COVER - FINAL · Microsoft Word - COVER - FINAL.doc Author: jde Created Date: 7/16/2004 9:22:56 PM...

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA

Friday, July 23, 2004 9 a.m.

SANDAG 401 B Street, 7th Floor Downtown San Diego

AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS

• ADOPTION OF REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

• I-15 INTERREGIONAL PARTNERSHIP

Board Members

Mickey Cafagna, Chair Mayor, Poway Mary Sessom, Vice Chair Mayor, Lemon Grove Ron Morrison Councilmember, National City Ramona Finnila Mayor Pro Tem, Carlsbad Steve Padilla Mayor, Chula Vista Phil Monroe Mayor Pro Tem, Coronado Crystal Crawford Councilmember, Del Mar Mark Lewis Mayor, El Cajon Christy Guerin Councilmember, Encinitas Lori Holt Pfeiler Mayor, Escondido Patricia McCoy Mayor Pro Tem, Imperial Beach Barry Jantz Councilmember, La Mesa Jack Feller Councilmember, Oceanside Dick Murphy Mayor, San Diego Jim Madaffer Councilmember, San Diego Corky Smith Mayor, San Marcos Hal Ryan Councilmember, Santee Joe Kellejian Mayor, Solana Beach Morris Vance Mayor, Vista Dianne Jacob Chairman, County of San Diego

Advisory Members

Victor Carrillo, Supervisor Imperial County Pedro Orso-Delgado, District Director California Department of Transportation Leon Williams, Chairman Metropolitan Transit System Judy Ritter, Chair North San Diego County Transit Development Board CAPT Christopher Schanze, USN U.S. Department of Defense Jess Van Deventer, Commissioner San Diego Unified Port District Bud Lewis, Director San Diego County Water Authority Luis Cabrera Cuaron Consul General of Mexico

Gary L. Gallegos Executive Director, SANDAG

PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES DURING THE MEETING

YOU CAN LISTEN TO THE SANDAG BOARD MEETING BY

VISITING OUR WEB SITE AT WWW.SANDAG.ORG

MISSION STATEMENT The 18 cities and county government are SANDAG serving as the forum for regional decision-making.

SANDAG builds consensus, makes strategic plans, obtains and allocates resources, and provides

information on a broad range of topics pertinent to the region’s quality of life.

San Diego Association of Governments ⋅ 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101-4231

(619) 699-1900 ⋅ Fax (619) 699-1905 ⋅ www.sandag.org

Welcome to SANDAG. Members of the public may speak to the Board on any item at the time the Board is considering the item. Request to Speak forms are located in the rear of the room. Once completed, the form should be presented to the Clerk of the Board seated at the front table. Public speakers should notify the Clerk of the Board if they have a handout for distribution to Board members. Members of the public also are invited to address the Board on any issue under the agenda item entitled Public Comments/ Communications. All speakers are limited to three minutes. The SANDAG Board may take action on any item appearing on the agenda. This agenda and related staff reports can be accessed on SANDAG’s Web site at www.sandag.org under Meetings. 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 on the Wednesday preceding the Friday SANDAG Board 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

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Friday, July 23, 2004

3

ITEM # RECOMMENDATION + 1. APPROVAL OF JUNE 25, 2004 MEETING MINUTES APPROVE

2. ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS

3. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS

Members of the public shall have the opportunity to address the Board on any issuewithin the jurisdiction of SANDAG. Anyone desiring to speak shall reserve time bycompleting a “Request to Speak” form and giving it to the Clerk of the Board prior tospeaking. Public speakers should notify the Clerk of the Board if they have a handoutfor distribution to Board members. Speakers are limited to three minutes. Board members may provide information and announcements under this agenda item.

CONSENT ITEMS (4 THROUGH 7)

+ 4. ACTIONS FROM POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES APPROVE

+ 5. FINAL 2004 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (RTIP)(Resolution No. 2005-02) (Sookyung Kim)

ADOPT

SANDAG, as the Metropolitan Planning Organization, is required by state and federal laws to develop and adopt a Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)every two years. The RTIP, a multi-year program of proposed major highway, arterial,transit, and nonmotorized projects, including the TransNet Program of Projects, covers Fiscal Years 2005 to 2009, and is due to the state by August 1, 2004. At the July 16,2004 meeting, the Transportation Committee received public testimony andrecommends the adoption of the Final 2004 RTIP including the Air Quality ConformityAnalysis and the air quality re-determination of the 2030 Revenue Constrained Regional Transportation Plan, and submittal of the Final 2004 RTIP to the StateDepartment of Transportation.

+ 6. FINAL CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM (CalPERS)

RESOLUTION (Leslie Campbell) APPROVE

As a final administrative act to complete the consolidation of SANDAG with transferred

functions from the Metropolitan Transit System (formerly Metropolitan TransitDevelopment Board) and North County Transit District, our individual contract with the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) must be amended. The Board approved the “Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment toContract” and the “Certification of Governing Body’s Action” on June 25, 2004. The required 20-day waiting period has passed and this item is the second reading for the resolution. Upon review and approval by the Board, our new CalPERS contract will be initiated.

4

+ 7. PROPOSED COMMENTS TO CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

(CPUC) REGARDING PROCESS FOR ALLOCATION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCYFUNDS (Rob Rundle)

APPROVE

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is currently considering alternative structures for administering Public Goods Charge Energy Efficiency funds in the future. SANDAG’s Energy Working Group has considered the alternatives under considerationby CPUC, and prepared a draft letter with comments on those proposals. On July 2,the Regional Planning Committee discussed the draft letter prepared by the Energy Working Group, and recommended specific modifications to the draft letter, which arediscussed in the agenda report. The Board is being requested to approve the draftletter for submittal to CPUC.

CHAIR’S REPORT

8. RECOGNITION OF COUNCILMEMBER RON MORRISON FOR HIS SERVICE AS CHAIR OF SANDAG

Councilmember Ron Morrison completed two years of service as the Chair of theSANDAG Board of Directors from July 2002 to June 2004. During his tenure,Councilmember Morrison helped lead the completion of the 2030 RegionalTransportation Plan, the development of the Regional Comprehensive Plan, and thedrafting of the TransNet Extension Ordinance and Expenditure Plan. In addition, Councilmember Morrison helped guide the implementation of the new consolidated SANDAG as mandated by state law.

+ 9. REPORT ON NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGIONAL COUNCILS (NARC)

ANNUAL CONFERENCE (Hon. Ron Morrison, Past Chair) INFORMATION

The Chair and two other Board members attended the NARC Annual Conference in Chicago, Illinois, from June 26-29, 2004. A report on the conference highlights isprovided.

+ 10. APPOINTMENT OF POLICY COMMITTEE CHAIRS AND VICE CHAIRS (Hon.

Mickey Cafagna, Chair) APPOINT

The Bylaws provide that the Board Chair annually appoints the Chairs and Vice Chairsof the Policy Advisory Committees.

5

REPORTS

+ 11. CERTIFICATION OF FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) AND ADOPTION OF REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (RCP)(Resolution No. 2005-01) (Hon. Lori Holt-Pfeiler, Chair, Regional Planning Committee; Carolina Gregor, SANDAG; Rob Rundle, SANDAG)

CERTIFY/ADOPT

The Regional Planning Committee unanimously recommends that the SANDAG Boardof Directors certify the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the RCP inaccordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and adopt the RCP.Adoption of the plan provides the region with a long-term comprehensive plan for theSan Diego region based on sustainability and smart growth principles.

+ 12. INTERSTATE 15 INTERREGIONAL PARTNERSHIP (I-15 IRP) - FINAL REPORT

(Hon. Crystal Crawford, Chair, I-15 Interregional Partnership Committee;Susan Baldwin, SANDAG)

APPROVE

The Board is being asked to approve the final report for the I-15 Interregional Partnership (I-15 IRP). This report is the final product of a three-year project funded by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. The reportcontains 23 transportation, housing, economic development, and program strategies to address the jobs/housing and related transportation issues that have arisen over thepast ten years between the San Diego region and southwestern Riverside County.

13. UPCOMING MEETINGS INFORMATION

The Friday, August 27, 2004 meeting of the Board of Directors has been cancelled. Thenext meeting is scheduled for Friday, September 24, 2004 at 9 a.m.

14. CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 –

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS

A. Property: Assessor Parcel Nos. 316-180-14, 15 and 16, located in the City of

San Diego Negotiators: Tim Allison and Chip Willett (for SANDAG); Legacy Sabre Springs, LLC (for property owner) Under Negotiation: Purchase price of subject property

B. Property: Assessor Parcel No. 313-031-16 (Carmel Mountain Ranch), located in

the City of San Diego Negotiators: Tim Allison and Chip Willett (for SANDAG); Carmel Mountain Ranch, a California General Partnership (for property owner) Under Negotiation: Purchase price of subject property

15. ADJOURNMENT GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

+ next to an agenda item indicates an attachment

2

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 04-07-1

JULY 23, 2004 ACTION REQUESTED – APPROVE

BOARD OF DIRECTORS DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS Meeting of June 25, 2004

Chairman Ron Morrison (National City) called the meeting of the SANDAG Board of Directors to order at 9:18 a.m. The attendance sheet for the meeting is attached. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler (Escondido) noted a correction on page 8 of the May 28, 2004, meeting minutes. Under “C. SUMMARY OF KEY CHANGES TO THE DRAFT REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (C),” the minutes state that “Mayor Holt Pfeiler noted that this Monday, June 24, 2004, there was a Joint Regional Planning Committee meeting…” Mayor Pfeiler said that the date of the Joint Regional Planning Committee meeting was May 24 rather than June 24. Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Mark Lewis (El Cajon) and a second by Mayor Corky Smith (San Marcos), the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the minutes from the May 28, 2004, meeting as amended.

2. ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS There were no additions or deletions to the agenda.

3. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBERS COMMENTS Tom Mullaney, representing Friends of San Diego, a nonprofit group interested in transit issues. He urged the Board members and Council members to read the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP). He said the concepts included in the RCP are good; however, reality is that the way the RCP is written it is not focused on limiting growth. It is anticipated that the region will have a 30 percent housing growth. He asked if the smart growth efforts in the RCP will keep pace with the expected home growth. He noted an example of true smart growth is Carlsbad’s plan. He supported the goals of livable communities, the integration of land use and transportation, enhanced cooperation between jurisdictions, and smart growth. He thought that if the RCP was approved in its present form, the Board’s constituents will not be happy. David Krogh, a member of the public, thanked the Board for the time spent on the TransNet effort. He said that extending TransNet is the most important thing to do to improve traffic congestion in San Diego County. He expressed doubt that this measure would be approved in November. He noted that about 80 percent of San Diego County residents get to work using the freeways. Relief of traffic congestion has been listed as the

2

SANDAG Board of Directors July 23, 2004 – Agenda Item #1 (APPROVE)

public’s highest priority. He didn’t think the equal one-third split of TransNet Extension dollars will provide sufficient resources to make significant improvements in traffic congestion. He suggested that the TransNet Extension funding split be 60 percent for highways, 20 percent for streets and roads, and 20 percent for transit. Vice Chair Mickey Cafagna (Poway) clarified that two-thirds of the proposed TransNet Extension funds will be going to highways, local streets and roads, and freeways. All of the existing corridors will be enhanced because there are no opportunities for brand new freeways. This plan maximizes the existing corridors out to their rights-of-ways; anything more would require additional funds to purchase more right-of-way. He believes that this is a well-balanced plan, but acknowledged that it does not solve all of the problems. He stated that 80 percent of the people are using freeways to go to work because they don’t have an alternative. Chuck Lungerhausen, a member of the public, stated that County Supervisor Dianne Jacob continues to advocate taking money away from public transportation to fund highways and local roads. He doesn’t see how that’s going to solve the traffic congestion problem; and, in fact, it will make the traffic congestion problem worse. He sees tourists using public transportation, but he doesn’t see the County Supervisors using public transportation. He stated that tourism is part of the economic engine of San Diego County. He said that decreasing the amount of the TransNet Extension for public transportation will be taking away jobs from people. His observations are that people who implement the system work hard. Vice Chair Cafagna stated that he has had the opportunity to meet with Supervisor Jacob, and her intentions on behalf of her constituents are pure. He thought that her efforts have strengthened the TransNet Extension measure. Supervisor Dianne Jacob (County of San Diego) said that she lives in the unincorporated area. People who live in the unincorporated areas don’t ride mass transit because it is not available to them in those areas, and it is not projected to be there in the TransNet Extension. We are locked into driving our cars. Chair Morrison pointed out that you don’t have to use something to support it. If we don’t put mass transit into our urban core, the rural areas will become urban.

CONSENT ITEMS (4 through 10)

4. ACTIONS FROM POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES (APPROVE)

5. FY 2003 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (INFORMATION)

6. CITY OF SAN DIEGO NONDISPOSAL FACILITY ELEMENT AMENDMENT (APPROVE) SANDAG, as the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Task Force, is requested to approve submission of the Sixth Amendment to the City of San Diego’s Nondisposal Facility Element of the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan to the California Integrated Waste Management Board. The City’s amendment adds two Material Recovery

3


Facilities to the plan, which will result in less waste in the City’s landfills, and deletes a facility that is no longer in use.

7. CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM (CALPERS) CONTRACT AMENDMENT (APPROVE) As a final administrative act to complete the consolidation of SANDAG with transferred functions from the Metropolitan Transit System (formerly Metropolitan Transit Development Board) and North County Transit District, our individual contract with CalPERS must be amended. To do that, the Board must approve the “Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment to Contract” and the “Certification of Governing Body’s Action.”

8. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROJECTS AFFECTING THE SAN DIEGO REGION (ACCEPT) Each year, the Defense Department provides SANDAG a summary of its activities related to implementing smart growth strategies and a listing of its military construction projects for the current fiscal year and the next two fiscal years. Board action would accept the report for distribution to interested agencies, organizations, and individuals.

9. FY 2005 WEIGHTED VOTING FORMULA (INFORMATION) On an annual basis, SANDAG is required to recompute the weighted vote of the Board based on updated population figures. The population figures used for this purpose have been certified by the California Department of Finance. There is no change in the formula for next year.

10. FY 2005 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) ALLOCATIONS (Resolutions No. 2004-25 through 2004-29) (APPROVE) The Transportation Development Act (TDA) provides ¼ percent of state sales tax for operating and capital support of public transportation systems and nonmotorized transportation projects. SANDAG, as the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), is responsible for the allocation of TDA funds to the region’s cities and transit operators. The FY 2005 TDA claim requests were presented to the Transportation Committee as part of the transit operators budget item at its June 18, 2004, meeting. This report presents the final allocation requests for the TDA Article 3, Article 4, Article 4.5, and Article 8 claims, and one State Transit Assistance claim. It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve Resolutions 2004-25 through 2004-29 approving the FY 2005 TDA allocations and the FY 2005 Productivity Improvement Goals. Action: Upon a motion by Cafagna and second by Madaffer (City of San Diego) the Board approved Consent Items 4 through 10, including Resolutions 2004-25 through 2004-29. Yes – 18 (weighted vote, 100%). No – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – 0 (0%). Absent – Santee.

4


CHAIR’S REPORT

11. PERFORMANCE REVIEW OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (APPROVE) Pursuant to the employment agreement with the Executive Director, an annual evaluation is required. If the Executive Director's performance is deemed to have been satisfactory over the past year, his contract amount is automatically revised. The Executive Committee has determined that this requirement has been met. In addition, the Executive Committee recommends that the Executive Director be provided a bonus award as is currently available to all staff in the amount of 10 percent of current base salary on accomplishment of performance goals over the past year. Attachment 1 is the Executive Director's Performance Review for the past year. Attachment 2 presents the objectives for the Executive Director for the coming year. Chair Morrison reported that this comes up once a year, with a review of the Executive Director’s performance over the past year in meeting the goals set during that period, and establishing goals for the next year. He recommended that a 10 percent bonus be approved for the Executive Director. He said that SANDAG is extremely privileged to have Gary Gallegos as its Executive Director. The Board leadership agrees that they have been extremeley pleased with his performance this past year. . Jim Schmidt, a member of the public, said that he has been active in civic affairs since 1960. He has been impressed with Mr Gallegos and SANDAG staff as a whole. It was surprising to him that everyone at SANDAG answers their own phones. He is a consolidation fan, and thought that SANDAG staff has worked as a team on consolidation. Vice Chair Cafagna mentioned that Mr. Gallegos has been on the Governor’s list of candidates to take over the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) statewide. He has been asked a number of times to consider taking that position. He said that he and the SANDAG Chair have done their best to keep Mr. Gallegos at SANDAG. He has a great reputation statewide, and we are lucky to have him. Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Smith and a second by Vice Chair Cafagna, the Board approved the performance review of the Executive Director for this past year, awarded a 10 percent bonus, and established the performance goals for next year. Yes – 18 (weighted vote, 98%). No – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – 0 (0%). Absent – Santee (Weighted vote, 2%).

12. SYNOPSIS OF THE JOINT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG)/SANDAG INFORMATIONAL EXCHANGE MEETING (INFORMATION) This informational report contains a synopsis of the regional topics discussed during the May 27, 2004, meeting of elected officials from both agencies. Topics encompassed intercity and commuter rail passenger ridership, transportation interregional partnerships, the aviation strategy for the SCAG region, regional housing needs, and the SANDAG Regional Economic Prosperity Strategy. Chair Morrison stated that the goal of this joint meeting is to exchange ideas, discuss common interests, and support initiatives such as the Interstate 15 Interregional Partnership

5


(I-15 IRP). The SCAG jurisdiction includes six counties, 200 cities, and deals with an area of 8,000 miles. Other SANDAG Board attendees included Vice Chair Cafagna, Mayor Lori Holt Pfiler (Escondido), and Councilmember Crystal Crawford (Del Mar). Vice Chair Cafagna stated that it is amazing what you learn about how our sister agencies are run and the projects they are working on. It makes a difference in how we work. We will be working on quality of life issues together. Councilmember Crawford encouraged other members of the Board to attend these meetings. The next meeting will be held after the elections in November. It is an excellent opportunity to share information, hear concerns from people who live outside our region, learn what they are doing in other areas, and to correct misperceptions about what is going on in our area.

13. RECOGNITION OF CAPT. CHRIS SCHANZE, USN, CIVIL ENGINEER CORPS For nearly two years, Captain Chris Schanze, the Commander of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Western Division, has served admirably as an advisory member to the SANDAG Board of Directors representing the U.S. Department of Defense. SANDAG wishes the Captain and his family fair winds and following seas as he assumes his new leadership post in Washington, D.C., as the Deputy Commander for Engineer Operations. Chair Morrison said that it has been the Board’s honor and pleasure to have Capt. Schanze on the SANDAG Board, and he has served admirably. He has been a strong partner and has helped with the RCP, the regional housing task force, and environmental issues. He offered the Board’s congratulations on Capt. Schanze’s new assignment, and expressed best wishes to him and his family. Capt. Schanze said that it has been his pleasure to serve on the SANDAG Board. He thanked the Board members for their counsel, support, advice, and friendship. He stated that he learned a lot and will take that information with him.

