval of the regional 2004 STIP and the 2004 RTIP by the SANDAG Board of Directors, and adoption of the statewide 2004 STIP by the CTC.

Table 3 2004 STIP Calendar

EVENT DATE

CTC releases draft 2004 Fund Estimate November 18, 2003 CTC adopts 2004 Fund Estimate December 11, 2003 Transportation Committee reviews preliminary analysis of December 12, 2003 2004 Fund Estimate and calendar of activities to approve 2004 STIP Transportation Committee reviews initial draft 2004 STIP January 16, 2004 Transportation Committee reviews final draft 2004 STIP, February 6, 20041 recommends approval to Board of Directors Board of Directors approves final draft 2004 STIP March 26, 2004 Deadline to submit 2004 STIP to California Transportation Commission April 12, 2004 CTC holds STIP hearing, North May 12, 2004 Transportation Committee holds a public hearing to review the May 21, 2004 draft 2004 RTIP, including air quality conformity determination. Transportation Committee forwards recommendation of final June 4, 2004 2004 RTIP to the Board of Directors CTC holds STIP hearing, South June 16, 2004 Board of Directors adopts the 2004 RTIP2 June 25, 2004 CTC publishes staff recommendations July 16, 2004 SANDAG submits 2004 RTIP for state and federal approval August 1, 2004 CTC adopts 2004 statewide STIP August 5, 2004

1. February 20, 2004 Transportation Committee meeting date remains available for potential additional discussion of draft 2004 STIP. 2. CTC staff will notify the regions of any changes to the initial April STIP submittal by late May. Should there be changes that can be incorporated prior to final adoption, staff proposes to delay the 2004 RTIP adoption to the July 23, 2004 Board meeting. CTC: California Transportation Commission STIP: State Transportation Improvement Program

Next Steps

Staff will monitor continuing developments in the state budget and the federal reauthorization of the Transportation Bill and analyze their impact to the region. Staff will prepare a draft 2004 STIP based on the latest information available and present it to the Transportation Committee for review and discussion at the January 16, 2004 meeting.

RENÉE WASMUND Director of Finance

Key Staff Contact: Jose Nuncio, (619) 595-5619; [email protected]

68 San Diego Association of Governments REVISED TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 11

Action Requested: INFORMATION

TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Introduction

The Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and the North County Transit District (NCTD) have developed their Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) for FY 2005. The CIPs will form the basis for updating the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and based on the CIPs, SANDAG will apply for the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) Section 5307 Urbanized Area formula funds and the Section 5309 Rail Modernization funds for all MTS projects and for those NCTD major capital projects for which SANDAG is the implementing agency. NCTD will continue as grantee for its minor operational capital projects and preventive maintenance assistance. The MTS Board of Directors approval of its CIP is scheduled for December 11, 2003, and the NCTD CIP was approved by the North San Diego County Transit Development Board (NSDCTDB) on May 15, 2003. However, beginning in FY 2006 the CIP and the project selection process will be consolidated for the entire San Diego region.

MTS and NCTD undertook very similar project selection processes based on established criteria and involving the active participation of sponsoring agencies and/or departments. The draft CIP project listings are attached (Attachments A and E) for the Transportation Committee’s review in anticipation of approving the final programs and grant application submittals at the January 16, 2004 meeting.

Discussion

FTA Section 5307 and Section 5309 Funds

These FTA formula programs are the primary sources of funding for transit operational and replacement capital projects in the region. The funds can be used generally to provide 80 percent of the cost of capital projects and the cost of preventive maintenance activities (considered to be operating costs). The ratio increases to 83 percent for the “clean-fuel” buses and vehicles meeting the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.

The Section 5307 Urbanized Area formula program is a block grant program in which each urbanized area over 50,000 in population receives financial assistance to provide public transit. The formula for determining each metropolitan area’s share of funds is based on an urbanized area’s population, population density, levels of existing fixed guideway service, and levels of existing bus service and ridership. The Section 5307 program is designed to meet routine capital needs for urbanized areas such as San Diego County. Section 5307 formula funds may not be used for operating assistance. However, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21)

69 REVISED

expanded the definition of capital to include preventive maintenance thereby, in effect, mitigating the lack of operating assistance

The Fixed Guideway Modernization program (also known as Rail Mod) is one of three categories of funding under the Section 5309 Capital Investment Program, which also includes the Bus Capital and Fixed Guideway New Starts programs. Unlike the Section 5309 Bus Capital and Fixed Guideway New Starts programs, the Rail Mod program is apportioned by formula. The Bus Capital and Fixed Guideway New Starts programs are designed to assist in meeting extraordinary capital needs and are awarded generally at the discretion of Congress. Section 5309 Rail Mod funds are allocated to rail systems that have been in operation for at least seven years. Eligible projects include the modernization of existing fixed guideway systems, including rolling stock. Through FY 2002, MTDB had been the sole recipient of Rail Mod funds for San Diego County. In February 2002, NCTD’s Coaster service completed its seventh year of operations making NCTD an eligible recipient for these funds. Like the Section 5307 funds, the Rail Mod funds may be used for preventive maintenance costs as well as for rail capital.

Since Congress has yet to pass final versions of the FY 2004 transportation appropriations, we have conservatively estimated the formula funds assuming virtually no increase in either the Section 5307 Urbanized Area formula funds or the Section 5309 Rail Modernization funds. This assumption is consistent with program funding levels in the transportation appropriations bill currently pending final approval. Traditionally, SANDAG has apportioned the formula funds between MTDB and NCTD based on population, with MTDB receiving approximately 70 percent, and NCTD receiving approximately 30 percent of the Section 5307 funds after the off-the-top funds are programmed for SANDAG planning and the regional vanpool program. While this is the approach that has been applied in recent years, SANDAG has not adopted a formal policy for dividing the federal capital funds for the region.

MTS FY 2005 CIP

Our estimate for the MTS Section 5307 program is $32,723,163. This would be matched with local funds of $8,180,791, which means that this program would provide an estimated $40,903,954 to fund FY 2005 capital projects.

Having no long-standing historical basis or regional formula for apportioning Rail Mod funds, and there being no federal appropriations bill in place, our estimate of $9,000,000 is based solely on last year’s apportionment. This would be matched with local funds of $2,250,000, which means that this program would provide an estimated $11,250,000 to fund FY 2005 capital projects.

The total of these two revenue sources is approximately $52,154,000. An additional $1,750,000 is available from the IAD Land Purchase (explained below); a carryover of $780,000 of CMAQ funds will be applied to the KMD CNG Fuel Station project. A total of $54,684,000 is available for FY 2005 projects in the MTS area.

Attachment A shows the recommended MTS FY 2005 CIP and project descriptions. This ranked list of projects is a result of the capital programming process undertaken by the MTS Capital Projects Review Committee (CPRC) and described in the Capital Projects Selection Process (Attachment B). The CPRC is comprised of members representing each of the MTS operators: Chula Vista Transit (CVT), MTS, National City Transit (NCT), San Diego Transit Corporation (SDTC), and San Diego

70 REVISED

Trolley, Inc. (SDTI). Each CPRC member was responsible for submitting the capital requests for their agency and the cities it serves and to participate in the prioritization of those capital requests. The draft CIP was reviewed and approved by management of the MTS operators and by the Transit Services Facility Advisory Committee (TSFAC), which consists of representatives of all MTS member cities and the County. The proposed MTS CIP, shown in Attachment A, reflects the review, comment, and revision from these groups. The CPRC review encompassed only the new projects submitted for FY 2005 and did not apply to earmarked funds potentially appropriated by Congress or passed through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).

The capital project requests submitted for FY 2005 exceeded the funding estimate by 23 percent. The capital project list in Attachment A represents the five-year, unconstrained need for the MTS operators. The proposed funded and unfunded project lists are in priority order. This would allow the Board of Directors to reduce or add to the Program of Projects (POP) to accommodate any differences in the federal funds currently estimated and the final appropriations numbers. The CPRC reviewed all the projects in the context of their impact on operations and determined the unfunded projects would not impact our ability to provide service. However, it is recognized that the continued deferral of some projects could have negative impacts on system infrastructure in future years.

The recommended MTS CIP is divided and subtotaled into three groupings:

1. Capital Commitments: This category includes preventive maintenance, debt service for projects that were financed in previous fiscal years, and projects the MTS Board has committed previous funding for earlier phases.

2. Planning Studies: These projects fund the day-to-day activities of the planning staff like Service Planning/Monitoring, Transit/Land Use, Regional Short-Range Transit Planning, and have customarily been funded by Federal Section 5307 funds.

3. Capital Project Requests: These are projects that compete for the balance of available funding after the Capital Commitments and Planning Studies have been taken into consideration.

The process includes, upon completion of the numerical scoring, a review of the rankings to ensure that operationally critical projects were funded. This is why there may be some deviation in priority ranking among the projects in Attachment A from their numerical scoring. Projects below the funding line are based on the total ranking score received and will be funded in the order presented if the actual funding exceeds the estimate.

The table in Attachment D shows the impact that the commitments made this year will have on the availability of funding for new capital projects for the following four years. Large multi-year and phased projects have been assumed to be funded over a number of years in order to fund as many projects as possible. However, the amount of future commitment for these projects diminishes through the end of the period. In addition, the program assumes, at the MTS and SANDAG Boards’ discretion, that we maximize the amount of formula funds for preventive maintenance for the next five years. The amount assumed is based on the current estimate of $29 million for SDTI and SDTC preventive maintenance costs.

71 REVISED

Taking into account anticipated future preventive maintenance, future multi-year capital commitments, and annual planning studies, the balance remaining for future programming could be as low as 25 percent of the annual CIP total for the FY 2006 program. It should be noted, however, that as the system matures, we will have more of these large projects, and we will need to develop new funding sources for this purpose. Continuing to rely on formula funds for these large projects at the expense of operational-type capital replacements is not a good option. The MTS Board will be addressing bus and rail infrastructure needs next Spring.

The local match for these projects will come from the pooled transit finances for the MTS region. While it is likely that the actual funds used would be Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, final decisions on the matching source would be made during the FY 2005 development process.

Transfer of Existing Project Funding

Prior to finalizing the recommendation, we reviewed previously budgeted capital projects to identify certain projects that may have been delayed or completed under budget to be sure that deserving new projects do not go unfunded while prior-year capital programming remained tied up and unused. As a result of this review, we identified $1.75 million that could be used to complete construction of the San Ysidro Intermodal Transportation Center (SYITC). The total budget for this project would be increased to $25,743,900. The budget increase is due to the following factors:

1. Additional work to relocate underground utilities, and place underground utilities because they were not mapped and could not be mapped during the design process.

