Members Joe Kellejian, Chair Councilmember, Solana Beach (Representing North County Coastal) Jim Madaffer, Vice Chair Councilmember, City of San Diego Lori Holt Pfeiler Mayor, Escondido (Representing North County Inland) Jack Dale Councilmember, Santee TRANSPORTATION (Representing East County) Phil Monroe COMMITTEE Councilmember, Coronado (Representing South County) AGENDA Bill Horn Chairman, County of San Diego Bob Emery Metropolitan Transit System Friday, February 17, 2006 Jerome Stocks Chairman, North County Transit District 9 a.m. to 12 noon Mary Teresa Sessom SANDAG Board Room San Diego County Regional th Airport Authority 401 B Street, 7 Floor San Diego Alternates David Druker Councilmember, Del Mar (Representing North County Coastal) Toni Atkins AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS Councilmember, City of San Diego Jerry Sanders Mayor, City of San Diego • MTS COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONAL Bob Campbell ANALYSIS Councilmember, Vista (Representing North County Inland) • I-5 NORTH COAST MANAGED LANES VALUE Art Madrid Mayor, La Mesa PRICING STUDY (Representing East County) Jerry Rindone • 2030 REVENUE CONSTRAINED RTP: 2006 Councilmember, Chula Vista (Representing South County) UPDATE Ron Roberts Vice Chairman, County of San Diego • COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Greg Cox AGENCY Chairman Pro Tem, County of San Diego

Harry Mathis Chairman, Metropolitan Transit System Jerome Stocks PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES DURING THE MEETING Chairman, North County Transit District Ed Gallo, Vice Chairman North County Transit District YOU CAN LISTEN TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Xema Jacobsen MEETING BY VISITING OUR WEB SITE AT WWW.SANDAG.ORG San Diego County Regional Airport Authority

Advisory Members MISSION STATEMENT Pedro Orso-Delgado The 18 cities and county government are SANDAG serving as the forum for regional decision- District 11 Director, Caltrans making. SANDAG builds consensus, makes strategic plans, obtains and allocates resources, Sandor Shapery plans, engineers, and builds public transit, and provides information on a broad range of topics Regional Planning Stakeholders Working Group pertinent to the region's quality of life.

Gary L. Gallegos San Diego Association of Governments ⋅ 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101-4231 Executive Director, SANDAG (619) 699-1900 ⋅ Fax (619) 699-1905 ⋅ www.sandag.org

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 noon, 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) 699-1900 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. To request this document or related reports in an alternative format, please call (619) 699-1900, (619) 699-1904 (TTY), or fax (619) 699-1905.

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

2 TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Friday, February 17, 2006

ITEM # RECOMMENDATION

+1. APPROVAL OF JANUARY 20, 2006, MEETING MINUTES 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 and shall reserve time by completing a “Request to Speak” form and giving it to the Clerk prior to speaking. Committee members also may provide information and announcements under this agenda item.

CONSENT ITEMS (3 through 6)

+3. FISCAL YEAR 2007 TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM RECOMMEND (Kim York)

The Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and the North County Transit District (NCTD) have developed their Capital Improvement Programs for FY 2007 which forms the basis for the Federal Transit Administration Section 5307 Urbanized Area formula fund grant, the Section 5309 Rail Modernization formula fund grant, and the RTIP amendment for transportation projects. SANDAG is responsible for programming these funds and approving these grants. The Transportation Committee is asked to recommend approval of the proposed funding allocations to the SANDAG Board of Directors.

+4. GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF FY 2007 APPROVE TRANSIT OPERATING BUDGETS ( Tim Watson)

Pursuant to SB 1703, the Transportation Committee provides guiding principles and objectives for the transit operators for use in preparing their operating budgets. The Transportation Committee is asked to approve the proposed guiding principles and objectives for use in preparing the FY 2007 transit operating budgets and the projections for FY 2008 through FY 2011.

+5. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) CLAIM AMENDMENT APPROVE (Sookyung Kim)

At the June 24, 2005 meeting, SANDAG approved the allocations for the FY 2006 Transportation Development Act (TDA) which provide operating and capital support to transit operators and for non-motorized projects. Allocations allow for the agencies to claim these funds for specified purposes. The TDA claims for North County Transit District (NCTD) and Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) included fund transfers to SANDAG for regional planning and for administrative costs as a result of consolidation. This claim amendment revises the transfer amount for MTS based on the recent Board- approved Addendum to the Master Memorandum of Understanding between SANDAG, MTS, and NCTD. There is no net change for NCTD. The Transportation Committee is asked to adopt Resolution No. 2006-11 approving the TDA claim amendments for MTS and SANDAG.

3

+6. TRANSIT REVENUE ESTIMATES AND ALLOCATIONS (Sookyung Kim) RECOMMEND

By March 1 of each year, SANDAG provides operating revenue estimates and allocations to the transit operators and to local agencies for the non-motorized program. The Transportation Committee is asked to review and recommend that the SANDAG Board of Directors approve these estimates and allocations at its February 24, 2006, meeting.

REPORTS (7 through 10)

+7. 2030 REVENUE CONSTRAINED REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN: 2006 RECOMMEND UPDATE (Mike Hix)

The public comment period for the Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained Regional Transportation Plan (RTP): 2006 Update and its Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) closed on January 27, 2006. This item summarizes the major comments received on the Draft RTP and SEIR as well as responses to the comments.

+8. INTERSTATE 5 (I-5) NORTH COAST MANAGED LANES VALUE PRICING RECOMMEND PLANNING STUDY: DRAFT CONCEPT PLAN (Heather Werdick)

In November 2003, SANDAG accepted funding to conduct the Interstate 5 (I-5) North Coast Managed Lanes Value Pricing Study as a technical study in preparation for Caltrans’ Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This study examines the feasibility of allowing solo drivers to pay a fee to use the I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes similar to the I-15 Managed Lanes. The results of the draft concept plan, including the public outreach efforts will be presented. Staff requests that the Transportation Committee recommend a preferred pricing concept to the SANDAG Board of Directors.

+9. COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION SERVICE AGENCY (CTSA) (Dan Levy) RECOMMEND

California law requires the creation of a Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA) in each county to coordinate and consolidate health and human services transportation providers. The San Diego region historically has had two CTSA service providers, one in each transit agency area of jurisdiction. With consolidation, SANDAG became responsible for designating the CTSA for the entire county. There has been recent interest in expanding the functions of the CTSA and reevaluating the effectiveness of its current structure. The Executive Committee, acting as the SourcePoint Board of Directors, recommends that the Transportation Committee endorse the following for consideration by the SANDAG Board of Directors: (1) combining the two existing CTSA service provider areas into one regionwide CTSA through an outside contractor; (2) initiating a competitive process to designate a regionwide CTSA; and (3) expanding the responsibilities of the regionwide CTSA to better meet the spirit and intent of coordination and consolidation of services.

4 +10. COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS STATUS (Dave Schumacher/ INFORMATION/ Conan Cheung) POSSIBLE ACTION

The draft plan for the Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) outlines the proposed changes to the MTS system. This report follows the presentation of the draft plan to the MTS Board on February 9, and MTS staff will summarize the comments received and the public hearing schedule leading to final approval of the plan tentatively set for March 2006.

11. UPCOMING MEETINGS INFORMATION

The next meeting of the Transportation Committee is scheduled for Friday, March 3, 2006, at 9 a.m.

12. ADJOURNMENT

+ next to an agenda item indicates an attachment

5 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

February 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 1

Action Requested: APPROVE

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS MEETING OF JANUARY 20, 2006

The meeting of the Transportation Committee was called to order by Chair Joe Kellejian (North County Coastal) at 9:08 a.m. See the attached attendance sheet for Transportation Committee member attendance.

Chairman Kellejian announced that this meeting is being broadcast live on the World Wide Web. He also welcomed and introduced new Transportation Committee members Toni Atkins, Councilmember from the City of San Diego; Harry Mathis, Chairman from the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS); and Bill Horn, Chairman from the County of San Diego.

1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES

Action: Upon a motion by Councilmember Emery (Metropolitan Transit System) and a second by Councilmember Ritter (North County Inland), the Transportation Committee approved the minutes from the December 9, 2005, meeting. The motion passed unanimously.

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS

Chuck Lungerhausen, a San Diego resident, began by wishing the Transportation Committee a Happy New Year. He noted that SANDAG Board and Committee members have sponsored him in the past regarding various fund raising events for the National Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Society. He requested that members sponsor him for the MS Water Walk that he will be participating in on Saturday, April 22, 2006. Chairman Kellejian thanked Mr. Lungerhausen for his comments.

Don Stillwell, a resident of Allied Gardens, noted that the #14 bus is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and has been for the past six months. He mentioned that the ADA requires that buses serve all major hospitals; however, there are no buses that serve Kaiser Hospital on Zion Avenue, therefore, MTS is in violation of these requirements. Chairman Kellejian requested that Mr. Stillwell present staff with a copy of his speaking points in order to address his issue.

Chairman Kellejian noticed that there are many new faces at today’s meeting and requested that self introductions be made.

CONSENT ITEMS (3 through 7)

3. 2004 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (RTIP) QUARTERLY AMENDMENT (APPROVE)

At its meeting on July 23, 2004, the SANDAG Board adopted the 2004 RTIP, the five-year program of major transportation projects in the San Diego region covering the period from FY 2005 to FY 2009. The Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration approved the 2004 RTIP on October 4, 2004. SANDAG processes amendments to the RTIP on a quarterly basis based on requests from member agencies. Amendment No. 13 includes requests for changes submitted by local agencies for various projects and also includes earmarks for High Priority or Demonstration projects as identified in the federal transportation legislation: Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act – a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The Transportation Committee is asked to adopt Resolution No. 2006-09, approving Amendment No. 13 to the 2004 RTIP, including validation that the 2004 RTIP continues to be fiscally constrained.

4. AMENDMENT TO FY 2006 OVERALL WORK PROGRAM (OWP): SOUTH BAY BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT) PROJECT TO FUND CHULA VISTA H STREET RAPID BUS STUDY (APPROVE)

The City of Chula Vista is in the process of adopting its General Plan Update (GPU). The revised GPU proposes increases in density along the H Street Corridor that will be supported by a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project that is included in SANDAG's MOBILITY 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. However, the development intensity proposed in the GPU will encroach onto the public right-of-way, possibly limiting the ability to implement transit priority measures along H Street for full BRT. To determine right-of-way impacts and operational feasibility with the revised densities, the City of Chula Vista is requesting that SANDAG partner with them on a study of the H Street Transit Corridor between Interstate 5 (I-5) and I-805. The Transportation Committee is asked to: (a) amend the FY 2006 OWP Work Element 50009 (South Bay BRT) to include the scope of work for the H Street Transit Study; and (b) to authorize the Executive Director to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Chula Vista to contribute $25,000 in funding from Work Element 50009 to the H Street Transit Study.

5. CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER RAIL SYSTEM QUARTERLY UPDATE (INFORMATION)

The California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) is the state agency responsible for planning, constructing, and operating a high-speed train system serving California’s major metropolitan areas. The proposed system stretches over 800 miles and would connect San Diego, Los Angeles, the Central Valley, San Francisco, and Sacramento using a state-of- the-art, electrified system capable of speeds in excess of 200 miles per hour. SANDAG continues to monitor and comment on the work of the CHSRA. This report is the regular quarterly update to the Transportation Committee.

2 6. LOS ANGELES–SAN DIEGO–SAN LUIS OBISPO RAIL CORRIDOR AGENCY (LOSSAN) BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING REPORT (INFORMATION)

The LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency seeks to increase ridership, revenue, capacity, reliability, and safety on the coastal rail line from San Diego to Los Angeles to San Luis Obispo. Known as Amtrak's Pacific Surfliner corridor, it is the second busiest intercity passenger rail corridor nationwide and Amtrak’s fastest growing. This report summarizes the actions from the LOSSAN Board meeting on December 7, 2005.

7. REPORT ON TRIBAL INVOLVEMENT IN THE 2007 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN (RTP) UPDATE (INFORMATION)

SANDAG has partnered with the Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA), a tribal consortium dedicated to serving the transportation needs of tribes in Southern California, to involve tribal nations in regional transportation planning. Currently, SANDAG is updating the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Staff will present the Committee with a report on efforts to involve tribal nations in the region in this process.

Action: Upon a motion by Councilmember Emery and a second by Mayor Sessom (San Diego County Regional Airport Authority), the Transportation Committee approved Consent Items 3 through 7, including Resolution No. 2006-9.

REPORTS

Chairman Kellejian announced that Item #9 - Comprehensive Transit Fare Ordinance - will be discussed now and then the Committee will discuss Item #8 - Fiscal Year 2007 Federal Transportation Appropriations Proposals.

9. COMPREHENSIVE TRANSIT FARE ORDINANCE (RECOMMEND)

Staff noted that in October 2004, SANDAG adopted Board Policy No. 29, entitled “Regional Fare Policy and Comprehensive Fare Ordinance,” to provide guidelines for setting a uniform, fair, and equitable regionwide fare system within the county for North County Transit District (NCTD) and the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS). The Regional Fare Policy established agency roles and responsibilities related to the fare structure and fare setting in the region. The Policy also states that SANDAG is responsible for adopting a Comprehensive Fare Ordinance to set the specific cash and pre-paid fare levels and transfer policies and pricing for the various types of services and rider groups. In addition, the new Compass Card (Regional Smart Card) that will be introduced in 2006 involves a new technology that offers the opportunity to simplify the fare structure and streamline and expedite fare collection and the collection of ridership and revenue data.

A working group of staff from NCTD, MTS, and SANDAG was established in October 2004, following adoption of the Regional Fare Policy, with the objective of consolidating the two existing transit agency fare ordinances into a single, regional comprehensive ordinance for adoption by SANDAG. Since discussions began on developing the Comprehensive Fare Ordinance, there have been fare adjustments made at both MTS and NCTD that have

3 highlighted the need to move forward with adoption of a single, regional fare ordinance at the earliest possible time. A regional fare ordinance is needed to simplify the process for holding public hearings and approving fare increases. Staff noted that the purpose of the regional consolidation of transit planning and programming in San Diego is to improve coordination and delivery of transit service to existing and potential customers.

Once the proposed Comprehensive Fare Ordinance is adopted, staff can then begin a study to examine the potential for developing a new, easier to understand regional fare structure that takes advantage of the new Compass Card technology. The public hearing and first reading will be held at the SANDAG Board of Directors meeting on February 24, 2006. Assuming the fare ordinance is adopted staff would begin the fare study by summer 2006. The study would lead to development of a simpler, more equitable fare system and identify any new or innovative approaches to fare collection that could be implemented as a result of the rollout of Compass Card technology.

Chairman Kellejian noted that this item brings the fares structures from the two transit agencies together to create one fare ordinance for the region. He asked if the Boards of the two individual agencies have concurred with this issue yet. Staff noted that the staffs of all three agencies have concurred and that the issue does not need to go to the transit agency boards as the setting of the fare policy is determined by the SANDAG Board.

Councilmember Emery mentioned that SANDAG and the two agencies agreed that the transit agencies would be permitted to set temporary, promotional, and experimental fares, which both agencies have been doing. However, the proposed fare ordinance limits those fares to six months. Mr. Emery stated that six months is too short a time to collect the data needed to adequately evaluate the fares and asked that the time limit be extended an additional six months.

Harry Mathis (MTS) commented that Councilmember Emery’s concerns are identified in the staff report on page 25, section 11.7. He added that the MTS Board feels that there needs to be an option of more time to experiment with the fares and concurred that six months isn’t long enough.

Mayor Madrid (East County) stated that both requests from the MTS representatives are fair. He suggested targeting smaller areas in each geographical subregion to test the fares as opposed to attempting to test them regionwide.

Chairman Kellejian indicated that this issue has been worked on for a long time, and it will be hard to select certain areas for such a regional issue.

Councilmember Emery pointed out that this is not a test of the fare ordinance but of the different fares.

Staff indicated that each fare relates to every other fare and since the temporary or promotional fares are targeted to specific markets and do not become part of the regional transit upgrade or fare media programs, it would not be a problem to test them for a year. After one year, those promotional fares should be incorporated into the normal fare schedules and fare ordinance.

4 Councilmember Stocks (NCTD) stated that NCTD and MTS could coordinate a Superbowl Trolley ride, which could be underwritten by a private company. Then the two transit agencies could work out some type of fare sharing between them. He mentioned that he can’t see why there needs to be more time to examine this issue even though he would not be opposed to expanding the test fares to one year.

Paul Jablonski (MTS) noted an example of a possible special fare for testing that would be a special downtown pass allowing residents to go from one side of town to the other. He added that it often takes several months to begin to get feedback regarding ridership and fare information. Also, considering the lead time to obtain Board input regarding this issue, staff could be pressed for time if six months were the limit.

Mayor Sessom expressed concern that there would be too many fares, which might confuse the users. She asked if all of the fares can be tracked. Staff replied that once the Compass Card is developed, staff would work with the two agencies to track the fares, as the new technology allows. Staff added that they would work with the transit operators to streamline the fare options through the fare study scheduled to begin this summer.

Councilmember Emery made the motion to approve the staff recommendation, with the amendment to extend the time for testing of special, promotional, and temporary fares to one year. Councilmember Rindone (South County) seconded the motion.

Staff noted that the language in the ordinance related to the special, promotional, and temporary fares is the same language that is in Policy No. 29, therefore, staff recommended that the language in Policy No. 29 also be amended to reflect the change from six months to one year to maintain consistency.

Action: Upon a motion by Councilmember Emery and a second by Councilmember Rindone, the Transportation Committee recommended that the SANDAG Board of Directors approve the proposed Regional Transit Fare Ordinance. The proposed ordinance maintains all existing fares, passes, transfers, and revenue-sharing arrangements, and adds new provisions to facilitate introduction of Smart Card fare media. The Committee also voted to extend the time for the two transit agencies to set special, temporary, promotional fares from six months to one year.

8. FISCAL YEAR 2007 FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS PROPOSALS (RECOMMEND)

Chairman Kellejian noted that this item sets the tone for the staff delegation to go to Washington, D.C., to lobby for federal funds.

Staff noted that this year will be challenging due to the effects of the hurricanes and the relief being provided as well as the lack of a local congressional representative in the 50th district. At its December 2005 meeting, the Transportation Committee approved a set of criteria for any new local projects to be included in the SANDAG submittal of funding requests to the San Diego Congressional delegation. Staff received several projects this year from three local jurisdictions. Staff reviewed the projects, checked them against the criteria and is proposing that several additional projects be added to the RTP. Those projects are the

5 Claremont Mesa Boulevard/State Route (SR) 163; Bird Rock Traffic Improvements; Rose Creek Bikeway Bridge; The University Avenue Mobility Plan; SR 905 Heritage Interchange; I-805/La Jolla Village Drive Interchange Improvements. Staff noted that there is a list of projects in the staff report that are not quite ready to go but will be soon.

Staff added that the two transit agencies have indicated that during the Washington, D.C., visit they would like to request additional funding for regional bus replacement vehicles and command and control infrastructure systems.

Next steps are to forward the Transportation Committee’s recommendations regarding the proposed list of projects to the SANDAG Board of Directors for approval at the meeting on January 27, 2006, then staff will travel to Washington, D.C., in early February 2006, to lobby for those projects. There will be a submittal of funding requests and then staff will develop a Joint Legislative Program with MTS, NCTD, and SANDAG. Finally, staff will travel to Washington, D.C., in March 2006, to lobby during the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Conference.

Chairman Kellejian announced that San Diego has a situation in that we have a vacancy in the 50th Congressional seat which will adversely affect the San Diego region.

Staff reported that the region has had success in the past in lobbying in Washington, D.C., while working with San Diego’s five Congressional delegates and encouraging them to work together to complete the funding process for local regional projects. It helped to have a Congressmember that is part of Appropriations Committee. The San Diego region needs to reach out to Congressmembers Issa and Hunter, whose districts adjoin, and also reach out to Congressman Filner for assistance. Not having a representative in the 50th District is going to be challenging for the region this year.

Councilmember Kellejian noted that although there is still staff in the 50th District office in Washington, D.C., they have no authority to make requests. Staff mentioned that lobbying requests usually take effect in the next fiscal year.

Mayor Madrid (East County) asked when that position will be filled.

Vice Chairman Roberts (County of San Diego) commented that the primary election will be held in April 2006, and the final election will be held in June 2006.

Councilmember Madaffer (City of San Diego) questioned why the proposed dollar request is listed as $0 in the staff report on page 3, under item I. Staff noted that is a request that warrants being on the project list but there is no funding needed at this time.

Councilmember Madaffer asked what the timing of completion is for that project. Pedro Orso Delgado (Caltrans) responded that the project is still one to two years from being finished. Funding will be requested when the project is closer to completion.

Staff stated that the total project cost is approximately $2-3 million. SANDAG usually gets small amounts of dollars from each congressional area. Projects that have been on the list are good projects and should stay on the list, even if they aren’t ready to go.

6 Councilmember Madaffer stated that the local elected officials are willing to assist with the funding efforts of the projects on the proposed list in any way they can.

Chairman Kellejian commented that projects A and M are on the proposed project list but are not in need of any funding right now. Staff added that the Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) for those projects are currently completed. Monies will be needed for those projects in the future.

Kathy Keehan, Executive Director of the San Diego County Bicycle Coalition, mentioned that she was impressed with the proposed list of projects this year because they all have strong bike and pedestrian components. She requested that the projects be reviewed first by SANDAG’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Working Group prior to being submitted to the Transportation Committee. She expressed concern about projects that were on the project list last year and earmarked for funding that are not on the list this year. Her fear is that projects may be falling through the cracks, and the funding is not being used.

Mayor Sessom (San Diego County Regional Airport Authority) concurred with Ms. Keehan in that she doesn’t want any bicycle and pedestrian projects falling through the cracks. Currently, there isn’t a bicycle and pedestrian advocate, and there needs to be a representative from the SANDAG Board on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Working Group.

Chairman Kellejian noted that SANDAG has had a coalition regarding this issue that has been in place for a long time. He questioned if there are projects that are falling through the cracks, and if so, how can that be rectified.

Ms. Keehan mentioned that she noticed that there are two specific projects that were on the list of projects for funding last year that are not on the proposed list for funding for this year. Staff responded that the bicycle and pedestrian projects are being funded by the state through the State Transportation and Improvement Program (STIP) process.

Staff added that there are no projects falling through the cracks. However, when lobbying for funding in Washington, D.C., the congressional delegation is going to ask for the region’s top three or four most important projects. The bicycle and pedestrian projects are important, and they are being covered very well by state funding. There doesn’t need to be a separate lobbying effort for these projects.

Action: Upon a motion by Councilmember Madaffer and a second by Councilmember Emery, the Transportation Committee recommended that the SANDAG Board of Directors approve the proposed prioritized list of transportation funding requests for the Fiscal Year 2007 federal appropriations cycle. The motion passed unanimously.

10. INTERSTATE 15 (I-15) MANAGED LANES CORRIDOR UPDATE (INFORMATION)

Chairman Kellejian noted that he attended a press conference with the California Governor yesterday at the SR 56/I-15 interchange. This is an exceptional project, unlike any other project in the region.

7 Staff commented that in January 2005, the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the I-15 TransNet Early Action Program, which Caltrans and SANDAG are jointly implementing. The I-15 Managed Lanes Corridor was one of those projects approved. Staff introduced Gustavo Dallarda, from Caltrans, to provide the Transportation Committee with an update on this project.

Mr. Dallarda reported that the I-15 Corridor from Escondido to Downtown San Diego includes 20 miles of managed lanes between SR 78 and SR 163. This includes 15 miles of BRT – between SR 163 and downtown San Diego; a 35-mile-long corridor; and BRT/Park and Ride stations spaced 4-5 miles apart.

The Managed Lanes project is being constructed in three segments. The Middle Segment is being currently built and is currently scheduled to open in late 2007 and or early 2008. The other two segments, the North and South segments, are scheduled to open in 2011 and 2012, respectively.