14. ELECTION OF BOARD OFFICERS – REPORT OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE (ACCEPT) Chair Morrison noted that the Chair of our Nomination Committee, Mayor Steve Padilla (Chula Vista), is out of town and Crystal Crawford would be presenting this report. Councilmember Crawford stated that the Nominating Committee met earlier this week, and its members were: Mayor Padilla, Councilmember Crawford, Mayor Morris Vance (Vista), Mayor Mark Lewis, and Mayor Dick Murphy (City of San Diego). The Committee was asked to make recommendations for the Chair and Vice Chair for the upcoming fiscal year. The Committee recommendatons are presented in the agenda report. She said that much of what was discussed is that SANDAG is not the organization it was several years ago. The Committee felt it was appropriate to take a look at changes that might be made to our Bylaws to put in place a more predictable and well-suited process for selecting Board officers, and looking at related issues. There was a precedent for sub-regionally rotation to rely on; however, our Bylaws do not require a particular process. The Bylaws state that new Board officers should be installed during the month of July. The new Chair would then

6


select the chairs and vice chairs for the Policy Advisory Committees (PACs) and this should occur in July. The Committee took into acount the elections in November, which oftentimes impact the Board officers and/or PAC chair / vice chair selections. We also have a lot of things that happen at different times. We should consider those issues and how timing affects each one. The TransNet Extension is an extremely important issue for the Board, and all members of the Board are involved in this effort. The RCP will be coming back to the Board for approval, and it is an extremely important and time-cosuming process. There is also the report to the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO’s) on consolidation that’s due at the end of this year. For these reasons, it seemed to the Nominating Committee that it would be appropriate to consider coming back with changes to the process for the selection of officers and include additional variables related to a succession plan. Given the responsibility of our Chair, Vice Chair, Board members, and the additional responsibilities of the agency, the addition of a second vice chair is recommended. This would provide additional stability and succession planning. Councilmember Crawford also disucssed what kinds of variables that go into the selection process for the Chair and Vice Chair including availability, experience, skill, and temperament. This process should be more set in our Bylaws. The Committee also felt that this action would be most appropriate if taken prior to the selection of the new Chair and Vice Chair. The timing might be better after the November election. The Committee suggested that it come back with changes to the Bylaws in December. She clarified that the Committee’s recommendations are in no way a negative reflection on the current Chair, Vice Chair, or current Board members. If the Board were to approve the recommendations, the current Chair and Vice Chair would remain in place until December. Mayor Murphy stated that the Committee members are all flexible on the issues, but the issue of changing to a calendar year makes sense to the Committee. The struggle is that if you have elections now, someone selected may not be reelected in November and the appointments of the PACs take place in January 2005. At some point, SANDAG needs to be on a calendar year basis. Councilmember Christy Guerin (Encinitas) agreed with all of the issues raised; however, she noted that tradition has taken part in what has been discussed. She felt that the process needs to continue. She disagreed with the timing concerns and thinks that it is inappropriate to change the selection process for the Chair and Vice Chair at this time. It was thought that the East County was not prepared for its rotation; however, it is prepared to come forward with a candidate. Sometimes you have to let traditions continue if they work. Motion Made: Councilmember Guerin nominated Mickey Cafagna as the new Chair and Mary Sessom as the new Vice Chair as of July 1, 2004; and referred the various issues back to the Nominating Committee for further consideration, and directed that it bring back a report to the full Board in December. Councilmember Jim Madaffer seconded the motion. Vice Chair Cafagna agreed with the issues raised by the Nominating Committee. He said that we need to look at a policy that determines what it takes to move up in this organization and it has to do more than with a simple rotation. The Nominating Committee deserves time to come up with a policy. He also thought that adding a second vice chair is an important thing to do. He supported the change to a calendar year.

7


Supervisor Jacob said that she will support the motion. The issues that have been raised are excellent. She agreed with the adherece to tradition at this point related to the selection of a new Chair and Vice Chair and further consideration of amendments to the Bylaws. Mayor Pro Tem Ramona Finnila (Carlsbad) said that as a past chair of SANDAG the question of succession and timing came up several years ago during the midst of Senate Bill (SB) 1703. She said that it is extremely important in the succession of the chair and vice chair that information does not get lost. In this organization, succession is extremely important. When you are the SANDAG Chair and Vice Chair, you give up your private and economic lives. It is an extremely demanding job. If you seek this job you need to know what is involved. The selection of a chair and vice chair should be based more on the commitment and time that people have to serve rather than geographical divisions. She agreed that the Board should accept the recommendations of the Nominating Committee. Mayor Pro Tem Phil Monroe (Coronado) expressed strong support of the motion. He noted that two years ago, there was a strategy being developed to change the succession of the chair and vice chair. He agreed with the succession recommendations of the Nominating Committee. He strongly supported Mayor Murphy’s comments on the January changeover. He suggested that the term for the new Chair be 1 ½ years with the ability to extend it for six months. Councilmember Jack Feller (Oceanside) asked about the question of succession. Chair Morrison responded that there has been an unwritten historic rotation between the four subregions. Mayor Mary Sessom (Lemon Grove) said that it is unusual for the chair and vice chair nomination to not come out of the Nominating Commtitee. She thanked her colleagues from East County for submitted her as their candidate. She thought that the issues rasied by the Nominating Committee are important. She hoped that Chair Morrison would be a very active past chair, especially on TransNet, if the motion is approved. Mayor Sessom said that she is fully prepared to take on the job as Vice Chair. She agreed that the proposed Bylaw changes will result in a better organization. Councilmember Patty Davis (Chula Vista) stated that the Nominating Committee recommendations are good. She agreed with the concerns that the time is not appropriate to change the process for the selection of chair and vice chair. She did think it was important to change to calendar year. She wondered if the Board could select a new chair and vice chair but they would not take office until December. Mayor Joe Kellejian (Solana Beach) agreed that the timing is not good right now to change the chair and vice chair, so he would be supporting the motion. He wondered if the Nominating Committee will be ongoing to discuss the issues that were raised. He would like to see the Committee come back with some recommendations on the issues. He agreed with the recommendation for two vice chairs, but he was not clear on whether it would be two vice chairs or a first and second vice chair for succession purposes. He thought that the Committee should come back to the Board with a recommendations on this.

8


Councilmember Crawford said that the intent of the Committee was to have a first vice chair and a second vice chair, but this could be explored in detail. If the Nominating Committee reports back in December, that would allow time to work on these issues. Councilmember Guerin clarified the motion to refer all of the Nominating Committee’s recommendations back to it for further review and consideration and to bring forward some concrete recommendations to include the debate on the calendar year. She thought that the Board should proceed with electing its new chair and vice chair as of July 1, 2004. Chair Morrison stated that if there is an issue related to changing to a calendar year, the Nominating Committee should report back in November rather than December. Mayor Pro Tem Monroe asked the Nominating Committee to also consider that some cities have term limits for their elected officials. Vice Chair Cafagna commented that if this motion passes, we’ll have the understanding that the terms can continue to be worked on. Councilmember Crawford asked Councilmember Guerin if her motion should state that the Nominating Committee should report back no later than November. This would allow the Committee to continue to discuss the issues. She noted that the new chair and vice chair may want to put other members on the Nominating Committee. Mayor Murphy offered to relinquish his seat on the Nominating Committee. Councilmember Guerin said that she fully expects to see Vice Chair Cafagna and Mayor Sessom to have a one-year term. She didn’t think we needed to affect the changes this next January 1. Chair Morrison pointed out that during the last two years the timing of the appointments for the chairs and vice chairs for the PACS has been extremely awkward with this occuring in January while the Board Chair and Vice Chair have been selected in July. He encouraged the change to the calendar year. Chair Morrison thanked the Board for the way this situation was handled. Mayor Pro Tem Finnila stated that the position here as a Board of Director member is equally as important as the chair, vice chair, or a committee chair. She said that Board members should not underestimate the importance of their positions on this Board. Councilmember Guerin thanked Chair Morrison for his leadeship over the past two years. She said that he has had some unbelievable issues on his plate and have handled them very well. He has put in a tremendous amount of time on the Board and encouraged the members to form a team; the change on the Board was obvious. We look forward to you being the mentor as we move forward with all you have done. Morrison said that this is very much a team effort and every Board member is important.

9


Action: Upon a motion by Councilmember Guerin and a second by Councilmember Madaffer, the Board approved the nomination of Mickey Cafagna as the new Chair and Mary Sessom as the new Vice Chair as of July 1, 2004; and referred the various issues raised by the Nominating Committee back to them for further consideration, and directed that it bring back a report to the full Board by December. Yes – 17 (weighted vote, 95%). No – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – 0 (%). Absent – El Cajon and Santee. Chair Morrison called for a break at 10:30 a.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:46 a.m.