2. Increased construction costs for delays incurred while redesign and relocation of utilities slowed or stopped certain work activities.

3. Increased quantities for earth work in the track area.

4. Increased right-of-way costs, which are still in negotiations and have not been finalized.

5. Increased cost for design and administration for a longer than expected construction period.

The additional funding is needed prior to FY 2005 and before the federal funds could be made available. To address this problem we are recommending transferring $1.75 million from the Imperial Avenue Division (IAD) Land Purchase project rather than funding it under the FY 2005 formula program. The money in the IAD Land Purchase was programmed for the purchase of the Unocal site, but the current funding is not sufficient to purchase the property based on the current market value. If the decision is made to go forward with the purchase, funding would be secured through a future CIP process. While we still need to expand the IAD facility and would like to purchase the Unocal property, the difficult decision was made to defer the IAD project for more pressing needs. The revised budget for the SYITC is shown in Attachment C.

The MTS CIP recommendation also includes $800,000 for the Kearny Mesa Division (KMD) compressed natural gas (CNG) Fuel Station Upgrade project. We have identified a balance of $780,000 in Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from previous bus projects. We are recommending that these funds be used for the KMD CNG Fuel Station Upgrade project because this project is eligible for funding under the CMAQ program.

72 REVISED

NCTD FY 2005 CIP

NCTD’s FY 2005 CIP (Attachment E) totals $30,619,837 which assumes approximately $14.8 million in Section 5307 funds and $8.5 million in Section 5309 Rail Mod funds. The local match totaling $7.3 million will come from NCTD TDA and TransNet apportionments. The funding estimates for 5307 and 5309 funds include $0.9 million and $2.3 million respectively in carryover funds.

This program was developed in a similar manner as the MTS CIP. The same ranking criteria were used: safety, replacement value, operating cost benefit, travel time savings, and customer benefit, but the scoring within each of the criteria was adapted to NCTD’s operations. In addition, NCTD employed an “Other” criteria that addressed nonquantifiable concerns, such as board priorities and impact on ongoing projects, similar to those considered in the MTS post-numerical scoring review.

Also, the NCTD CIP program is not in priority order and will need to be reviewed if the funding received deviates from the estimate used as the basis for developing the recommendation. For these reasons we have chosen not to consolidate the regional program this year. Next year, the MTS operator’s and NCTD will develop one CIP recommendation for the entire San Diego region.

NCTD’s CIP assumes $54.6 million for preventive maintenance for the next five years, which includes $1.25 million annually for preventive maintenance related to the SPRINTER beginning in FY 2008. Capital projects related to the SPRINTER were treated as a priority in FY 2006 to support the opening of the SPRINTER Rail Project.

NCTD’s unfunded capital program consists of several major capital projects on the horizon over the next five years including bus replacements, rail bridge and infrastructure replacements and station/transit center projects. Like the MTS major capital projects of the future, the NCTD major project capital need far outstrips the projected availability of federal formula funds. The table in Attachment F provides a summary of the major components of NCTD’s CIP program for the next five years.

RENÉE WASMUND Director of Finance

Key Staff Contact: Kimberly York, (619) 557-4517; [email protected]

73 MTS OPERATORS FY 2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Previous FY 05 FY 05 FY 05 AGENCY Project Title Funding Process Funded Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project CAPITAL COMMITMENTS

1 Preventive Maintenance 21,000.0 21,000.0 0.0 29,000.0 29,000.0 29,000.0 29,000.0 0.0 137,000.0 2 MMO 30118 MCS SVCC Capital Costs of Contracting (FY05-09) 0.0 260.0 260.0 0.0 260.0 260.0 260.0 260.0 0.0 1,300.0 3 MMO NEW MTS Comprehensive Operational Analysis (FY05-09) 0.0 145.0 145.0 0.0 145.0 145.0 145.0 120.0 0.0 700.0 4 MMO 10496 East County Bus Maintenance Facility 8,123.0 400.0 400.0 0.0 1,500.0 1,977.0 1,400.0 0.0 0.0 13,400.0

5 MTDB 11086 Maintenance Audit of Rail and Bus Facilities 200.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 150.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 425.0

6 ITS 10940 Regional Transit Management System - Phase I 9,823.0 3,884.0 3,884.0 0.0 3,884.0 3,883.0 2,100.0 0.0 0.0 23,574.0

7 MMO 10485 SBMF Expansion 6,630.0 400.0 400.0 0.0 1,500.0 1,900.0 1,400.0 0.0 0.0 11,830.0

8 MTDB 11405 LRV Shop Modifications (LRT-11405) 821.0 1,230.0 1,230.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,051.0 9 Regional Miscellaneous Operations Capital 945.0 945.0 0.0 945.0 945.0 945.0 945.0 0.0 4,725.0

10 MTDB 11404 Tunnel Fleet Modification (LRT-11404) 1,900.0 2,490.0 2,490.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,390.0 11 10497 Grossmont Station Pedestrian Enhancements 770.0 930.0 930.0 0.0 1,000.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,700.0

TOTAL CAPITAL COMMITMENTS 28,267.0 31,759.0 31,759.0 0.0 38,384.0 38,110.0 35,250.0 30,325.0 0.0 202,095.0

PLANNING STUDIES

12 PLNG 3.2.22 SANDAG Transportation Studies 1,000.0 1,000.0 0.0 1,226.0 990.0 805.0 804.0 1,671.7 6,496.7 13 MMO varies MMO Transportation Studies 210.0 210.0 0.0 220.0 230.0 240.0 241.0 1,141.0 TOTAL PLANNING STUDIES 0.0 1,210.0 1,210.0 0.0 1,446.0 1,220.0 1,045.0 1,045.0 1,671.7 7,637.7

FY 2005 CAPITAL PROJECT REQUESTS

14 MTDB 10453 San Ysidro Intermodal Transportation Center 23,994.0 1,750.0 1,750.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25,744.0 15 MTDB 11084 Station Resigning (MVE) 82.0 520.0 520.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 602.0

16 MTDB 10954 LF LRV Station Mod. Project - MVW & Santee 8,350.0 3,219.0 3,219.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11,569.0

17 MTDB 11403 Train Location (MVE) 523.0 960.0 960.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,483.0

18 ITS 10498 Trolley Station Fiber Infrastructure 4,350.0 3,100.0 3,100.0 0.0 3,453.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10,903.6

19 CVT H Street Transit Center Pavement Rehab 0.0 175.0 175.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 175.0

20 NCT NCT Maintenance Shop Improvements 0.0 15.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 21 MMO NEW Regional Bus Stop Signs and Improvements 0.0 120.0 120.0 0.0 200.0 205.0 210.0 220.0 0.0 955.0

Item#11_attach1 - FINAL.xlsSANDAG 1 12/05/2003 MTS OPERATORS FY 2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Previous FY 05 FY 05 FY 05 AGENCY Project Title Funding Process Funded Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project 22 MTS 10994 Organizational Desktop Replacement 600.0 250.0 0.0 460.0 460.0 460.0 460.0 460.0 3,150.0

250.0 23 MTS 10981 Organizational Server Replacement / Upgrades 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 350.0 0.0 350.0 0.0 775.0 24 MTS Transit Watch Security System 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 300.0 25 SDTC 10972 KMD CNG Fuel Station Upgrade 2,420.0 800.0 800.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,220.0

26 SDTI 11413 Catenary Improvement - Phase II 372.0 895.0 895.0 0.0 960.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,227.0 27 CVT CVT Shop Fork Lift 0.0 34.5 34.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.5 28 MMO NEW SBMF Equipment 0.0 120.0 120.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 520.0 29 MTDB Multimodal Building Seismic Retrofit or Demolition 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

30 SDTC BUS SDTC 60' Bus Replacement (35 Artics) 0.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 100.0 22,095.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22,270.0 31 SDTI SDTI Overhaul Brake Kits 0.0 554.0 554.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 554.0 32 CVT CVT ADA Bus Stop Improvements 0.0 23.0 23.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.0 33 MMO BUS MCS ADA Small Vehicles (127) 0.0 4,000.0 4,000.0 0.0 4,000.0 2,000.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10,000.0 34 SDTC IAD Radio Room Remodel 0.0 55.0 55.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.0 35 SDTI 10818 Rebuild U2 Camshaft, Phase ll (LRT-10818) 745.0 725.0 725.0 0.0 775.0 775.0 775.0 775.0 0.0 4,570.0 36 CVT CVT Bus Security Cameras (15 Buses) 0.0 184.0 184.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 184.0 37 MMO BUS MCS 30-35 foot CNG Low Floor Medium Size Buses (9) 0.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 3,000.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,025.0 38 SDTC NEW SDTC Supervisor Cars (9) 0.0 115.0 115.0 0.0 172.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 287.5 39 SDTI LRV Tires 0.0 453.0 453.0 0.0 503.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 956.0 40 MMO BUS MCS Medium/Small Flex Route Buses (15) - 900 0.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 1,200.0 510.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,735.0 41 SDTC 11002 KMD Air Filter System, Paint Booth 570.0 450.0 450.0 0.0 70.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,090.0 42 SDTI 11087 SD100 Digital Voice System Replacement 300.0 300.0 300.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 600.0

44 SDTC SDTC Forklift Replacement 0.0 69.0 69.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 69.0 45 SDTI Broadway Wye Train Location 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

46 MCS MVE Grantville and 70th Station Driver Restrooms 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 95.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 95.0 47 SDTC IAD Facility Improvements 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 250.0 1,100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,400.0

48 SDTI Substation Standardization Phase 2 0.0 402.0 402.0 0.0 750.0 750.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,902.0 49 MMO OTTC Bench Replacement and Shelter Rehabilitation 0.0 30.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 50 SDTC KMD Facility Improvements 0.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 100.0 300.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 425.0