The total cost of the Middle Segment is approximately $448 million and the major challenges in building this segment are Lake Hodges, the escalation of material prices, the sources of materials, and the fact that there are still 20 percent of the contracts left to bid. The opportunities on the Middle Segment include the early purchase of the moveable barrier machine, receipt of developer contributions of $5-$15 million, and the reconstruction of the Pomerado Bridge. Mr. Dallarda showed the Transportation Committee pictures of construction currently underway on the Middle Segment.

The North Segment, from Centre City Parkway in Escondido to SR 78 is a five-mile-long section of the corridor and is currently in design with construction scheduled to begin in 2008. All segments of the managed lanes construction will use the Design Sequencing method of contract administration. The North Segment of the managed lanes will take approximately three years to construct and completion is expected in 2011. The cost to complete this work is currently estimated at $189 million in 2005 dollars. Construction of this segment will include the direct access ramps at Hale Avenue to serve the Escondido Transit Station.

The South Segment, the eight-mile-long section from SR 163 to SR 56, also will begin construction in 2008, but with the additional length and added complexity of the existing managed lanes this segment will be completed in 2012. Costs to construct the South Segment of the freeway are estimated at $402 million in 2005 dollars and include the Mira Mesa transit station and a direct access ramp between Carroll Canyon Road and Mira Mesa Boulevard to provide access to the station as well as the community.

8

Mayor Madrid asked if U.S. Miramar will be participating in the funding of this project. Pedro Orso-Delgado (Caltrans) noted that the funds that the military receives from the federal government can only be used for improvements inside the bases, not outside.

Staff stated that the reason why the bridges are being reconstructed is for the convenience of the region, not for the convenience of the military bases.

Mr. Dallarda commented that Caltrans is using contractors on both the North and the South segments to keep the projects on their aggressive schedules. Caltrans has also enlisted the assistance of the Associated General Contractors (AGC) offices.

Between SR 163 and downtown San Diego, Caltrans will prepare a corridor study. SANDAG will prepare a feasibility study for stations at Kearny Mesa (Balboa) and Mission Valley (BRT to LRT). SANDAG will also prepare the conceptual designs for Mid-City (El Cajon Boulevard and University Avenue) and downtown stations.

Each of the three phases of managed lanes will have Value Pricing elements incorporated into them so that the FasTrak system is fully functional on opening day of each segment. A consultant team is developing the systems design, which includes a federally funded study of automated violation enforcement systems. Results of that study will be presented at a future Transportation Committee meeting. The cost for value pricing for the entire managed lanes corridor is $19.8 million in 2005 dollars.

Chairman Kellejian congratulated Caltrans on bringing its design team and manufacturers to the site and thinks that is something that can be understood and used in the future for different kinds of projects. He applauded Caltrans for having a highly motivated, excited, and energetic team working on this project and thanked them for their innovative thinking.

Mr. Orso-Delgado thanked the Chairman for his comments. He highlighted that the team that is working on this project believes in it and is working hard to make a project that wasn’t working into a project that works.

Councilmember Emery stated that the possibility of LRT on the I-15 was suggested years ago, and it was determined that idea wasn’t feasible. He added that the schedule, which extends out to 2012, should be brought to the SANDAG Board as well as the Boards of the two transit agencies for discussion.

Councilmember Rindone (South County) asked how Caltrans is saving money on the North Segment of this project. Mr. Dallarda responded that the savings occured because the purchase of the moveable barriers occurred sooner than anticipated, which provided a discount from the manufacturer.

Staff added that this project is the result of important innovations on this corridor. And, staff is considering using the removable barriers on other projects.

Chairman Kellejian requested that this report be brought before the SANDAG Board for information purposes.

Action: This item was presented for information only.

9 11. UPCOMING MEETINGS

The next meeting of the Transportation Committee is scheduled for February 17, 2006. The Transportation Committee will meet only once in February due to the SANDAG Board Retreat.

12. ADJOURNMENT

Chair Kellejian adjourned the meeting at 10:39 a.m.

Attachment: Attendance Sheet

10

CONFIRMED ATTENDANCE SANDAG TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING JANUARY 20, 2005

MEMBER/ GEOGRAPHICAL JURISDICTION NAME ATTENDING COMMENTS ALTERNATE AREA/ ORGANIZATION

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

City of Oceanside Jim Wood Alternate No

North County Inland City of Poway Mickey Cafagna Member No

City of Vista Judy Ritter Alternate Yes Can only attend for an hour

East County City of Santee Jack Dale Member No

City of La Mesa Art Madrid Alternate Yes

South County City of Chula Vista Jerry Rindone Member Yes

City of Coronado Phil Monroe Alternate Yes

City of San Diego ---- Jim Madaffer Member Yes ---- Toni Atkins Member Yes

---- Jerry Sanders Alternate No

County of San Diego ---- Bill Horn Member Yes

---- Ron Roberts Alternate Yes

---- Greg Cox Alternate No

Metropolitan Transit City of Poway Bob Emery Member Yes Development Board MTS Harry Mathis Alternate Yes

North County Transit City of Encinitas Jerome Stocks Member Yes District ----- Vacant Alternate N/A

City of Escondido Ed Gallo Alternate Yes

San Diego County City of Lemon Grove Mary Sessom Member Yes Regional Airport Governor’s Xema Jacobson Alternate No Authority Appointee

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

Regional Planning ___ Sandor Shapery Member Yes Stakeholders Working Group ___ Bill Anderson Alternate No 02/10/2006 12:37 PM

11 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

February 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 3

Action Requested: RECOMMEND

FISCAL YEAR 2007 TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM File Number 8000100

Introduction Recommendation

The Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and the The Transportation Committee is asked North County Transit District (NCTD) Boards have recommend that the SANDAG Board of developed their Capital Improvement Programs Directors approve: (CIPs) for FY 2007. The CIPs will form the basis for updating the Regional Transportation 1. the FY 2007 Capital Improvement Improvement Program (RTIP). Based on the CIPs, Program (CIP) and concurrent Regional SANDAG will apply for the Federal Transit Transportation Improvement Program Administration (FTA) Section 5307 Urbanized Area amendment for the San Diego region formula funds and the Section 5309 Rail (MTS and NCTD) including the transfer Modernization funds for MTS and NCTD capital of funds from MTS to SANDAG for projects for which SANDAG is the implementing planning studies; agency in accordance with Senate Bill 1703 These 2. the submittal of FTA Sections 5307 and would be the capital projects for planning; design 5309 applications for the San Diego and construction of new infrastructure and region (SANDAG, MTS and NCTD); and facilities; rehabilitation of existing infrastructure and facilities; capital projects involving 3. the transfer of $2,452,200 from the environmental, engineering and construction indicated MTS projects (shown in support; and construction right-of-way. Attachment 3) to the MTS FY 2007 CIP.

Both MTS and NCTD will continue as the grantee for routine capital projects that support the day- to-day business of the operators. Examples of projects where the operator would apply for the federal grant are maintenance and repair projects and procurements, right-of-way and equipment in support of operations, revenue and non-revenue vehicle procurements, light rail vehicle maintenance, and revenue vehicle parts and components. Additionally MTS and NCTD will continue as the grantee for those major projects retained by the operators as well as preventive maintenance, associated capital maintenance, and some Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Paratransit services.

The MTS Board of Directors approved its CIP on December 8, 2005, based on an estimate of federal funding. The amount of funding coming from the FTA has since been updated resulting in an increase of $1,911,700 over the original estimates. The MTS program was adjusted accordingly and the proposed SANDAG action reflects those changes. The NCTD CIP was presented to the NCTD Planning Committee on January 19, 2006. Final NCTD Board approval is scheduled for June 2006 in conjunction with its annual Operating Budget.

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 San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program project submittals for FY 2007 and the NCTD proposed constrained CIP for FY 2007 – 2011 are attached (Attachments 1 and 5, respectively) for the Transportation Committee’s review in anticipation of final approval by the SANDAG Board on February 24, 2006.

Discussion

FTA Section 5307 and Section 5309 Federal Formula 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 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 preventive maintenance (in essence an operating cost) and some ADA complementary paratransit service are considered capital costs.

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 the U.S. 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 2003, MTDB was the sole recipient of Rail Mod funds for San Diego County. Beginning in FY 2004, 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.

Traditionally, SANDAG has apportioned the Section 5307 formula funds between MTDB and NCTD based on the regionally agreed distribution of 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. More recently, the same approach has been used for allocating the Rail Mod funds as well. While this has been the historical approach, SANDAG has not adopted a formal policy for dividing the federal capital funds for the region.

2

MTS FY 2007 CIP

As shown in the San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program Funding for FY 2007 (Attachment 2) the allocation for the MTS Section 5307 program is $31,318,090. This would be matched with local funds of $7,829,500, to provide an estimated $39,147,590 to fund FY 2007 capital projects. The Section 5309 Rail Mod funds allocated to MTS for FY 2007 are $10,674,310 to be matched with local funds of $2,668,577, to provide an estimated $13,342,887 to fund FY 2007 capital projects. The total funding from the federal formula programs with the related local match for MTS is $52.5 million.

Additionally, the MTS FY 2007 capital program includes $2.7 million in FY 2006 Section 5309 Bus/Bus-Related Facility earmarks and their respective local matching funds; $2.0 million in nonrecurring TransNet non-rail capital; $3.0 million in additional State Transit Assistance funding; $1.9 million in Transportation Security Administration (TSA) funding, and $2.5 million to be transferred from current projects. The total estimated funding for the MTS FY 2007 CIP is $64.6 million. $29.0 million will be used for preventive maintenance (FY 2006 operating), $3.8 million for debt service payments, and $31.8 million for capital projects.

Local Match

The local match for capital 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 2007 budget development process.

Development of the MTS FY 2007 CIP

The MTS Capital Projects Review Committee (CPRC) is composed 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 Trolley, Inc. (SDTI). The CPRC reviewed and approved, by consensus, the prioritization of this year’s capital project submittals. Attachment 1 shows the San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program project submittals for FY 2007.

The San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program project submittals for FY 2007 in Attachment 1 represent the five-year, unconstrained need for the MTS operators. The lists were consolidated for review by the CPRC to ensure that operationally critical projects were funded. The remaining projects were deferred; however, it is recognized that the continued deferral of some projects could have negative impacts on system infrastructure in future years.

The FY 2007 funding levels represent 38.9 percent of the total project needs after funding preventive maintenance and debt service. Prior to finalizing the recommendation, all previously budgeted capital projects were reviewed 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, $2.5 million was identified to be transferred to the FY 2007 CIP. The San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program project transfers for FY 2007 in Attachment 3 lists the individual projects and the amounts to be transferred from each.

3

Five-Year MTS Capital Program Projections

The San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program summary for FY 2007 in Attachment 4 summarizes a high-level look at the five-year MTS capital program. The federal Sections 5307 and 5309 funding levels are projected to increase by 3 percent per year for fiscal years 2008 through 2011. The program assumes that MTS maximizes the amount of formula funds used for preventive maintenance for the next five years. The debt service for both the Regional Transit Management System and the Automated Fare Technology will be completed in FY 2008. With the above assumptions, the funding for capital projects ranges from $31.8 million in FY 2007, dipping to $17.4 million in FY 2008, and trending back to $30 million in FY 2011.

NCTD FY 2007 CIP

The allocation for NCTD’s Section 5307 program is $13,667,140. This would be matched with local funds of $3,416,785, to provide an estimated $17,083,925 to fund FY 2007 capital projects and operating expenses. The Section 5309 Rail Mod funds allocated to NCTD are $4,574,710 to be matched with local funds of $1,143,677 to provide an estimated $5,718,387 to fund FY 2007 capital projects and operating expenses. NCTD’s total funding from the federal formula programs with the related local match is $22.8 million. NCTD’s FY 2007 CIP recommendation will use $11.3 million for operating and planning funds for NCTD operations, and $11.5 million for capital projects.

Development of the NCTD FY 2007 CIP

NCTD staff prepared and reviewed the NCTD proposed constrained Capital Improvement Program for FY 2007 – FY 2011 in Attachment 5. This is a constrained program meaning it has been adjusted to reflect the funding that can reasonably be expected for each of the five years. Attachment 6 provides the NCTD proposed unconstrained Capital Improvement Program for FY 2007 – FY 2011, which reflects the actual capital needs for each of the five years. A summary of NCTD’s proposed major capital projects is in Attachment 7.

The proposed NCTD CIP for FY 2007 to FY 2011 is based on staff preliminary estimates of funding levels for fiscal years 2007 – 2011 and is slightly lower than the updated funding estimates provided above. NCTD staff will recommend minor modifications to the proposed CIP based on the final revenue estimates. As part of the annual CIP development process, NCTD completed a rating and ranking process for all of its capital projects. If funding for the CIP is not sufficient to fully fund the proposed program, projects would be funded on a priority basis, based upon their final ranking. If funding exceeds the estimated levels, priority projects that did not receive all funding requested could receive additional funding.

NCTD’s proposed CIP is scheduled for formal NCTD Board approval in June 2006 in conjunction with the annual Operating Budget, following a 30-day public comment period and public hearing.

NCTD’s unfunded capital program also includes 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. NCTD’s major project capital needs for the future far exceed the projected availability of federal formula funds.

4

Long-Term Capital Needs

MTS and NCTD have significant capital maintenance needs for the infrastructure of their transit systems. The projected funding necessary to adequately maintain these systems far exceeds any amount that could be received from the federal formula program. It is imperative that we aggressively seek other sources of funding for these purposes. The long-term effects of how aging infrastructure may impact a transit service agency include:

• Impacts on safety and service reliability • Reduced operating speeds • Increases in maintenance intervals and level of effort • Increased staffing and equipment • Regulatory compliance impacts: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), FTA, and California Highway Patrol (CHP) • Loss of ridership

Regional Transportation Improvement Program

All CIP projects must be included in the current Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), the multi-year funding program for major highway, arterial, transit, and non-motorized projects. The Transportation Committee is generally responsible for approving RTIP amendments; however, since the CIP must be approved by the full Board of Directors, the RTIP amendment that would include the CIP projects would be accomplished concurrently at the time of the Board action on the CIP. The Transportation Committee is requested to recommend Board approval of the CIP and (subject to an air quality conformity determination) approval of the concurrent RTIP amendment.

RENEE WASMUND Director of Finance

Attachments: 1. San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program – Project Submittals FY 2007 2. San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program Funding FY 2007 3. San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program - Project Transfers FY 2007 4. San Diego MTS Capital Improvement Program Summary FY 2007 5. NCTD Proposed Constrained Capital Improvement Program FY 2007 – FY 2011 6. NCTD Proposed Unconstrained Capital Improvement Program FY 2007 – FY 2011 7. NCTD Proposed Major Capital Projects – Multi-Year

Key Staff Contact: Kimberly York, (619) 699-6902, [email protected]

5 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Attachment 1 Capital Improvement Program - Project Submittals Fiscal Year 2007 (in 000's)

Reference Division PROJECT FUNDED THRU TOTAL BUDGET FY07 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Number FY06 FY07 - FY11 Funded Projects Unfunded Projects

1 MCS MCS ADA Small Vehicles (141) 4,710.0 7,189.5 4,209.5 - 2,200.0 685.0 95.0 - 2 SDTI Catenary Contact Wire 1,310.0 13,620.0 3,630.0 - 3,820.0 3,750.0 2,420.0 3 MCS MCS Purchase 9 Mid-size CNG Buses (Airport/Coronado) - 3,040.0 2,400.0 - 640.0 - - - 4 SDTI Rehab Traction motors Phase II - 6,619.9 1,693.5 - 1,693.5 1,693.5 1,539.5 - 5 SDTI Centralized Train Control 2,400.0 9,295.0 1,600.0 - 4,574.0 3,121.0 - - 6 SDTC Bus Video Cameras 1,491.0 1,491.0 - - - - - 7 SDTC IAD/KMD Parking Lot Resurfacing Project 271.0 1,479.0 1,479.0 - - - - - 8 MCS MCS East County Bus Maint. Facility Expansion 8,538.0 13,437.7 1,687.7 2,750.0 4,000.0 3,000.0 2,000.0 9 SDTI CCTV Equipment (San Ysidro / Yard Shop Area) - 2,850.0 750.0 - 525.0 525.0 525.0 525.0 10 MTS Misc. Capital (All Divisions) 4,225.0 1,325.0 - 725.0 725.0 725.0 725.0 11 SANDAG SANDAG Planning Studies 3,716.4 700.0 - 721.0 742.6 764.9 787.9 12 MCS MCS Medium/Small Dart Fixed (961-965) Buses (11) - 1,200.0 600.0 - 600.0 - - - 13 SDTI SDTI Yard Fence and Other Security Measures - 510.0 510.0 - - - - - 14 SDTI LRV Body Rehab - 2,500.0 500.0 - 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 15 SDTC IAD/KMD Vacuum Replacement - 497.8 497.8 - - - - - 16 SDTI Blue Line Trolley Shelter Improvements - 426.6 426.6 - - - - - 17 SDTC SDTC Gemini Compressor Upgrades - 425.0 425.0 - - - - - 18 SDTC Bus Video Cameras 410.5 410.5 - - - - - 19 SDTC SDTC Bus Washer Renovation - 400.0 400.0 - - - - - 20 MTS Multimodal Building Seismic Retrofit 20.0 380.0 380.0 - - - - - 21 SDTI LRV Tires - 1,800.0 360.0 - 360.0 360.0 360.0 360.0 22 SDTI Blue Line Tie Replacement - 1,400.0 350.0 - 350.0 350.0 350.0 - 23 SDTI Head Spans - 700.0 350.0 - 350.0 - - - 24 MTS IT Ellipse Financial System - 350.0 350.0 - - - - - 25 SDTC KMD CNG - Emergency Generator 4,200.0 350.0 350.0 - - - - - 26 SDTI Rail Profile Grinding - 325.0 325.0 - - - - - 27 SDTI Substation Standardization - 5,000.0 300.0 - 1,700.0 1,000.0 1,000.0 1,000.0 28 MTS Organizational Desktops 796.2 900.0 300.0 - 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 29 MCS MCS SBMF Paving - 600.0 300.0 - - - - 300.0 30 SDTC KMD Steam Rack Retrofitting - 292.5 292.5 - - - - - 31 MCS MCS ECBMF Emergency Generator - 250.0 250.0 - - - - - 32 SDTI Crane Truck - 250.0 250.0 - - - - - 33 SDTC KMD Roof and Tile Repair 203.0 200.0 200.0 - - - - - 34 MCS MCS Service Trucks - Maintenance - East County - 165.0 165.0 - - - - - 35 MCS MCS SBMF Portable Lift Replacement - 515.0 135.0 - 90.0 90.0 100.0 100.0 36 MTS IT Network Storage 100.0 200.0 125.0 - - - - 75.0 37 MCS MCS South Bay Maint. Facility Air Compressor - 120.0 120.0 - - - - - 38 SDTI Non-Revenue Vehicle-Security - 517.5 103.5 - 103.5 103.5 103.5 103.5 39 MCS MCS South Bay Maint. Misc. Equipment - 600.0 100.0 - 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 40 SDTC IAD Main Entrance Security Project - 80.0 80.0 - - - - - 41 CVT CVT Supervisor Vans (3) - 77.0 77.0 - - - - - 42 SDTC Service Trucks - 139.0 77.0 - - 62.0 - - 43 SDTC Hastus ATP Software - 76.0 76.0 - - - - - 44 MTS Network Servers 520.0 375.0 75.0 - 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 45 SDTI NRV - Fare Collection - 70.6 70.6 - - - - -

6 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Capital Improvement Program - Project Submittals Fiscal Year 2007 (in 000's)

Reference Division PROJECT FUNDED THRU TOTAL BUDGET FY07 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Number FY06 FY07 - FY11 Funded Projects Unfunded Projects

46 SDTC Transit Store Security Improvements 69.5 69.5 - - - - - 47 SDTI Radio Receiver Replacement - 119.6 59.8 - - - - 59.8 48 SDTC Office Equipment - 191.9 52.8 - 32.3 33.8 35.6 37.4 49 MCS MCS Purchase 40ft CNG Buses (73) South Central - 28,400.0 50.0 - 28,350.0 - - - 50 SDTC High Capacity Buses Replaces 1100 Buses - 7,200.0 50.0 - 7,150.0 - - - 51 SDTC 40 Foot Bus Replacement - 5,150.7 915.7 - 4,235.0 - - - 52 CVT CVT Bus Stop Security Improvements - 250.0 50.0 - 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 53 MCS MCS ADA Paratransit Computer Equipment - 210.0 50.0 - 20.0 20.0 100.0 20.0 54 SDTC SDTC Utility Vehicles - 45.0 45.0 - - - - - 55 SDTC SDTC Forklift Replacement - 43.2 43.2 - - - - - 56 CVT CVT ADA Bus Stop Improvemnts 23.0 200.0 40.0 - 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 57 MCS MCS SBMF 3650A Main St. Upgrades - 40.0 40.0 - - - - - 58 NCT GFI-Farebox Software Upgrade - 34.0 34.0 - - - - - 59 SDTI Misc. Security Equipment - 125.0 25.0 - 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 60 SDTC Shakeup Bid Display Module - 23.0 23.0 - - - - - 61 SDTI Rehabilitation U2 LRVS - 75,600.0 0.0 15,120.0 15,120.0 15,120.0 15,120.0 15,120.0 62 MCS MCS South Bay Maint. Facility Expansion 7,334.0 13,000.0 0.0 4,000.0 4,000.0 3,000.0 2,000.0 63 MCS MCS Bus Surveillance Camera System - 2,835.0 0.0 2,835.0 - - - - 64 SDTI Chopper Propulsion Modification U2 Phase 1 - 10,152.0 0.0 2,538.0 2,538.0 2,538.0 2,538.0 - 65 SDTI San Ysidro Slope Repair 140.0 2,412.5 0.0 2,412.5 - - - - 66 SDTI Switch Indicator Modifications 70.0 2,160.0 0.0 2,160.0 - - - - 67 MCS MCS ECBMF/SBMF GFI Farebox Rehab 1,150.0 0.0 1,150.0 68 SDTI Station Trackway Paving (Rehab) - 3,100.0 0.0 1,000.0 700.0 700.0 700.0 - 69 MTS Configuration Management System - 1,000.0 0.0 1,000.0 - - - - 70 SDTI Breakers (78 DC and 26 AC) - 3,750.0 0.0 865.4 721.2 721.2 721.2 721.2 71 SDTI Blue Line Station Shelter Rehab - 7,000.0 0.0 700.0 3,150.0 3,150.0 - 72 SDTI Highway/Grade Crossing Street Improvements - 3,500.0 0.0 700.0 700.0 700.0 700.0 700.0 73 La Mesa La Mesa Trolley Station Security Cameras - 600.0 0.0 600.0 - - - - 74 SDTI Street Running Pavement - 2,376.0 0.0 594.0 594.0 594.0 594.0 - 75 SDTI Blue Line No. 20 Crossovers - 1,725.0 0.0 575.0 575.0 575.0 - - 76 SDTI LFLRV Station Modification Project - OT & Bayside - 6,160.0 0.0 520.0 5,640.0 - - - 77 SDTI Mainline Drainage - 2,450.0 0.0 490.0 980.0 980.0 - - 78 CVT Security Equipment - Transit Yard 346.0 0.0 346.0 - - - - 79 SDTI Trolley Station Fiber Infrastructure 4,650.0 6,820.0 0.0 330.0 240.0 2,000.0 4,250.0 - 80 SDTI Downtown Trolley Signal Optimization - 2,416.3 0.0 304.8 95.0 2,016.5 - - 81 SDTI LRT Station Enhancements (East Line) - 3,500.0 0.0 300.0 3,200.0 - - - 82 MCS MCS ECBMF CNG Fuel Station - 1,800.0 0.0 300.0 1,500.0 - - - 83 SDTI Imperial Transit Center Platform Improvement - 270.0 0.0 270.0 - - - - 84 SDTI Event Recorders Phase 1 - 1,060.0 0.0 265.0 265.0 265.0 265.0 - 85 CVT Bus Security Cameras - 256.0 0.0 256.0 - - - - 86 SDTI LRV HVAC Retrofit SD100 Replace R22 - 1,014.0 0.0 253.5 253.5 253.5 253.5 - 87 SDTI Rehabilitation Electronic Control Circuit U2 - 1,000.0 0.0 250.0 250.0 250.0 250.0 - 88 SDTI Down Guy Wire Replacement - 1,000.0 0.0 250.0 250.0 250.0 250.0 - 89 SDTI TWC equipment replacement - 240.0 0.0 240.0 - - - - 90 SDTI Railroad Signaling System Upgrade - 8,340.0 0.0 230.0 495.0 3,808.0 3,807.0 - 91 SDTI Signal Equipment/Case Replacment - 2,806.0 0.0 212.0 792.0 792.0 505.0 505.0