REPORTS

15. FINAL FY 2005 PROGRAM BUDGET (Resolution No. 2004-23) The Director of Finance, Renée Wasmund, reported that the budget development process started in November 2003, then it was presented to the Executive Committee and Board every month after that time. She noted that we are undergoing a comprehensive personnel survey; however, any changes will be done within this budget. She stated that the transit operator budgets were approved at last week’s Transportation Committee meeting, so they are not included in this budget. Last week staff reviewed changes with the Executive Committee and they recommended approval of this budget. Ms. Wasmund reviewed the changes with the Board since they last saw the budget: (1) The first change relates to a carryover of unexpended training funds from FY 2004 to FY 2005; (2) the second change is an increase in the workers compensation line item from $141,000 to $281,000 to include the entire consolidated staff; (3) the third change included $470,000 for the cost of printing the prepaid fare media; (4) the fourth change is the addition of funds to an existing project, the Kearny Mesa Division Underground Tank, to correct deficiencies at both the Kearny Mesa Divison and Imperial Avenue Division facilities; (5) the fifth change is the addition of two Criminal Justice programs to the Overall Work Program (OWP); (6) the sixth change is an adjustment of Automated Regional Justice Information System (ARJIS) costs and funding to reflect updated assumptions for member assessments, member fees, and grants; (7) the final change is to increase the Assistance to Transit Operators project by $130,000 to fully fnd the passenger counting program. Ms. Wasmund stated that after printing of the agenda package, Caltrans asked that SANDAG be the lead agency on the Coordination with Native American Tribunal Governments, which is funded with a $112,500 grant from Caltrans. We also received a cost estimate from the Registrar of Voters of $500,000 to $700,000 for printing of the TransNet Extension ballot. Mayor Pro Tem Monroe referred to page 15, and wondered why the Meeting and Miscellanenous Expense line item decreased by $30,000. Ms. Wasmund replied that some money for memberships and publications had previously been included in the Meeting and Mscellaneous Expense line item. That money has been transferred to the Memberships and Publications line item. Mayor Pro Tem Finnila asked if the item related to the Kearny Mesa Underground Tanks would include double siding and an increase in capacity. The Director of Mobility and

10


Project Implementation, Jack Boda, replied that this work will include double-walling the facilities and expanding capacity. Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Monroe and a second by Councilmember Madaffer, the SANDAG Board of Directors approved Resolution 2004-23, adopting the FY 2005 Final Budget, which includes the authority to pass through $112,500 to the Reservation Transportation Authority for a project to improve communication and coordination between Native American tribes, Caltrans, and regional planning agencies. Yes – 17 (weighted vote, 96%). No – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – 0 (0%). Absent – San Marcos, Santee.

16. UPCOMING MEETINGS The next Policy Board meeting is tentatively scheduled for Friday, July 9, 2004, and the next regular Board of Directors business meeting is scheduled for Friday, July 23, 2004. Chair Morrison indicated that a survey had been sent to each Board member inquiring about Board member preferences for how they want their agenda package materials to be delivered. The Executive Director requested that Board members fill out this survey before leaving today’s meeting.

17. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:59 a.m.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Secretary

11


ATTENDANCE SANDAG BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING

JUNE 25, 2004

JURISDICTION/ ORGANIZATION

NAME

ATTENDING

COMMENTS

City of Carlsbad Ramona Finnila (Member) Yes

City of Chula Vista Patty Davis (Alternate) Yes

City of Coronado Phil Monroe (Member) Yes

City of Del Mar Crystal Crawford (Member) Yes

City of El Cajon Mark Lewis (Member) Yes

City of Encinitas Christy Guerin (Member) Yes

City of Escondido Lori Holt Pfeiler (Member) Yes

City of Imperial Beach Patricia McCoy (Member) Yes

City of La Mesa Dave Allan (Alternate) Yes

City of Lemon Grove Mary Sessom (Member) Yes

City of National City Ron Morrison, Chair (Member) Yes

City of Oceanside Jack Feller (Member) Yes

City of Poway Mickey Cafagna, Vice Chair (Member) Yes

City of San Diego – A Dick Murphy (Member) Yes

City of San Diego - B Jim Madaffer (Member) Yes

City of San Marcos Corky Smith (Member) Yes

City of Santee Hal Ryan (Member) No

City of Solana Beach Joe Kellejian (Member) Yes

City of Vista Judy Ritter (Alternate) Yes

County of San Diego Diane Jacob (Member) Yes

ADVISORY MEMBERS LISTED BELOW (ATTENDANCE NOT COUNTED FOR QUORUM PURPOSES)

Caltrans Bill Figge (Alternate) Yes

MTDB Leon Williams (Member) Yes

NCTD Tom Golich (1st Alternate) Yes

Imperial County Victor Carrillo (Member) No

US Dept. of Defense CAPT Christopher Schanze (Member) Yes

SD Unified Port District Jess Van Deventer (Member) No

SD County Water Authority Bud Lewis (Alternate) Yes

Baja California/Mexico Lydia Antonio (Alternate) Yes

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 04-07- 4JULY 23, 2004 ACTION REQUESTED – APPROVE

ACTIONS FROM POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES The following actions were taken by the Policy Advisory Committees (PACs) since the last Board meeting. Actions printed in bold typeface must be ratified by the Board of Directors to be effective. Transportation Committee (July 2, 2004) This meeting was cancelled. Regional Planning Committee (July 2, 2004) The Regional Planning Committee took the following actions: • Substituted the word "higher" for

"highest” for prioritizing funding for regional transportation projects in the Smart Growth Opportunity Area matrix contained in the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP).

• Recommended certification of the RCP’s program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and adoption of the RCP to the SANDAG Board of Directors.

• Added Goal No. 10 to the Regional Energy Strategy (RES) as follows: “Define the political authority and sustainable funding sources necessary to implement the RES and identify the appropriate implementation strategies.”

• Approved transmittal of a letter

supporting San Diego Gas & Electric Company’s (SDG&E’s) request to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for due process to ensure that the potential to shift more than $1 billion in additional costs to the San Diego region over the next eight years does not occur.

Executive Committee (July 9, 2004) The Executive Committee took the following actions: • Amended the FY 2005 budget and work

program to expand the scope and time frame for the Automated Regional Justice Information System (ARJIS) Border Safe Project based on notification of additional funding.

• Changed its meeting start time to 8 a.m. and recommended that the Policy Board meetings also start earlier.

Board of Directors Policy Meeting (July 9, 2004) This meeting was cancelled. Public Safety Committee (July 9, 2004) The Public Safety Committee took the following actions: • Approved the objectives of the San Diego

Regional Sex Offender Information Management System.

2


• Recommended a letter from the Public Safety Committee supporting Assembly Bill (AB) 488, which deals with the availability of sex offender information via the Internet.

• Approved the development of a cooperative agreement between ARJIS and the Capital Wireless Integrated Network (CAPWIN).

• Recommended that Chairman Padilla invite Baja California Attorney General Antonio Martinez Luna to make a presentation to the Public Safety Committee.

• Recommended a letter from the Public

Safety Committee supporting law enforcement access to enhanced biometrics information.

Transportation Committee (July 16, 2004) The Transportation Committee took the following actions: • Approved a schedule extension for the

improvement project at the State Route (SR) 163/Clairemont Mesa Boulevard interchange.

• Held a public hearing on the 2004 Regional Transportation Improve- ment Program (RTIP) and recommended adoption of the 2004 RTIP to the SANDAG Board of Directors.

• In closed session, the Transportation Committee gave direction to staff on the purchase price of real property in the City of El Cajon.

Borders Committee/2004 Binational Summer Conference (July 16, 2004) The Borders Committee joined the SANDAG 8th Binational Summer Conference “Cooperation Across the California-Baja California Border: Where do we go from here?” held in the Multicultural Complex of San Ysidro Middle School. The outcome from the conference will be presented to the Board at a future meeting GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 04-07- 5JULY 23, 2004 ACTION REQUESTED – ADOPT

FINAL 2004 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (RTIP)

Introduction

The 2004 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) is a $4.8 billion five-year program of major highway, transit, arterial, and nonmotorized projects funded by federal, state, TransNet local sales tax, and other local funding sources from FY 2004/05 to FY 2008/09. The 2004 RTIP is due to the State by August 1, 2004. A summary of major projects is shown in Table 1. As required by federal regulations, SANDAG conducted an air quality conformity analysis of all regionally significant capacity increasing projects in the 2004 RTIP. The analysis demonstrates that the 2004 RTIP meets the air quality conformity requirements. At its June 18, 2004, meeting, the Transportation Committee accepted the draft 2004 RTIP for distribution and public comment, and scheduled a public hearing. Since then, SANDAG has received requests for clarification and minor revisions from local jurisdictions but has not received any

significant comments. At its meeting on July 16, 2004, the Transportation Committee held a public hearing to receive public testimony from interested parties. No comments were received.

Discussion

Notices of availability of the draft 2004 RTIP document were sent to all interested parties, and the draft report has been available on the SANDAG Web site for the past month. In addition, a notice for today’s public hearing was published in several newspapers of general circulation. Upon approval, the final 2004 RTIP including the Air Quality Conformity Determination and the conformity re-determination of the 2030 Revenue Constrained Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) will be prepared for submittal to the State by the August 1, 2004 deadline. Inland Rail Trail At its July 16, 2004 meeting, the Transportation Committee also approved the increased funding of $4.7 million for the Inland Rail Trail (IRT) to be incorporated into the final 2004 RTIP. The IRT is a multi- jurisdictional project to develop a bicycle and pedestrian trail within the Sprinter right-of-way. The North County Transit District (NCTD) recently awarded the construction contract for the Sprinter main line which included the construction of the IRT. However, the construction cost for the IRT segment was higher than the initial estimate (by $4.7 million). In order to ensure that both the Sprinter and IRT projects proceed, the

Recommendation The Transportation Committee recommends the approval of Resolution No. 2005-02 adopting the final 2004 RTIP including its Air Quality Conformity Determination and the conformity re-determination of the 2030 Revenue Constrained Regional Transportation Plan.