51 SDTI Catenary Contact Wire Replacement 0.0 310.0 310.0 0.0 3,620.0 3,620.0 3,820.0 3,560.0 0.0 14,930.0 52 MMO NEW MCS Non-revenue Vehicles (2) 0.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 53 SDTC IAD Steam Rack 0.0 335.0 335.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 335.0 54 SDTI SDTI Non Revenue Vehicles 82.0 325.0 325.0 0.0 320.0 320.0 320.0 320.0 320.0 2,007.0 55 SDTI 11042 LRV Body Rehabilitation 1,044.0 500.0 500.0 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 1,500.0 5,044.0 56 SDTC SDTC Brake Lathes Replacement 0.0 34.5 34.5 0.0 34.5 34.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 103.5 57 SDTI 10974 Replace Switches - State / Columbia 701.6 250.0 250.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 951.6 58 SDTI SDTI MOW Catenary Truck 0.0 90.0 90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 90.0 59 SDTC 11057 IAD / KMD Parking Lot Resurface 150.0 750.0 127.0 623.0 0.0 250.0 250.0 250.0 0.0 1,650.0

Item#11_attach1 - FINAL.xlsSANDAG 2 12/05/2003 MTS OPERATORS FY 2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Previous FY 05 FY 05 FY 05 AGENCY Project Title Funding Process Funded Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project 60 RGNL NEW Regional ADA Bus Stop Improvements 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 250.0 250.0 250.0 0.0 950.0 61 SDTI Switch Replacement 0.0 135.0 0.0 135.0 1,355.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,490.0 62 SDTI Revenue Processing Room Redesign / Expansion 0.0 135.0 0.0 135.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.0 63 SDTI 11005 SDTI Security / Safety Equipment 30.0 15.0 0.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.0 64 SDTI Blue Line Switch Replacement - Phase II 0.0 117.5 0.0 117.5 400.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 517.5 65 SDTC IAD/KMD Vacuum Replacement 0.0 508.2 0.0 508.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 508.2 66 MTDB LRT Shelter Grounding Program 0.0 80.0 0.0 80.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 580.0 67 SDTI 10831 Downtown Substation Protection 150.0 1,000.0 0.0 1,000.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,150.0 68 SDTI South Line Inverters 0.0 135.0 0.0 135.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.0 69 SDTC IAD Facility Trench Plate Improvements 0.0 65.0 0.0 65.0 175.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 240.0 70 PLNG 11402 Kearny Mesa Transit Center 75.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 1,120.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,295.0 71 MTDB 11085 Switch Indicator Modifications 70.0 802.0 0.0 802.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 872.0 72 ITS Transportation Operations Management Center 0.0 719.0 0.0 719.0 0.0 9,036.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9,755.0

73 MTDB LF LRV Station Mod. Project - O.T. & Bayside 0.0 4,186.0 0.0 4,186.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,186.0

74 PLNG 11099 Transit First Now! Implementation 0.0 1,293.2 0.0 1,293.2 1,755.0 1,755.0 1,846.0 1,846.0 3,692.0 12,187.2 75 SDTC IAD/KMD Haz Mat Canopies 0.0 103.0 0.0 103.0 103.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 206.0

76 MTDB Signal Case/Equipment Replacement 0.0 212.3 0.0 212.3 792.0 792.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,796.3 77 MTDB Substation Isolation Switches - Phase II 0.0 181.5 0.0 181.5 840.0 996.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,017.5 78 ITS 10995 Regional Scheduling System - Phase II 60.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 160.0 79 ITS Voice Recognition Software Enhancement for IVR 0.0 500.0 0.0 500.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 80 PLNG Centre City Action Plan 0.0 180.0 0.0 180.0 180.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 81 MTDB 11054 Signal Plan Update 12.0 12.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.0 82 ITS Organizational Document Management System 0.0 200.0 0.0 200.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 200.0 83 ITS SDTI Safety Tracking Software 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 84 MTDB 10453 SYITC - Intercity Bus Facility Furniture 0.0 500.0 0.0 500.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 85 MTDB Orange Line Tree Replacement 0.0 15.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 86 PLNG Transit First Studies 0.0 240.0 0.0 240.0 504.0 528.0 552.0 576.0 0.0 2,400.0 87 SDTC SDTC Relief Cars (20) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 172.5 172.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 345.0 88 SDTI 10696 CCTV Equipment Upgrade 1,643.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 690.0 690.0 690.0 690.0 690.0 5,093.0 43 MMO BUS MCS Medium/Small Flex Route Buses (7) - 800 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 775.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 800.0 89 SDTI 10897 Yard Switch Electrification, Phase ll (LRT-10897) 857.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 170.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,027.5 90 SDTI LRV Coupler Disconnects, Phase lll 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 106.0 360.0 360.0 0.0 0.0 826.0 91 SDTI 11400 Rehab Traction Motors - Phase II (LRT-11400) 3,660.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,578.7 1,578.7 1,578.7 0.0 0.0 8,396.1 92 SDTI Event Recorders - Phase I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 265.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 265.0 93 SDTI Orange Line TWC Activated Crossovers 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 58.5 637.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 695.5 94 SDTI Interlock and TWC Activate Switches 73 & 75 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.0 500.0 500.0 0.0 0.0 1,135.0 95 SDTI Blue Line Crossover - Phase II 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 200.0 1,000.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,200.0 96 SDTI C Street Track and Paving Improvements 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 2,500.0 97 SDTI Grade Crossing Improvements 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 700.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 700.0 98 SDTI Rail Grinding 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 300.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 300.0 99 SDTI Station Trackway Paving 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 700.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 700.0 100 SDTI Permanent Ticket Booth at Gaslamp Station 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.0 101 SDTI Old Town Permanent Ticket Booth 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.0 102 SDTI South Line Tie and Rail Replacement (10 miles) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,350.0 8,000.0 8,000.0 0.0 0.0 17,350.0 103 MTDB Catenary Improvement - Phase III 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 140.0 645.0 645.0 0.0 0.0 1,430.0 104 MTDB Dynamic Signal Crossing Activation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 260.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 260.0

Item#11_attach1 - FINAL.xlsSANDAG 3 12/05/2003 MTS OPERATORS FY 2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Previous FY 05 FY 05 FY 05 AGENCY Project Title Funding Process Funded Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project 105 MTDB 10960 Visual Message Signs - Phase II (10960) 1,380.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 519.0 1,446.0 1,446.0 0.0 0.0 4,791.0 106 MTDB Railroad Signaling System Upgrades 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 725.0 3,808.0 3,807.0 0.0 0.0 8,340.0 107 MTDB LFV Procurement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 27,370.0 27,370.0 27,370.0 50,000.0 132,210.0 108 MTDB LRT Station Paving Repairs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 250.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 300.0 109 MTDB 10832 Configuration Management - Phase II 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 65.0 0.0 0.0 365.0 110 MTDB Orange Line Record of Survey - Phase II 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 115.0 55.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 170.0 111 MTDB El Cajon Station Improvements 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 112 MTDB 10740 Station Shelter Replacement Project (Civic Center) 537.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 85.0 376.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 998.0 113 MTDB ADA Station Improvements 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 114 MTDB 11022 IAD Building Shakeup Room 150.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 550.0 310.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,010.0 115 MTDB Inter City Bus Facility 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 300.0 1,800.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,100.0 116 MTDB 10736 Fifth Ave Station Improvements 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 86.0 395.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 484.0 117 MTDB 11402 Kearny Mesa Transit Center 150.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,350.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,500.0 118 MTDB 10955 Anita Street Grade Crossing 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 90.0 435.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 575.0 119 MTDB 10842 Fenton Station Parking Lot (Construction) 1,005.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,295.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,300.0 120 MTDB 10843 Fenton Parkway Grade Crossing 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 470.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 570.0 121 MTDB San Ysidro Fence Replacement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 160.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 160.0 122 MTDB Large Station Shelter Rehabilitation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 155.0 825.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 980.0 123 MTDB Blue Line Curve Straightening 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,625.0 815.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,440.0 124 MTDB Qualcomm Station Elevator 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 150.0 900.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,050.0 125 MTDB LRT Station Enhancements (East Line) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 250.0 1,450.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,700.0 126 MTDB Station Enhancements (South Line) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 250.0 1,450.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,700.0 127 MTDB Retaining Wall Rehabilitation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 200.0 1,300.0 600.0 0.0 0.0 2,100.0 128 MTDB Drainage Study - Beyer Blvd 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 180.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 180.0 129 MTDB Coaster Extension to the Border 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,200.0 1,200.0 1,200.0 0.0 0.0 3,600.0 130 MMO BUS MCS 35/40 foot CNG Low Floor Heavy Duty Buses (21) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 25.0 7,950.0 0.0 0.0 8,000.0 131 MMO NEW Trolley Station Signs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 0.0 120.0 132 MMO BUS MCS 40 foot CNG Low Floor Buses (73) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 27,900.0 0.0 0.0 28,000.0 133 MMO 10495 Spring Valley Transit Center 200.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 900.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,200.0

134 MMO BUS MCS Purchase 11 SVCC Vehicles 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,080.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,080.0 135 SDTC BUS SDTC 40' CNG Bus Replacement (28) 1300/1400 Series 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.0 100.0 10,978.0 0.0 0.0 11,153.0 136 11457 Fare Technology 7,840.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,463.0 3,308.0 0.0 15,611.0 137 MTDB Mira Mesa Transit Center 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 200.0 1,300.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,500.0 138 ITS 10940 Regional Transit Management System - Phase II 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 2,000.0 0.0 9,000.0

139 SDTI Commercial Street Switch Replacement and Removal 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 173.0 1,651.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,824.0 140 PLNG 11099 Transit First Now! Planning 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.0 330.0 380.0 380.0 380.0 1,605.0 141 MTDB 10782 Mainline Drainage - FY 04 744.0 0 0.0 0.0 200.0 600.0 600.0 0.0 0.0 2,144.0 142 MTDB 10956 San Ysidro Slope Repair 135.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,715.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,850.0 143 SDTI Overhaul SD-100 Traction Motors 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 745.0 745.0 745.0 0.0 0.0 2,235.0 144 SDTI South Line Tie and Rail Replacement (10 miles) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,000.0 8,000.0 8,000.0 0.0 19,000.0 145 MTDB Strain Insulator Replacement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 90.0 900.0 0.0 0.0 990.0 146 MTDB Catenary Improvement - Phase IV 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 314.0 1,590.0 1,590.0 0.0 3,494.0 147 MTDB Signal Case/ Equipment Replacement - Phase II 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 212.3 792.0 792.0 0.0 1,796.3 148 MTDB U2 Refurbishment 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13,285.0 29,700.0 26,000.0 19,500.0 88,485.0 149 MTDB LF LRV Station Mod Project - 25th & Comm. To La Mesa Blvd. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 495.0 2,840.0 2,965.0 0.0 6,300.0 150 MMO BUS MCS 30-35 foot CNG Low Floor Medium Size Buses (7) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 2,475.0 0.0 0.0 2,500.0