7 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Capital Improvement Program - Project Submittals Fiscal Year 2007 (in 000's)

Reference Division PROJECT FUNDED THRU TOTAL BUDGET FY07 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Number FY06 FY07 - FY11 Funded Projects Unfunded Projects

92 SDTC SDTC Hazardous Materials Storage Site - 212.0 0.0 212.0 - - - - 93 MTS Regional Bus Stop Signs and Improvements - 1,145.0 0.0 205.0 220.0 230.0 240.0 250.0 94 SDTI Pilot Motor Control Unit Drive - 200.0 0.0 200.0 - - - - 95 MCS MCS SBMF Security Lighting 200.0 0.0 200.0 - - - - 96 MCS MCS ECBMF Security Lighting 200.0 0.0 200.0 - - - - 97 MCS MCS SBMF Security Gates 200.0 0.0 200.0 - - - - 98 MCS MCS ECBMF Security Gates 200.0 0.0 200.0 - - - - 99 SDTI LFV Station Platform Retrofit Feasibility Study - 200.0 0.0 200.0 - - - - 100 SDTI Power Switch Mechanisms - 972.2 0.0 194.4 194.4 194.4 194.4 194.4 101 SDTI Commercial Street Switch Replacement and Removal - 1,824.0 0.0 182.4 1,641.6 - - - 102 SDTI Substation Isolation Switches - Phase II 2,017.5 0.0 181.5 840.0 996.0 - - 103 SDTI Station Shelter Replacement Project (Civic Center/5th) - 1,105.0 0.0 180.0 925.0 - - - 104 SDTI Wayside Non-Revenue Vehicles - 540.0 0.0 180.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 105 SDTI Low Voltage Trainline Wiring - 175.0 0.0 175.0 - - - - 106 SDTI LRV Coupler/Disconnects Phase III - 612.0 0.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 - 107 SDTI Qualcomm Station Elevator - 1,540.0 0.0 150.0 1,390.0 - - - 108 SDTI Transformers - 750.0 0.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 109 MCS MCS ECBMF Site Fencing and Walls 150.0 0.0 150.0 - - - - 110 MCS MCS SBMF Site Fencing and Walls 150.0 0.0 150.0 - - - - 111 SDTI Catenary Improvement Project - Phase III - 1,430.0 0.0 140.0 645.0 645.0 - - 112 MCS MCS ECBMF Portable Lift Replacement - 515.0 0.0 135.0 90.0 90.0 100.0 100.0 113 SDTI Catenary Inspection/Work Platform Vehicle - 250.0 0.0 125.0 125.0 - - - 114 MCS MCS ECBMF Surveillance Camera System Upgrade 125.0 0.0 125.0 - - - - 115 SDTI Forklift Replacement - 125.0 0.0 125.0 - - - - 116 SDTI Visual Message Signs - Phase II - 3,433.0 0.0 122.0 419.0 1,446.0 1,446.0 - 117 SDTI Blue Line LED Grade Crossing Roudels - 600.0 0.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 118 MCS MCS ECBMF Steam Rack Replacement - 120.0 0.0 120.0 - - - - 119 SDTI LFV Procurement - 132,210.0 0.0 100.0 27,370.0 27,370.0 27,370.0 50,000.0 120 SDTI LRT Station Parking Lot Paving Repairs - 1,000.0 0.0 100.0 900.0 - - - 121 MTS Palm Avenue Station Transit Center - 1,900.0 0.0 100.0 300.0 1,500.0 - - 122 MTS Bus Transit Centers Pavement Replacement - 500.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 123 MTS MVE Grantville and 70th Station Driver Restrooms - 100.0 0.0 100.0 - - - - 124 SDTI Track Vegetation Control - 400.0 0.0 80.0 80.0 80.0 80.0 80.0 125 SDTI Permanent Ticket Booth at Gaslamp Station - 76.9 0.0 76.9 - - - - 126 SDTI Substation Building Structure - 375.0 0.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 127 MCS MCS SBMF Gas Detection System Replacement - 75.0 0.0 75.0 - - - - 128 MCS MCS SBMF Surveillance Camera System Upgrade 75.0 0.0 75.0 - - - - 129 SDTI LRT Shelter Grounding Program - 700.0 0.0 70.0 630.0 - - - 130 MCS MCS Service Truck - Bus Stop Maintenance - 135.0 0.0 65.0 70.0 - - - 131 SDTI El Cajon Transit Center Improvements - 560.0 0.0 60.0 500.0 - - - 132 MTS Transit Center Bench Replacement and Shelter Rehab - 300.0 0.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 133 MTS Building 3 Paving - Multimodal Operations - 60.0 0.0 60.0 - - - - 134 MTS Regional ADA Bus Stop Improvements - 950.0 0.0 50.0 200.0 225.0 225.0 250.0 135 MCS MCS East County Bus Maint. Facility Misc. Equip. - 350.0 0.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 136 MTS IT Network Infrastructure 796.2 250.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 137 SDTI Platform Scrubbing Equipment and Vacuum Vehicle - 1,250.0 0.0 50.0 - 1,200.0 - - 138 SDTI Old Town Depot Upgrades and Repaint - 50.0 0.0 50.0 - - - -

8 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Capital Improvement Program - Project Submittals Fiscal Year 2007 (in 000's)

Reference Division PROJECT FUNDED THRU TOTAL BUDGET FY07 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Number FY06 FY07 - FY11 Funded Projects Unfunded Projects

139 MCS MCS SBMF Surveillance Camera System Replacement - 50.0 0.0 50.0 - - - - 140 SDTI Track Non-Revenue Vehicles - 580.0 0.0 40.0 - 500.0 - 40.0 141 NCT RCS Automatic Vehicle Locator via GPS system - 40.0 0.0 40.0 - - - - 142 MCS MCS Staff Vehicles - Multimodal Operations - 138.0 0.0 33.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 - 143 SDTI Transportation Supervisor Vehicle - 101.2 0.0 25.3 25.3 25.3 25.3 - 144 MTS Building 3 - Multimodal Operations - Copy machines - 37.0 0.0 21.0 16.0 - - - 145 SDTI Grossmont Ticket Booth - 19.5 0.0 19.5 146 MCS MCS Bus Stop Maintenance Program Tools/Equip. - 75.0 0.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 147 MCS MTS Purchase 35-40 ft CNG Buses (16) East County - 6,300.0 0.0 - 6,300.0 - - - 148 MCS MTS Purchase Mid-size Buses Poway (7) - 2,500.0 0.0 - 2,500.0 - - - 149 MCS MCS Purchase 6 Mid-size CNG Buses South Central - 2,115.0 0.0 - 2,115.0 - - - 150 MTS Spring Valley Transit Center 200.0 3,600.0 0.0 - 1,800.0 300.0 1,500.0 - 151 SDTI Retaining Wall Rehabilitation - 3,080.0 0.0 - 300.0 2,780.0 - - 152 SDTI Dynamic Signal Crossing Activation - 260.0 0.0 - 260.0 - - - 153 MCS MCS SBMF Wash Facilities Replacement - 250.0 0.0 - 250.0 - - - 154 SDTI Yard Switch Electrification, Phase II (10897) 857.5 170.0 0.0 - 170.0 - - - 155 MCS MCS SBMF HVAC Replacement - 3650A Bldg - 200.0 0.0 - 150.0 25.0 25.0 - 156 MCS MCS SBMF Steam Clean Rack Upgrade - 110.0 0.0 - 110.0 - - - 157 SDTI 32nd St and Commercial Enhancements - 515.0 0.0 - 105.0 410.0 - - 158 NCT Security Camera System - 24th St Trolley/Bus Station - 100.0 0.0 - 100.0 - - - 159 SDTI ADA Station Improvements - 100.0 0.0 - 100.0 - - - 160 MCS MCS SBMF Diesel Pump Replacement - 100.0 0.0 - 100.0 - - - 161 MCS MCS SBMF Dispatch Communications - 50.0 0.0 - 50.0 - - - 162 MCS MCS ECBMF Dispatch Communications - 50.0 0.0 - 50.0 - - - 163 MCS MCS ADA Dispatch Communications - 50.0 0.0 - 50.0 - - - 164 MCS MCS SBMF Semi-Permanent Fixture Replacement - 3650A - 90.0 0.0 - 40.0 25.0 25.0 - 165 NCT NCT Supervisor Replacement Vehicle - 36.0 0.0 - 36.0 - - - 166 SDTC IAD / KMD Fencing Repairs 34.5 0.0 - 34.5 - - - 167 SDTC IAD Card Reader Access Control 24.0 0.0 - 24.0 - - - 168 SDTI Signal Plan Update 12.0 12.0 0.0 - 12.0 - - - 169 SDTC High Capacity Buses Replaces 1100 Buses - 5,949.0 0.0 - - 5,949.0 - - 170 SDTC 40 Foot Bus Replacement - 5,425.0 0.0 - - 5,425.0 - - 171 MCS MCS SBMF Radios - East County - 340.0 0.0 - - 340.0 - - 172 SDTC KMD Interior/Exterior Renovation - 335.0 0.0 - - 335.0 - - 173 SDTC IAD/KMD HVAC Overhaul - 305.0 0.0 - - 305.0 - - 174 MCS MCS ECBMF Wash Facilities Replacement - 250.0 0.0 - - 250.0 - - 175 SDTC KMD & IAD CCTV Installation 145.0 0.0 - - 145.0 - - 176 SDTC IAD/KMD Compressor & Service Equipment Upgrade - 140.0 0.0 - - 140.0 - - 177 MCS Building 3 Remodel - Multimodal Operations - 120.0 0.0 - - 120.0 - - 178 MCS MCS SBMF Radios - South Central - 120.0 0.0 - - 120.0 - - 179 NCT Security Camera System - 8th St Trolley/Bus Station - 100.0 0.0 - - 100.0 - - 180 MTS MTS Trolley Station Signs - 150.0 0.0 - - 50.0 50.0 50.0 181 SDTC KMD Electrical Service Upgrade - 38.0 0.0 - - 38.0 - - 182 MCS MCS SBMF Roof Replacment - 60.0 0.0 - - 30.0 - 30.0 183 SDTC 40 Foot Bus Replacement - 9,780.0 0.0 - - - 9,780.0 - 184 SDTC 40 Foot Bus Replacement - 9,404.0 0.0 - - - 9,404.0 - 185 MCS MTS Purchase Mid-size Buses (10) Rural - 2,900.0 0.0 - - - 2,900.0 -

9 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Capital Improvement Program - Project Submittals Fiscal Year 2007 (in 000's)

Reference Division PROJECT FUNDED THRU TOTAL BUDGET FY07 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 Number FY06 FY07 - FY11 Funded Projects Unfunded Projects

186 MCS MTS Purchase 30-35 ft CNG Buses (7) East County - 2,700.0 0.0 - - - 2,700.0 - 187 MCS MTS Purchase Mid-size (14) SVCC - 1,700.0 0.0 - - - 1,700.0 - 188 SDTC SDTC Hoist Overhaul - 1,310.0 0.0 - - - 770.0 540.0 189 SDTC IAD Roof System Replacement - 316.5 0.0 - - - 316.5 - 190 MCS MCS Service Trucks - Maintenance - South Central - 185.0 0.0 - - - 185.0 - 191 SDTC 40 Foot Bus Replacement - 10,171.0 0.0 - - - - 10,171.0 192 MCS MCS Fareboxes Replacement - 8,000.0 0.0 - - - - 8,000.0

TOTAL 37,151.0 542,045.0 31,845.1 49,983.3 157,393.8 107,241.3 103,006.4 92,575.2

10 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Attachment 2 Capital Improvement Program Funding Fiscal Year 2007 (in 000's)

Project FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Federal Formula Program 5307 80% Funding Estimate 31,318.1 32,257.6 33,225.3 34,222.1 35,248.8 TDA Local Match (5307) 7,829.5 8,064.4 8,306.3 8,555.5 8,812.2 5309 Rail Mod 80% Funding Estimate 10,674.3 10,994.5 11,324.4 11,664.1 12,014.0 TDA Local Match (5309) 2,668.6 2,748.6 2,831.1 2,916.0 3,003.5 TransNet Non-Rail Funding 2,042.0 Additional STA Funding (Proposition 42) 3,048.1 Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Funding - Rail Operations 1,372.1 Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Funding - Bus Operations 544.5 5309 Bus/Bus Related Fac Earmark - ADA Paratransit Vehicles 487.6 TDA Local Match (Earmark) 121.9 5309 Bus/Bus Related Fac Earmark - Blue Line Trolley Shelter Improvements 341.3 TDA Local Match (Earmark) 85.3 5309 Bus/Bus Related Fac Earmark - East County Bus Maintenance Facility 975.2 TDA Local Match (Earmark) 243.8 5309 Bus/Bus Related Fac Earmark - East County Bus Maintenance Facility Expansion 375.0 TDA Local Match (Earmark) 93.8 Capital Improvement Program - Project Transfers (details in Att. # 3) 2,452.2 Preventive Maintenance (29,000.0) (29,000.0) (29,000.0) (29,000.0) (29,000.0) Regional Transit Management System Phase I (Debt Service) (3,828.0) (2,042.0) - - - Automated Fare Technology (Debt Service) 0.0 (5,599.4) - - -

Available Funding for FY 07 Capital Program 31,845.1 17,423.8 26,687.1 28,357.8 30,078.5

11 MTS FY 07 CIP - Unconstrained Attachment 3

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Capital Improvement Program - Project Transfers Fiscal Year 2007 (in 000's)

Project Project Transfer Number Name Amount

Federal Funds Available from COP Payments for Buses 637.8 Project 10443 IAD CNG Facility Improvements 14.7 Project 10452 Curve Straightening 21.8 Project 10579 IAD/KMD Clean Up Study 31.8 Project 10696 LRT Station Surv. Systems 284.4 Project 10739 KMD Oil Tank Installation 54.9 Project 10834 Broadway Wye Signal Mods 11.2 Project 10842 Fenton Parkway Station 32.2 Project 10843 Fenton Parkway Grade Crossing 31.3 Project 10862 Computer Upgrades (Risk) 89.3 Project 10888 Grade Crossing Improvements 31.6 Project 10893 Sweetwater Flats Switch Replacement 20.0 Project 10907 Bus Surveillance Cameras 11.0 Project 10948 LRT Station Svc Panel Upgrade 6.8 Project 10951 Rail Replacement - 12th and Imperial 9.1 Project 10974 Replace Switches - State / Columbia 43.7 Project 10975 F Street Diamond Replacement 11.0 Project 10986 SDTC Engine Retrofits 141.7 Project 10987 50 Rebuild Transmissions 27.1 Project 10993 IAD Expansion Land Purchase 0.4 Project 11022 IAD Building Shakeup Room 144.6 Project 11028 LRV HVAC Modification Phase II 112.2 Project 11087 SD100 Digital Voice System Replacement 583.5 Project 11402 Kearny Mesa Transit Center 100.0

2,452.2

12 Attachment 4

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Capital Improvement Program Summary Fiscal Year 2007 (in 000's)

Proposed Projected Projected Projected Projected Five-Year FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 Total

Federal Funding Levels 52,490.5 54,065.2 55,687.2 57,357.8 59,078.5 278,679.1 TransNet Non-Rail Funding 2,042.0 - - - - 2,042.0 Additional STA Funding 3,048.1 - - - - 3,048.1 TSA Funding 1,916.6 - - - - 1,916.6 Earmarks 2,723.8 - - - - 2,723.8 Project Transfers 2,452.2 - - - - 2,452.2 Preventive Maintenance (29,000.0) (29,000.0) (29,000.0) (29,000.0) (29,000.0) (145,000.0) Debt Service (3,828.0) (7,641.4) - - - (11,469.4)

Total Funding Availability 31,845.1 17,423.8 26,687.2 28,357.8 30,078.5 134,392.4

Total Project Needs 81,828.4 157,393.8 107,241.3 103,006.4 92,575.2 542,045.0

Total Deficit (49,983.3) (139,969.9) (80,554.1) (74,648.7) (62,496.7) (407,652.7)

% of Funding / Needs 38.9% 11.1% 24.9% 27.5% 32.5% 24.8%

13 Attachment 5

NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT SUMMARY PROPOSED CONSTRAINED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY 2007-2011

Asset Class Asset Description 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Totals 104 Revenue Vehicles$ 875,670 $ 650,225 $ 3,110,625 $ 2,615,000 $ 6,105,000 $ 13,356,520 223 Service Vehicles 1,026,231 - 826,500 527,000 205,000 2,584,731 337 Buildings and Structures ------338 Building and Structure Improvements 1,645,375 2,979,819 835,544 304,000 183,000 5,947,738 431 Transit Way Equipment - - 60,000 - - 60,000 432 Right-of-Way ------433 Right-of-Way Improvements 5,829,297 5,902,000 7,580,000 8,720,000 6,220,000 34,251,297 434 Operating Yard Equipment - 850,000 - - - 850,000 435 Shop and Garage Equipment 181,500 126,502 78,000 70,000 70,000 526,002 438 Vehicle Movement Control Equipment - 100,000 - - - 100,000 439 Revenue Collection and Fare Equipment 4,000 - - - - 4,000 440 Data Processing Equipment 675,000 194,354 50,000 100,000 - 1,019,354 500 Office Furniture & Equipment 100,000 930,000 8,000 - - 1,038,000 600 Land 30,000 - - - - 30,000 601 Land Improvement ------

TOTALS - Constrained CIP$ 10,367,073 $ 11,732,900 $ 12,548,669 $ 12,336,000 $ 12,783,000 $ 59,767,642

14 STATUS: NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT 1 = Requested, Not approved Proposed FY 07 Constrained CIP By Asset Class 2 = Approved, Not Funded As of 11/28/05

Program Asset Requested Year Status Mode Job# Description Class Project Manager Dept Amount 7 2 1 107003 Emission Reduction Equipment 104 Michael R. Wygant 170$ 70,670 7 2 4 407105 Locomotive Heavy Overhaul 104 Lane D. Fernandes 150 125,000 7 2 6 507051 DMU Spare Trucks for Wheels 104 Lane D. Fernandes 155 550,000 7 2 2 207011 ADA Paratransit Vehicles (2) 104 Alane B. Haynes 280 40,000 7 1 2 207012 ADA Paratransit Vehicles (3) 104 Alane B. Haynes 280 60,000 7 2 1 107002 Driver Seats (15) 104 Michael R. Wygant 170 30,000 Asset Class 104 - Revenue Vehicles$ 875,670

7 2 5 507012 Signalman's Pickup Truck 223 Richard Walker 510$ 50,256 7 2 6 607037 Sprinter Support Service Veh (7) 223 Walt Stringer 155 285,000 7 2 1 607001 Box Van/Trucks (3) 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 120,000 7 2 1 607002 3/4 Ton Trucks (5) 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 175,000 7 2 1 107009 Replacement Fleet Service Trucks (2) 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 65,000 7 2 1 107006 Service Truck (1) 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 34,975 7 2 1 107007 Sedans (9) 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 176,000 7 2 1 107005 Service Trucks (2) (shop trucks) 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 120,000 Asset Class 223 - Service Vehicles$ 1,026,231

7 1 1 108100 OTC Control/Customer Service Facility 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220$ 700,000 7 2 1 107036 West Division Security Gates 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 200,000 7 2 1 107024 Misc. Small Building Projects 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 51,000 7 2 1 107030 OTC Polycarbonate Roof Repl 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 575,000 7 2 1 107028 Roof Replacement - GAO 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 57,375 7 2 1 107237 Bus Plus Program 338 Stefan M. Marks 260 62,000 Asset Class 338 - Bldg and Structure Improvements$ 1,645,375

7 2 5 507201 At-Grade Crossing Renewal 433 Richard Walker 510$ 350,000 7 2 5 507301 Turnout Renewal Program 433 Richard Walker 510 550,000 7 2 5 507015 Crosstie Renewal Program 433 Richard Walker 510 282,750 7 2 5 507501 Supplement Crosstie Renewal 433 Richard Walker 510 274,012 7 2 5 507013 Bridge and Infrastructure Replacement 433 Richard Walker 510 3,059,038 7 2 5 507014 Rail Replacement Program 433 Richard Walker 510 254,460 7 2 5 507016 Track Structure Rehabilitation 433 Richard Walker 510 318,075 7 2 5 507102 Supplement - Bridge & Infrastrc Repl 433 Richard Walker 510 740,962 Asset Class 433 - Right-of-Way Improvements$ 5,829,297

7 2 1 107019 Facility Mnt Shop and Garage Equip 435 Thomas B. Gallagher 220$ 51,000 7 2 1 107010 Misc. Shop Tools 435 Michael R. Wygant 170 21,500 7 2 1 607033 Equip for Sprinter Maintenance Facility 435 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 50,000 7 2 1 607034 Maintenance Equip for Sprinter Stations 435 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 59,000 Asset Class 435 - Shop and Garage Equipment 181,500

7 2 1 107011 Change Machines 439 Rosalia J Martinez 270 4,000 Asset Class 439 - Revenue Collection and Fare Equip$ 4,000

7 2 1 107051 PRIME Migration 440 Kirk Talbott 320$ 300,000 7 2 1 107020 Network Expansion and Support 440 Kirk Talbott 320 100,000 7 2 1 107023 Server Replacements 440 Kirk Talbott 320 75,000 7 2 1 107021 PC Replacements and Upgrades 440 Kirk Talbott 320 200,000 Asset Class 440 - Data Processing Equipment$ 675,000

7 2 1 108047 Board Room Audio Visual System 500 Thomas B. Gallagher 220$ 100,000 Asset Class 500 - Office Furniture and Equipment$ 100,000

7 2 1 107054 San Luis Rey TC - Phase 2 600 Stefan M. Marks 260$ 30,000 Asset Class 600 - Land$ 30,000

TOTAL FY 07$ 10,367,073

15 STATUS: NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT 1 = Requested, Not approved Proposed FY 08 Constrained CIP By Asset Class 2 = Approved, Not Funded As of 11/28/05

Program Asset Requested Year Status Mode Job # Description Class Project Manager Dept Amount 8 2 1 108001 Emission Reduction Equipment 104 Michael R. Wygant 170$ 80,625 8 2 1 108003 Transit Vans (5) 104 Michael R. Wygant 170 500,000 8 2 2 208011 ADA Paratransit Vehicles (2) 104 Alane B. Haynes 280 39,600 8 2 1 108002 Driver Seats (15) 104 Michael R. Wygant 170 30,000 Asset Class 104 - Revenue Vehicles$ 650,225

8 2 1 107035 East Division Security Gates 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220$ 200,000 8 2 4 408026 Old Town Mini Hi Relocation 338 Eric Kosty 150 165,000 8 2 1 108025 Misc. Small Building Projects 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 52,000 8 2 6 608036 Wheel Truing Machine Sprinter 338 Walt Stringer 250 1,700,000 8 2 5 508050 Poinsettia Station Platform Extension 338 Kate Stonelake 510 732,819 8 2 1 108237 Bus Plus Program 338 Stefan M. Marks 260 130,000 Asset Class 338 - Bldg and Structure Improvements$ 2,979,819

8 2 5 508201 At-Grade Crossing Renewal 433 Richard Walker 510$ 350,000 8 2 5 508301 Turnout Renewal Program 433 Richard Walker 510 550,000 8 2 5 508016 Crosstie Renewal Program 433 Richard Walker 510 550,000 8 2 5 508501 Supplement Crosstie Renewal 433 Richard Walker 510 260,000 8 2 5 508015 Rail Replacement Program 433 Richard Walker 510 246,000 8 2 5 508017 Track Structure Rehabilitation 433 Richard Walker 510 536,000 8 2 5 508018 Bridge and Infrastructure Replacement 433 Richard Walker 510 2,447,500 8 2 5 508102 Supplement - Bridge and Infrastrc Repl 433 Richard Walker 510 812,500 8 2 5 508601 Supplement - Track Structure Rehab 433 Richard Walker 510 150,000 Asset Class 433 - Right-of-Way Improvements$ 5,902,000