2

SANDAG Board of Directors July 23, 2004 – Agenda Item # 5 (ADOPT)

Transportation Committee approved the use of Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) and TransNet-Bicycle funds to fill the deficit. RTIP Requirements SANDAG, as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), is required by state and federal laws to develop and adopt an RTIP, a multi-year program of proposed major highway, arterial, transit, and nonmotorized projects, including the TransNet Program of Projects, every two years. The current 2002 RTIP, adopted by the SANDAG Board on July 28, 2002, expires September 30, 2004. The 2004 RTIP is designed to implement the region’s overall strategy for enhancing mobility and improving the efficiency and safety of the transportation system, while reducing transportation-related air pollution in support of efforts to attain federal and state air quality standards for the region. The 2004 RTIP also incrementally develops the adopted RTP for the San Diego region. Table 2 lists all projects proposed to be included in the 2004 RTIP. These projects were developed in cooperation with all jurisdictions with projects in the San Diego region. Federal Air Quality Conformity Requirements Federal regulations require that SANDAG conduct an air quality conformity analysis of all regionally significant projects that increase the transportation system capacity. This includes major local and privately funded projects, state or federally funded projects that might not otherwise appear in the RTIP, and major changes in project scope for existing programmed projects. In addition, the RTIP must provide for the timely

implementation of transportation control measures (TCMs). There are four adopted TCMs for the San Diego region: rideshare, transit, bicycle/pedestrian and traffic flow improvement projects. Table 3 lists these four TCMs and the percentage share of funding to the total RTIP. The draft quantitative emissions analyses for the 2004 RTIP and for the re-determination for the 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP were conducted and the results distributed for public review and comment. The deadline for written comments was July 9, 2004. The results of the regional emissions analysis indicate that the 2004 RTIP and the 2030 RTP meet the air quality conformity requirements. The San Diego Region Conformity Working Group (CWG) reviewed the draft air quality conformity assessment at its June 16, 2004 meeting, where minor revisions to the reports were identified. To date, SANDAG has not received any significant comments on these analyses, and no comments were received during the public hearing. Attachment 1 presents the final Regional Emissions Analysis and Modeling Procedures. This report also is included as Appendix C in the Final 2004 RTIP document.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

Attachments

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

No Budget Impact

401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone (619) 699-1900 • Fax (619) 699-1905 www.sandag.org

RESOLUTION NO. 2005-02

ADOPTING THE 2004 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY DETERMINATION

WHEREAS, Title 23 and 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations require the preparation and updating of a Transportation Improvement Program by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO); and WHEREAS, Sections 14527 and 65082 of the California Government Code require the biennial preparation of a Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) by the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA); and WHEREAS, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has been designated the MPO, RTPA and Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for the San Diego region; and WHEREAS, the San Diego Transportation Improvement Program Ordinance and Expenditure Plan (Proposition A, 1987, Ordinance) further provides that the SANDAG Board acting as the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) shall approve a multi-year TransNet sales tax funded program of projects as part of the RTIP; and WHEREAS, SANDAG, through the conduct of a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process and in conformance with all applicable federal and state requirements, has prepared the 2004 RTIP, including an updated TransNet Program of Projects for the San Diego region; and WHEREAS, the 2004 RTIP has been found to be in conformance with the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), the 1998 Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS)/1982 State Implementation Plan (SIP), the California Transportation Commission’s 2004 STIP Fund Estimate, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century of 1998 (TEA-21), and the TransNet Program, including reasonably available funding provisions; and WHEREAS, the 2004 RTIP projects have been developed from the 2030 RTP and 2002 Congestion Management Program (CMP) process, which together serve as the Congestion Management System (CMS) for the San Diego region; and WHEREAS, the 2004 RTIP provides for timely implementation of transportation control measures contained in the adopted RAQS/SIP for air quality and a quantitative emissions analysis demonstrates that implementation of the RTIP projects and programs meet all the federally required emissions budget targets; and WHEREAS, the public and affected agencies have been provided notice of and an opportunity to comment on the 2004 RTIP and its air quality conformity determination, and a public hearing was held on July 16, 2004 to present the 2004 RTIP and air quality conformity determination and to solicit testimony from the public; NOW THEREFORE

Resolution 2005-02 Page 2 of 2 BE IT RESOLVED that SANDAG finds the 2004 RTIP and the 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP in conformance with the applicable SIP for the San Diego region. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the SANDAG Board of Directors does hereby adopt the 2004 RTIP and its air quality conformity determination, and the re-determination of the Revenue Constrained 2030 RTP. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all regionally significant, capacity-increasing projects included in the 2004 RTIP are included in the 2030 RTP. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the SANDAG Board, acting as the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission approves the FY 20004/05 to FY 2007/08 TransNet program of projects, as incorporated in the 2004 RTIP. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the adoption of the 2004 RTIP constitutes the Intergovernmental Review Procedures for those projects listed in the RTIP. The 2004 RTIP approval does not constitute project level design or environmental approval, which is conducted according to state and federal regulations. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the inclusion of any federally funded projects in the 2004 RTIP, including all amendments, constitutes the federal project selection procedures for the San Diego region, and any projects programmed in the RTIP may proceed to implementation without further project selection action by SANDAG. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 2004 RTIP, including the FY 2004/05 to FY 2007/08 TransNet Program of Projects, has been developed based upon an estimate of reasonably available revenues for the program period. Actual transportation fund availability to each eligible recipient/project applicant will be based on actual federal/state fund apportionments, including obligational authority limitations, and TransNet sales tax receipts. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that SANDAG’s approval of the 2004 RTIP also constitutes the federal transit “designated recipient” approval of all grant applications filed by the transit operators that are consistent with the RTIP project programming. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that SANDAG certifies that the urban transportation planning process is being carried on in conformance with all applicable federal requirements as described in the “Statewide Transportation Planning/Metropolitan Transportation Planning, Proposed Rule” dated May 25, 2000, and the federal Clean Air Act, as amended.

PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 23rd of July, 2004.

________________________________________ 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.

Description Federal State TransNetLocal/

Private Total

Highway ProjectsI-5 (HOV/Added Lanes/Auxiliary Lanes) $19,455 $128,276 $358 $12,037 $160,126I-15 (Managed Lanes-Freeway including debt service)* $53,227 $537,039 $0 $0 $590,266SR 52 (SR 125 to SR 67) $19,800 $215,435 $44,340 $0 $279,575SR 56 (Carmel Country Road to Black Mountain Road) $0 $86,116 $26,100 $888 $113,104SR 125 (Toll Road, Gap & Connector) $115,984 $0 $22,596 $332,946 $471,526SR 905 (I-805 to Otay Mesa Border Crossing) $70,002 $142,614 $4,000 $0 $216,616Traffic Management Systems $0 $24,500 $0 $0 $24,500SR 241 Toll Road $0 $0 $0 $257,360 $257,360Highway Bridge Replacement & Rehabilitation $50,154 $0 $0 $11,378 $61,532State Highway Operations Protection Program (SHOPP) $130,896 $18,266 $0 $0 $149,162Other Highway Projects $32,473 $91,266 $5,424 $8,898 $138,061

Subtotal Highway Projects $491,991 $1,243,512 $102,818 $623,507 $2,461,828

Transit ProjectsMission Valley East Light Rail Project $340,185 $72,829 $80,806 $2,047 $495,867Oceanside-Escondido Rail Extension $157,000 $104,200 $90,320 $0 $351,520I-15 Bus Rapid Transit (Rolling Stock/Stations) $23,132 $28,800 $7,100 $0 $59,032Mid-Coast Corridor Project $1,159 $19,791 $16,371 $0 $37,321Regional Fare Technology $18,220 $20,300 $0 $780 $39,300Bus/Rail Vehicles Purchase $43,888 $28,700 $0 $10,439 $83,027Bus/Rail Infrastructure $71,454 $1,500 $2,502 $18,637 $94,093Other Rail Projects $12,942 $43,439 $6,439 $588 $63,408Other Transit Projects (Operations/Planning) $142,388 $0 $133,495 $37,202 $313,085

Subtotal Transit Projects $810,368 $319,559 $337,033 $69,693 $1,536,653

Local Street & Road ProjectsRegional Arterial System $33,736 $6,000 $99,868 $111,865 $251,469Roadway Maintenance & Rehabilitation $0 $0 $88,162 $19,675 $107,837Traffic Signal Projects $30,144 $0 $5,684 $524 $36,352Highway Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation $23,090 $0 $1,562 $5,512 $30,164Other Local Street & Road $43,403 $4,750 $170,948 $73,713 $292,814Subtotal Local Street & Road Projects $130,373 $10,750 $366,224 $211,289 $718,636

Other ProjectsBicycle/Pedestrian Projects $32,988 $4,025 $10,133 $304 $47,450Freeway Service Patrol $4,621 $19,336 $0 $2,598 $26,555Transportation Enhancement Activities $5,435 $1,669 $0 $0 $7,104Transportation Demand Management (TDM) $8,557 $15,064 $464 $686 $24,771Transportation Management System $17,782 $675 $2,282 $2,971 $23,710Other-Miscellaneous $1,444 $3,067 $473 $681 $5,665

Subtotal Other Projects $70,827 $43,836 $13,352 $7,240 $135,255

Grand Total $1,503,559 $1,617,657 $819,427 $911,729 $4,852,372*Total includes debt service for 11 years (to 2015)

2004 RTIP Program SummarySummary of Major Projects by Mode (in $000s)

Table 1

5

CaltransMPO ID: CAL08 Capacity Status: CITITLE: I-5/I-805 Merge WideningDESCRIPTION: South of I-5/I-805 Junction to Del Mar Heights Road - widen freeway and bridges

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $12,037 $12,037 $1,095 $10,942STIP-RIP $96,390 $96,390 $3,292 $93,098RSTP $6,582 $5,082 $1,500 $6,582TCRP $19,000 $19,000 $19,000