Item#11_attach1 - FINAL.xlsSANDAG 4 12/05/2003 MTS OPERATORS FY 2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Previous FY 05 FY 05 FY 05 AGENCY Project Title Funding Process Funded Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project 151 NCT NEW NCT Supervisor Vehicle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.0 152 MMO BUS MCS ADA Small Vehicles (14) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 450.0 800.0 0.0 0.0 1,250.0 153 MMO BUS CVT Purchase 3 40' CNG Buses 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 1,155.0 0.0 0.0 1,170.0 154 MTDB Grade Crossing and Railway Signaling Equipment Replacement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 115.0 870.0 0.0 985.0 155 MTDB Old Town Transit Center (OTTC) Parking Facility 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,000.0 10,200.0 0.0 11,200.0 156 MTDB LF LRV 12th Ave. & C Street Corridor Improv. Project 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 198.0 1,980.0 23,400.0 25,578.0 157 MTDB LF LRV Station Mod. Project - South Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 796.0 4,647.0 4,657.0 10,100.0 158 MTDB Moss, Naples, and Anita St Grade Crossing Widening 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 115.0 870.0 0.0 985.0 Fare Technology PH II - Fare Boxes: Suburban Operators 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,500.0 2,500.0 4,000.0

TOTAL FY 2005 CAPITAL PROJECT REQUESTS 34,072.7 21,715.0 12,357.7 56,814.3 135,996.0 158,053.7 99,741.0 107,749.0 655,786.8

TOTAL FY 05 CIP REQUESTS (INCLUDES COMMITTED, BOARD PRIORITY, AND FY 05 CPR's) 67,041.7 54,684.0 12,357.7 96,644.3 175,326.0 194,348.7 131,111.0 109,420.7 865,519.5

ESTIMATED FUNDING AVAILABLE 54,684.0 54,684.0 0.0 53,719.0 55,330.0 56,990.0 58,700.0 0.0 334,107.0 LESS: CAPITAL COMMITMENTS (31,759.0) (31,759.0) 0.0 (38,384.0) (38,110.0) (35,250.0) (30,325.0) 0.0 (205,587.0) LESS: PLANNING STUDIES (1,210.0) (1,210.0) 0.0 (1,446.0) (1,220.0) (1,045.0) (1,045.0) (1,671.7) (7,637.7) LESS: FY 2005 CAPITAL PROJECT REQUESTS (34,072.7) (21,715.0) (12,357.7) (56,814.3) (135,996.0) (158,053.7) (99,741.0) (107,749.0) (626,499.4) BALANCE (12,357.7) 0.0 (12,357.7) (42,925.3) (119,996.0) (137,358.7) (72,411.0) (109,420.7) (506,827.1) PERCENT OF TOTAL FUNDING : CAPITAL COMMITMENTS 58.1% 58.1% 0.0% 71.5% 68.9% 61.9% 51.7% 0.0% 60.5% PERCENT OF TOTAL FUNDING : PLANNING STUDIES 2.2% 2.2% 0.0% 2.7% 2.2% 1.8% 1.8% 0.0% 2.3%

Item#11_attach1 - FINAL.xlsSANDAG 5 12/05/2003 FY 2005 CAPITAL PROJECTS SELECTION PROCESS

1. The MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will initiate the capital projects development cycle with a Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) kickoff meeting that will include each agency’s designated Capital Projects Coordinator (CPC). At the meeting the MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will distribute the capital project development package to the CPCs. The package will also be distributed to General Managers, Presidents, and directors subsequent to the kickoff meeting. The Capital Project Development package will include the following items:

• Capital Program Schedule • Federal Formula Fund Estimate for Fiscal Years 2005 – 2009 • Capital Project Selection Process • Flowchart of the Capital Project Selection Process • Capital Project Request Form • Instructions for Capital Project Request • Capital Project Ranking Criteria • MTS Operators FY 04 Capital Project Rankings

2. CPCs will initiate the First Cut of the capital project requests at the agency level. Each individual agency will establish its own process for the First Cut. This process should be carried forward to cover the next five fiscal years. The CPCs should ensure that the proposed capital projects selected to go on for further screening are those that best meet the criteria shown on the capital request form. The project descriptions and justifications must clearly show how the criteria are met.

3. The MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will then compile and generate a list of projects for each of the next five fiscal years.

• Upon completion of the First Cut, each CPC will forward a separate set of proposed capital projects for fiscal years 2005-2009, accompanied by completed copies of the Capital Project Request form, to the MTDB Budget Manager. The MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will compile a single, comprehensive list of proposed capital projects for all agencies.

• The list will be forwarded to the SANDAG Director of Finance to verify that all proposed projects qualify as capital projects. The SANDAG Director of Finance may request copies of specific capital project forms as needed to complete the review. The SANDAG Director of Finance will notify the MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager if any proposed projects are non-capital items. The CPC will be notified, and will be responsible to inform the originator of the request that the item is non-capital and will not be considered for funding under this process.

• The MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will delete non-capital projects from the list of capital requests and forward copies of the edited list of qualifying proposed capital projects, along with copies of the Capital Project Request/Evaluation forms, to the Capital Projects Review Committee (CPRC). The CPRC will consist of representatives from each operating agency and MTDB Engineering, MTDB Multimodal Operations, SANDAG Planning, and SANDAG Finance. Representatives from SANDAG programming and NCTD will attend the FY 05 CPRC meetings in a non- voting capacity.

4. The CPRC will make the Second Cut.

• Evaluate each capital project request individually, according to how it meets the established criteria. Each capital project request is given a numerical rating for each of the five ranking criteria. The projects will be ranked according to total points received. The ranked project list is then reviewed for consensus before it is finalized.

• The CPRC will establish a tentative list of the highest-ranked projects with a combined cost totaling 100 percent of the capital-funding estimate. The CPRC will establish tentative schedules for these highest-ranked projects. If it is determined that a higher-ranked project could not be started during the fiscal year, then the CPRC will substitute a capital project which falls below the 100 percent funding line.

• The MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will prepare the list of proposed capital projects above and below the 100 percent funding level. This list will be transmitted to the CPCs in each agency along with individual capital evaluation forms showing the total points received and relative ranking for all projects.

• The MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will send out a list of ranked, proposed capital projects for the next five fiscal years, with all supporting documentation, to the general managers, vice presidents, and directors with an updated estimate of the total capital funding available. The MTDB Financial Planning and Programming Administrator will provide the final funding resources.

5. The general managers, vice presidents, and directors will attend the Final Cut meeting. The MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will give a presentation of the ranked, proposed capital project list and schedules. General managers, vice presidents, and directors will evaluate the proposed capital project list and make revisions and/or request further project information from the CPRC. After the final cut session(s), the MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will distribute the finalized list of funded and unfunded proposed capital projects to the general managers, vice presidents, directors, and CPCs. It will be the responsibility of the CPC within each agency to ensure that all capital request originators are informed of the final results.

6. The MTDB/SANDAG Budget Manager will forward the funded capital list to the SANDAG Financial Planning and Programming Administrator, who will then undertake the grant application process as follows:

• Public Comment on the Proposed Program of Projects (POP)

• SANDAG Transportation Committee approval of the POP

• Amendment of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)

• Application submittal and monitoring through the approval process

• Provide CPCs with federal capital grant number as soon as it is available

• Inform CPCs when the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) approves capital grant project

7. Upon SANDAG Transportation Committee approval of the POP, the SANDAG Director of Finance will incorporate the funded capital projects/equipment into the next fiscal year budget development process. CIP 10453 San Ysidro Intermodal Transportation Center

Line Item Current Budget Revised Budget Change Administration $1,300,000 $1,400,000 $100,000 Engineering & Design $2,400,000 $2,600,000 $200,000 Construction Management $1,926,100 $1,926,100 $0 Professional Services $400,000 $400,000 $0 Right of Way $3,000,000 $3,200,000 $200,000 Construction $14,967,800 $15,967,800 $1,000,000 Project Contingency $0 $250,000 $250,000 Total $23,993,900 $25,743,900 $1,750,000

12/05/2003 2:53 PM Item#11_attach4.xls SUMMARY MTS FY 05 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

PROPOSED PROJECTED FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE $21,000 $29,000 $29,000 $29,000 $29,000

MULTI-YEAR CAPITAL COMMITMENTS $10,759 $9,384 $9,110 $6,250 $1,325

MTS PLANNING STUDIES $1,210 $1,446 $1,220 $1,045 $1,045

TOTAL PRIORITY NEEDS (A) $32,969 $39,830 $39,330 $36,295 $31,370

TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECT NEEDS (B) $21,715 $13,889 $16,000 $20,695 $27,330

TOTAL PROGRAM NEEDS (A + B) $67,042 $96,644 $175,326 $194,349 $131,111

TOTAL ESTIMATED FUNDING AVAILABLE $54,684 $53,719 $55,330 $56,990 $58,700

ANNUAL SURPLUS (DEFICIT) ($12,358) ($42,925) ($119,996) ($137,359) ($72,411) NCTD REVISED FY 2005 CIP

Ref No. Project Title FY 05 Process FY 05 Funded FY 05 Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project

1 FTA Planning 125,000 125,000 0 187,500 187,500 187,500 187,500 875,000 2 FTA Preventative Maint-Fixed Route 6,000,000 6,000,000 0 6,875,000 9,375,000 9,500,000 9,500,000 41,250,000 3 FTA Preventative Maint-Coaster 2,125,000 2,125,000 0 2,125,000 2,125,000 2,250,000 2,250,000 10,875,000 4 FTA Preventative Maint-Sprinter 0 000 0 1,250,000 1,250,000 2,500,000 4 FTA Associated Capital Maintenance 375,000 375,000 0 375,000 375,000 375,000 375,000 1,875,000 5 FTA ADA Paratransit 2,315,000 2,315,000 0 2,433,000 2,560,000 2,695,000 2,829,800 12,832,800

MODE: 1 - FIXED ROUTE - BUS Asset Class 104 - REVENUE VEHICLES 6 7 C8.3d Cummins Bus Engine 37,007 37,00700000 037,007 8 Driver Seats 28,680 28,680 0 71,320 51,000 52,000 53,000 0 256,000 9 Bike Racks For Buses 13,878 13,878 0 0 000 013,878 10 Emission Reduction Equipment 37,007 37,007 0 57,455 70,670 80,625 0 245,757 11 15 Buses - Alternative Fuel 5,644,691 5,644,691 0 0 6,000,000 6,080,000 6,230,000 0 23,954,691

Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES 000 000 0 0 12 Pickup Trucks - 3/4 Ton 49,343 49,343 0 0 000 049,343 13 Sedans 202,304 202,304 0 160,874 176,000 00 0539,178 14 Trucks 106,210 106,210 0 153,213 99,975 68,000 0 0 427,398

Asset Class 337 - BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 000000 0 0 15 East Division Maintenance Facility 3,253,162 3,253,162 0 0000 0 3,253,162

Asset Class 338 - BUILDING AND STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT 000000 0 0 16 Bus Plus: Upgrading Existing Shelters 207,454 207,454 0 0000 0 207,454 17 Rehab Fire Alarm Systems 61,678 61,678 0 0000 0 61,678 18 Replace Roof Structures 91,800 91,800 0 0 273,947 0 0 0 365,747 19 Security Systems Upgrade - CCTV Monitoring 30,839 30,839 0 31,919 0 0 0 0 62,758 20 Service Islands Exhaust Fans - West (TBD-207) 12,000 12,000 0 0000 0 12,000

Asset Class 434 - OPERATING YARD EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 21 Chassijet - Chassis Cleaning Equipment 120,000 120,000 0 0000 0 120,000

Asset Class 435 - SHOP & GARAGE EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 22 Engine Service Kit 6,384 6,384 0 0000 0 6,384 23 Hydraulic floor Jacks 8,635 8,635 0 0000 0 8,635 24 Misc. Shop Tools 24,671 24,671 0 17,816 21,500 19,834 25,000 0 108,821 25 Maintenance Shop and Garage Equipment 35,000 35,000 0 66,300 51,000 0 53,000 0 205,300 26 Bus Vacuum Bellows Rehab 20,000 20,000 0 0000 0 20,000 27 Lighting Towers With Tow Hitches (TBD 224) 16,000 16,000 0 0000 0 16,000

28 Asset Class 440 - DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 29 PC Software Upgrades 77,714 77,714 0 84,267 0 0 50,000 0 211,981 30 Printers, Scanners, Other Devices 24,671 24,671 0 25,536 0 0 0 0 50,207 31 Replace and Add Personal Computers 138,776 138,776 0 175,556 50,000 50,000 100,000 0 514,332

Asset Class 500 - OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 32 Warehouse Bins - Warehouse Space Improvements 6,168 6,168 0 0000 0 6,168

Item#11_attach5 - REVISED.xlsNCTD 1 12/12/2003 NCTD REVISED FY 2005 CIP

Ref No. Project Title FY 05 Process FY 05 Funded FY 05 Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project

MODE: 2 - ADA SERVICES 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 104 - REVENUE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 33 New ADA Vans 103,275 103,275 0 0 0 39,600 0 0 142,875

MODE: 4 - COASTER OPERATIONS 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 104 - REVENUE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 34 Locomotive Heavy Overhaul 698,625 698,625 0 723,077 0 0 0 0 1,421,702

Asset Class 338 - BUILDING & STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT 0 000000 0 0 35 VPAS System 123,356 123,356 0 0000 0 123,356

Asset Class 434 - OPERATING YARD EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 36 Reverse Osmosis System For Train Washer 12,768 12,768 0 0000 0 12,768

MODE: 5 - COASTAL RAILROAD MOW 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 37 mow Manager's Vehicle 33,278 33,278 0 0 0 0 230,000 0 263,278 38 Hy-Rail Pickup SDNR 57,455 57,455 0 0000 0 57,455

Asset Class 432 - RIGHT OF WAY 0 000000 0 0 39 Crosstie Renewal Program 445,388 445,388 0 535,988 535,988 550,000 550,000 0 2,617,364 40 Rail Replacement Reserve 237,540 237,540 0 245,860 254,460 246,000 200,000 0 1,183,860 41 Bridge and Infrastructure Replacement 5,564,000 5,564,000 0 3,426,000 3,405,000 4,630,000 4,600,000 0 21,625,000 42 Track Structure Rehabilitation 475,080 475,080 0 885,255 540,000 536,000 710,000 0 3,146,335

MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS - UNFUNDED NEEDS 43 Automated Fare Technology 1,675,000 1,675,000 0 50,000 0 0 0 0 1,725,000 44 Del Ma Bluffs Stabilization 18,000,000 0 18,000,000 0000 0 18,000,000 45 San Luis Rey Transit Center 3,002,000 0 3,002,000 0000 0 3,002,000 46 Sorrento to Miramar Curve Realignment and Second Main Track 13,500,000 0 13,500,000 0000 0 13,500,000 47 Solana Beach Parking Structure 7,000,000 0 7,000,000 0000 0 7,000,000 48 Oceanside Station Platform Widening 1,800,000 0 1,800,000 0000 0 1,800,000 49 Oceanside Transit Maintenance & Security Improvement 3,000,000 0 3,000,000 0000 0 3,000,000 50 NCTD Administration Field Office Relocation (MOW) 7,800,000 0 7,800,000 0000 0 7,800,000 51 Carlsbad Poinsettia Parking Project 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 0000 0 2,000,000 52 Santa Margarita River Bridger (#223.1) Replacement 28,500,000 0 28,500,000 0000 0 28,500,000 53 SDNR Culvert Repalcement Program 960,000 0 960,000 0 223,000 162,000 0 0 1,345,000

MODE: 1 - FIXED ROUTE - BUS Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES

54 Emergency Mobile Command Vehicle Improvements (TBD 227) 35,000 0 35,000 0000 0 35,000

Asset Class 337 - BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 0 000000 0 0 55 East Division Maintenance Facility (See 1-05-10) 1,565,969 0 1,565,969 0000 0 1,565,969

Asset Class 338 - BUILDING AND STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT 0 000000 0 0 56 Electric Gates At Bus Maintenance Facilities - East Division (TBD 210) 175,000 0 175,000 0000 0 175,000 57 Bus Plus 410,546 0 410,546 455,278 353,758 265,212 478,000 0 1,962,794

Item#11_attach5 - REVISED.xlsNCTD 2 12/12/2003 NCTD REVISED FY 2005 CIP

Ref No. Project Title FY 05 Process FY 05 Funded FY 05 Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project 58 Explosion Proof Heaters (TBD 223) 44,442 0 44,442 0000 0 44,442

Asset Class 500 - OFFICE FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 59 Board Room Audio Visual Equipment 100,000 0 100,000 0000 0 100,000

MODE: 5 - COASTAL RAILROAD MOW 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 431 - TRANSIT WAY EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 60 Installation of Ride Quality/Track Geometry Equipment 50,000 0 50,000 0000 0 50,000

FY 2006

MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS 61 San Dieguito River Bridge (#243) Replacement 0 0017,245,000 0 0 0 0 17,245,000 62 Bridge & Infrastructure Replacement Zprogram 0 0011,574,000 3,135,000 4,870,000 2,200,000 51,176,000 72,955,000

MODE: 1 - FIXED ROUTE - BUS Asset Class 104 - REVENUE VEHICLES 63 10 Transit Vans, 5 Transit Buses 0 002,998,406 0 0 0 0 2,998,406 64 Bus Engine 0 0038,303 0 0 0 0 38,303

Asset Class 338 - BUILDING AND STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT 0 000000 0 0 65 Video Surveillance System 0 0063,839 0 250,000 0 0 313,839 66 Bus Plus Program: Bench Replacement 0 00214,722 0 0 0 0 214,722 67 OTC Polycarbonate Roof Replacement (TBD 209) 0 00575,000 0 0 0 0 575,000 68 Miscellaneous Small Building Projects (TBD 229) 0 0050,000 51,000 52,000 53,000 0 206,000 69 Replace HVAC Units 0 0040,000 0 15,000 0 0 55,000

Asset Class 434 - OPERATING YARD EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 70 Transit Bus Wash Systems - West (TBD 212) 0 00575,000 275,000 0 0 0 850,000 71 Replacement fuel Dispensers (TBD 230) 0 0050,000 0 0 0 50,000

Asset Class 435 - SHOP & GARAGE EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 72 Portable Lifts 0 0038,303 0 0 0 0 38,303

Asset Class 438 - VEHICLE MOVEMENT CONTROL EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 73 Suppl - Radio System - San Onofre Microwave Tower 0 00250,000 0 0 0 0 250,000 74 Suppl - Radio System - Additional Radios For Buses 0 00126,768 0 0 0 0 126,768 75 Suppl - Radio System - ADA Announcement System 0 00594,113 0 0 0 0 594,113 76 Mobile Command Unit Upgrades (TBD 292) 0 00200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000

Asset Class 440 - DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 77 Miscellaneous Network Enhancements 0 00191,517 0 0 0 0 191,517 78 Application Consulting Services (14) 0 00250,000 0 0 0 0 250,000

Asset Class 500 - OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 79 Miscellaneous Furnishings And Fixtures 0 0020,000 20,400 20,800 21,200 0 82,400

MODE: 2 - ADA SERVICES 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 104 - REVENUE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0

Item#11_attach5 - REVISED.xlsNCTD 3 12/12/2003 NCTD REVISED FY 2005 CIP

Ref No. Project Title FY 05 Process FY 05 Funded FY 05 Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project 80 ADA Paratransit Vehicles 0 0036,879 38,169 0 0 0 75,048

Asset Class 337 - BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 0 000000 0 0 81 ADA Transition Plan (TBD 228) 0 00400,000 0 0 0 0 400,000

MODE: 4 - COASTER OPERATIONS 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 337 - BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 0 000000 0 0 82 Convention Center/Stadium Coaster Station Preliminary Design 0 00200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000

Asset Class 338 - BUILDING & STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT 0 000000 0 0 83 Supplement To VPAS System 0 00150,000 0 0 0 0 150,000 84 Information Display Panels For 8 Coaster Stations 0 0045,000 0 0 0 0 45,000 85 Old Town Station Minor Platform Extension 0 0055,000 0 0 0 0 55,000 86 Old Town Station Mini-Hi Relocation 0 00165,000 0 0 0 0 165,000 87 Stuart Mesa Paint Booth 0 0073,956 73,956 73,956 73,956 0 295,824

MODE: 5 - COASTAL RAILROAD MOW 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 88 Replace Hi-Rail inspection Vehicle 0 0078,662 0 0 0 0 78,662