8 2 1 108030 Bus Washers (3) East/West Div 434 Thomas B. Gallagher 220$ 850,000 Asset Class 434 - Operating Yard Equipment$ 850,000

8 2 4 408019 Maint Shop and Garage Equip 435 Thomas B. Gallagher 220$ 53,000 8 2 4 408020 Supplement - Facility Mnt Shop Equip 435 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 14,000 8 2 1 108008 Portable Hoists 435 Michael R. Wygant 170 39,668 8 2 1 108006 Misc. Shop Tools 435 Michael R. Wygant 170 19,834 Asset Class 435 - Shop and Garage Equipment$ 126,502

8 2 1 108053 Remote Dispatch and AVL Access 438 Rod Surber 110$ 100,000 Asset Class 438 - Vehicle Movement Control Equipment$ 100,000

8 2 1 108031 Network Overhaul and Replacement 440 Kirk Talbott 320$ 156,374 8 2 1 108022 PC Replacements and Upgrades 440 Kirk Talbott 320 37,980 Asset Class 440 - Data Processing Equipment$ 194,354

8 1 1 108012 Telephone/Radio Recording System 500 Cynthia Harris 110$ 30,000 8 1 1 108011 Network Copier Replacement 500 Kirk Talbott 320 400,000 8 1 1 108010 Phone System Replacement 500 Kirk Talbott 320 500,000 Asset Class 500 - Office Furniture and Equipment$ 930,000

TOTAL FY 08$ 11,732,900

16 STATUS: NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT 1 = Requested, Not approved Proposed FY 09 Constrained CIP By Asset Class 2 = Approved, Not Funded As of 11/28/05

Program Asset Requested Year Status Mode Job# Description Class Project Manager Dept Amount 9 2 1 tbd Emission Reduction Equipment 104 Michael R. Wygant 170$ 80,625 9 2 2 209001 ADA Vans (3) 104 Alane B. Haynes 280 60,000 9 2 1 109012 CNG Buses (7) 104 Michael R. Wygant 170 2,940,000 9 2 1 109008 Driver Seats (15) 104 Michael R. Wygant 170 30,000 Asset Class 104 - Revenue Vehicles$ 3,110,625

9 2 4 409028 Rail Safety and Incident Vehicle 223 Wayne M Penn 160$ 45,000 9 2 5 509013 Stakebed Truck 223 Richard Walker 510 43,050 9 2 5 509014 Signalman's Pickup Truck 223 Richard Walker 510 43,050 9 2 5 509050 MOW Hy-Rail Boom Truck 223 Richard Walker 510 150,000 9 2 5 509012 Weld Truck 223 Richard Walker 510 221,400 9 1 1 109011 Service Trucks (3) 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 105,000 9 1 1 109006 Sedans or Delivery Vans (8) 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 184,000 9 1 1 109009 Delivery Truck 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 35,000 Asset Class 223 - Service Vehicles$ 826,500

9 2 1 tbd Facility Security Project 338 Gallagher/Papworth 220$ 128,000 9 2 1 109013 Misc. Small Building Projects 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 53,000 9 2 1 109015 Bus Plus Program 338 Stefan M. Marks 260 437,972 9 2 1 109027 Roof Replacement West Division 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 216,572 Asset Class 338 - Bldg and Structure Improvements$ 835,544

9 2 5 509041 Track Geometry Equipment 431 Richard Walker 510$ 60,000 Asset Class 431 - Transit Way Equipment$ 60,000

9 2 5 509201 At-Grade Crossing Renewal 433 Richard Walker 510$ 350,000 9 2 5 509301 Turnout Renewal Program 433 Richard Walker 510 550,000 9 2 5 509001 Crosstie Renewal Program 433 Richard Walker 510 550,000 9 2 5 509501 Supplement Crosstie Renewal 433 Richard Walker 510 260,000 9 2 5 509002 Track Structure Rehabilitation 433 Richard Walker 510 710,000 9 2 5 509004 Rail Replacement Program 433 Richard Walker 510 200,000 9 2 5 509017 Bridge and Infrastructure Replacement 433 Richard Walker 510 4,600,000 9 2 5 509102 Supplement - Bridge and Infrastrc Repl 433 Richard Walker 510 360,000 Asset Class 433 - Right of Way Improvements$ 7,580,000

9 2 1 109001 Facility Maint Shop and Garage Equip 435 Thomas B. Gallagher 220$ 53,000 9 2 1 109007 Misc. Shop Tools 435 Michael R. Wygant 170 25,000 Asset Class 435 - Shop and Garage Equipment$ 78,000

9 2 1 109002 Misc. Software Upgrades 440 Kirk Talbott 320$ 50,000 Asset Class 440 - Data Processing Equipment$ 50,000

9 2 1 109010 Warehouse Bins 500 Michael R. Wygant 170$ 8,000 Asset Class 500 - Office Furniture and Equipment$ 8,000

TOTAL FY 09$ 12,548,669

17 STATUS: NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT 1 = Requested, Not approved Proposed FY 10 Constrained CIP By Asset Class 2 = Approved, Not Funded As of 11/28/05

Program Asset Requested Year Status Mode Job # Description Class Project Manager Dept Amount 10 2 1 110003 Emission Reduction Equipment 104 Michael R. Wygant 170$ 50,000 10 2 1 110001 Transit Buses (5) 104 Michael R. Wygant 170 2,205,000 10 2 2 210001 ADA Vans (3) 104 Alane B. Haynes 280 60,000 10 2 1 110002 Driver Seats (15) 104 Michael R. Wygant 170 30,000 10 1 1 111004 Sedans (4) 104 Mike Wygant 170 161,000 10 1 1 111005 Service Trucks (3) 104 Mike Wygant 170 109,000 Asset Class 104 - Revenue Vehicles$ 2,615,000

10 2 5 510001 Hy-Rail Boom Truck SDNR #101 223 Richard Walker 510$ 150,000 10 2 5 510002 MOW Pickup Truck SDNR #103 223 Richard Walker 510 55,000 10 2 5 510003 MOW Gang Truck and Vehicle 223 Richard Walker 510 230,000 10 2 1 110004 Sedans (4) 223 Michael R. Wygant 170 92,000 Asset Class 223 - Service Vehicles$ 527,000

10 2 1 110015 Security Surveillance System 338 David J. Papworth 230$ 250,000 10 2 1 110007 Misc. Small Building Projects 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 54,000 Asset Class 338 - Bldg and Structure Improvements$ 304,000

10 2 5 510014 Rail Replacement Program 433 Richard Walker 510$ 200,000 10 2 5 510201 At-Grade Crossing Renewal 433 Richard Walker 510 350,000 10 2 5 510301 Turnout Renewal Program 433 Richard Walker 510 550,000 10 2 5 510501 Supplement Crosstie Renewal 433 Richard Walker 510 810,000 10 2 5 510102 Bridge and Infrastructure Replacement 433 Richard Walker 510 6,100,000 10 2 5 510601 Track Structure Rehabilitation 433 Richard Walker 510 710,000 Asset Class 433 - Right-of-Way Improvements$ 8,720,000

10 2 1 110008 Facility Maintenance Equipment 435 Thomas B. Gallagher 220$ 50,000 10 2 1 110006 Misc. Shop Tools 435 Michael R. Wygant 170 20,000 Asset Class 435 - Shop and Garage Equipment$ 70,000

10 2 1 110013 PC Replacements and Upgrades 440 Kirk Talbott 320$ 100,000 Asset Class 440 - Data Processing Equipment$ 100,000

TOTAL FY 10$ 12,336,000

18 STATUS: NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT 1 = Requested, Not approved Proposed FY 11 Constrained CIP By Asset Class 2 = Approved, Not Funded As of 11/28/05

Program Asset Requested Year Status Mode Job # Description Class Project Manager Dept Amount 11 1 1 111003 Emission Reductions Equipment 104 Mike Wygant 170$ 50,000 11 1 1 111001 CNG Buses (15) 104 Mike Wygant 170 6,025,000 11 1 1 111002 Driver Seats (15) 104 Mike Wygant 170 30,000 Asset Class 104 - Revenue Vehicles$ 6,105,000

11 1 5 511003 Hy-Rail Boom Truck SDNR #101 223 Richard Walker 510$ 150,000 11 1 5 511005 MOW Pickup Truck 223 Richard Walker 510 55,000 Asset Class 223 - Service Vehicles$ 205,000

11 1 1 tbd Facility Security Project 338 Gallagher/Papworth 220$ 128,000 11 1 1 111021 Misc. Small Building Projects 338 Thomas B. Gallagher 220 55,000 Asset Class 338 - Bldg and Structure Improvements$ 183,000

11 1 5 511018 Bridge and Infrastructure Replacement 433 Richard Walker 510$ 3,600,000 11 1 5 511017 Crosstie Renewal Program 433 Richard Walker 510 810,000 11 1 5 511016 Track Structure Rehabilitation 433 Richard Walker 510 710,000 11 1 5 511301 Turnout Renewal Program 433 Richard Walker 510 550,000 11 1 5 511201 At-Grade Crossing Renewal 433 Richard Walker 510 350,000 11 1 5 511015 Rail Replacement Program 433 Richard Walker 510 200,000 Asset Class 433 - Right of Way Improvements$ 6,220,000

11 1 1 111020 Facility Maintenance Equipment 435 Thomas B. Gallagher 220$ 50,000 11 1 1 111006 Misc. Fleet Shop Tools 435 Mike Wygant 170 20,000 Asset Class 435 - Shop and Garage Equipment$ 70,000

TOTAL FY 11$ 12,783,000

19 Attachment 6

NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT SUMMARY PROPOSED UNCONSTRAINED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY 2007-2011

Asset Class Asset Description 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Totals 104 Revenue Vehicles$ 3,575,670 $ 6,950,225 $ 6,470,625 $ 2,345,000 $ 6,105,000 $ 25,446,520 223 Service Vehicles 991,256 938,500 1,111,500 958,000 455,000 4,454,256 337 Buildings and Structures 2,600,000 9,245,319 2,587,500 1,736,000 20,000,000 36,168,819 338 Building and Structure Improvements 5,161,375 4,062,500 1,357,044 1,867,408 186,000 12,634,327 431 Transit Way Equipment - - 60,000 - - 60,000 432 Right-of-Way ------433 Right-of-Way Improvements 5,829,297 5,992,000 9,080,000 12,220,000 7,470,000 40,591,297 434 Operating Yard Equipment - 850,000 - 2,000,000 - 2,850,000 435 Shop and Garage Equipment 181,500 126,502 78,000 70,000 109,668 565,670 438 Vehicle Movement Control Equipment - 100,000 25,000 370,000 100,000 595,000 439 Revenue Collection and Fare Equipment 4,000 - - - - 4,000 440 Data Processing Equipment 675,000 1,444,354 1,100,000 850,000 420,000 4,489,354 500 Office Furniture & Equipment 108,000 34,500 8,000 - 47,500 198,000 600 Land 30,000 - - - - 30,000 601 Land Improvement ------

TOTALS - Unconstrained CIP$ 19,156,098 $ 29,743,900 $ 21,877,669 $ 22,416,408 $ 34,893,168 $ 128,087,243

20 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT PROPOSED UNCONSTRAINED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY 2007-2011 Project Project Title Manager Mode FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 TOTAL

Asset Class 104 - REVENUE VEHICLES Transit Vans (replacement) Wygant 1$ 500,000 $ 500,000 Driver Seats Wygant 1 $ 30,000 30,000$ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 150,000 Emission Reduction Equipment Wygant 1 70,670 80,625 80,625 50,000 50,000 331,920 Buses - CNG (replacement) Wygant 1 2,700,000 6,300,000 6,300,000 2,205,000 6,025,000 23,530,000 Replacement ADA Vans Haynes 2 100,000 39,600 60,000 60,000 259,600 Locomotive Heavy Overhaul Fernandes 4 125,000 125,000 DMU Spare Trucks for Wheels Fernandes 4 550,000 550,000 Total Asset Class 104 $ 3,575,670 $ 6,950,225 $ 6,470,625 $ 2,345,000 $ 6,105,000 $ 25,446,520

Asset Class 223 - SERVICE VEHICLES Patrol Vehicle Lighting/Equipment Papworth 4 $ 10,000 $ 1,000 $ 11,000 Replacement Pickup Trucks - 3/4 Ton Wygant 1$ 175,000 175,000 Replacement Fleet Service Trucks Wygant 1 65,000 105,000 105,000 109,000 384,000 Replacement Box Vans/Trucks Wygant 1 120,000 120,000 Replacement Sedans Wygant 1 176,000 176,000 184,000 253,000 789,000 Replacement Shop Trucks Wygant 1 120,000 160,000 280,000 Replacement Delivery Truck Wygant 1 35,000 35,000 Replacement Hy-Rail Pickup Truck Walker 5 55,000 55,000 110,000 Replacement Hy-Rail Boom Truck Walker 5 150,000 150,000 150,000 450,000 Replacement Rail Safety & Incident Vehicle Penn 4 45,000 45,000 Replacement Stakebed Truck Walker 5 43,050 43,050 Replacement Weld Truck Walker 5 221,400 221,400 Replacement Gang Truck/Signal Truck Walker 5 50,256 307,500 43,050 230,000 75,000 705,806 Replacement Speed Swing Walker 5 350,000 350,000 Replacement Grade-All Walker 5 275,000 275,000 Replacement Back Hoe Walker 5 175,000 175,000 Sprinter Support Service Vehicles Stringer 6 285,000 285,000 Total Asset Class 223 $ 991,256 $ 938,500 $ 1,111,500 $ 958,000 $ 455,000 $ 4,454,256

Asset Class 337 - BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES Encinitas Station Guard Building Gallagher 1 $ 18,000 $ 18,000 Poinsettia Station Guard Building Gallagher 1 18,000 18,000 Oceanside Sprinter Layover Maint Facility Lichterman 6$ 312,500 $ 2,187,500 2,500,000 OTC Commuter Rail Plaza Gallagher 4$ 1,500,000 1,500,000 GAO Building on Tremont Howard 3,000,000 $ 20,000,000 23,000,000 Poinsettia Station Platform Extension Feely 5 732,819 732,819 Parking - Expand Carlsbad Village Kosty 4 200,000 800,000 1,000,000

21 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT PROPOSED UNCONSTRAINED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY 2007-2011 Project Project Title Manager Mode FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 TOTAL Parking - Expand Carlsbad Poinsettia Kosty 4 600,000 2,400,000 3,000,000 Platforms - Expand Sorrento Valley Kosty 5 300,000 2,000,000 2,300,000 Parking - Expand Encinitas Kosty 4 200,000 800,000 1,000,000 Platforms - Expand Encinitas Kosty 5 200,000 900,000 1,100,000 Total Asset Class 337 $ 2,600,000 $ 9,245,319 $ 2,587,500 $ 1,736,000 $ 20,000,000 $ 36,168,819

Asset Class 338 - BUILDING AND STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT Bus Plus Program Marks 1 $ 62,000 $ 130,000 $ 437,972 $ 500,000 $ 1,129,972 OTC Control Center/Cust Serv Facility Gallagher 1 700,000 700,000 OTC Polycarbonate Roof Repl Gallagher 1 575,000 575,000 Security Surveillance System Papworth 1 250,000 250,000 West Division Security Gates Gallagher 1 200,000 200,000 East Division Security Gates Gallagher 1 200,000 200,000 Misc. Small Building Projects Gallagher 1 51,000 52,000 53,000 54,000 55,000 265,000 GAO Roof Replacement Gallagher 1 57,375 57,375 West Division Roof Replacement Gallagher 1 216,572 216,572 Methane Detection System - West Div Graham 1 750,000 750,000 Computer Room AC Gallagher 1 15,000 15,000 OTC Exterior Lighting Replacement Gallagher 1 60,000 60,000 OTC Collonade Renovation Gallagher 1 575,000 575,000 OTC Bird Control Avian Fly Away System Gallagher 1 50,000 50,000 ETC Collonade Renovation Gallagher 1 500,000 500,000 ETC Detectable Tile ADA Gallagher 1 8,000 8,000 Palomar College Detectable Tile ADA Gallagher 1 8,000 8,000 ETC SPRINTER/BREEZE/BRT Integration Gallagher 1 750,000 750,000 West Division Carpet Replacement Gallagher 1 40,500 40,500 GAO Elevator Rehab Gallagher 1 60,000 60,000 ETC A/C and Ventilator Equip Gallagher 1 15,000 15,000 East Division Roof Replacement Gallagher 1 43,500 43,500 Layover Yard A/C and Ventilators Gallagher 1 12,000 12,000 West Division Exterior Lighting Repl Gallagher 1 40,000 40,000 ETC Exterior Lighting Replacement Gallagher 1 40,000 40,000 ETC Landscape Renovation Gallagher 1 405,080 405,080 West Division Landscape Renovation Gallagher 1 123,828 123,828 West Division Sign Replacement Gallagher 1 40,000 40,000 ETC Sign Replacement Gallagher 1 75,000 75,000 Palomar College Site Furnishings Repl Gallagher 1 20,000 20,000 West Divi Underground Storage Tank Repl Gallagher 1 250,000 250,000

22 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT PROPOSED UNCONSTRAINED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY 2007-2011 Project Project Title Manager Mode FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 TOTAL Old Town Mini Hi Relocation Kosty 4 165,000 165,000 Facility Security Project Papworth 4 106,000 106,000 212,000 Solana Beach Stn A/C and Ventilators Gallagher 4 45,000 45,000 Tremont Exterior Lighting Repl Gallagher 4 5,000 5,000 Solana Beach Station Roof Repl Gallagher 4 7,500 7,500 Stuart Mesa AC and Ventilator Equip Gallagher 4 25,000 25,000 Wheel Truing Machine - Sprinter Stringer 6 1,700,000 1,700,000 Stuart Mesa Drop Table Kosty 4 300,000 1,200,000 1,500,000 Bus Plus Program Marks 1 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,500,000 Total Asset Class 338 $ 5,161,375 $ 4,062,500 $ 1,357,044 $ 1,867,408 $ 186,000 $ 12,634,327

Asset Class 431 - TRANSIT WAY EQUIPMENT Track Geometry Equipment Walker 5$ 60,000 $ 60,000 Total Asset Class 431 $ - $ - $ 60,000 $ - $ - $ 60,000

Asset Class 433 - RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS Crosstie Renewal Program Walker 5$ 556,762 $ 550,000 $ 810,000 $ 810,000 $ 810,000 $ 3,536,762 Rail Replacement Reserve Walker 5 254,460 246,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,100,460 Bridge and Infrastructure Repl Walker 5 3,800,000 3,260,000 4,960,000 6,100,000 3,600,000 21,720,000 Track Structure Rehabilitation Walker 5 318,075 686,000 710,000 710,000 710,000 3,134,075 Turnout Renewal Program Walker 5 550,000 550,000 550,000 550,000 550,000 2,750,000 At-Grade Crossing Renewal Walker 5 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 1,750,000 Signal/Communications Upgrade Walker 5 350,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,850,000 Escondido Cr Br/Maint Facility Double Track Lichterman 7 1,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 SPRINTER Expansion PE/design Lichterman 7 750,000 750,000 Total Asset Class 433 $ 5,829,297 $ 5,992,000 $ 9,080,000 $ 12,220,000 $ 7,470,000 $ 40,591,297

Asset Class 434 - OPERATING YARD EQUIPMENT Replace Bus Washers (3) East/West 1 Division Gallagher $ 850,000 $ 850,000 West Division CNG Fueling Facility 1 (replace equipment not owned by NCTD) Gallagher $ 2,000,000 2,000,000 Total Asset Class 434 $ - $ 850,000 $ - $ 2,000,000 $ - $ 2,850,000

Asset Class 435 - SHOP AND GARAGE EQUIPMENT Portable Hoists Wygant 1 $ 39,668 $ 39,668 $ 79,336 Misc. Fleet Shop Tools Wygant 1 $ 21,500 19,834$ 25,000 $ 20,000 20,000 106,334 Maintenance Shop and Garage Equip Gallagher 1 51,000 67,000 53,000 50,000 50,000 271,000 23 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT PROPOSED UNCONSTRAINED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY 2007-2011 Project Project Title Manager Mode FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 TOTAL Maint. Equipment for Sprinter Stations Gallagher 1 59,000 59,000 Equipment for Sprinter Maint Facility Gallagherr 6 50,000 50,000 Total Asset Class 435 $ 181,500 $ 126,502 $ 78,000 $ 70,000 $ 109,668 $ 565,670

Asset Class 438 - VEHICLE MOVEMENT CONTROL EQUIPMENT Remote Dispatch and AVL Access Surber 1 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 CTC/SCADA/Radio/GPS Upgrades Stringer 6 $ 100,000 100,000 Radios Papworth 4$ 25,000 25,000 Coaster Station Emergency Call Box Papworth 4$ 250,000 250,000 Mobile Tower Papworth 4 120,000 120,000 Total Asset Class 438 $ - $ 100,000 $ 25,000 $ 370,000 $ 100,000 $ 595,000

Asset Class 439 - REVENUE COLLECTION AND FARE EQUIPMENT Change Machines Martinez 1 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 Total Asset Class 439 $ 4,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 4,000

Asset Class 440 - DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT PRIME Migration Talbott 1 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Network Expansion and Support Talbott 1 100,000$ 156,374 256,374 Server Replacements Talbott 1 75,000 75,000 PC Replacements and Upgrades Talbott 1 200,000 37,980$ 100,000 $ 70,000 407,980 Misc. Software Upgrades Talbott 1 $ 50,000 50,000 50,000 150,000 Network Copier Replacement Talbott 1 400,000 400,000 Phone System Replacement Talbott 1 500,000 500,000 JD Edwards Migration/Upgrade Talbott 1 500,000 500,000 Fare Collection System Replacement Talbott 1 50,000 50,000 Radio System Replacement Talbott 1 50,000 50,000 Supervisor Laptops/Radion System Talbott 1 200,000 200,000 Coaster CAD/AVL Expansion Talbott 1 150,000 150,000 Application Consulting & Expansion Talbott 1 400,000 100,000 50,000 550,000 Data Storage Expansion Talbott 1 300,000 300,000 Network Expansion Talbott 1 100,000 100,000 200,000 Security Enhancements Talbott 1 50,000 50,000 100,000 Sprinter CAD/AVL Expansion Talbott 1 300,000 300,000 Total Asset Class 440 $ 675,000 $ 1,444,354 $ 1,100,000 $ 850,000 $ 420,000 $ 4,489,354

Asset Class 500 - OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT Board Room Audio Visual System Gallagher 1 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Telephone/Radio Recording System Harris 1 $ 30,000 30,000 24 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT PROPOSED UNCONSTRAINED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY 2007-2011 Project Project Title Manager Mode FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 TOTAL Warehouse Bins Wygant 1 8,000$ 8,000 $ 8,000 24,000 West Division Office Partition System Gallagher 1 35,000 35,000 Security Office Equipment 1 4,500 4,500 9,000 Total Asset Class 500 $ 108,000 $ 34,500 $ 8,000 $ - $ 47,500 $ 198,000

Asset Class 600 - LAND San Luis Rey TC - PH 2 Marks 1 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Total Asset Class 600 $ 30,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 30,000

TOTAL BASELINE PROJECTS - UNCONSTRAINED $ 19,156,098 $ 29,743,900 $ 21,877,669 $ 22,416,408 $ 34,893,168 $ 128,087,243

25 Attachment 7 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT PROPOSED MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS MULTI-YEAR

Estimated Program. Unfunded Project Description Project Funding Needs Budget

PROJECTS REMAINING AT NCTD (millions $)

Oceanside-Escondido Rail Project$ 375.5 $ 375.5 $ -

Oceanside Transit Center Parking Structure (joint project with the City of Oceanside) 11.1 11.1 -

Solana Beach Parking Structure 2 (joint project with private developer) 12.5 6.9 5.6 Carlsbad Poinsettia Parking Project 2.0 - 2.0 San Luis Rey Transit Center 4.5 1.4 3.1 Oceanside Transit Maintenance & Security Improvement 3.0 - 3.0 Bridge & Infrastructure Replacement Program 3 125.0 - 125.0 SDNR Culvert & Signal Replacement Program 3 22.0 - 22.0

Estimated Program. Unfunded Project Funding Needs PROJECTS TRANSFERING TO SANDAG (millions $) Budget Sorrento to Miramar Curve Realignment and Second Main Track 1 45.2 31.7 13.5 Del Mar Bluffs Stabilization-(all three phases) 27.2 9.2 18.0 Santa Margarita River Bridge (#223.1) Replacement, including double-tracking 31.0 2.5 28.5 San Dieguito River Bridge (#243) Replacement 18.1 0.9 17.2 Oceanside Station Platform Widening 1.8 - 1.8 NCTD Administration Field Office Relocation (MOW) 8.6 3.0 5.6 East Division Maintenance Facility 4.6 4.6 - Convention Center/Padres Stadium Coaster Station TBD 4 - TBD 4 Del Mar Fairgrounds Station TBD 4 - TBD 4 Coastal Rail Corridor Capacity Building Project (LOSSAN improvement) TBD 4 - TBD 4 Sprinter Phase 2 (double track and North County Fair Extension) TBD 4 - TBD 4 $ 692.1 $ 446.8 $ 245.3

1 As the level of design progresses, a more accurate cost estimate may be established.

2 The programmed funding for this project consists of $0.5 million in federal discretionary dollars and $5.0 million in estimated revenues to be generated from private development fees.