TOTAL $134,009 $132,509 $1,500 $3,292 $1,095 $129,622

MPO ID: CAL09 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Interstate 5 - HOV Managed Lanes StudyDESCRIPTION: From San Diego to Oceanside - construct HOV/Managed Lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONIMD $4,000 $4,000 $4,000CBI $500 $500 $500TransNet-H $358 $358 $358STP $2,000 $2,000 $2,000STIP-RIP $2,796 $2,796 $2,796RSTP $3,183 $3,183 $3,183

TOTAL $12,837 $12,337 $500 $12,837

MPO ID: CAL18 Capacity Status: CITITLE: I-15 Managed Lanes (Corridor -Middle)DESCRIPTION: SR 56 to Centre City Pkwy - construct managed lanes (freeway elements)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $20,100 $20,100 $20,100DEMO -Section 115 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000STIP-IIP $88,908 $88,908 $88,908STIP-RIP $149,124 $149,124 $4,500 $144,624RSTP $32,127 $32,127 $32,127SHOPP - State Cash $474 $474 $474SHOPP - Operations $3,662 $3,662 $3,662TCRP $41,200 $34,300 $6,900 $21,300 $13,000 $6,900

TOTAL $336,595 $328,695 $1,000 $6,900 $25,800 $13,000 $297,795

MPO ID: CAL18A Capacity Status: CITITLE: I-15 Managed Lanes-North SegmentDESCRIPTION: From Clarence Lane to SR 78 - construct Managed Lanes (north segment)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-RIP $5,000 $5,000 $5,000

TOTAL $5,000 $5,000 $5,000

MPO ID: CAL18B Capacity Status: CITITLE: I-15 Managed Lanes- South SegmentDESCRIPTION: From SR 163 to Route 15/56 Separation - construct Managed Lanes south segment

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-RIP $10,000 $10,000 $10,000

TOTAL $10,000 $10,000 $10,000

2004 Federal Transportation Improvement ProgramSan Diego Region (in $000s)

Table 2

6


CaltransMPO ID: CAL26 Capacity Status: CITITLE: State Route 52 Freeway (E&F)DESCRIPTION: In Santee, SR 125 to Cuyamaca Street to SR 67 - construct 4 lane freeway

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONDemo $2,250 $2,250 $2,250STIP-IIP $3,400 $3,400 $2,400 $1,000TransNet-H $44,340 $44,340 $44,340STIP-RIP $167,035 $48,495 $24,861 $24,759 $68,920 $6,605 $91,510 $68,920RSTP $17,550 $17,550 $17,550TCRP $45,000 $25,000 $20,000 $25,000 $20,000

TOTAL $279,575 $141,035 $24,861 $24,759 $20,000 $68,920 $9,005 $181,650 $88,920

MPO ID: CAL28 Capacity Status: CITITLE: State Route 56 (Middle)DESCRIPTION: From Carmel Country Road to Black Mountain Road - construct new 4-lane freeway

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-IIP $7,800 $7,800 $7,800County Funds $888 $888 $888TransNet-H $26,100 $26,100 $26,100STIP-RIP $53,316 $53,316 $12,553 $40,763TCRP $25,000 $21,600 $3,400 $10,813 $14,187

TOTAL $113,104 $109,704 $3,400 $12,553 $36,913 $63,638

MPO ID: CAL29 Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR 76 North County (D & E)DESCRIPTION: Melrose Ave to Mission Rd - widen from 2 to 4 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONDemo $3,700 $1,560 $2,140 $1,560 $2,140TransNet-H $4,631 $2,050 $390 $2,191 $2,440 $2,191RSTP $8,924 $8,924 $8,924

TOTAL $17,255 $2,050 $1,950 $13,255 $4,000 $13,255

MPO ID: CAL30A Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR 78 Auxiliary LaneDESCRIPTION: In Oceanside - El Camino Real 0.6 km east - construct auxiliary lane

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-H $566 $566 $566RSTP $1,134 $1,134 $1,134SHOPP - State Cash $324 $72 $252 $72 $11 $241SHOPP - Operations $2,501 $553 $1,948 $553 $89 $1,859

TOTAL $4,525 $625 $3,900 $625 $100 $3,800

MPO ID: CAL31 Capacity Status: CITITLE: State Route 125 (Toll, Gap, Connector)DESCRIPTION: From SR 905 to SR 54 - construct 6-lane freeway with interchange and HOV provisions

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-H $22,596 $15,739 $6,857 $3,764 $18,832Private Funds $332,946 $332,946 $24,850 $40,075 $268,021RSTP $115,984 $107,266 $8,718 $29,116 $86,868

TOTAL $471,526 $440,212 $15,739 $15,575 $24,850 $72,955 $373,721

7


Caltrans MPO ID: CAL38 Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR-905 New FreewayDESCRIPTION: I-805 to Otay Mesa border station - construct 6-lane freeway (Stages 2-4)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONDemo $40,485 $29,114 $11,371 $29,114 $11,371Demo - Section 115 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000CBI $25,342 $14,086 $11,256 $14,086 $11,256NCPD $175 $175 $175STIP-IIP $97,748 $18,858 $78,890 $16,853 $2,005 $78,890STP $1,000 $1,000 $1,000STIP-RIP $23,866 $23,866 $23,866TCRP $21,000 $21,000 $21,000

TOTAL $212,616 $84,058 $3,175 $101,517 $23,866 $16,853 $70,380 $125,383

MPO ID: CAL41 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: CHP Inspection Facility @ Tecate Truck size and weight inspection stationsDESCRIPTION: At Tecate - Mexican border to Humphries Road - construct a Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Facility (CVEF) and related intersection modifications @ SR188 and Thing Road

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCBI $8,859 $1,331 $7,528 $1,331 $7,528SHOPP - Mobility $3,441 $3,441 $2,300 $173 $968

TOTAL $12,300 $1,331 $10,969 $2,300 $1,504 $8,496

MPO ID: CAL43 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: HES/SR2SDESCRIPTION: Hazard Elimination Safety and Safe Routes to School projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal HES $2,715 $2,020 $695 $2,715

TOTAL $2,715 $2,020 $695 $2,715

MPO ID: CAL44 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: HBRR Non capacity widening or bridge reconstructionDESCRIPTION: Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $7,061 $3,966 $3,095 $7,061HBRR $29,612 $16,224 $13,388 $29,612

TOTAL $36,673 $20,190 $16,483 $36,673

MPO ID: CAL44A Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bridge Seismic Safety Retrofit Non capacity widening or bridge reconstructionDESCRIPTION: Lump sum for seismic retrofit projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $4,317 $157 $520 $3,640 $4,317HBRR $17,267 $627 $2,080 $14,560 $17,267

TOTAL $21,584 $784 $2,600 $18,200 $21,584

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

8


CaltransMPO ID: CAL45 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SHOPP Minor AQ Exempt Grouped Projects Exempt Category: Safety Improvement Program.DESCRIPTION: In Escondido, on SR 78 from Centre City Pkwy to Escondido Blvd, and at Spring Valley from SR 94 from Sweetwater Springs Blvd to Avocado Blvd - install median barriers

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONState Minor Program. $560 $560 $560

TOTAL $560 $560 $560

MPO ID: CAL46A Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SHOPP Operations/MobilityDESCRIPTION: AQ exempt SHOPP operations and mobility projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSHOPP - Mobility $25,512 $3,483 $8,890 $13,139 $25,512SHOPP - State Cash $3,305 $451 $1,152 $1,702 $3,305

TOTAL $28,817 $3,934 $10,042 $14,841 $28,817

MPO ID: CAL46B Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SHOPP Roadside Plantings, landscaping, etc.DESCRIPTION: AQ exempt SHOPP roadside projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSHOPP - Roadside Preservatio $11,927 $11,927 $11,927SHOPP - State Cash $1,545 $1,545 $1,545

TOTAL $13,472 $13,472 $13,472

MPO ID: CAL46C Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SHOPP Roadside Preservation Plantings, landscaping, etc.DESCRIPTION: AQ exempt SHOPP roadside preservation projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSHOPP - Roadside Preservatio $19,168 $5,604 $13,564 $19,168SHOPP - State Cash $2,483 $726 $1,757 $2,483

TOTAL $21,651 $6,330 $15,321 $21,651

MPO ID: CAL46D Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SHOPP Roadway Non capacity widening or bridge reconstructionDESCRIPTION: AQ exempt SHOPP roadway projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONHBRR $44,552 $853 $41,466 $2,233 $44,552SHOPP - Roadway Preservatio $2,610 $2,610 $2,610SHOPP - State Cash $6,109 $110 $5,372 $627 $6,109

TOTAL $53,271 $963 $46,838 $5,470 $53,271

MPO ID: CAL46E Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SHOPP Roadway Preservation Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: AQ exempt SHOPP roadway preservation projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSHOPP - Roadway Preservatio $18,702 $10,427 $8,275 $18,702SHOPP - State Cash $2,423 $1,351 $1,072 $2,423

TOTAL $21,125 $11,778 $9,347 $21,125

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

9


Caltrans MPO ID: CAL46F Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SHOPP Safety Guardrails, median barriers, crash cushionsDESCRIPTION: AQ exempt SHOPP safety projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSHOPP - Safety $5,402 $5,402 $5,402SHOPP - State Cash $2,009 $2,009 $2,009

TOTAL $7,411 $7,411 $7,411

MPO ID: CAL46G Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SHOPP- Storm Water MitigationDESCRIPTION: Lump sum for storm water mitigation projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSHOPP - Mobility $3,023 $3,023 $3,023SHOPP - State Cash $392 $392 $392