MODE: 6 - SPRINTER OPERATIONS 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 89 Box Van/Trucks - 3 Total (TBD 191) 0 00120,000 0 0 0 0 120,000 90 3/4 Ton Truck - 6 Each (TBD 192) 0 00210,000 0 0 0 0 210,000 91 Sprinter Support Service Vehicles 0 00285,000 0 0 0 0 285,000

Asset Class 434 - OPERATING YARD EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 92 Wheel Truing Machine For Sprinter 0 001,500,000 0 0 0 0 1,500,000 93 Procure Hi-Rail Speed Swing 0 00225,000 0 0 0 0 225,000

Asset Class 435 - SHOP & GARAGE EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 94 Equipment Sprinter Facilities Shop (TBD 215) 0 0050,000 0 0 0 0 50,000 95 Maintenance Equipment - Sprinter Facilities (TBD 208) 0 0059,000 0 0 0 0 59,000

FY 2007 MODE: 1 - FIXED ROUTE - BUS 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 104 - REVENUE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 96 Swing Transmission 0 000 25,000 0 0 0 25,000

Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 97 Service Trucks 0 000 120,000 0 105,000 0 225,000

Asset Class 338 - BUILDING AND STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT 0 000000 0 0 98 Bus Plus Program: Upgrade Bus Stops 0 000 222,242 222,369 0 0 444,611 99 Security Surveillance & Communications Improvement 0 000 75,000 0 0 0 75,000

Asset Class 435 - SHIP & GARAGE EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 100 Pressure Washer Replacement 0 000 7,188 0 0 0 7,188

Item#11_attach5 - REVISED.xlsNCTD 4 12/12/2003 NCTD REVISED FY 2005 CIP

Ref No. Project Title FY 05 Process FY 05 Funded FY 05 Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project Asset Class 440 - DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 101 Network Expansion & Support 0 000 100,000 0 0 0 100,000 102 Regional Application Support & Expansion 0 000 300,000 0 0 0 300,000 103 Server Replacements 0 000 75,000 0 0 0 75,000 104 E-Procurement (11) 0 000 400,000 0 0 0 400,000 105 E-HR (11) 0 000 400,000 0 0 0 400,000

MODE: 5 - COASTAL RAILROAD MOW 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 102 Signalman's Pickup Truck 0 000 50,256 43,050 0 0 93,306

FY 2008

MODE: 1 - FIXED ROUTE - BUS 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 435 - SHOP & GARAGE EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 103 Floor Jacks 0 000 0 3,306 0 0 3,306 104 Portable Hoists 0 000 0 39,668 0 0 39,668 105 Ride-On Sweeper Scrubber Machine 0 000 0 66,359 0 0 66,359 106 Storeroom Bins 0 000 0 6,611 0 0 6,611

Asset Class 440 - DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 107 Network Overhaul And Replacement 0 000 0 400,000 0 0 400,000 108 Regional Application Support And Expansion 0 000 0 150,000 0 0 150,000

MODE: 4 - COASTER OPERATIONS 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 109 Rail Safety & Incident Response Vehicles 0 000 0 45,000 0 0 45,000

Asset Class 435 - SHOP & GARAGE EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 110 Maintenance Shop and Garage Equipment 0 000 0 53,000 0 0 53,000

MODE: 5 - COASTAL RAILROAD MOW 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 111 Weld Truck 0 000 0 221,400 0 0 221,400 112 Stakebed Truck 0 000 0 43,050 0 0 43,050

FY 2009

MODE: 1 - FIXED ROUTE - BUS 0 000000 0 0 Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES 0 000000 0 0 113 Sedan/Delivery Vans - 8 Total (TBD 193) 0 000 0 0 184,000 0 184,000 114 Delivery Truck (TBD 196) 0 000 0 0 35,000 0 35,000

Asset Class 338 - BUILDING AND STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT 0 000000 0 0 115 Security Surveillance System (1) (TBD 226) 0 000 0 0 250,000 0 250,000

Asset Class 440 - DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 119 Transit Applications Support 0 000 0 0 400,000 0 400,000

Item#11_attach5 - REVISED.xlsNCTD 5 12/12/2003 NCTD REVISED FY 2005 CIP

Ref No. Project Title FY 05 Process FY 05 Funded FY 05 Unfunded FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 Beyond FY09 Total Project

Asset Class 435 - SHOP & GARAGE EQUIPMENT 0 000000 0 0 120 Warehouse Bins (TBD 197) 0 000 0 0 8,000 0 8,000

TOTAL: 118,562,794 30,619,837 87,942,957 57,909,682 32,097,009 35,612,340 33,001,456 51,176,000 328,359,281

Item#11_attach5 - REVISED.xlsNCTD 6 12/12/2003 REVISED SUMMARY NCTD FY 05 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

PROPOSED PROJECTED FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09

PLANNING $125,000 $187,500 $187,500 $187,500 $187,500

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE $8,125,000 $9,000,000 $11,500,000 $13,000,000 $13,000,000

ASSOCIATED CAPITAL MAINTENANCE $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000

ADA PARATRANSIT $2,315,000 $2,433,000 $2,560,000 $2,695,000 $2,829,800

TOTAL PRIORITY NEEDS (A) $10,940,000 $11,995,500 $14,622,500 $16,257,500 $16,392,300

TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECT NEEDS (B) $107,622,794 $45,914,182 $17,474,509 $19,354,840 $16,609,156

TOTAL PROGRAM NEEDS (A + B) $118,562,794 $57,909,682 $32,097,009 $35,612,340 $33,001,456

TOTAL ESTIMATED FUNDING AVAILABLE $30,619,837 $29,040,682 $28,739,009 $30,580,340 $30,801,456

ANNUAL SURPLUS (DEFICIT) ($87,942,957) ($28,869,000) ($3,358,000) ($5,032,000) ($2,200,000) San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

December 12, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 12

Action Requested: INFORMATION

SOFAR AGREEMENT ANALYSIS

Background

SANDAG and SOFAR signed a settlement agreement in July 2003 in order to avoid costly and time consuming litigation related to adoption of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan, known as MOBILITY 2030 (Figure 1). Section 4 of the settlement agreement outlines the substantive analysis that must be completed to comply with the terms of the agreement. Pursuant to the settlement, the technical analysis for the SOFAR Transportation Network Alternative (as mutually agreed by SANDAG and SOFAR and herein referenced as the “SOFAR Alternative”) must be substantially completed no later than December 31, 2003.

SANDAG agreed to analyze this new alternative to compare the effects of eliminating specified roadway improvements in north- and east-county, and reprogramming the cost savings for enhanced transit service in San Diego’s urban core. The SOFAR Alternative defined in the settlement agreement, Sections 4.B.(i) and 4.B.(ii), is depicted in Figure 2 and includes the following changes:

2030 HIGHWAY PROJECTS TO BE ELIMINATED

Year Cost Freeway From To Existing Improvements Built By (millions)

2030 SR 67 Mapleview Dye Road 2C 4C $240 Street 2010 SR 76 Melrose Drive Mission Road 2C 4C $100 2020 SR 76 Mission Road I-15 2C 4C $80 2030 SR 94 SR 125 Avocado Blvd. 4F/4C 6F $70 2030 SR 94 Avocado Blvd. Steele Canyon 2C 4C $20 Road Total $510

90 TRANSIT SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ADDED

Route Service Frequency

Route 570 – Mid Coast from Old Town to Sorrento Increased off-peak headways from 15 to 7 ½ Mesa minutes Route 627 – H Street Trolley to Eastlake via Increased peak headway* from 30 to 15 Southwestern College minutes Route 616 – Old Town to Mira Mesa via Clairemont Add route with peak 10-minute headways and 15-minute off-peak headway Route 632 – Balboa Station to UTC via La Jolla Add route with peak 10-minute headway Boulevard and 10-minute off-peak headway * The peak period is 6:00 a.m. to 8:59 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 5:59 p.m.

Section 4 B (iv) of the settlement agreement requires SANDAG to prepare the technical analysis of the SOFAR Alternative and provide a brief preliminary discussion of the potential environmental issue areas that could be affected by the alternative as compared to the 2030 RTP.

Performance Measures

MOBILITY 2030 and all the RTP alternatives were compared against a set of goals and performance measures that gauged mobility, accessibility, reliability, equity, livability, sustainability, and efficiency. As agreed to in the Settlement Agreement, the output of the goals and performance measures (technical analysis) were also used to compare the SOFAR Alternative against MOBILITY 2030.

The outcome of the performance measures did not yield significant regional differences between the two networks. This is most likely due to the relative magnitude of the improvements (and deleted roadways) to the overall plan. The $510 million not spent to improve the three rural highways represents approximately 2.5% of the approximately $21 billion of the plan that is spent on transit and highway capital improvements. System-wide impacts are minimally discernable at this scale. Some of the performance measure indicators did show minor improvement, while others were slightly worsened (see Table 1 attached).

Of particular note are the Level of Service maps that were included as Figures 1.5 and 1.6 of the 2030 RTP. Theses figures are attached herein as Figures 3 and 4. Figures 3 and 4 identify Level of Service (LOS) in the years 2000 and 2030 (with network improvements), respectively. Figure 5 identifies LOS for the SOFAR Alternative which shows LOS F at most of the areas where the roadway improvements have been deleted. In some cases, LOS F also extends to areas beyond the alignment of the unimproved roadways.

In the original RTP analysis, the Mobility performance measure gauged travel time by mode for selected corridors. The selected origin/destination points provided an overview of travel times in representative corridors throughout the region. The results of that performance measure did not show significant changes when eliminating rural serving highways and improving transit service in the urban core. To better demonstrate the effects of the changes, SANDAG selected corridors that would be directly affected by the changes. These corridors and travel times are provided in Table 2.

91 Travel time results from the newly selected origin/destination pairs showed some auto trips were lengthened, but no transit trip lengths were improved by reprogramming the highway and transit projects. This was due to the fact that two of the improved transit routes (Route 570 and Route 672) increased frequency in non-peak hours which would not be reflected in the table (Table 2 output is for peak hour times only). Similarly, the new transit routes that were added provided somewhat redundant service in heavily traveled corridors and though transit ridership would improve, these improvements did not show improvement in travel times. Overall transit ridership was improved with the SOFAR Alternative. A comparison of transit ridership in the MOBILITY 2030 and SOFAR Alternative is provided in Table 3.