3 Includes estimated program costs in excess of baseline "constrained" CIP budget amounts for all years through 2011. Includes all estimated program costs after 2011.

4 The estimated cost for this project has not yet been determined.

26 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

February 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 4

Action Requested: APPROVE

GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF FY 2007 TRANSIT OPERATING BUDGETS File Number 7000100

Introduction Recommendation The responsibility for programming transit The Transportation Committee is asked to operating and capital funding resides with SANDAG approve the proposed guiding principles in its role as the Regional Transportation Planning and objectives for use in preparing the Agency. As in prior years, the Transportation FY 2007 transit operating budgets and the Committee approves guiding principles and projections for FY 2008 through FY 2011. objectives for the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and North County Transit District (NCTD) for use in preparing their operating budgets. The proposed guiding principles and objectives have been reviewed by the staff of both transit agencies and reflect their comments and input.

In order to prepare the Transportation Committee for this responsibility, we have prepared a budget schedule, which leads up to Transportation Committee approval of the transit operator budgets for funding in June. The Transportation Committee will be provided background information, historical operating results, and a discussion of key issues, all of which will assist in better understanding the challenges and dynamics of the budget process for the transit agencies.

Discussion

The Transition Plan, approved by the SANDAG Board on February 28, 2003, identified the following as SANDAG’s responsibilities:

1. Preparation and approval of the five-year Regional Short Range Transit Plan, which incorporates the transit agency Service Implementation Plans.

2. Development of a public input process including public hearings (Board Policy No. 25, Public Participation/Involvement, amended January 2006).

3. Development of the Regional Fare Policy (Board Policy No. 29, Regional Fare Policy, approved October 2004).

4. Development of fund estimates for Transportation Development Act (TDA), State Transit Assistance (STA), and other annual operating funds.

5. Establishment or revision of financial tracking and auditing procedures as needed, with emphasis placed on examining the budget and budget process in an effort to obtain efficiencies.

6. Approval of transit operator budgets for funding.

Consistent with these responsibilities, the guiding principles and objectives are proposed to provide a prudent basis for preparing the operating budgets and to ensure consistent presentation of budget information.

Budget Schedule

Following is the proposed schedule for transit agency budget discussions with the Transportation Committee:

Date: February 17, 2006 Topics: Approval of Guiding Principles and Objectives

Date: February 17, 2006 (this will be a recommendation to the full Board) Topics: Recommendation to Board of Directors on the FY 2007 through FY 2011 fund estimates for TDA, STA, TransNet, and federal formula funds

Date: May 19, 2006 Topics: Review of Draft FY 2007 transit agency balanced budgets and five-year financial operating plan, including any proposed regionally significant service changes. Separate item to include review and approval of annual TDA claim.

Date: June 23, 2006 Topics: Approval of the FY 2007 transit operating budgets for funding, contingent upon transit agency board approvals

Guiding Principles and Objectives

The following guiding principles and objectives were developed over the last several years and have been reviewed and updated with input from the NCTD and MTS staff.

1. The overarching goal should be to work toward achieving a sustainable level of service, whereby recurring revenues are sufficient to cover recurring expenditures and the operating plan should encompass a multi-year time period as a foundation. When necessary, this approach allows for incremental service reductions, rather than a one-time severe cut in services.

2. On the revenue side, the fare structure should be reviewed each year as part of the budget process, and we should aggressively pursue new recurring revenue sources as part of the legislative process. The proposed regional fare ordinance (reviewed by the Transportation Committee in January 2006 and scheduled for approval by the SANDAG Board in February 2006) maintains the status quo for all fares but adds provisions to accommodate the new Compass Card smart card.

2

3. The Regional Short Range Transit Plan (RSRTP) will be developed to establish productivity standards for service, recognizing that areas with different levels of urban development (e.g., urban vs. rural) would have different services and standards. The RSRTP will also provide a five-year blueprint for the enhancement of the regional transit system as it becomes a sustainable operation.

4. There should be flexibility to readjust services each year to react to changing circumstances (e.g., passage of new federal transportation legislation, if the economy improves, and implementation of the Comprehensive Operational Analysis [COA], etc.).

5. It is SANDAG’s responsibility to prepare fund estimates, including allocations, and to provide this information to the transit operators by March 1 of each year.

6. The transit operators will use a zero-based budget approach for the annual FY 2007 budget, with the use of high and low ranges for FY 2008 through FY 2011. The FY 2008 - FY 2011 projections shall be presented at a highly summarized level. The transit agencies will coordinate with each other to provide the information in a consistent format, as requested by the Transportation Committee last year.

7. Preserve current service levels as much as possible and evaluate opportunities for cost efficiencies and opportunities for potential implementation of changes as outlined in the Service Implementation Plans.

8. Define recurring operating revenue to include the use of up to the maximum amount of TDA, STA, TransNet (40 percent), and federal formula funds for operations. The level of funds to be used for operations is a decision to be made by the transit agencies as they proceed through the budget process and balance operating and capital needs. Recurring operating revenue shall also include passenger fares and any other operating revenues that the transit agency can demonstrate are stable, reliable, and long-term in nature.

9. Provide budget information, financial reporting, and performance measurements in a standardized format consistent with TDA reporting requirements.

With the Transportation Committee’s approval of these guiding principles and objectives, the transit agencies will proceed to prepare their FY 2007 operating budgets and FY 2008 to FY 2011 projections.

RENEE WASMUND Director of Finance

Key Staff Contacts: Renee Wasmund, (619) 699-1940, [email protected] Tim Watson, (619) 619-1966, [email protected]

3 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

February 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 5

Action Requested: APPROVE

TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) CLAIM AMENDMENT File Number 4000500

Introduction Recommendation

At the June 24, 2005, meeting, SANDAG approved the The Transportation Committee is asked FY 2006 Transportation Development Act (TDA) to adopt Resolution No. 2006-11 allocations which provide operating and capital support approving the revised TDA claims for to transit operators and funding for non-motorized SANDAG and MTS. projects. Once the Board approves the allocations, the agencies are then able to claim these funds for the specified purposes. The TDA claims for North County Transit District (NCTD) and Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) included fund transfers to SANDAG for regional planning and for administrative costs as a result of consolidation. This claim amendment revises the transfer amount for MTS based on the recent Board approved Addendum to the Master Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between SANDAG, MTS, and NCTD. There is no net change for NCTD.

Discussion

As part of the annual budget process, NCTD and MTS transfer TDA funding to SANDAG for administrative functions that transferred to SANDAG as a result of the consolidation. Rather than determining the transfer amounts annually based on negotiation, an addendum to the Master MOU between SANDAG, NCTD and MTS, established a formula to determine the amounts to be transferred each year (see BOD Agenda Item No. 05-11-5, dated November 18, 2005, and BOD Agenda Item No. 05-12-04, dated December 16, 2005). This formula results in an additional $564,077 to MTS for FY 2006, with a corresponding reduction for SANDAG. The MTS Board is scheduled to approve this item at its February 9, 2006, meeting. There is no net change to the transfer amount from NCTD to SANDAG.

RENEE WASMUND Director of Finance

Attachment: 1. Resolution No. 2006-11

Key Staff Contact: Sookyung Kim, (619) 699-6909, [email protected]

Attachment 1

RESOLUTION

401 B Street, Suite 800 2006-11 San Diego, CA 92101 NO. Phone (619) 699-1900 • Fax (619) 699-1905 www.sandag.org

APPROVING THE ALLOCATION OF FY 2006 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT FUNDS FOR PLANNING AND ADMINISTRATION WHEREAS, the Transportation Development Act (TDA) claimants listed below have submitted revised claims for FY 2006 TDA funds pursuant to Chapter 4, Article 3, of the California Public Utilities Code (PUC); and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 29532 of the California Government Code (CGC), the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has determined that the claims are eligible pursuant to the provisions of the Transportation Development Act of 1971, as amended;

WHEREAS, the SANDAG Board of Directors delegated the authority for TDA amendments to the Transportation Committee; NOW THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED by the SANDAG Transportation Committee as follows:

1. That the Transportation Committee, pursuant to CGC 29532, does hereby approve the revised allocation of TDA funds to the following claimants for purposes listed below:

Claim Previous Revised No. Claimant Allocation Allocations

06031004 Metropolitan Transit System $5,118,040 $5,682,117

06031006 SANDAG $2,753,422 $2,189,345

Total $7,871,462 $7,871,462

2. That the Board does hereby authorize the Executive Director to prepare and transmit allocation instructions and payment schedules to the San Diego County Auditor as are necessary and legal for payment of these claims.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of February, 2006.

______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 System, North San Diego County Transit Development Board, Imperial County, U.S. Department of Defense, San Diego Unified Port District, San Diego County Water Authority, and Baja California/Mexico. 2 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

February 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 6

Action Requested: RECOMMEND

TRANSIT REVENUE ESTIMATES AND ALLOCATIONS File Number 4000500

Introduction Recommendation

The transit operators within the SANDAG region The Transportation Committee is asked receive various federal, state, and local revenues to to recommend that the SANDAG Board support both ongoing operations and major capital of Directors at its February 24, 2006, projects. While Federal Transit Administration (FTA) meeting: funds comprise the main funding source for capital 1. adopt the FY 2007 apportionments improvements, these federal formula funds are also for various federal, state, and local used for operating purposes (i.e., for activities revenues; and qualifying as “preventive maintenance” including maintenance of vehicles, equipment, and facilities). 2. approve the revenue projections for FY 2008 to FY 2011 for these State and local revenues provide funding for revenues, as shown in Attachments continued operations of transit services as well as 1 through 5. match for federal capital funds. SANDAG is responsible for the apportionment of these funds to the transit operators and to the local agencies for the non- motorized program. This report provides the apportionments for FY 2007 and projection of revenues for FY 2008 to FY 2011 for each fund type.

For FY 2007, the San Diego County Auditor provided the apportionment of regional Transportation Development Act (TDA) revenues, the State Controller’s Office published estimates of State Transit Assistance (STA), and the FTA released the annual apportionments for federal formula funds. TransNet estimates are based on actual sales tax receipts to date for the program escalated by growth projected in the region’s Demographic and Economic Forecasting Model (DEFM). The FY 2008 to FY 2011 estimates of TDA and TransNet reflect a modest increase of 3 percent on the low end to a growth from 4.7 to 6.3 percent on the high range based on DEFM. The escalation factor for the STA program is based on the California Transportation Commission (CTC) approved 2006 Fund Estimate. For the federal formula funds, the annual increase is based on the federal transportation bill entitled, Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The FY 2007 apportionment and future estimates are shown in Attachments 1 through 5.

Discussion

Each year, as the transit agencies undertake their budget development processes, SANDAG provides the estimates of regional transit funding under TDA, STA, the FTA Urbanized Area Formula Program (Section 5307), the FTA Fixed Guideway Modernization Program (Section 5309 Rail Mod), and TransNet sales tax. By law, TDA and TransNet funds are allocated based on the most recently available population estimates (January 2005, Department of Finance). STA funds are allocated partially by population and partially by a formula based on qualifying revenues as reported by the transit agencies in their annual State Controller’s Report. There is no adopted policy for allocating the FTA formula funds; however, in practice, these funds have been divided by a historical formula agreed to by the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and the North County Transit District (NCTD).

Transportation Development Act (TDA)

The TDA is the major subsidy source that supports the region’s public transit operators and non- motorized transportation projects. The TDA comes from 1/4 percent of state sales tax assessed in the region. SANDAG, as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), is responsible for the apportionment of TDA funds each year in conformance with legislative priorities. The transit operators and other member agencies submit their annual TDA claims based on these apportionments and in compliance with SANDAG’s TDA Administration Policy (approved by the SANDAG Board on February 24, 2004).

The County Auditor has estimated that $128.5 million of TDA funds will be available for FY 2007. This equates to a 10.6 percent increase from the FY 2006 apportionment. This increase is greater than the projected growth in sales tax receipts from FY 2006 to FY 2007 because it includes higher than expected receipts in FY 2006. The apportionment for FY 2007 determines the amount of funds available to each agency to claim. SANDAG is required to notify prospective claimants of the apportionments by March 1, necessitating action by the Board this month.

The legislative priorities established by state law include certain categories for which TDA funds are taken “off the top.” These include the allocation to SANDAG for various planning, programming, and administrative-related expenses, funding of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and support of community transit services. In addition, the County Auditor receives an allocation based on estimates of its costs to administer the TDA program. The remaining apportionment along with prior year carryover funds are available to be claimed by NCTD and MTS. The balance of current year funds are apportioned based upon the respective population of two transit service areas. Prior year carryover funds are those apportionments that have not yet been claimed by the operators, and they remain available to the operator for which they were originally apportioned.

Senate Bill (SB) 1703 transferred certain functions previously performed by NCTD and MTS to SANDAG as the consolidated agency. SB 1703 requires that all local, state, federal, and other funding available to carryout the responsibilities of the consolidated agency shall be deemed to be funding of the consolidated agency. Accordingly, TDA apportionments reflect the transfer of local match to the federal formula funds for the capital projects transitioned to SANDAG. An additional apportionment to SANDAG covers those indirect administrative functions that are not directly funded by projects. The calculation for these indirect costs was memorialized in Addenda Nos. 3 and 4 to the Memorandum of Understanding between SANDAG and MTS and NCTD (approved by the Board at its November 18 and December 16, 2005, meetings). Table 1 (Attachment 1) shows the breakdown of revenues available for each agency. For information and comparison purposes, the apportionment for FY 2006 is included in this table alongside the apportionment for FY 2007 and projections for FY 2008 to FY 2011.

2 Staff from SANDAG, NCTD, and MTS recently undertook a review of the current TDA apportionment process in light of changes implemented under SB 1703. These discussions will continue into the coming fiscal year, and we anticipate resolution of outstanding issues in time for the FY 2008 TDA allocation process.

State Transit Assistance (STA)

The STA program (SB 620, as amended) is derived from the Public Transportation Account (PTA) and provides a second source of operating and capital funding for transit operators. Half of the funds in the PTA support state programs including the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The remaining PTA balance goes to the STA program. Within STA, 25 percent is allocated to regional entities according to a population formula, and an additional 25 percent is allocated to regional entities to be allocated in turn to individual operators proportionately based on a revenue formula. The State Controller is required to issue estimates of STA funds to be allocated to each regional entity by January 10 of each year. The STA also outlines specific requirements and eligibilities that each transit operator must meet in order to receive STA funds. Table 2 (Attachment 2) shows the apportionment for FY 2007 and the projected revenues from FY 2008 to FY 2011. The estimated revenues for FY 2008 to FY 2011 are based on the 2006 STIP Fund Estimate, which anticipates that for FY 2008 to FY 2009 the state will pay back previously borrowed Proposition 42 funds.

TransNet

The half-cent sales tax, approved by the voters of San Diego County in 1987, provides funding for major transportation projects in the region. The funding is distributed in equal thirds among highway, transit, and local street and road projects. The one-third of TransNet sales tax revenues dedicated for transit purposes is allocated by population to MTS and NCTD.

By vote of the SANDAG Board of Directors in June 2003, the maximum available for non-rail capital purposes, such as transit operations or bus rapid transit construction (formerly limited to 20 percent of the total transit share of TransNet annual revenues) was increased to 40 percent. Hence, no less than 60 percent of the annual TransNet revenues must be used for specific rail-related capital improvements. Using the actual sales receipts to date, the estimated FY 2006 TransNet revenues for transit is $81.6 million, an 8.6 percent increase from FY 2005. The FY 2007 estimate of $85.9 million is consistent with the DEFM model projection of 5.2 percent growth.

The TransNet program was extended to 2048 by the voters in November 2004. The distribution of revenues under the extension of TransNet differs from the original measure. After deducting costs associated with administration, the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC), and the bicycle/pedestrian program, beginning in FY 2009 the TransNet program is divided into Major Corridor Projects (42.4 percent), New Bus Rapid Transit/Rail Operations (8.1 percent), Local System Improvements (33 percent), and Transit System Improvements (16.5 percent) from which the transit revenues are derived. Within the transit share, services provided pursuant to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and subsidies for seniors have specific earmarks (2.5 percent and 3.25 percent, respectively). The remaining revenues can be used for operating or miscellaneous capital purposes.

Since the division of revenues differs between the original TransNet measure and the TransNet extension, the allocations of those revenues for transit purposes differ as well. Table 3 (Attachment 3), showing the distribution of the final two years of the original measure (through

3 FY 2008), starts with the entire one-third of the TransNet revenues for transit and breaks this amount down by operator and by capital versus operations purposes. Table 3a (Attachment 4) provides the revenues based on transit’s 16.5 percent share of the TransNet extension, setting aside approximately 0.95 percent of the 16.5 percent transit funding for ADA and senior service and assuming that the transit agencies’ shares for operations and operating capital will remain consistent with the levels funded under the current TransNet program. This consistent level of funding equates to 13.33 percent of the total TransNet revenues. The remaining 2.22 percent of the 16.5 percent total revenues available for transit operating purposes are assumed to be set aside for discretionary use for regional transit priorities as adopted by the SANDAG Board of Directors as part of the annual Regional Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP).

Federal Transit Administration Programs (Sections 5307 & 5309)

49 USC Section 5307 provides for transit capital and operating assistance in urbanized areas and for transportation-related planning. For areas with populations of 200,000 and more such as San Diego County, the formula is based on a combination of bus/vanpool revenue vehicle miles, bus/vanpool passenger miles, fixed guideway revenue vehicle miles, and fixed guideway route miles as well as population and population density. Eligible activities under this program include planning, engineering design, and evaluation of transit projects and other technical transportation-related studies; capital investments in bus and bus-related activities; construction of maintenance and passenger facilities; capital investments in new and existing fixed guideway systems including rolling stock, overhaul and rebuilding of vehicles, track, signals, communications, and computer hardware and software. All preventive maintenance and some ADA complementary paratransit service, while recorded as operating expenditures, are considered capital costs for purposes of eligibility.

Capital projects to modernize or improve fixed guideway systems are eligible for funding under the 49 USC Section 5309 Fixed Guideway Modernization program. Projects include, but are not limited to, the purchase and rehabilitation of rolling stock, track, line equipment, and structures, signals and communications, power equipment and substations, passenger stations and terminals, security equipment and systems, maintenance facilities and equipment, operational support equipment (including computer hardware and software), and system extensions. Preventive maintenance also is an eligible cost.

After deducting for the SANDAG Regional Vanpool Program and regional planning (which is assumed to grow with growth in the total FTA formula program), Section 5307 funds have historically been allocated 70 percent for MTS and 30 percent for NCTD. Based on discussion with both MTS and NCTD, the same formula was used to allocate the Section 5309 Rail Mod funds. (SANDAG does not receive funds from the Rail Mod program.) These revenues also were used to develop the FY 2007 Transit Capital Improvement Program ([CIP], Agenda Item No. 3). Under SB 1703, SANDAG is responsible for reviewing the current allocation methodology for formula- based funds to maximize the efficient use of these funds on a regional basis while maintaining equitable distribution for the transit operators. SANDAG continually revisits the allocation process to ensure that it remains equitable for the transit operators as well as the regional programs, and, for FY 2007, we recommend that historical practices remain in place.

4 Table 4 (Attachment 5) shows the federal formula program appropriations for FY 2007 and projections for FY 2008 to FY 2011. The CIP identifies the division of capital projects to be implemented either by MTS, NCTD, or SANDAG. The revenues reflect the projects for each agency.

RENEE WASMUND Director of Finance

Attachments: 1. Table 1 – TDA Apportionments 2. Table 2 – STA Fund Estimates 3. Table 3 – TransNet Revenue Forecasts-Transit Program FY 2007 to 2008 4. Table 3a – TransNet Revenue Forecasts – Transit Program FY 2009 to 2011 5. Table 4 – FTA Fund Estimates

Key Staff Contract: Sookyung Kim, (619) 699-6909, [email protected]

5 Attachment 1

Table 1 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Apportionments (in $000s)

1 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Total (2008 to 2011) High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low 2 Total Apportionment $116,160 $128,541 $135,589 $132,397 $143,484 $136,369 $152,524 $140,460 $159,749 $144,674 $591,346 $553,901 Less County Auditor Expenses (PUC 99233.1) ($40) ($41) ($41) ($41) ($42) ($42) ($43) ($43) ($44) ($44) ($170) ($170) Less SANDAG Expenses (PUC 99233.1) ($430) ($596) ($502) ($502) ($531) ($531) ($707) ($707) ($590) ($590) ($2,330) ($2,330) Less 3% Planning Funds (PUC 99233.2) ($3,471) ($3,837) ($4,051) ($3,956) ($4,287) ($4,074) ($4,553) ($4,191) ($4,773) ($4,321) ($17,665) ($16,542) Less 2% Bicycle/Pedestrian Funds (PUC 99233.3) ($2,244) ($2,481) ($2,620) ($2,558) ($2,772) ($2,634) ($2,944) ($2,710) ($3,087) ($2,794) ($11,424) ($10,697) Less MTS 10% Fund (MTS Share [PUC 99233.5]) ($5,682) ($6,283) ($6,638) ($6,481) ($7,025) ($6,675) ($7,460) ($6,867) ($7,821) ($7,080) ($28,944) ($27,104) Less MTS 10% Fund (SANDAG Share 3 [PUC 99233.5]) ($2,189) ($2,421) ($2,552) ($2,492) ($2,701) ($2,567) ($2,869) ($2,641) ($3,007) ($2,722) ($11,129) ($10,422) Less 5%Community Transit Service (PUC 99233.7) ($5,105) ($5,644) ($6,419) ($6,267) ($6,793) ($6,454) ($7,214) ($6,640) ($7,563) ($6,846) ($27,988) ($26,208) Subtotal $96,998 $107,237 $112,766 $110,100 $119,332 $113,392 $126,734 $116,660 $132,864 $120,276 $491,695 $460,428

4 Total Available for MTS : $67,301 $74,423 $78,119 $76,273 $82,668 $78,553 $87,796 $80,817 $92,042 $83,322 $340,625 $318,965 5 Less Regional Planning/Capital Projects ($4,752) ($2,419) ($2,515) ($2,491) ($2,727) ($2,566) ($2,901) ($2,643) ($3,017) ($2,722) ($11,160) ($10,422) Total MTS 10% Fund $7,871 $8,704 $9,190 $8,973 $9,726 $9,242 $10,329 $9,508 $10,828 $9,803 $40,074 $37,525 3 Less Transferred Functions ($2,189) ($2,421) ($2,552) ($2,492) ($2,701) ($2,567) ($2,869) ($2,641) ($3,007) ($2,722) ($11,129) ($10,422) Total Community Transit Service $3,581 $3,960 $4,503 $4,397 $4,766 $4,528 $5,061 $4,659 $5,306 $4,803 $19,636 $18,387 Subtotal $71,812 $82,248 $86,745 $84,660 $91,732 $87,190 $97,416 $89,701 $102,152 $92,483 $378,046 $354,034 Prior Year Carryover $280 $0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $0 $0 Total Available to Claim $72,092 $82,248 $86,745 $84,660 $91,732 $87,190 $97,416 $89,701 $102,152 $92,483 $378,046 $354,034

4 Total Available for NCTD : $29,697 $32,814 $34,647 $33,828 $36,664 $34,839 $38,938 $35,843 $40,821 $36,954 $151,070 $141,463

5 Less Regional Planning/Capital Projects ($278) ($24) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD 3 Less Transferred Functions ($496) ($548) ($579) ($565) ($612) ($582) ($650) ($599) ($682) ($617) ($2,523) ($2,362) Total Community Transit Service $1,422 $1,571 $1,787 $1,745 $1,891 $1,797 $2,008 $1,849 $2,106 $1,906 $7,792 $7,297 Subtotal $30,345 $33,814 $35,855 $35,007 $37,943 $36,054 $40,296 $37,093 $42,245 $38,243 $156,339 $146,397 Prior Year Carryover $12,861 $12,663 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total Available to Claim $43,207 $46,476 $35,855 $35,007 $37,943 $36,054 $40,296 $37,093 $42,245 $38,243 $156,339 $146,397

Total Available for SANDAG: 5 Regional Planning/Capital Projects $5,030 $2,442 $2,515 $2,491 $2,727 $2,566 $2,901 $2,643 $3,017 $2,722 $11,160 $10,422 3 Transferred Functions $2,685 $2,969 $3,131 $3,057 $3,313 $3,148 $3,519 $3,239 $3,689 $3,340 $13,652 $12,784 Total Community Transit Service $102 $113 $128 $125 $136 $129 $144 $133 $151 $137 $560 $524 SANDAG Expenses $430 $596 $502 $502 $531 $531 $707 $707 $590 $590 $2,330 $2,330 3% Planning Funds $3,471 $3,837 $4,051 $3,956 $4,287 $4,074 $4,553 $4,191 $4,773 $4,321 $17,665 $16,542 Total Available to Claim $11,718 $9,957 $10,328 $10,131 $10,994 $10,449 $11,824 $10,913 $12,220 $11,109 $45,367 $42,602

1Shown here for comparison purposes only, FY 2006 apportionment approved by the Board 2/27/05 and reflects revised transferred functions amount for MTS (see note 3 below).