TOTAL $3,415 $3,415 $3,415

MPO ID: CAL48 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: TMS (I-805, SR 94) Directional and informational signsDESCRIPTION: North of SR 94 to I-8 and on I-805 from SR 94 to south of I-8 - install TMS field elements

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSHOPP - Operations $1,037 $1,037 $203 $834SHOPP - ONational Hwy Syste $8,000 $8,000 $1,566 $6,434

TOTAL $9,037 $9,037 $1,769 $7,268

MPO ID: CAL51 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: TMS (I-5, I-805, & SR 94) Ramp Meters Traffic signal synchronization projectsDESCRIPTION: In Chula Vista and San Diego - install ramp meters

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-RIP $7,804 $641 $7,163 $641 $7,163

TOTAL $7,804 $641 $7,163 $641 $7,163

MPO ID: CAL52 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: TMS (I-5, I-805, SR-52 and SR-94) CMS Directional and informational signsDESCRIPTION: South of 19th Street overcrossing to Tamarack Ave overcrossing - install Changeable Message Signs


TOTAL $1,160 $100 $1,060 $100 $1,060

MPO ID: CAL54 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: TMS on I-5, I-805 and SR-94 (Loops) Traffic signal synchronization projectsDESCRIPTION: Install new or upgrade existing traffic monitoring stations and maintenance pull outs


TOTAL $6,500 $449 $6,051 $449 $6,051

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category;

Exempt Category;

10


CaltransMPO ID: CAL56 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: I-5/805 Port of EntryDESCRIPTION: On I-5 US/Mexico Border to Willow Road and On I-805 from Border to San Ysidro Blvd - modify port of entry

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCBI $1,998 $1,998 $1,998TCRP $10,000 $600 $9,400 $7,600 $1,200 $1,200

TOTAL $11,998 $2,598 $9,400 $9,598 $1,200 $1,200

MPO ID: CAL62 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SR 54/SR 125 HOV lanes (PAED/Design) Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: In and near Lemon Grove on SR 125 from south of Jamacha Blvd to SR 94, on SR 54 from I-805 to South of Jamacha Blvd - engineering for HOV lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-RIP $7,000 $500 $6,500 $7,000

TOTAL $7,000 $500 $6,500 $7,000

MPO ID: CAL66 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: State Route 11 Engineering studies.DESCRIPTION: Border of Mexico - east of SR 905/Otay Mesa Border Crossing to future SR 125/905 junction - study for future construction of 4-lane freeway and truck bypass road

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-IIP $8,000 $8,000 $8,000

TOTAL $8,000 $8,000 $8,000

MPO ID: CAL67 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SR 94 Widening Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: From I-5 to SR 125 - study future widening

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTCRP $10,000 $4,000 $6,000 $10,000

TOTAL $10,000 $4,000 $6,000 $10,000

MPO ID: CAL68 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SR 94/125 Widening Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: Near La Mesa and Lemon Grove - study future freeway to freeway connector

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTCRP $60,000 $3,000 $57,000 $5,400 $28,500 $26,100

TOTAL $60,000 $3,000 $57,000 $5,400 $28,500 $26,100

MPO ID: CAL69 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Noise Barrier Program Guardrails, median barriers, crash cushionsDESCRIPTION: Construct soundwalls in the Cities of La Mesa and Oceanside

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-H $227 $51 $176 $34 $17 $176RSTP $1,755 $394 $1,361 $266 $128 $1,361

TOTAL $1,982 $445 $1,537 $300 $145 $1,537

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

11


CaltransMPO ID: CAL71 Capacity Status: CITITLE: I-5/SR 78 Direct ConnectorsDESCRIPTION: In the Cities of Oceanside & Carlsbad - modify interchange, construct auxiliary lanes, construct direct connectors

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTP $500 $500 $500

TOTAL $500 $500 $500

MPO ID: CAL72 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bike Path at San Ysidro Bicycle and pedestrian facilitiesDESCRIPTION: At San Ysidro north of pedestrian and bicycle border into Mexico - provide bike path, upgrade sidewalks, railing and bicycle lane

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-IIP $1,672 $225 $1,447 $225 $9 $1,438

TOTAL $1,672 $225 $1,447 $225 $9 $1,438

MPO ID: CAL73 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Balboa Park Historic Preservation Transportation enhancement activitiesDESCRIPTION: Richmond Street to Washington Street - landscape, lighting and fencing

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-IIP $3,517 $70 $300 $16 $3,131 $370 $16 $3,131

TOTAL $3,517 $70 $300 $16 $3,131 $370 $16 $3,131

MPO ID: CAL74 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Transportation Museum Transportation enhancement activitiesDESCRIPTION: On Taylor Street in Old Town - interior rehab of existing Caltrans building

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-IIP $950 $185 $765 $185 $765

TOTAL $950 $185 $765 $185 $765

MPO ID: CAL75 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: I-5 Sorrento Valley Auxiliary Lane Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: On I-5 from Genesee Avenue to south of Sorrento Valley Overhead - construct southbound auxiliary lane

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSHOPP - Mobility $782 $782 $782

$782 $782 $782

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

12


Carlsbad, City ofMPO ID: CB04 Capacity Status: CITITLE: El Camino Real ImprovementsDESCRIPTION: Between SR 78 and Olivenhain Road - widen to 6 lane arterial including traffic signal upgrades, bike lanes & sidewalks

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $2,852 $1,400 $493 $959 $2,852

Local Funds $23,148 $3,000 $3,827 $4,320 $3,361 $4,320 $4,320 $23,148TOTAL $26,000 $4,400 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $26,000

MPO ID: CB07 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Pavement Management Program Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Rehabilitate roadway pavement including reconstruction, pavement overlays and sealing

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $13,600 $3,200 $2,600 $2,600 $2,600 $2,600 $13,600

TOTAL $13,600 $3,200 $2,600 $2,600 $2,600 $2,600 $13,600

MPO ID: CB11 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Cannon Road Reach 4DESCRIPTION: College Blvd. to boundary with Oceanside - construct 4-lane arterial with median, bike lanes, sidewalks, pedestrian trails

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $14,546 $2,174 $2,292 $10,080 $2,174 $2,292 $10,080TransNet-L $1,136 $1,136 $1,136

TOTAL $15,682 $1,136 $2,174 $2,292 $10,080 $3,310 $2,292 $10,080

MPO ID: CB12 Capacity Status: CITITLE: College Boulevard Reach ADESCRIPTION: From Badger Lane to future Cannon Road - construct 4-lane arterial with median, bike lanes and sidewalks/trails

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $11,952 $1,579 $1,195 $957 $8,221 $2,774 $957 $8,221

TOTAL $11,952 $1,579 $1,195 $957 $8,221 $2,774 $957 $8,221

MPO ID: CB13 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Poinsettia Lane Reach EDESCRIPTION: From Cassia Drive to Skimmer Court - construct 4-lane arterial with median, bike lanes, and sidewalks/trails

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $11,715 $1,301 $1,308 $9,106 $1,301 $1,308 $9,106

TOTAL $11,715 $1,301 $1,308 $9,106 $1,301 $1,308 $9,106

Exempt Category:

13


Chula Vista, City ofMPO ID: CHV06 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Pavement Rehabilitation Program Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: At various locations - AC overlay, chip seals and slurry seal rehabilitation


TOTAL $14,000 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $1,400 $12,600

MPO ID: CHV08 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Willow Street Bridge ProjectDESCRIPTION: Between Bonita & Sweetwater - replace & widen from 2 to 4 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,080 $240 $840 $240 $60 $780HBRR $3,860 $500 $3,360 $500 $240 $3,120

TOTAL $4,940 $740 $4,200 $740 $300 $3,900

MPO ID: CHV18 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Sidewalk Rehab/Installation Program Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Sidewalk construction, replacements, installation

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $188 $94 $94 $9 $179

TOTAL $188 $94 $94 $9 $179

MPO ID: CHV19 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: North Broadway Reconstruction Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: From C to F Street - pavement reconstruction

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $6,000 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $600 $5,400

TOTAL $6,000 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $600 $5,400

MPO ID: CHV20 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: North Fourth Avenue and Brisbane S Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: From Brisbane Street to 100 ft of intersection - rehabilitate road

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $500 $500 $100 $400

TOTAL $500 $500 $100 $400

MPO ID: CHV21 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: North Fourth Ave. Reconstruction Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: From Davidson Street to SR 54 - pavement reconstruction

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $3,000 $1,500 $1,500 $400 $2,600

TOTAL $3,000 $1,500 $1,500 $400 $2,600

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

14


Coronado, City ofMPO ID: COR04 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street and Road Maintenance Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Provide maintenance and repair of selected streets and alleys

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $2,611 $613 $644 $644 $710 $2,611Local Funds $760 $190 $190 $190 $190 $760

TOTAL $3,371 $803 $834 $834 $900 $3,371

MPO ID: COR05 Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR 75 TunnelDESCRIPTION: SR 75 Tunnel EIS to provide analysis of a tunnel & other congestion relief alternatives to SR 75 corridor

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTCSP $564 $564 $564CBI $500 $500 $500Local Funds $8,337 $8,337 $8,337STP $745 $745 $745

TOTAL $10,146 $10,146 $10,146

Exempt Category:

15


Del Mar, City ofMPO ID: DM01 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Resurfacing & Drainage Projects Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Street rehabilitation & drainage improvement projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $848 $199 $208 $216 $225 $848Local Funds $590 $133 $143 $152 $162 $590

TOTAL $1,438 $332 $351 $368 $387 $1,438

Exempt Category:

16


El Cajon, City ofMPO ID: EL03 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Overlay Projects Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Overlay collectors, thorofares & residential streets at various locations

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $7,114 $2,110 $1,647 $1,575 $1,782 $7,114