Environmental Issues

As was stated throughout SANDAG’s discussions with SOFAR, the scale at which impact analysis is conducted for an RTP makes quantifying corridor impacts difficult. It is anticipated that the SOFAR Alternative would result in new impacts in some environmental issue areas, and reduced impacts in other areas. It should be noted that the magnitude of these impacts is not known and whether significance thresholds would be exceeded can not be determined until an EIR is prepared for the next update of the RTP. The following issue areas are most likely the topics that would yield differences between the updated RTP and the SOFAR Alternative. This discussion is preliminary - the Settlement Agreement requires SANDAG to compare the SOFAR Alternative to the next update of the RTP. Until that updated transportation network is known, a preliminary comparison to the existing RTP (MOBILITY 2030) is all that can be conducted.

Land Use and Growth Inducement - The growth inducement discussion in the updated RTP will address how growth in the rural areas of the county is facilitated by the provision of roadways. A project is defined as growth inducing when it directly or indirectly fosters economic growth, population growth, or additional housing; when it removes obstacles to growth; and/or when it facilitates or encourages other activities that could significantly affect the environment.

The growth inducement discussion in the updated RTP will be more detailed than was included in the MOBILITY 2030 EIR. SANDAG will research other similar projects and case law from throughout the state to determine an appropriate standard for determining growth inducing impacts. In addition, SANDAG will be able to draw from recommendations in the Regional Comprehensive Plan to determine future land use commitments from the local jurisdictions that could affect future planned facilities. It is anticipated that the RCP will provide incentives to agencies that are willing to increase development intensities near transit areas and, conversely, conserve areas better suited for habitat conservation. The next update of the RTP will rely on policies outlined in the RCP.

Existing conditions on the subject rural roadways (SR 76, SR 67, and SR 94) will also be included in the analysis. Regardless of these projects being growth inducing or growth accommodating, it will be necessary to analyze existing levels of service and safety factors.

Biological Resources - Impacts to Biological Resources will be outlined by corridor, though actual acreages will most likely not be available until alignments and preliminary design work has been completed for the proposed facilities. The preliminary acreage ranges provided in the table below are estimates that are based on the best available information. It should be noted that the acreage figures in the table are based on 1995 vegetation data that are mapped at a 1” = 4,000’ scale. In

92 addition, these estimates were made without specific design details for the proposed facilities. These estimates are conservative, that is, the acreages are likely overstated.

Habitat Acreage Impacted Facility Habitat Types Impacted Uplands Wetlands State Route 67 150-200 acres 5-10 acres Coastal sage scrub , Chaparral Grassland , Oak woodland, Riparian scrub, Disturbed/developed State Route 76 150-200 acres 50-80 acres Coastal sage scrub, Marsh, Riparian forest, Riparian scrub, Grassland, Disturbed/developed State Route 94 20-30 acres 5-10 acres Grassland, Riparian scrub Chaparral, Coastal sage scrub Disturbed/developed

The three roadways being deleted in the SOFAR Alternative are located in more rural areas of the county where large tracts of habitats are still intact. Habitat adjacent to SR 94 and SR 67 have been included in the County of San Diego’s subarea plan for the MSCP. Both SR 94 and SR 67 are adjacent to areas that have been designated as habitat preserves. Although these preserve areas anticipate future development, sensitive design of future roadways (or any development) will be necessary to ensure that wildlife corridors are not further degraded.

Although habitat plans in the SR 76 corridor have not been completed to date, a north county subarea plan of the MSCP is being prepared and will include sensitive habitats in the SR 76 corridor. Of particular sensitivity in the SR 76 corridor are the wetland and riparian habitats that support the threatened/endangered Arroyo toad, Southern willow flycatcher, and the Least bells vireo.

Roadway improvements adjacent to these sensitive habitats will have to consider noise impacts to sensitive species as well as water quality impacts. This is especially critical due to the proximity of the proposed roadway expansion to riparian habitat types. Caltrans currently constructs projects pursuant to a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit which regulates non- point source discharge from their properties, facilities, and activities. Caltrans has prepared a series of handbooks outlining best management practices for construction activities. Caltrans also requires all contractors to prepare and implement a program to control water pollution effectively during the construction of all projects.

Transportation/Circulation-SANDAG will run its transportation model on the updated RTP network as well as the SOFAR Alternative in compliance with the Settlement Agreement. Preliminary analysis indicates that congestion on many north- and east-county highway segments results from the elimination of those proposed facility improvements (located on SR 76, SR 67, and SR 94).

Other environmental issue areas that will be included in the EIR may result in impacts that will also require discussion such as air quality, noise, and energy. However, as the performance measures indicate, this system-level analysis does not yield significant changes when modifications of this magnitude are made (see Table 1).

93 CEQA requires the discussion of Alternatives and Cumulative Impacts. The Alternatives discussion in the EIR that will be prepared for the next update of the RTP will include the SOFAR alternative (pursuant to the Settlement Agreement) as well as other alternatives that will be formulated to reduce significant environmental impacts associated with the updated RTP. The Cumulative Impacts section of the EIR will be prepared using either a “projections” or “list of projects” approach to determine the impacts from the project. The RTP EIR will likely draw from the analysis that will be prepared as part of the RCP, which is a planning policy document with a 2030 horizon year.

BOB LEITER Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Key Staff Contact: Rob Rundle, (619) 595-5649; [email protected]

94 Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Performance Measures (*)

SOFAR MOBILITY 2030 MOBILITY 2030 Goals and Performance Measures (Feb. 2003) (Sept. 2003)

MOBILITY

Average travel time (peak periods) by mode for selected corridors (in minutes door to door)

1. Oceanside-Downtown San Diego Average travel time by carpool 49 49 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 81 81 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 66 66 Average travel time by auto 69 69

2. Escondido-Kearny Mesa Average travel time by carpool 30 30 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 51 51 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 48 47 Average travel time by auto 45 45

3. Escondido-Carlsbad Average travel time by carpool 26 26 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 50 50 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 44 44 Average travel time by auto 31 31

4. El Cajon-Downtown San Diego Average travel time by carpool 28 28 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 62 62 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 56 56 Average travel time by auto 36 37

5. Mid City San Diego-Sorrento Valley Average travel time by carpool 24 24 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 39 39 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 38 38 Average travel time by auto 32 32

6. Chula Vista-Sorrento Valley Average travel time by carpool 33 33 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 66 66 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 55 54 Average travel time by auto 43 43

7. San Ysidro-Downtown San Diego Average travel time by carpool 28 28 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 46 46 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 44 44 Average travel time by auto 32 32

Denotes difference between the two alternatives

(*) Forecast conditions in 2030 1 Draft 12/05/2003 Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Performance Measures (*)

SOFAR MOBILITY 2030 MOBILITY 2030 Goals and Performance Measures (Feb. 2003) (Sept. 2003)

Average daily travel time per trip (in minutes) 15 15

Work trip average daily travel time (in minutes) 25.2 25.4

Work trip average travel speed (in m.p.h.)

Work trip average travel speed (peak periods) per auto trip 28 28

Work trip average travel speed (peak periods) per transit trip 14 14

Work trip average travel speed (peak periods) per carpool trip 34 34

(*) Forecast conditions in 2030 2 Draft 12/05/2003 DRAFT Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Performance Measures (*)

MOBILITY SOFAR 2030 (Feb. MOBILITY 2030 Goals and Performance Measures 2003) (Sept. 2003)

ACCESSIBILITY

Percent of work and higher education trips accessible in 30 minutes in peak periods 67% 66%

Percent of work and higher education trips accessible in 30 minutes in peak periods by mode

Percent of work and higher education trips accessible in 30 minutes by auto 72% 71%

Percent of work and higher education trips accessible in 30 minutes by transit 12% 12%

Percent of work and higher education trips accessible in 30 minutes by carpool 84% 84%

Percent of non-work related trips accessible in 15 minutes 66% 66%

Percent of non-work related trips accessible in 15 minutes by mode

Percent of non-work trips accessible in 15 minutes by auto 71% 71%

Percent of non-work trips accessible in 15 minutes by transit 5% 5%

Percent of non-work trips accessible in 15 minutes by carpool 76% 76%

0 Draft 12/05/2003 DRAFT Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Performance Measures (*)

MOBILITY SOFAR 2030 (Feb. MOBILITY 2030 Goals and Performance Measures 2003) (Sept. 2003)

RELIABILITY

Projected number of accidents/ fatalities per day 130 129

Congested Vehicle Miles of Travel (*)

Percent of total travel in congested conditions (peak periods) 25% 25%

Percent of total travel in congested conditions (all day) 17% 17%

(*) Non-recurrent congestion due to incidents, breakdowns, etc. is not included.

(*) Forecast conditions in 2030 1 Draft 12/05/2003 DRAFT Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Performance Measures (*)

MOBILITY SOFAR 2030 (Feb. MOBILITY 2030 Goals and Performance Measures 2003) (Sept. 2003)

EQUITY

Average travel time per person trip (in minutes)

Low income population - Average travel time 16 16 Non-low income population - Average travel time 15 15

Minority population - Average travel time 15 15 Non-minority population - Average travel time 15 16

Percent of work and higher education trips accessible in 30 minutes

Low income population 68% 68% Non-low income population 67% 66%

Minority population 69% 69% Non-minority population 66% 65%

Percent of non work related trips accessible in 15 minutes

Low income population 60% 60% Non-low income population 66% 66%

Minority population 67% 67% Non-minority population 65% 65%

(*) Forecast conditions in 2030 0 Draft 12/05/2003 DRAFT Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Performance Measures (*)

MOBILITY SOFAR 2030 (Feb. MOBILITY 2030 Goals and Performance Measures 2003) (Sept. 2003)

LIVABILITY

Percent of homes within 1/2 mile of a transit stop 63% 63%

Percent of jobs within 1/4 mile of a transit stop 45% 45%

Work trip mode split (peak periods) Drive Alone 74% 74% Carpool 12% 12% Transit 10% 10% Bike/Walk 4% 4%

(*) Forecast conditions in 2030 0 Draft 12/05/2003 DRAFT Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Performance Measures (*)

SOFAR MOBILITY 2030 MOBILITY 2030 Goals and Performance Measures (Feb. 2003) (Sept. 2003)

SUSTAINABILITY

Smog forming pollutants in tons per day 42.99 42.97

Total on-road fuel consumption (all day) 5,907,000 5,895,000

Systemwide VMT (all day) 112,234,000 111,997,000

Transit Passenger Miles (all day) 5,245,000 5,369,000

Gross acres of constrained lands consumed for transit and highway infrastructure (2000 to 2030) 138 137