2FY 2007 Apportionments are based on the County Auditor. The estimates for FY 2008 to FY 2011 are based on growth rate in retail sales as forecasted by the SANDAG Demographic and Economic Forecasting Model (DEFM) and excludes interest and prior year excess funds. DEFM serves as the high revenue scenario (between 4.7% to 6.3% growth) while the low revenue scenario is fixed at 3.0% growth.

3Based on the MOU, as amended, between SANDAG and MTS and NCTD (2.78% from MTS, including Community Transit Service funds; and 1.67% from NCTD, excluding Community Transit Service funds). 4Apportionment distribution is based on the population estimates published by the California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates as of January 2005. 5Local match for regional planning and capital projects Note: The increase in SANDAG Administration cost in FY 2007 and FY 2010 is due to costs associated with the triennial performance audit.

6 Attachment 2 Table 2 State Transit Assistance (STA) Fund Estimates (in $000s)

FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Total (2008 to 2011) High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low Regional Discretionary Funds North County Transit District 2,420 2,792 2,493 3,410 2,568 3,029 2,645 3,147 2,724 12,379 10,430 Metropolitan Transit System 7,316 8,440 7,535 10,308 7,761 9,156 7,994 9,511 8,234 37,415 31,524 Subtotal Discretionary 9,736 11,232 10,028 13,719 10,329 12,185 10,639 12,658 10,958 49,793 41,954 Operator Formula Funds North County Transit District 1,072 1,237 1,104 1,511 1,137 1,342 1,172 1,394 1,207 5,483 4,620 Chula Vista Transit 115 133 119 162 122 144 126 150 130 590 497 City of La Mesa 000000000 0 0 MTS Contract Services 774 893 797 1,091 821 969 846 1,006 871 3,958 3,335 City of National City 59 68 61 83 63 74 64 77 66 302 254 San Diego Transit Corp. 1,666 1,922 1,716 2,347 1,767 2,085 1,820 2,166 1,875 8,519 7,178 San Diego Trolley Inc. 1,097 1,265 1,129 1,545 1,163 1,372 1,198 1,426 1,234 5,608 4,725 Subtotal Formula 4,783 5,517 4,926 6,739 5,074 5,986 5,226 6,218 5,383 24,460 20,609 Regional Total 14,519 16,749 14,954 20,458 15,403 18,171 15,865 18,875 16,341 74,253 62,563

Statewide Total 234,910 271,000 241,957 331,000 249,216 294,000 256,692 305,400 264,393 1,201,400 1,012,258

Notes: (1) FY 2007 estimate provided by the State Controller (1/18/06) . (2) The statewide estimates for FY 2008 to FY 2011 are based on the 2006 Fund Estimate which reflects the anticipation that the state will payback the borrowed Prop. 42 funds in FYs 2008 and 2009. These estimated revenues are also consistent with the Draft 2006 Regional Transportation Plan. The distribution of revenues are based on the same percentage as used in FY 2007.

7 Attachment 3 Table 3 TransNet Revenue Forecasts - Transit Program FY 2007 to 2008 (in $000s)

FY 2007 FY 2008 High High Low 1/3 TransNet Available For Transit Purposes: $85,866 $90,592 $88,442 Less 1% for Senior and Disabled Services ($859) ($906) ($884)

Subtotal $85,007 $89,686 $87,558

Total Available for MTS Projects and Services1: $60,858 $64,207 $62,683 Minimum 60% for Rail Capital Projects $36,515 $38,524 $37,610 Estimated Debt Service ($22,125) ($18,439) ($18,439) Net Minimum Available for Capital Projects $14,390 $20,085 $19,171 Maximum 40% Available for Non-Rail Capital and Service Improvements $24,343 $25,683 $25,073 Less BRT Transfer to SANDAG2 ($89) ($628) ($628) Net Available for Non-Rail Capital and Service Improvements $24,254 $25,055 $24,445 Maximum Available for ADA Services1 $615 $649 $633

Total Available for NCTD Projects and Services1: $24,150 $25,479 $24,874 Minimum 60% for Rail Capital Projects $14,490 $15,287 $14,925 Estimated Debt Service ($9,170) ($7,636) ($7,636) Net Minimum Available for Capital Projects $5,320 $7,651 $7,289 Maximum 40% Available for Non-Rail Capital and Service Improvements $9,660 $10,192 $9,950 Maximum Available for ADA Services1 $244 $257 $251

BRT Transfer2 $89 $628 $628

1Distribution based on the Department of Finance population estimates for January 2005 (2,184,443 for MTS and 866,837 for NCTD) 2The development of certain Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) projects is part of the transfer from MTS to SANDAG. These projects are eligible under the operating portion of the original TransNet program and are consistent with the MTS Board action of May 2003.

8 Table 3a Attachment 4 TransNet Revenue Forecasts - Transit Program FY 2009 to FY 2011 (in $000s)

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 TOTAL High Low High Low High Low High Low Total Available For Transit Purposes1: $46,617 $45,421 $49,555 $46,734 $51,903 $48,135 $148,075 $140,290 Less 2.5% for ADA-related Services ($1,165) ($1,136) ($1,239) ($1,168) ($1,298) ($1,203) ($3,702) ($3,507) Less 3.25% for Senior Services2 ($1,515) ($1,476) ($1,611) ($1,519) ($1,687) ($1,564) ($4,812) ($4,559) Subtotal $43,936 $42,809 $46,706 $44,046 $48,919 $45,367 $139,561 $132,223

MTS Projects And Services: Maximum Available for Pass Programs/Transit Operations/Miscellaneous Capital Projects3 $26,901 $26,211 $28,597 $26,968 $29,951 $27,777 $85,449 $80,957 Maximum Available for ADA Services $834 $813 $887 $836 $929 $862 $2,650 $2,511

NCTD Projects And Services3: Maximum Available for Pass Programs/Transit Operations/Miscellaneous Capital Projects $10,675 $10,401 $11,348 $10,702 $11,885 $11,023 $33,908 $32,125 Maximum Available for ADA Services $331 $323 $352 $332 $369 $342 $1,052 $996

Regional Discretionary Programs2 Senior Services $1,515 $1,476 $1,611 $1,519 $1,687 $1,564 $4,812 $4,559 Other Prioritized Transit Projects $6,360 $6,197 $6,761 $6,376 $7,082 $6,568 $20,203 $19,141

1The Transit System Improvements share is 16.5% of net available revenues (after off-the-top deductions). These funds are available for operations and miscellaneous capital projects, divided between MTS, NCTD, and SANDAG. 2After providing for consistent operating revenue stream for MTS and NCTD, the remaining excess revenues are set aside for regional priorities as determined through the Regional SRTP adopted by the SANDAG Board. 3Although not specified in the TransNet Extension Ordinance, in order to provide consistent level of revenues to MTS and NCTD to provide current level of transit service, these funds represent 13.3% of net revenues available distributed by population. Other Notes: (1) Estimates are based on growth rate in taxable retail sales as forecasted by DEFM and excludes interest and prior year excess funds. DEFM serves as the 'high' revenue scenario (4.7% and 6.3% growth respectively) while the 'low' revenues are based on a 3% annual growth. (2) This table is based on the 2004 Proposition A Extension: San Diego Transportation Improvement Program and Expenditure Plan.

9 Attachment 5

Table 4 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Fund Estimates (in $000s)

FY 2007* FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 TOTAL Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Apportion- Capital Regional Apportion- Capital Regional Apportion- Capital Regional Apportion- Capital Regional Apportion- Capital Regional Apportion- Capital Regional ment Projects1 Planning ment Projects1 Planning ment Projects1 Planning ment Projects1 Planning ment Projects1 Planning ment Projects1 Planning Section 5307 Formula Funds MTS $31,894 ($8,314) ($571) $33,177 ($8,648) ($594) $35,980 ($9,379) ($644) $38,277 ($9,977) ($684) $39,924 ($10,376) ($712) $179,253 ($46,694) ($3,204) NCTD1 $13,669 $0 N/A $14,219 TBD N/A $15,420 TBD N/A $16,404 TBD N/A $17,110 TBD N/A $76,823 TBD N/A SANDAG (Planning/Vanpool Program) $2,038 N/A $571 $2,120 N/A $594 $2,299 N/A $644 $2,444 N/A $684 $2,376 N/A $712 $11,278 N/A $3,204 SANDAG (Capital Projects) $8,314 $8,648 $9,379 $9,977 $10,376 $46,694 $0 Total $47,601 $0 $0 $49,516 $0 $0 $53,700 $0 $0 $57,126 $0 $0 $59,411 $0 $0 $267,353 $0 $0

Section 5309 Rail Mod Funds MTS $10,568 N/A N/A $10,996 N/A N/A $11,922 N/A N/A $12,655 N/A N/A $13,161 N/A N/A $59,303 N/A N/A NCTD $4,529 N/A N/A $4,712 N/A N/A $5,110 N/A N/A $5,424 N/A N/A $5,641 N/A N/A $25,415 N/A N/A Total $15,098 N/A N/A $15,708 N/A N/A $17,032 N/A N/A $18,079 N/A N/A $18,802 N/A N/A $84,718 N/A N/A

*Federal apportionment is for FY 2006 to be applied to FY 2007 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). 1Regional Capital Projects refer to projects transferred to SANDAG to implement on behalf of MTS. No regional capital projects were identified by NCTD to be funded out of their federal formula program for FY 2007. Future growth of the regional projects are based on growth of the 5307 program (included in SAFETEA-LU) for MTS while the regional projects for NCTD will be determined on an annual basis. Notes: (1) FY 2007 funds are based on the final apportionment published in the Federal Register (February 3, 2006). (2) Estimates for FY 2008 to FY 2010 are based on the growth of the two programs included in the Federal Register (ranges from 4% to 8%). FY 2011 is based on the lowest rate of 4%. (3) SANDAG planning/vanpool share is based on the total increase in the two formula programs but not less then $2 million per year. The balance of 5307 funds are allocated between MTS and NCTD based on a historical formula (MTS - 70%; NCTD - 30%). The same 70/30 split applies to the 5309 funds (SANDAG does not share in this program).

10 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

February 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 7

Action Requested: RECOMMEND

2030 REVENUE CONSTRAINED REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN: 2006 UPDATE File Number 3000400

Introduction Recommendation On December 9, 2005, the Transportation The Transportation Committee is asked to Committee accepted the Draft 2030 Revenue recommend that the SANDAG Board of Constrained Regional Transportation Plan (RTP): Directors approve the suggested 2006 Update and Draft Supplemental Impact Report modifications, which will be incorporated (SEIR) for public distribution and comment. The into the Final 2030 Revenue Constrained public comment period for both documents closed Regional Transportation Plan: 2006 Update on January 27, 2006. and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, scheduled for Board approval As of February 3, 2006, SANDAG received a total of on February 24, 2006. seven comment letters/e-mails on both documents. In addition, there were three public comments during the public hearing on January 27, 2006. In response, SANDAG staff recommends only minor revisions to the documents. Summaries of the comments and preliminary responses on the Draft RTP and Draft SEIR are included as Attachments 1 and 2, respectively.

Discussion

Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments

The comments received on the Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update were focused on two broad topics. First, there was general acknowledgement of the region’s need to quickly produce a 2006 Technical Update to the MOBILITY 2030 RTP, with the understanding that a 2007 Comprehensive RTP would soon follow. The 2006 RTP update is necessary to make an air quality conformity determination of the long-range transportation plan by March 2006, before the transition to longer RTP cycles next year. The short timeframe to prepare the 2006 RTP Update did not permit the re-evaluation of project priorities and the difficult decisions of how to allocate limited revenues.

The second broad topic in the comment letters related to specific issues and/or projects that agencies would like to see addressed in the Comprehensive 2007 RTP. However, two agencies did request that either expedited project schedules be included in the 2006 RTP Update or that specific projects be broken out from a general category of projects. Both the suggestions for future study and the re-evaluation of project priorities, phasing and funding will be included in the development of the 2007 Comprehensive RTP.

Transit planning was the focus of several letters, which called for additional transit funding, better transit service to the San Diego International Airport, and a stronger connection between transit and smart growth development. All of these issues will be addressed in the 2007 Comprehensive RTP.

At the December 9, 2006, Transportation Committee meeting, several committee members commented on the potential delay to the El Cajon Boulevard Showcase Bus Rapid Transit Project, as laid out in the draft 2006 RTP Update. Prior to that meeting, the Transportation Committee approved the concept of developing Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service on El Cajon Boulevard in phases, rather than as a single, comprehensive project. This phased approach reflects both community input and funding limitations. While not a project in the TransNet Early Action Program, project capital funds would be available in the 2006-2010 timeframe under the Transit First Priority Measures Program. In March, SANDAG staff will report back to the Transportation Committee to further define the phased approach to BRT implementation in this corridor and to detail the elements that should be included in the first phase. Final design will be needed for this first phase, and a funding plan will be developed which may depend on sources other than TransNet.

Summaries of all the comments and preliminary responses on the Draft RTP are included as Attachment 1.

Draft 2030 SEIR Comments

SANDAG received four comment letters on the Draft Supplemental EIR that was prepared for the project. Most of the comments in the letters pertained specifically to the RTP update and did not address the adequacy of the SEIR. The comments that did address the SEIR related mainly to the level of detail of the information that was provided in the document and the conclusions made in the document in the traffic/circulation section. The analysis presented in the RTP and SEIR is based on a programmatic level of analysis and does acknowledge that localized impacts could result from individual projects.

Summaries of the comments and responses on the Draft SEIR are included as Attachment 2.

Draft 2030 RTP/SEIR Distribution

The Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update and Draft Supplemental EIR were circulated to local jurisdictions, MTS, NCTD, Caltrans, and other interested parties and organizations. A notice of availability of the draft RTP and SEIR was published in area newspapers and sent to interested individuals, working groups, agencies, and organizations generated from SANDAG’s mailing lists. Displays ads in area newspapers announcing the January 27, 2006 public hearing also were published.

Copies of both the Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update and Draft SEIR were available in hard copy, CD, and on SANDAG’s Web site at www.sandag.org.

Proposed Changes to the Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update

Based on the comments received during the public comment period, no major changes are recommended to the 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update. Comments suggesting changes

2

to projects or their phasing outside the TransNet Early Action Program were not incorporated in the 2006 RTP Update but will be analyzed as part of the 2007 Comprehensive RTP. The minor text and map changes that are recommended for inclusion in the final document are as follows.

• Rename the references to transit-related "Early Action Project Funding" to “Transit First Priority Measures.” Noted in several places in the draft RTP, these dollars were intended to advance transit infrastructure improvements, and the name change avoids confusion with the TransNet Early Action Program.

• Update Figures 1.2, 4.1, and 4.5 to include State Route (SR) 241. (SR 241 has been in the RTP since 1996, but the base map for the RTP typically does not show a portion of this facility in its location in the extreme northwest corner of San Diego County.)

• Extend the defined limits for Access Improvements on Interstate 5 (I-5) from Interstate 8 (I-8) to J Street (was SR 54) on Figures 1.2, 4.1, and 4.5. Specific projects already were defined in MOBILITY 2030 and were derived from the Central I-5 Corridor Study.

• Revise Table 3.1 to reflect updated TransNet bond proceeds based on the recently approved Plan of Finance.

• Add language to the text to reflect that regional light rail grade separation projects, funded with $122 million in the 2011-2020 timeframe, need to be in place before increased service can be implemented.

• Update Appendix B, Air Quality Planning and Transportation Conformity, to reflect the carbon monoxide (CO) motor vehicle emissions budget that became effective on January 30, 2006.

Appropriate language and figure changes were made in the Supplemental EIR to match the changes in the RTP.

BOB LEITER Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Attachments: 1. Summary of Comments and Preliminary Responses on the Draft Regional Transportation Plan 2. Summary of Comments and Preliminary Responses on the Draft Supplemental Environment Impact Report

Key Staff Contact: Mike Hix, (619) 699-1977, [email protected]

3 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Attachment 1 Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

Comments on Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update 1 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman Rail and trolley have the same archaic characteristics Arterial BRT projects proposed in the plan include a Appendix B that have been around for centuries. There is no variety of transit priority measures, including signal improvement here as far as the customer is priority, queue jumpers, and dedicated rights-of-way concerned. The difference is that these have exclusive to keep transit vehicles out of general lane rights-of-way that give them superior characteristics. congestion as much as possible. When surface streets are congested, this is a benefit. But BRT will be plagued by the same street congestion even with signal priorities and queue jumpers.

2 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman TAPs are currently in use, but they have made no TAPs are used for modeling purposes and do not Appendix B noteworthy increase in transit use. imply changes in transit use.

3 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman "Regional and express transit routes…are assumed to Please see response to comment #1. Appendix B operate out of congestion." This is wishful thinking.

4 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman "Transit route changes are…produced by transit Near-term transit route changes are drawn from the Appendix B agencies." What about customer input? regional short-range transit plan. This plan is adopted by the SANDAG Board, with review by the transit agencies, and is subject to a formal public hearing. The text in this section will be updated to reference the Regional Short-Range Transit Plan by name. 5 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman "These transit projects are funded with TransNet This text will be changed to reflect that there can be Appendix B funds or other local revenue sources." What about other funding sources for regional significant transit State and Federal funds for capital improvements? projects, in addition to local funds.

6 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman "The trip generation model works by applying trip Substantive trip generation rates are obtained Appendix B rates to zone-level growth forecasts." This is a through periodic travel behavior surveys, traffic guessing game. There is no way to obtain substantive counts at traffic generator sites, and comparisons of numbers. model-estimated traffic volumes with traffic counts.

7 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman "The mode choice is calibrated using 1995 and 2001 Only a single, most likely forecast is currently Appendix B Travel Behavior Survey trip tables by mode and produced for each scenario. A range of forecasts income, and 2001-2003 Regional Transit Survey trip could be produced for the 2007 RTP if there is characteristics. Regional-level Census 2000 work trip consensus on the need for additional information. mode shares were also used to fine-tune mode share estimates." What about randomness?

4 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

8 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman Why bother with the elaborate models if onboard On-board surveys only provide information on Appendix B transit rider surveys are performed? existing conditions. Models make use of survey data to forecast future conditions and answer "what if" questions. 9 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman All the assumptions, extrapolations, and evaluations The Regional Transit Vision (RTV) was developed in Appendix B of transit fail the crucial test of what the customer part from an extensive market segmentation survey desires. Today's technology and business methods of San Diego residents. Through this work, major can produce a service which recognizes today's demands on transit from several different market market. It must be something that can compete with segments were developed (e.g., the need for the paramount transportation means: the private flexibility and speed). While one-seat transit is not automobile. Typically, door-to-door transportation is affordable nor feasible for all trips, the RTV and the demanded. No transfers. Instantaneous response. At RTP do include major regional routes with this goal least eighteen market features are possible while in mind. Designing transit that is frequent also is current transit lacks any. included in the plan, but for major longer-distance commuter trips on our major corridors, it is arguable that other attributes like reliability outweigh frequency. 10 1/19/06 Letter North County Transit Due to the funding shortfall, transit projects critical Comment noted. The Comprehensive 2007 RTP will Systems District (NCTD) to NCTD would be delayed. These include capacity re-evaluate the projects and priorities for each Development increasing projects related to the SPRINTER and potential funding scenario. COASTER. Additionally, improvements to regional transit services would also be pushed back based upon the 2006 Plan's cost projections. Essentially, the 2006 proposed update delays SPRINTER double tracking until after 2020, as well as all other regionally funded COASTER rail double track projects. NCTD would like to point out that it would be extremely difficult for the Railroad to absorb a major capital improvement program in less than one decade, while continuing to provide passenger and freight service to the nation's second busiest rail corridor. 11 1/19/06 Letter NCTD We respectfully request that the SANDAG Board The Comprehensive 2007 RTP will re-evaluate the General consider these assumptions as part of the 2007 projects and priorities for each potential funding Comprehensive Update of the Regional scenario. Transportation Plan.

5 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

12 1/25/06 Letter Shute, Mihaly & A recent SANDAG study, ...found that San Diego Comment noted. General Weingerger, LLP on County residents' number one concern is highway behalf of Save Our congestion, and as a result 57% of residents are Forest and considering moving from the region in order to Ranchlands (SOFAR) improve their quality of life…On a positive note the survey also found that about half of the residents favor "smart growth" development. 13 1/25/06 Letter Shute, Mihaly & A further refined SOFAR Alternative could address SANDAG will discuss refinements to the SOFAR General Weingerger, LLP on transportation impacts by providing more transit Alternative as part of the development of the 2007 behalf of SOFAR where "smart growth" is occurring, such as in Comprehensive RTP. downtown. 14 1/25/06 Letter Shute, Mihaly & SOFAR invites SANDAG to discuss possible SANDAG will discuss refinements to the SOFAR General Weingerger, LLP on refinements to the SOFAR Alternative that would Alternative as part of the development of the 2007 behalf of SOFAR involve transferring transportation dollars from Comprehensive RTP. regional highway projects to downtown-oriented transit. 15 1/26/06 Letter City of Chula Vista On an overall basis, we would like to question why By definition, all revenues coming to the region Financial SANDAG is currently proposing to allocate the entire during the RTP period, including TransNet, must be Strategies TransNet revenues solely within the Revenue included as part of the Revenue Constrained Constrained Scenario of the RTP. Scenario. Other projects not included in the 2006 Update but part of TransNet plan of projects will be implemented between 2030 and 2048, or sooner if other funding is identified.

6 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

16 1/26/06 Letter City of Chula Vista It was our understanding that the passage of The passage of TransNet has had two key impacts. It Financial TransNet would allow the region to utilize the has allowed the region to keep moving forward with Strategies recommendations of the Reasonably Expected implementation of several projects despite the fact Scenario. that federal and particularly state funds over the past three years have been reduced. The second impact from TransNet is that it allows the region to bond against future revenues to allow the implementation of these projects in an accelerated time frame, consistent with the TransNet Early Action Program (EAP) approved by the SANDAG Board. In some instances, implementation of the EAP forces other non-EAP projects to be deferred to later phases of the 2030 RTP. It should be noted that without the passage of TransNet , the Revenue Constrained Scenario would have been shorter and with project implementation of remaining projects further out into future.

17 1/26/06 Letter City of Chula Vista The widening of two HOV lanes along I-5 between The 2006 RTP Update kept the previous Revenue Systems downtown San Diego and Chula Vista, which was Constrained Network intact. As TransNet extends to Development promised as part of TransNet passage, is not the year 2048, not all projects are in the Revenue included in the subject 2006 update. Constrained Plan. The Comprehensive 2007 RTP will re-evaluate the projects and priorities for each potential funding scenario. 18 1/26/06 Letter City of Chula Vista If the update is adopted in its current form, it will South Bay projects in the Revenue Constrained Plan Financial become increasingly more difficult for the South Bay include I-805, SR 54, SR 125, and SR 905.The Strategies Region to secure timely funding for much needed Comprehensive 2007 RTP will re-evaluate the highway congestion relief. projects and priorities for each potential funding scenario. 19 1/26/06 Letter City of Chula Vista Congestion relief in the South Bay should be The Comprehensive 2007 RTP will re-evaluate the Systems incorporated into the proposed plan to allow the projects and priorities for each potential funding Development region to initiate the long and arduous process of scenario. freeway's widening. SANDAG funding assumptions should be revised to allow such a process to commence.

7 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

20 1/26/06 Letter City of Chula Vista Identify grade separation structures and related SANDAG is developing evaluation criteria to Systems station improvements along the Blue Line Trolley in prioritize regional rail grade separation projects. The Development South County as separate and unique projects with criteria and a prioritized list of projects will be construction time frames between 5 and 10 years. incorporated into the Comprehensive 2007 RTP. The Funding should be allocated from the Transit Capital Revenue Constrained funding scenario includes $122 expenditure plan. SANDAG has previously million for regional rail grade separations. committed to construct two bridges on E Street and Additional language has been added to the 2006 RTP H Street along with the planned service upgrade for update to clarify the need for light rail grade the trolley in South County. The Chula Vista staff separations to be in place if required to implement recommendation is a minor modification that would the increase in service on the trolley lines. allow these two bridges to be constructed as separate projects before the planned service upgrade. 21 1/26/06 Letter City of Chula Vista Extend the limits of the "Access Improvement" While SANDAG agrees to extend the descriptive Systems project on the I-5 south of its planned terminus at SR limits on the south end to J Street, access Development 54 to the J Street interchange to reduce current and improvements on I-5 between I-8 and SR 54 refer to future traffic congestion in the South County. The specific project recommendations from the Central I- current funding plan already contains freeway 5 Corridor Study. These include access improvements improvements on I-5 to enhance access to this vital from I-5 to the Old Town Transit Center and the corridor. However, these improvements are limited marine terminals at Tenth Avenue and Bay Marina to the areas between downtown San Diego and SR Drive. 54. Chula Vista's position is that the freeway congestion does not end at SR 54 and that it would be prudent to extend the subject freeway improvements southerly to J Street. 22 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego The SR 76 improvements from Melrose Drive to I-15 SANDAG concurs. SANDAG has provided funding for Systems were part of the original TransNet agreement. The the SR 76 Early Action Project with the adoption of Development County concurs that the SR 76 improvements should the Plan of Finance in December 2005. SANDAG will be part of the TransNet Early Action Program (EAP). continue to encourage Caltrans to expedite the The updated RTP indicates that the SR 76 construction of the SR 76 Early Action Project. The improvements would not be completed until the year County is encouraged to coordinate the 2014. The County encourages SANDAG to expedite development of the San Luis Rey Regional Park with funding and construction of the SR 76 improvements Caltrans' SR 76 efforts. which are needed now to address existing and future traffic congestion.

8 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

23 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego SANDAG should provide the County and Caltrans The updated cost estimate from Caltrans reflects Systems with the data/assumptions used to develop the cost further refinement in the design of the facility. Development estimates for the SR 76 improvements. When Large across-the-board cost increases for right-of- comparing the 2003 RTP to the 2006 RTP update, the way and construction materials, including cement estimated cost for the SR 76 improvements from and structural steel, contributed to the significant Melrose Drive to I-15 have increased from $180 to increase in the cost estimate for this facility. In $382 million. The estimated cost increase for SR 76 particular, certain elements such as roadway and appears to be significantly higher than assumed bridge alignments and other roadway features have higher costs for the other highway projects that been modified to reflect community desires and remain part of the RTP. The final RTP should provide input. clarification as to what factors have lead to the substantial revision in the cost estimate for the SR 76 improvements.

24 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego The updated RTP identifies that the SR 11 project The year of completion refers simply to the end year Systems would not be assumed to be completed until the for that period. It means that the facility is currently Development final year of the RTP (2030). The County requests that anticipated to be completed and open to traffic SANDAG expedite funding for the completion of the sometime during the period 2021 to 2030, not environmental studies. Completion of the necessarily in the final year (2030) of the period. It environmental studies will help assist in preserving should be noted that preliminary environmental right-of-way in the future SR 11 right-of-way work can begin at any time prior to that. This corridor, expedite future funding and construction of facility, in fact, has over $8 million programmed for the SR 11 freeway including, if practical, the environmental phase and work to complete this consideration as a potential public/private project as phase is underway. a toll facility. The completion of the SR 11 freeway will not only benefit the unincorporated area, but also the entire San Diego region and the State of California. 25 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego The revenue constrained RTP should identify/discuss The study is just underway and will be reflected in Systems the SR 76 East needs assessment that is being the Comprehensive 2007 RTP. Development prepared by Caltrans in coordination with SANDAG.

9 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

26 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego SANDAG should identify and expedite funding for The Comprehensive 2007 RTP will re-evaluate the Systems the completion of projects identified at LOS F in projects and priorities for each potential funding Development Table 7-3, Congestion Management System Program scenario. (CMP), in the currently adopted RTP. These projects include improvements to the SR 67, SR 76 East, and SR 94 corridors. Completion of the environmental studies for the above projects should also be expedited. Expedited environmental documentation will facilitate preservation of future right-of-way in these corridors; the provision of operation and spot improvements in these corridors (through developer contributions, local and/or state/federal funding), and the ability of projects in these corridors to compete for State and/or federal funding.

27 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego The draft RTP states that SR 67 improvements The Comprehensive 2007 RTP will re-evaluate the between Mapleview Street and Dye Road will not projects and priorities for each potential funding occur for at least 15 more years, and as much as 25 scenario. years from now. SANDAG should recognize the existing and projected traffic demand and traffic operation/safety issues along the SR 67 corridor and advance these improvements much earlier. 28 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego The RC RTP continues to omit the proposed widening The Comprehensive 2007 RTP will re-evaluate the of SR 94 from SR 125 to Steele Canyon Road. The projects and priorities for each potential funding segment of SR 94 from SR 125 to Jamacha Road is a scenario. heavily traveled corridor that serves developed suburban County communities. At a minimum, the RC RTP should set aside funding for operational improvements to SR 94 from Jamacha Road to Steele Canyon Road. SR 94 east of Jamacha Road carries a high volume of traffic from the eastern portion of the County with a substantial percentage being truck traffic.

10 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

29 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego The final RC RTP should elaborate on the description The 2006 RTP Update kept the previous Revenue General of the criteria used to select which projects are Constrained Network intact. Other than including included in the plan. The final RC RTP should identify the TransNet EAP at the Board's direction, SANDAG what specific transportation projects, policies, and did not revisit project evaluation criteria. The programs are being proposed that will address Comprehensive 2007 RTP will re-evaluate the increasing traffic congestion on freeway and projects and priorities for each potential funding highways that serve both rural and urban/suburban scenario. areas within the San Diego region.

30 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego The final RC RTP should summarize the criteria for The criteria used to select TransNet Early Action Systems projects being included in the TransNet EAP. Program (EAP) projects was first shown in the Development January 28, 2005, report to the Board of Directors. Tier 1 projects consist of projects that remain uncompleted from the original 1987 TransNet Ordinance. These projects include SR 52 Extension, SR 76 Widening, and Mid-Coast Light Rail Transit. Tier 2 projects consist of projects already under construction or construction ready. These projects include the I-15 Managed Lanes and SR 52 Managed Lanes. The environmental documents for I-5 and I- 805 and additional, corridor supporting transit projects also were included.

11 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

31 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego The final RTP should compare and contrast the The Revenue Constrained budget is shown on Table Financial original $30 billion Revenue Constrained budget to 3.1 of the draft 2006 Update document. Overall, the Strategies the currently proposed $35.7 billion Revenue TransNet revenues increased significantly to account Constrained budget. The final RTP should identify for the extension approved by the voters in which revenue sources have been projected to November 2004. State and federal revenue forecasts increase or decrease, and identify changes to the were lower than in the 2003 Revenue Constrained allocation of funds to specific highway and transit scenario to account for a lower baseline in revenues projects. The source of revenue should be discussed from these two sources. The 2006 Update also and the allocation of future revenue to transit and assumes three fewer years of revenues and the highway projects should be discussed. For instance, is dollars referenced in the 2006 Update have been the revenue allocation consistent with the adjusted for inflation. The allocation of revenues percentages set forth in the TransNet ordinance? between transit and highway did not change markedly from the 2003 RTP as the 2006 RTP is just a technical update. Changes in the split between transit, highway, and local streets and roads will be addressed as part of the 2007 RTP. The allocation of TransNet is consistent with the ordinance.

32 1/26/06 Letter County of San Diego Since the RTP was last updated in 2003, the County Comment noted. Financial has adopted a Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Strategies program (April 2005). SANDAG, in prioritizing highway improvement projects, should consider that the County is conforming with the development impact fee requirement as stipulated in the TransNet extension and the additional funding sources that will be available to aid in the construction of County highway projects. 33 1/27/06 Letter San Diego County There needs to be additional expansion of the Route Improved service between Old Town Transit Center Systems Regional Airport 992 Flyer and potential rapid bus/Transit First service and Lindbergh Field will be evaluated in the 2007 Development Authority (SDCRAA) between Old Town Transit Center which provides RTP update. We also have referred the comment intermodal connectivity to the Trolley and Coaster regarding the Route 992 to MTS. for airport users. Please include additional and more frequent transit connections to the airport in the MOBILITY 2030 plan.

12 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

34 1/27/06 Letter SDCRAA Revise the Regional Transportation System and Please see response to comment #33. Systems Transit Projects to include expanded transit route Development service to SDIA, considering flex trolley service between the Old Town Transit Center and the airport.

35 1/27/06 Public Jay Powell, City Requests that the I-15 bus rapid transit route in mid- The Escondido to Downtown San Diego I-15 BRT Systems Hearing Heights Community city be advanced and included in the 2010 time project is scheduled for full implementation by 2012, Development Development period. to coincide with the completion of needed Association HOV/Managed Lanes facilities in the corridor. (For example, the south stage of managed lanes between Ted Williams Parkway and SR 163 is currently scheduled for completion in 2012.) We will bring additional specifics on the I-15 BRT Operations Plan to the Transportation Committee in April 2006.

Comments received after the January 27, 2006 deadline 36 1/30/06 E-mail Caltrans District 11 Please include SR 241 in Figures 1.2 and 4.5. Figures 1.2 and 4.5 have been revised to include SR Systems 241. Development

37 1/30/06 E-mail Caltrans District 11 There is no specific mention of FTA 5311 revenue There is no specific line item for FTA 5311 funds Financial sources in the revenue assumptions. because the anticipated revenues are very small Strategies compared to other funds. The region anticipates getting approximately $240,000 per year from this source. 38 1/30/06 E-mail Caltrans District 11 It is not clear from this section (page 57) that a The RAS included as part of the 2030 Revenue Systems "Revenue Constrained" or a "Reasonably Expected" Constrained RTP: 2006 Update remains the same as Development Regional Arterial System (RAS) exists. Figure 4.2 MOBILITY 2030. The RAS will be updated as part of makes reference to a RAS, independent of fiscal the Comprehensive 2007 RTP update. constraints. A listing of the improvements contained in the RAS would be very useful. 39 1/30/06 E-mail Caltrans District 11 Caltrans is concerned about the accuracy and clarity Table 4.6 has been revised based on updated Systems of the "Master Plan Date" and "Capacity Expansion" information from the San Diego County Regional Development columns in Table 4.6. Please define the terms Airport Authority. "various" and "on hold."

13 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response Chapter(s)

40 1/30/06 E-mail Caltrans District 11 According to Caltrans Headquarters records, the The Brown Field Airport Master Plan was last Systems Master Plan for Brown Field was updated in 1990. updated and adopted in May 1980. In March 2000, Development the Airport Master Plan was updated but never adopted due to environmental concerns. (Source: SD County ALUCP.) 41 1/30/06 E-mail Caltrans District 11 Furthermore, Gillespie Field is updating their Airport The Gillespie Field Master Plan is dated 1986. The Systems Layout Plan, not their Master Plan. Airport Layout Plan Narrative was completed in Development September 2005. Comment noted and corrected.

42 1/30/06 E-mail Caltrans District 11 McClellan-Palomar Airport is planning to extend The runway extension at McClellan-Palomar Airport Systems their runway, which could be construed as airport is to comply with runway safety area needs of Development capacity expansion. regional jets used for commercial service. 43 1/30/06 E-mail Caltrans District 11 There lacks a general discussion of how RTP Chapter 7: Evaluation Criteria and Rankings; Systems improvements are selected for each fiscal scenario. Technical Appendices from MOBILITY 2030, included Development For Regional Arterials, Rail Grade Separations, ranking criteria for regional arterials, highway Arterial Transit Priorities, Regional Bike/Ped, etc., corridors, HOV to HOV connectors, freeway some discussion of the criteria that are used to connectors, and transit services. These criteria were prioritize improvements could be included. Cite RTP not changed and projects were not re-evaluated as Technical Appendices for freeway/highway project part of the 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 selection. Update.

14 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Attachment 2 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response

Comments on Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 1 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman There is no recognition of customer desires in the list Comment noted. of "potentially significant impacts" in the second paragraph.

2 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman "Spacing stations farther apart" is counter to the Regional and corridor services connect the major trip customer's desires. pairs. Local bus service provides frequent stop service. Both types of services can be used in the same corridor to serve different trips and passenger markets. 3 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman "New stations would be integral into central activity This relates to the smart growth strategy called for areas that include pedestrian and bicycle-friendly in the Regional Comprehensive Plan, in which transit components." This is too trivial to have a noticeable is located in community and neighborhood centers effect on transit volume. where people want to go. These areas are designed for the pedestrian and are appropriate walk and wait environments for transit. 4 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman "Trains on tires" is nothing more than a play with There are distinct differences between bus and rail words. How will the customer perceive any service. The point of this is to say that BRT and other noticeable difference? new regional bus services will have a premium quality ride. 5 1/10/06 Letter Robert J. Hoffman Signal priority, grade-separated intersections, or Transit priority measures are used both nationally queue jumper lanes are certainly not cost-effective and internationally to enhance transit service and nor politically acceptable. therefore increase use. In Los Angeles, signal priority has been used for several years and in San Diego, in particular, there are a number of queue jumpers in operation.

15 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response

6 1/25/06 Letter Shute, Mihaly & We concur with the SEIR'S general conclusion that The SEIR analyzes the impacts of comparing one Weingerger, LLP on the 2006 Revenue Constrained Plan, which includes program (MOBILITY 2030) to the Revenue behalf of Save Our fewer highway improvements, will be Constrained Program (2030 Revenue Constrained Forest and environmentally superior to the adopted RTP with RTP: 2006 Update). While SANDAG did perform Ranchlands (SOFAR) respect to biological resources, agricultural lands, detailed traffic analysis with the TransCAD hydrology, and other impact areas. However, we transportaiton model to analyze the performance of remain concerned that the original EIR lacks the transportation network, SANDAG does not have sufficient detail from which to compare the impacts detailed facility alignments and footprints to of the Project to those of the Adopted RTP. quantitatively assess direct impacts from specific project implementation. The origianal FEIR for MOBILITY 2030 does state project-specific analysis for implementation of future transportation projects will be required. Similarly, the SANDAG Board adpoted an Addendum to the Final EIR (March 2003) that in part states, "The Plan analyzed in the Final EIR covers the San Diego County region covered by SANDAG’s 18 member city boundaries. (Final EIR, p. 1 1.) At future stages in planning and implementation of the specific transportation projects identified in the Plan (“projects”), there will be separate, project- specific CEQA and/or NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) evaluation prepared by the project sponso to 1-3; 4.0-1.) The unique environmental aspects of each project, coupled with the unique environmental issues facing the San Diego region, will require separate environmental review of each project without reliance on the Final EIR. This conclusion does not invalidate the Plan as a general model and guideline for transportation improvements and growth.

16 Draft 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Comments and Responses

No. Date Form Name/Agency Comment Response

7 1/25/06 Letter Shute, Mihaly & The RTP EIR and SEIR conclude that neither plan The analysis presented in the RTP EIR and SEIR is Weingerger, LLP on would result in any significant traffic impacts. This based on programmatic level analysis and does behalf of SOFAR conclusion ignores potential significant traffic acknowledge that localized impacts could result impacts at individual intersections and roadway from individual projects. The MOBILITY 2030 EIR segments and dodges the opportunity to consider states that, "it is possible that individual mitigation and alternatives that could minimize transportation improvements included in the 2030 transportation impacts. RTP would have traffic and transportation impacts on local streets and transportation systems. The detailed environmental analysis to be conducted at the project-specific level is the appropriate process for the analysis and mitigation of any identified transportation impacts." 8 1/26/06 Letter City of Chula Vista The EIR is inadequate for it does not analyze the The 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP: 2006 Update is impacts of removing TransNet revenues from the based on a revenue constrained funding scenario Reasonably Expected scenario and allocating the that does include the TransNet percent sales tax entire amount to the Revenue Constrained Scenario. extension. While MOBILITY 2030 assumed the passage of the TransNet extension in the reasonably expected funding scenario, since that time the TransNet extension was passed by the voters and was therefore included in the revenue constrained scenario.

17 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

February 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 8

Action Requested: RECOMMEND

INTERSTATE 5 (I-5) NORTH COAST MANAGED LANES VALUE PRICING PLANNING STUDY: DRAFT CONCEPT PLAN File Number 3005000

Introduction Recommendation Caltrans is continuing environmental studies and The Transportation Committee is asked to preliminary engineering on the Interstate 5 (I-5) recommend that the SANDAG Board of North Coast Managed Lanes project. The project Directors approve the “skewed per mile” includes the construction of a 26-mile-long rate as the preferred pricing strategy for the Managed Lanes facility in the median of I-5 from I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes. La Jolla Village Drive in the City of San Diego to Vandegrift Boulevard, north of the City of Oceanside. Preparation of the I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes environmental document is included in the TransNet Early Action Program.

SANDAG accepted funding from Caltrans to conduct the I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes Value Pricing Study as a technical study in preparation for Caltrans’ Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This study, which began in June 2004, examines the feasibility of allowing solo drivers to pay a fee to use the I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes similar to the I-15 Managed Lanes. SANDAG’s consultant, PB Consult, evaluated various pricing options under each of the four “build” alternatives and conducted public outreach for the study. The concept plan and selected pricing strategy for the I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes will be incorporated in the Caltrans Draft EIR.

Potential pricing strategies include flat tolls, per mile tolls, and tolls by segment. Based on the high level of forecasted traffic demand for I-5 and that congestion is likely to continue to grow, a dynamic, “skewed per mile” pricing strategy is recommended for adoption on the I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes. A skewed per mile strategy uses tolls that are based on distance traveled with a per mile rate that may be higher at congested sections of the facility. This option will maximize the ability to manage travel in high demand locations. The adoption of a skewed per mile strategy is consistent with the adopted pricing strategy for the future I-15 Managed Lanes.

Discussion

Project Description and Objectives

A robust Managed/High-Occupancy-Vehicle (HOV) network was included in MOBILITY 2030, SANDAG’s Regional Transportation Plan. These managed lanes/HOV facilities will serve multiple modes and provide priority access for HOVs, buses, and vanpools. The I-5 North Coast corridor was identified as a future managed lanes facility and will be modeled after the I-15 Managed Lanes. The project will feature multiple access points to and from the general purpose lanes. There also will be direct access ramps (DARs) connecting local arterials directly to the managed lanes for buses,

carpools, vanpools, and paying solo commuters (FasTrak™ customers). Locations being studied for the DARs include Lusk Boulevard (at I-805), Voigt Drive, Manchester Boulevard, Cannon Road, and Oceanside Boulevard. Value pricing technology would be used to “manage” the facility.

Study Description and Organization

The scope of this planning study is to determine if pricing as a demand management tool is feasible on the managed lanes. Pricing is intended to be the primary tool to manage demand that maximizes the number of potential users who can use the I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes, thereby promoting mobility in an equitable manner to the greatest number of users. Pricing can be prescribed according to a preset schedule or applied dynamically to manage demand in real time for all segments of the corridor. This study examines various factors that influence value pricing feasibility. Study activities include both technical analysis and public outreach. The technical analysis includes the following parameters that influence feasibility: demand, access, pricing strategy, impacts to adjacent lanes, technology, revenue, public attitudes, and equity.

A technical working group, made up of staff from each of the six cities in the corridor, the University of California at San Diego, Caltrans, and SANDAG staff, has been meeting monthly since the beginning of the project. Staff provided regular updates on the progress of the value pricing study and received input on draft technical reports. The results of the draft concept plan were presented to the working group in January 2006.

Draft Concept Plan

This study evaluated whether pricing as a demand management tool is feasible on the managed lanes. PB Consult developed a Draft Concept Plan outlining the key study components including: traffic forecasts and demand, operations plan, revenue analysis, technology assessment, and monitoring and evaluation plan. Overall, the results of the study validate value pricing as a demand management tool for the proposed I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes project for all of the build alternatives under study. The build alternatives being considered in the Caltrans environmental document for the I-5 North Coast corridor include the “8+4 with Buffer,” “8+4 with Barrier,” “10+4 with Buffer,” and “10+4 with Barrier.” The results of this study will be incorporated into the Caltrans Draft EIR.

As part of the Draft Concept Plan, traffic demand forecasts were conducted for both 2015 and 2030. The analysis indicates that there is sufficient demand for use of the managed lanes. Tolling strategies and revenue forecasts for the 8+4 and 10+4 alternatives also were conducted. A toll collection system and operation concept was evaluated, based on potential tolling strategies. A functional tolling concept is included in the draft plan. Additionally, PB Consult developed a monitoring and evaluation plan as part of the study.

Pricing Strategy

PB Consult analyzed various pricing strategies as part of this study. Based on the high level of forecasted traffic demand for I-5 and that congestion is likely to continue to grow, a dynamic, skewed per mile pricing strategy is recommended for adoption on the I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes. The skewed per mile option is estimated to produce $12.6 million to $19.7 million annually in revenue depending on which build alternative is implemented. The tolls are expected to range from

2

$0.10 to $1.50 per mile under the skewed per mile option. Higher tolls are expected to occur in the southern portion of the corridor where demand is the highest. Additionally, the analysis shows the majority of the revenues are generated in the south end of the corridor.

Currently, the San Diego region has an HOV policy of allowing two or more occupants in a vehicle (HOV-2+) to use the HOV/Managed Lanes for free. Other regions require three or more occupants (HOV-3+) in order to use some HOV lanes. The results of the analysis in this study indicate that the San Diego region may need to reconsider the region’s HOV policy in the future in order to manage demand on these facilities.

Public Outreach

PB Consult conducted public outreach to measure public response to the I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes project, including a value pricing application. The outreach included 25 stakeholder interviews, four focus groups, over 350 intercept surveys at park and ride lots and transit centers, and a telephone survey of 800 I-5 North Coast users.