(*) Forecast conditions in 2030 n/a: not applicable 0 Draft 12/05/2003 DRAFT Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Performance Measures (*)

MOBILITY SOFAR 2030 (Feb. MOBILITY 2030 Goals and Performance Measures 2003) (Sept. 2003)

EFFICIENCY

Out-of-pocket user costs per trip $1.75 $1.74

Total 30-year public and private travel costs per trip $1.88 $1.87

(*) Forecast conditions in 2030 0 Draft 12/05/2003 DRAFT Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Mode Share in Peak Periods for Selected Screenlines (*)

SOFAR MOBILITY 2030 MOBILITY 2030 (Feb. 2003) (Sept. 2003) Screenline # Screenline Screenline Location

1 I-5 Palomar Airport Drive Alone 60% 60% Carpool 37% 37% Transit 3% 3% Total 100% 100%

2 SR 78 Vista Drive Alone 63% 63% Carpool 28% 28% Transit 9% 9% Total 100% 100%

3 I-15 Rancho Bernardo Drive Alone 61% 61% Carpool 33% 33% Transit 6% 6% Total 100% 100%

4 I-5 North of I-805 merge Drive Alone 62% 62% Carpool 32% 32% Transit 6% 6% Total 100% 100%

5 I-15 Mira Mesa Drive Alone 63% 62% Carpool 29% 29% Transit 8% 9% Total 100% 100%

6 I-5 Mission Bay Drive Alone 64% 62% Carpool 27% 26% Transit 10% 12% Total 100% 100%

7 I-8/SR 94 west of SDSU Drive Alone 59% 58% Carpool 23% 23% Transit 18% 18% Total 100% 100%

Note: See attached map for screenline location. (*) Forecast conditions in 2030 0 Draft 12/05/2003 DRAFT Table 1 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Mode Share in Peak Periods for Selected Screenlines (*)

SOFAR MOBILITY 2030 MOBILITY 2030 (Feb. 2003) (Sept. 2003) Screenline # Screenline Screenline Location 8 I-805 Chula Vista Drive Alone 54% 54% Carpool 29% 29% Transit 17% 18% Total 100% 100%

9 I-5 National City Drive Alone 55% 55% Carpool 22% 22% Transit 23% 22% Total 100% 100%

10 I-5/I-805 South Bay Drive Alone 53% 53% Carpool 27% 27% Transit 20% 20% Total 100% 100%

11 SR 52 Kearny Mesa Drive Alone 56% 56% Carpool 27% 27% Transit 17% 17% Total 100% 100%

Note: See attached map for screenline location. (*) Forecast conditions in 2030 1 Draft 12/05/2003 Table 2 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Performance Measures (*) Revised Origin/Destination Pairs

SOFAR MOBILITY 2030 Goals and Performance Measures MOBILITY 2030 (Oct. 2003)

MOBILITY

Average travel time (peak periods) by mode for selected corridors (in minutes door to door)

1. Ramona-El Cajon Average travel time by carpool 43 57 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 180 180 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 166 180 Average travel time by auto 44 63

2. Jamul-Downtown San Diego Average travel time by carpool 38 40 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 180 180 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 63 63 Average travel time by auto 41 43

3. I-15 at County Line-North Oceanside Average travel time by carpool 38 42 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 180 180 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 108 112 Average travel time by auto 40 44

5. UTC-Mission Valley Average travel time by carpool 19 19 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 36 36 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 34 34 Average travel time by auto 24 24

6. Eastlake-Downtown San Diego Average travel time by carpool 31 31 Average travel time by transit (walk access) 67 67 Average travel time by transit (park-n-ride access) 44 44 Average travel time by auto 35 35

(*) Forecast conditions in 2030 0 Draft 12/05/2003 Table 3 Transit Ridership

Mobility SOFAR Route Description Passengers Passengers Difference 632 Balboa LRT Station to UTC via La Jolla Blvd Route Added 16328 16328 616 Old Town to Mira Mesa via Linda Vista Rd/Kearny Villa Rd Route Added 14857 14857 570 Mid-Coast LRT Centre City to Sorrento Mesa Off-Peak frequencies increased from 15 to 7 1/2 minutes 25615 35774 10159 627 H St LRT Station to Eastlake via H St Peak frequencies increased from 30 to 15 minutes 5341 9738 4397 680 San Ysidro to UTC via I-805/Kearny Mesa Transitway Route gets bonus from all the above routes, which tie into Rt 680 42492 43601 1109

ROUTE Description Dispersed Ridership 25 (rt 126) Centre City to Clairemont Losses ridership to Rt 616 4243 3160 -1083 134 Downtown La Jolla to UTC Losses ridership to Rt 632 2188 967 -1221 495 San Marcos Local (?) - Model cannot determine why route is affected 3263 1990 -1273 665 Pacific Beach to Downtown La Jolla Losses ridership to Rt 632 4531 2445 -2086 500 San Ysidro to El Cajon via Centre City/Old Town/Mission Valley Losses ridership to Rt 570 in Centre to Old Town corridor 151425 148605 -2820 634 UTC Super Loop Losses ridership to Rts 632 and 570 8701 5278 -3423 621 Coronado to Sorrento Valley via Centre City/Hillcrest/Genessee Losses ridership to Rts 616 and 570 47958 43903 -4055 612 Old Town to Kearny Mesa via Pacific Beach Losses ridership to Rts 616 and 632 30103 26028 -4075 399 Oceanside to Escondido LRT (Sprinter) (?) - Model cannot determine why route is affected 40505 36087 -4418

Overall Trips Made by Transit 543,871 559,214 15,343

0 San Diego Region San Diego Region

Camp Camp MAP AREA Pendleton MAP AREA Pendleton

15 15

5 76 5 76 76 76

Oceanside Vista Oceanside Vista

78 78 San San Marcos Marcos

Carlsbad Escondido Carlsbad Escondido

78 78

Encinitas Encinitas

67 67 Solana Beach Solana Beach 5 Poway 5 Poway P P P A P A A 56 A 56 C County of San Diego C County of San Diego I Del Mar I Del Mar F F I I C C

O O

C C

E 15 E 15

A A

N N

52 Santee 52 Santee 67 67 52 52 8 8

5 805 125 5 805 125

San San Diego El Diego El Figure 1 805 805 8 Cajon Figure 2 8 Cajon 2030 La La Mobility Network Mesa SOFAR Alternative Mesa 15 Network Modifications 15 April 2003 163 163 Lemon Lemon 94 Grove October 2003 94 Grove 125 125 Transit 94 94 Roadway Managed/HOV Lanes 282 Improvements to be 282 Eliminated General Purpose Lanes Coronado Coronado National 54 Additional Transit National 54 Freeway Connectors City Routes City 75 Increased Transit 75 HOV Connectors 125 Headways 125

Chula MILES Chula MILES Vista Vista 0 3 6 805 0 3 6 805

0 4.83 9.6 0 4.83 9.6 KILOMETERS KILOMETERS Imperial TES Imperial TES 5 905 NITED STA 5 905 UNITED STA Beach 11 U Beach 11 MEXICO MEXICO

1-D Tijuana, B.C. 1-D Tijuana, B.C. Orange County San Diego Region

Riverside County

San Diego County

79 MAP AREA

Camp Pendleton 15

5 76 76

Oceanside Vista

78 San Marcos

Carlsbad Escondido

78 78

P Encinitas A C I F I 67 C Solana Beach 5 O Poway C 56 E

A Del Mar

N County of San Diego

805 67 52 Santee 52 8

125 San Figure 3 Diego 5 El 2000 163 8 Cajon Modeled La Level of Service 15 Mesa

April 2003 94 Lemon 125 Grove A to E (HOV Lanes) 282 A to E ( Main Lanes) F (0 to 2 Hours) F ( > 2 to 4 Hours) Coronado National 54 City F ( > 4 Hours) 75 94 125

MILES Chula 0 3 6 Vista 805 0 4.83 9.6 KILOMETERS Imperial Beach 5 905 ATES 11 UNITED ST MEXICO

1-D Tijuana, B.C. Orange Orange County County San Diego Region San Diego Region

Riverside County Riverside County

San Diego County San Diego County

79 79 MAP AREA MAP AREA

Camp Camp Pendleton 15 Pendleton 15

5 76 5 76 76 76

Oceanside Vista Oceanside Vista

78 San 78 San Marcos Marcos

Carlsbad Escondido Carlsbad Escondido

78 78 78 78

P Encinitas P Encinitas A A C C I I F F I 67 I 67 C Solana Beach C Solana Beach 5 5 O Poway O Poway C C 56 56 E E

A Del Mar A Del Mar County of San Diego N N County of San Diego

15 15

805 805 67 67 52 Santee 52 Santee 52 52 8 8

125 125 San San Figure 4 Diego Diego 5 Figure 5 5 El El 2030 163 2030 163 8 Cajon 8 Cajon Mobility Network La SOFAR Alternative La Level of Service 15 Mesa Level of Service 15 Mesa

April 2003 94 Lemon August 2003 94 Lemon 125 Grove 125 Grove A to E (HOV Lanes) 282 A to E (HOV Lanes) 282 A to E ( Main Lanes) A to E ( Main Lanes)

F (0 to 2 Hours) 54 F (0 to 2 Hours) F ( > 2 to 4 Hours) Coronado National F ( > 2 to 4 Hours) Coronado National 54 City City F ( > 4 Hours) 75 94 F ( > 4 Hours) 75 94 125 125

MILES Chula MILES Chula 0 3 6 Vista 805 0 3 6 Vista 805 0 4.83 9.6 0 4.83 9.6 KILOMETERS Imperial KILOMETERS Imperial Beach 5 905 STATES Beach 5 905 STATES 11 UNITED 11 UNITED MEXICO MEXICO

1-D 1-D Tijuana, B.C. 1-D Tijuana, B.C. Figure 6 Addressing the RTP Goals - SOFAR Summary

Networks Mobility SOFAR 2030 Alternative Mobility Average work trip travel time

Accessibility Work/schooltrips within 30 minutes

Reliability Congested peak period travel conditions

Efficiency Out of pocket user costs

Livability Work trip mode split Carpool Transit Bike/walk

Sustainability Vehicle miles traveled Transit passenger miles

Equity

Average travel time Low income Minority

= Modest Improvement = No Change