The key findings of the public outreach include:

• Most of those surveyed are only I-5 users and use only a portion of the corridor • Prefer managed lanes over general purpose lanes • Favorable to lane management • Simplified pricing strategy preferred • Wide demographics within the corridor • Pricing more equitable than access restrictions • Excess revenue should be spent within the corridor • Results consistent across all demographic groups

BOB LEITER Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Key Staff Contact: Heather Werdick, (619) 699-6967, [email protected]

3 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

February 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 9

Action Requested: RECOMMEND

COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION SERVICE AGENCY (CTSA) File Number 3004700

Introduction Recommendation

California legislation and regulations require the Pending action by the Executive Committee creation of a Consolidated Transportation Service on February 10, 2006, the Transportation Agency (CTSA) in each county. The purpose of a Committee is asked to recommend that the CTSA is to create a mechanism to coordinate and SANDAG Board of Directors approve the consolidate Health and Human Services following actions related to the MTS and transportation providers to share resources, North County CTSAs: reduce costs and increase capacity for specialized transportation for seniors and persons with 1. Combine the MTS and NCTD CTSA service disabilities. areas into a single regional CTSA service area. This action would transfer the MTS State law provides that the Transportation area CTSA from SourcePoint to an outside Planning Agency (TPA) for a geographic area has contractor for the entire region with authority to appoint the CTSA for that area. Prior oversight by the SANDAG Transportation to 2003, state law made the Metropolitan Transit Committee, similar to the oversight Development Board (now MTS [Metropolitan currently provided for the North County Transit System]) the TPA for its service area. MTS Lifeline CTSA services; designated SANDAG as the CTSA, and SANDAG, in turn, contracted this function to the American 2. Initiate a competitive request for Red Cross. In the North County Transit District proposals to designate a single regional (NCTD) service area, SANDAG, was the TPA and CTSA to be in place on July 1, 2006 (to had responsibility for appointing a CTSA. Under coincide with the expiration of the North this authority SANDAG contracted with North County Lifeline CTSA services contract), in County Lifeline to provide CTSA services for North accordance with Options A or B in County following a competitive selection process. Attachment 3; and Attachment 1 displays the organizational relationship of the transit agencies, SANDAG, and 3. Ensure that the regional CTSA better the CTSAs prior to 2003. In FY 2003, as a result of meets the spirit and intent of consolidation under Senate Bill 1703, SANDAG coordination and consolidation of Human became the TPA for both the NCTD and MTS and Social Services transportation as service areas. Because of internal restructuring by envisioned in California statutes and the Red Cross, SANDAG brought the MTS area regulations. CTSA in-house under SourcePoint (Attachment 2). The CTSA was placed under SourcePoint to preserve its nonprofit status and eligibility for certain grants. North County Lifeline continues to be the CTSA contractor for the NCTD area; however, its contract expires in June 2006.

The upcoming expiration of the North County Lifeline contract, the efficiencies that could be gained by consolidating the CTSA services for the entire region, the recently growing interest from Health and Human Services agencies, cities and the community for expanding the functions of the CTSA, and some ongoing organizational limitations inherent in the current CTSA structure, have led staff to propose a restructuring of the CTSAs in San Diego County. This report addresses potential restructuring options for the CTSA that would consolidate the function in San Diego County, respond to the need for improved transportation coordination for Health and Human Services transportation, better meet the requirements of state regulations, and address the expiration of the North County Lifeline contract. Because the MTS area CTSA falls under SourcePoint, the SANDAG Executive Committee must initiate a recommendation to the Transportation Committee to pursue any changes.

Discussion

California is one of only seven states that have enabling legislation to facilitate the creation of an agency dedicated to coordinating and consolidating specialized transportation for seniors and the disabled. In San Diego County 2 percent of the Transportation Development Act (TDA) Section 4.5 funding is directed to providing a CTSA as outlined under state regulations. This is currently about $100,000 a year.

The CTSA under SourcePoint has limited its function to coordination rather than consolidation, providing technical assistance, service referrals and training for Health and Human Services transportation providers. The demand for Health and Human Services transportation is increasing as a result of an aging population, and cost pressures are making it more difficult to meet the specialized demand. This economic and demand pressure has led to increasing support in the community for a more proactive CTSA that consolidates functions and resources of various service providers. Many of the social service agencies in the county are interested in seeing the CTSA, or another organization, take a more active role in consolidating and coordinating transportation as allowed under existing legislation and regulations to help increase capacity and lower costs. The Full Access and Coordinated Transportation (FACT) initiative, introduced at the December 9, 2005, Transportation Committee, is strong evidence of the interest in developing better coordinated Health and Human Services transportation. FACT promoters propose consolidated dispatch and service provision among specialized transportation providers.

The relationships have also changed as a result of agency consolidation in 2003, and SANDAG, as the TPA for all of San Diego County, now has the authority to appoint a single CTSA for the entire region. Current state regulations do not contemplate an appointing authority (e.g. SANDAG) also serving as a CTSA. This means that if SANDAG decides not to designate an outside CTSA, staff would need to work with Caltrans to modify the state regulations. Staff members from the Caltrans District 11 office have indicated that they would be willing to request a change in the regulations from Caltrans Headquarters if SANDAG desires to remain as the CTSA. There are, however, other issues that could limit the ability of an in-house CTSA to effectively implement coordinated and consolidated health and human services transportation. In particular, SANDAG administers or controls grant programs for which the CTSA is eligible to receive funding, including the annual federal Section 5310 capital equipment grants program and the upcoming TransNet funded Senior Transportation Mini-Grant program. SANDAG, through the CTSA, assists nonprofit agencies in applying for these capital grants, and then, as the transportation planning agency, is responsible for the evaluation of the applications. Should the CTSA become more actively involved in dispatch,

2

brokering or transportation operations, as the Health and Human Resources agencies have proposed, it would also be eligible to apply for these grants. A revised organizational structure for CTSA would address these types of potential internal conflicts.

Attachment 3 offers three options for a new organizational structure for the CTSA. In Option A, SANDAG could designate any existing or new agency or organization as the countywide CTSA. With Option B, SANDAG could designate an existing or new agency which in turn could then contract out some or all of the functions to a third party. Option C retains the CTSA in-house as part of SourcePoint, but would require changes to statewide regulations and require safeguards to ensure that functions relating to grant application assistance and grant awards are isolated. This could possibly be achieved by contracting out some functions of the CTSA.

Because the North County Lifeline CTSA contract will expire in June, this is the ideal time to consider a consolidated CTSA with a new organizational structure to address some of the goals and deficiencies of the existing structure and functions. It is proposed that SANDAG issue a request for proposals for a countywide CTSA to provide expanded services under contract to SANDAG (Options A or B in Attachment 2). This approach and organizational structure will consolidate the CTSA, address potential conflicts in the existing organizational structure, and allow the CTSA to expand its functional role to more actively coordinate and consolidate transportation services for seniors and persons with disabilities as supported by state legislation and regulations. In the event that no suitable proposal is received from an outside agency, SANDAG could proceed with Option C in conjunction with a request to the state that certain regulations be amended. The 2 percent TDA funding would provide the funding for any option pursued.

BOB LEITER Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Attachments: 1. CTSA Organizational Structure Prior to 2003 2. CTSA Organizational Structure as of July 2003 3. CTSA Organizational Structure Options

Key Staff Contact: Dan Levy, (619) 699-6942, [email protected]

3 Attachment 1

CTSA Organizational Structure Prior to 2003

MTDB Service Area NCTD Service Area

CTSA Designating Agency MTDB SANDAG

CTSA SANDAG

CTSA Contractor American North County Red Cross Lifeline

4 Attachment 2

CTSA Organizational Structure as of July 2003

(Current Organizational Structure)

MTS Service Area NCTD Service Area

CTSA Designating Agency SANDAG SANDAG

North County CTSA SourcePoint Lifeline

5 Attachment 3

CTSA Organizational Structure Options

Option A Option B Option C

San Diego County San Diego County San Diego County

CTSA CTSA CTSA Designating SANDAG Designating SANDAG Designating SANDAG Agency Agency Agency

CTSA* Other Agency CTSA* Other Agency CTSA SourcePoint

CTSA Contractor** CTSA Optional** Contractor Contractor

* Examples: Transit Agencies, Nonprofit Agencies, Paratransit Operators, and Health or Human Service Agencies ** Examples: Nonprofit Agencies, Paratransit Operators

6 San Diego Association of Governments TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

February 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 10

Action Requested: INFORMATION/POSSIBLE ACTION

COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS STATUS File Number 3005200

Introduction

Over the past year, the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) has been undertaking a Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) to develop a service plan to reshape the current MTS transit system. The goals of the COA are to improve the attractiveness and effectiveness of bus and trolley services and to achieve long-term financial sustainability through increased ridership and productivity. Transportation Committee Chair Joe Kellejian and SANDAG staff members have been active participants in the study process to date, working closely with MTS staff to coordinate the COA with our Independent Transit Planning Review. SANDAG staff members are reviewing the draft COA to ensure consistency with SANDAG plans and policies.

MTS staff has prepared a draft service plan that is scheduled for presentation to the MTS Board of Directors at its February 9, 2006, meeting. MTS staff will present an overview of this draft service plan to the Transportation Committee and report on the results from the MTS Board meeting. A schedule for MTS public hearings leading up to adoption of the service plan, tentatively planned for March 2006, will also be provided. SANDAG staff will provide the Transportation Committee with an update on our review at the Transportation Committee meeting on February 17.

Discussion

The draft service plan that MTS staff will be outlining at the February 17 Transportation Committee meeting has been developed around a set of service development guidelines and an MTS area service concept. The service development guidelines were adopted by the MTS Board on June 23, 2005:

• Develop a Customer-Focused System: Provide services that reflect the travel needs and priorities of our customers.

• Develop a Competitive System: Provide services that are competitive with other travel options by meeting market segment expectations.

• Develop an Integrated System: Develop transit services as part of an integrated network rather than a collection of individual routes.

Building on these guidelines, a Service Concept for the MTS service area was developed around the following service tiers:

• Urban Network - Rich network of services that support spontaneous use for a wide range of travel needs within urban areas demonstrating sufficient demand (see Attachment 1).

• Market-Based Services – Services designed to allow for spontaneous use for specific high-demand trip purposes when and where urban network services are not available. These services fall into two general categories: commuter-based, and community-based services:

- Commuter-Based Services – Services designed for individual commuter market needs where enough demand exists to warrant service.

- Community-Based Services – Services specifically tailored to individual community niche market needs where enough demand exists to warrant service.

Staff Comments

SANDAG staff has been supportive of the key principles of the COA as outlined in the service development guidelines and service concept discussed above. The focus of our review of the draft COA service plan has been to ensure consistency between the short-term services MTS will be implementing as a result of the COA and SANDAG’s regional plans and policies, specifically the mid- term and long-term transit and Managed Lanes plans and projects as outlined in the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan and the TransNet expenditure plan. As noted above, we will provide the Transportation Committee with an update regarding any issues at the February 17 meeting.

BOB LEITER Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Attachment: 1. COA Urban Network Map

Key Staff Contact: Dave Schumacher, (619) 699-6906, [email protected]

2 Attachment 1

MTSMTS UrbanUrban NetworkNetwork ServiceService AreaArea

Urban Network Service Boundary

3 This Item Relates to Agenda Item #10 Transportation Committee February 17, 2006 I-5 NORTH COAST MANAGED LANES VALUE PRICING STUDY

Transportation Committee February 17, 2006

1

Overview • Project Description • Study Overview • Draft Concept Plan • Community Outreach Program • Summary • Next Steps

2 Scope • I-5 North Coast identified as future ML facility • Technical study for EIR/EIS • Focus on pricing feasibility & acceptance • “10+4” vs. “8+4” alternatives

3

Study Overview

• Traffic Operations Plan and Forecast Report • Evaluation of Pricing Strategies • Community Outreach Program • Concept Plan • Recommendation of a Preferred Pricing Scenario

4 What are Managed Lanes?

• Eligibility • Access • Pricing

5

Feasibility Criteria • Demand • Access • Pricing Strategy • Impacts to Adjacent Traffic • Technology • Revenue • Public Attitudes/Acceptance • Equity

6 Traffic Demand and Access • Sufficient demand in 2015 and 2030 • Managed lanes benefit to general purpose lanes compared to No Build • Both slip ramps and DARs needed • Highly restrictive access concept best for lane management

7

Pricing Scenarios • Pricing scenarios tested include SOV pricing and SOV/HOV-2 pricing • In 2030, some sections of ML exceed capacity during peak hour with SOV pricing only • SOV/HOV-2 pricing dramatically reduces ML demand

8 Pricing Strategies

• Flat tolls • Segment tolls • Per mile tolls • Skewed per mile tolls

9

Recommended Pricing Strategy

• Many concepts studied • Skewed per mile best for management • Consistent with I-15 Managed Lanes

10 Revenue Forecast

• Varies by toll strategy selected • Applicable range is $12-19 million gross annually • Per mile toll and revenues higher in the southern portion of the study area • Majority of the revenue is generated south of Manchester

11

Technology and Performance Monitoring • Review of current and future technology options • Functional plan developed for 2015 and 2030 • Data collection is key • Need to communicate pricing and benefits

12 Example Signing

13

Community Outreach Activities

• Stakeholder Interviews • Focus Groups • Telephone Survey • Intercept Survey

14 Public Attitudes/Acceptance • Most are only I-5 users and use portions of the corridor • Favorable to lane management • Simplified pricing preferred • Equity – Wide demographics within corridor – Pricing more equitable than access restrictions – Excess revenue should be used in corridor

15

Support Managed Lanes

• Prefer tolls to limiting access • Prefer managed lanes to general purpose lanes • Believe managed lanes can reduce congestion • Results consistent across all demographic groups

16 Telephone Survey Key Findings • 62% support construction of 10+4 lanes • 61% feel project will reduce congestion • 23% feel it will take too long

17

Summary • Pricing is feasible for I-5 North Coast • Skewed per mile tolls are best for managing demand • May need to reconsider the region’s HOV policy in the future • Public is favorable to lane management • Keep user information simple

18 Next Steps

• Transportation Committee Recommends a Preferred Pricing Strategy – February 17, 2006 • Board of Directors – February 24, 2006 • Incorporate Study into Draft EIR/EIS for I-5 North Coast

19

I-5 NORTH COAST MANAGED LANES VALUE PRICING STUDY

Transportation Committee February 17, 2006

20 DAR Locations

Voigt

Lusk Manchester

Cannon SR 78 Oceanside

2

Intermediate Access Locations Intermediate Access Locations

Del Mar Solana Beach Encinitas Carlsbad NB

Carlsbad SB

Carlsbad SB Carlsbad NB Oceanside

22 Pricing Strategies

Refined Design Concept

• Access locations – Direct Access Ramps – Intermediate access

2 Revenue Analysis I-5 Managed Lanes Estimated Annual Revenue (in millions)

2015 Location 8+4 10+4 s/o SR 56 $5.555 $4.248 s/o Via de la Valle $3.904 $2.918 s/o Manchester Ave $1.794 $1.376 n/o Encinitas Blvd $0.759 $0.628 s/o Palomar Airport Rd $0.254 $0.210 n/o Carlsbad Village Dr $0.132 $0.108 n/o SR 76 $0.108 $0.104 TOTAL $12.506 $9.592

Revenue Analysis

I-5 Managed Lanes Estimated Annual Revenue (in millions)

2030 Location 8+4 10+4 s/o SR 56 $6.656 $4.329 s/o Via de la Valle $6.274 $3.983 s/o Manchester Ave $2.076 $1.154 n/o Encinitas Blvd $2.421 $1.478 s/o Palomar Airport Rd $1.203 $0.837 n/o Carlsbad Village Dr $0.882 $0.629 n/o SR 76 $0.227 $0.225 TOTAL $19.739 $12.636 Presentation to Transportation Committee

Coordinated Transportation Service Agency

The CTSA

ƒ The CTSA are intended to promote transportation coordination and consolidation among Health and Human Resource service providers

ƒ The San Diego region is served by the SourcePoint CTSA and a CTSA contractor in North County.

2

1 The Legal Authority for the CTSA

ƒ State statutes and regulations ƒ Responsibilities defined as consolidation and coordination ƒ CA one of only 7 states with provision ƒ Significant new federal incentives for consolidation/coordination including SAFETEA-LU

3

Funding ƒ Provided by state regulation but varies by county ƒ For San Diego – 2% of TDA Section 4.5 grant money, or about $100,000/yr

4

2 Current Organization

ƒ SANDAG through SourcePoint is CTSA for MTS service area ƒ North County Lifeline is CTSA Services Contractor for NCTD service area – Contract with Lifeline expires on June 30, 2006, with option for 1 year extension

5

Three Issues to be Resolved

ƒ Need/demand for agency to actually provide coordinated or consolidated services as provided in legislation

ƒ Existence of two agencies doing the work of a CTSA

ƒ Statutes and regulations do not contemplate organizational structure now found in San Diego

6

3 Issue 1 Single CTSA

ƒ Multiple CTSAs in a single county are permitted by statute but: – Most counties that have multiple CTSA’s have an urban-rural split – Multiple CTSAs defeats the purpose of consolidating transportation – Many H&HS providers operate region wide

7

Recommendation 1

Designate single CTSA for entire region

Supported by MTS & NCTD

8

4 Issue 2 – Regulations & Legislation

ƒ SANDAG (as TPA) now responsible for designating a CTSA but regulations do not contemplate a TPA (SANDAG) being a CTSA ƒ S.B. 1703 precludes SANDAG from operating transit, but CTSA’s are empowered to operate services if it improves coordination

9

Other Issues

ƒ CTSA currently assists transportation providers to apply for grants

ƒ SANDAG has authority to recommend (ie 5310) or award grants (e.g. future TransNet Seniors Mini-Grant)

10

5 CTSA Organizational Structure Options Option A Option B Option C San Diego County San Diego County San Diego County

CTSA Designation SANDAG SANDAG SANDAG Agency

CTSA Other Agency Other Agency SourcePoint

CTSA Optional Contractor Contractor

Agency or contractors could include: Transit Agencies, Nonprofit Agencies, paratransit operators, or Health and Human Services Agencies.

11

Recommendation 2

Designate outside agency Potential candidates include: » NCTD/MTS » County » Non profit transportation provider » Other agency serving seniors or persons with disabilities

12

6 Issue 3 – Role of CTSA

ƒ When CTSA founded decision was made to offer assistance and training not health and human services transportation coordination or consolidation

13

Times they are a Changin’

ƒ Increased costs and higher demand have stimulated need for greater coordination or consolidation

ƒ Very successful coordination or consolidated operations elsewhere have stimulated interest locally

14

7 Recommendation 3

Expand CTSA to better meet spirit and intent of CTSA legislation and regulations for coordination and consolidation

15

Summary of CTSA Recommendations

ƒ Create single CTSA for entire region

ƒ Issue RFP for outside agency to be CTSA

ƒ Require CTSA to implement intent and spirit of legislation and regulations

16

8 Proposed Actions

ƒ Notify Lifeline that CTSA Services contract extension option will not be exercised

ƒ Issue RFP for agency to be designated as CTSA for entire region

ƒ Structure RFP to meet statute and regulatory role for CTSAs

17

Presentation to Transportation Committee

Coordinated Transportation Service Agency

9 Metropolitan Transit System

Comprehensive Operational Analysis

SANDAG Transportation Committee February 17, 2006

1

Why are we conducting the COA?

• Achieve Financial Sustainability – Optimize bus and trolley operations – Reduce or eliminate unproductive and duplicative services to “right size” system – Increase ridership (revenues) by making transit services more attractive and effective • Reconnect with our Markets – Detailed analysis of what is working and what isn’t – Identify markets that can and should be served – Respond to current mobility needs of our markets – Provide type and level of service our markets want and need

2

1 Regional Service Concept

3 Tiers of Service Urban Commuter Community Network Services Based Services Services Network of routes Direct service for Customized with high frequency one seat travel for services tailored to and consistent commute corridors individual span of service to with “critical mass”. community needs. support High frequency Flexible routing and spontaneous use only during peak schedule that may for wide range of hours. vary throughout travel needs. day and week.

3

Service Frequency Enhancements

EXISTING PROPOSED NETWORK NETWORK

BASE FREQUENCIES 15 min. or better 16 - 30 min. Over 30 min. or peak service only 4

2 PLANNING ANALYSIS Example: Routes 9 and 30

Split Market: - Regional service linking downtown, PB, La Jolla, University City - Local circulation in PB, University City

30

34 9

5

PLANNING ANALYSIS

48/49 Example: Routes 9 and 30

BENEFITS • Faster, more direct regional Local segments service attached to new local circulators • New community specific circulators in Pacific Beach and University City

30 Revised regional • Simple routing and service with more schedules 34 9 direct routing and faster travel time for inter-regional trips

6

3 Changes from Original Plan

• Addition of Community Based Services – 10 routes + 1 DART (25,000 Ann. Rev. Hours) – $1 Million Ann. Subsidy – Propose evaluation of services within 6 months of operations • Revisions to Fixed Route Proposals – Address public concerns – Reductions to offset Community Based Services and address capital needs • ADA Paratransit Recommendation – Delay change in service area for 6 months after fixed route implementation – Recommendation supported by ASAC – Community outreach beginning as early as Spring 2006

7

Routes 844 (Poway)

Routes 89 (Carmel Valley)

Routes 84 (Tierrasanta)

(Community Based Service)

4 Escondido Fixed Route Revisions

Rancho • Delay implementation of new Bernardo commuter express routes until additional operating funds are

Sorrento secured Valley Mira Mesa

Kearny University Mesa City

I-15 Transit Plaza Downtown

9

Ridership & Budget Impact

Service Changes Ridership Revenue Improved Frequency* 4.10 million $2.59 million Deleted segments (0.47 million) ($0.45 million) Ann. Net Change 3.63 million $2.14 million

* Studies show that doubling frequency results in a 38%-54% increase in ridership. We used the low estimate of 38% for ridership, and a low average fare of $0.63 to account for existing riders riding more often.

Including operational efficiencies, the annual subsidy savings is estimated at $5 million.

10

5 Public Hearing COA Night Public Hearing • Testimony would be forwarded Thursday, March 2, 2006 to March 9th for consideration 6:00 pm • No formal action requested of Golden Hall - Plaza Hall Room MTS Board San Diego Concourse, 1st Floor COA Day Public Hearing • Testimony would be forwarded Thursday, March 8, 2006 to March 9th for consideration 6:00 pm • No formal action requested of German-American Hall MTS Board 1017 S. Mollison Ave El Cajon COA Day Public Hearing • Regularly scheduled meeting Thursday, March 9, 2006 date and time (different 9:00 am location) Golden Hall - Plaza Hall Room • Testimony would be heard on San Diego Concourse, 1st Floor COA proposals • Request approval of plan

11

SANDAG Staff Comments on COA Plan

12

6 Comments on COA • Consistency with Smart Growth Map - All Existing/Planned Smart Growth areas covered by COA - Many Smart Growth areas benefit from improved service in urban core

13

Service Frequency Enhancements

EXISTING PROPOSED NETWORK NETWORK

BASE FREQUENCIES 15 min. or better 16 - 30 min. Over 30 min. or peak service only 14

7 Comments on COA • Consistency with SGOA Map - All Existing/Planned SGOAs covered by COA - Many SGOAs benefit from improved service in urban core

• Coordination with 2030 RTP Transit Plan - Service improvements include LRT/BRT corridors: including Mid-Coast, El Cajon Blvd, H St - SANDAG/MTS staff coordinating on I-15 BRT plan

15

Comments on COA

• Consistency with SGOA Map - All Existing/Planned SGOAs covered by COA - Many SGOAs benefit from improved service in urban core

• Coordination with 2030 RTP Transit Plan - Service improvements include LRT/BRT corridors: including North I-5, El Cajon Blvd, H St - SANDAG/MTS staff coordinating on I-15 BRT plan

• Regional Short Range Transit Plan - Adopted COA plan will be incorporated into next RSRTP update

16

8 Metropolitan Transit System

Comprehensive Operational Analysis

SANDAG Transportation Committee February 17, 2006

17

9