TOTAL $7,114 $2,110 $1,647 $1,575 $1,782 $7,114

MPO ID: EL06 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Signals Traffic signal synchronization projects.DESCRIPTION: New or modify traffic signals at various locations

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $800 $200 $200 $200 $200 $800

TOTAL $800 $200 $200 $200 $200 $800

MPO ID: EL10 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Jamacha RoadDESCRIPTION: From East Main Street to south of City limit - widen Jamacha Road from 4 to 6 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $535 $535 $535RSTP $490 $490 $490

TOTAL $1,025 $1,025 $1,025

MPO ID: EL11 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Sidewalk and other Repairs Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Various locations - repair broken sidewalk, driveway, ramps, etc


TOTAL $581 $150 $150 $131 $150 $581

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

17


Encinitas, City ofMPO ID: ENC03 Capacity Status: CITITLE: I-5 @ ManchesterDESCRIPTION: 4 lanes plus one auxiliary lane northbound and southbound interchange improvements

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $300 $300 $300RSTP $2,125 $2,125 $2,125

TOTAL $2,425 $2,425 $2,425

MPO ID: ENC11 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Santa Fe Drive Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: I-5 to Vulcan Ave. - complete pedestrian and bicycle improvements on the north & south sides of Santa Fe Drive

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,005 $205 $800 $1,005Local Funds $710 $710 $710

TOTAL $1,715 $915 $800 $1,715

MPO ID: ENC14 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Overlay Program Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Overlay and pavement treatment of streets

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $2,100 $600 $600 $600 $300 $2,100Local Funds $2,950 $850 $300 $300 $300 $600 $600 $2,950

TOTAL $5,050 $850 $900 $900 $900 $900 $600 $5,050

MPO ID: ENC17 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Safe Routes to School Sidewalk Program Exempt Category: Safety Improvement ProgramDESCRIPTION: Provide sidewalks in vicinity of schools

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $2,935 $1,135 $350 $300 $300 $850 $2,935Local Funds $120 $120 $120

TOTAL $3,055 $1,255 $350 $300 $300 $850 $3,055

MPO ID: ENC19 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Safety/Calming Non signalization traffic control and operatingDESCRIPTION: Install traffic safety and calming improvements

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $700 $100 $150 $150 $150 $150 $700

TOTAL $700 $100 $150 $150 $150 $150 $700

MPO ID: ENC20 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Coast Highway Beautification Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: From A Street to La Costa Avenue and\/ From F Street to entrance at Swami's Beach Park - design/construct comprehensive streetscape improvements: new curb, gutter, sidewalk & landscaping

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $3,500 $3,000 $500 $1,000 $2,500

TOTAL $3,500 $3,000 $500 $1,000 $2,500

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

18


Encinitas, City ofMPO ID: ENC21 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Hall Property Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: I-5 & Santa Fe Drive - off-site improvements to accommodate ingress/egress to future 43-acre park

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $5,000 $500 $4,500 $500 $4,500

TOTAL $5,000 $500 $4,500 $500 $4,500

MPO ID: ENC22 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Leucadia Blvd. Improvement Bicycle and pedestrian facilitiesDESCRIPTION: I-5 to Highway 101 - reconstruct to accommodate bike lanes and other improvements

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,250 $1,250 $250 $1,000TransNet-L $2,000 $2,000 $2,000

TOTAL $3,250 $1,250 $2,000 $250 $3,000

MPO ID: ENC23 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Olivenhain RoadDESCRIPTION: Between Los Pinos Cir. and Rancho Santa Fe Road - widen for median, landscaping & bike lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $600 $600 $600

TOTAL $600 $600 $600

MPO ID: ENC25 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Coast Highway 101 Overlay Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: From San Elijo Lagoon bridge to Chesterfield - provide overlay and pavement treatment


TOTAL $455 $455 $455

MPO ID: ENC26 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Coast Hwy 101/La Costa Avenue Traffic signal synchronization projectsDESCRIPTION: Realign and redesign intersection and install traffic signal improvements


TOTAL $100 $100 $10 $90

MPO ID: ENC27 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Birmingham Drive Curb & GutterDESCRIPTION: On Birmingham Drive west of I-5 - install curb and cross gutter


TOTAL $150 $150 $150

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

19


Encinitas, City ofMPO ID: ENC28 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Signal Modifications Traffic signal synchronization projectsDESCRIPTION: Various locations


TOTAL $400 $250 $50 $50 $50 $400

MPO ID: ENC29 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Signals @ Santa Fe Drive Exempt Category: Traffic signal synchronization projects.DESCRIPTION: Santa Fe Drive @ Balour and @ I-5 - traffic signal modification


TOTAL $250 $0 $250 $250

MPO ID: ENC30 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Encinitas Rail Corridor Design Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: Leucadia Blvd. at LOSSAN MP 236.50 - grade separation study

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $200 $80 $120 $200

TOTAL $200 $80 $120 $200

MPO ID: ENC31 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: I-5/Encinitas Blvd Interchange Modification Exempt Category: Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: Between Santa Fe Drive and Leucadia Blvd - modify interchange to improve safety and alleviate congestion

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $260 $130 $130 $260

TOTAL $260 $130 $130 $260

MPO ID: ENC32 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Encinitas Pedestrian Crossing Study Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: Between Leucadia Blvd. and Chesterfield Dr. - PE/PS&E for three grade separation study

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,248 $298 $950 $1,248

TOTAL $1,248 $298 $950 $1,248

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

20


Escondido, City ofMPO ID: ESC01 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Bear Valley ParkwayDESCRIPTION: From Oak Hill Drive to Citrus Ave. - widen from 2 to 4 lanes with left turn pockets, raised medians and new traffic signals

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $6,404 $3,304 $3,100 $1,000 $5,404

TOTAL $6,404 $3,304 $3,100 $1,000 $5,404

MPO ID: ESC02 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Bear Valley/East Valley/Valley CenterDESCRIPTION: From Hayden Dr to East Valley Pkwy, from East Valley Pkwy to Valley Center Dr. Realignment and widening from 2 to 4 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $2,031 $974 $57 $1,000 $229 $745 $1,057RSTP $7,969 $7,526 $443 $1,771 $5,755 $443

TOTAL $10,000 $8,500 $500 $1,000 $2,000 $6,500 $1,500

MPO ID: ESC03 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Citracado ParkwayDESCRIPTION: From Don Lee Ln to Vineyard Ave. - widen 2 to 4 lanes with left turn pockets and signal

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,050 $100 $700 $250 $100 $950Local Funds $1,800 $1,800 $1,800

TOTAL $2,850 $1,900 $700 $250 $100 $2,750

MPO ID: ESC04 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Citracado Parkway IIDESCRIPTION: From West Valley Pkwy to Harmony Grove - widen from 2 to 4 lanes with raised medians, construct bridge over Escondido Creek

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONHUD $908 $908 $908TransNet-L $1,500 $1,500 $1,192 $308

TOTAL $2,408 $908 $1,500 $2,100 $0 $308

MPO ID: ESC05 Capacity Status: CITITLE: El Norte ParkwayDESCRIPTION: From La Honda Drive at Citrus/Mission Avenue & at Washington Ave. - widen from 2 to 4 lanes with left turn pockets, raised medians and new traffic signals

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $2,490 $2,040 $450 $2,490

TOTAL $2,490 $2,040 $450 $2,490

MPO ID: ESC08 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Felicita Ave/Juniper StreetDESCRIPTION: From Escondido Blvd to Juniper Street; from Juniper Street to Chestnut Street - widen from 2 to 4 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $6,406 $1,356 $2,300 $2,750 $50 $2,000 $4,356Local Funds $750 $250 $500 $250 $500

TOTAL $7,156 $1,356 $2,550 $3,250 $50 $2,250 $4,856

21


Escondido, City ofMPO ID: ESC11 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Rehabilitation & Resurface Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Reconstruction, resurfacing, chip sealing, crack filling

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $2,400 $800 $400 $400 $400 $400 $2,400Local Funds $4,000 $400 $900 $900 $900 $900 $4,000

TOTAL $6,400 $1,200 $1,300 $1,300 $1,300 $1,300 $6,400

MPO ID: ESC13 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Nordahl Rd Bridge Widening @ SR-78DESCRIPTION: From Mission to Montiel - widen Nordahl Road overcrossing from 4 to 6 lanes; widen EB off ramp from 2 to 3 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONDemo $2,250 $1,300 $950 $1,200 $100 $950TransNet-L $602 $364 $238 $191 $25 $386RSTP $300 $300 $300

TOTAL $3,152 $1,964 $1,188 $1,691 $125 $1,336

MPO ID: ESC17 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Neighborhood Projects Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Curb & gutter, sidewalks, street lights and other misc. street improvements

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,750 $350 $350 $350 $350 $350 $200 $1,550

TOTAL $1,750 $350 $350 $350 $350 $350 $200 $1,550

MPO ID: ESC19 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Felicita Avenue Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: From Centre City Pkwy to I-15 Overpass - widen from 2 to 4 lanes w/left turn pockets


TOTAL $450 $450 $450

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

22


Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)MPO ID: FHWA01 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Miller Ranch Road Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Rehabilitate Miller Road

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONPublic Lands Highway $1,476 $100 $1,376 $123 $1,353

TOTAL $1,476 $100 $1,376 $123 $1,353

Exempt Category:

23


La Mesa, City ofMPO ID: LAM03 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Maintenance Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Preventative maintenance and repair

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,020 $340 $170 $170 $170 $170 $1,020

TOTAL $1,020 $340 $170 $170 $170 $170 $1,020

MPO ID: LAM05 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic signal synchronization projectsDESCRIPTION: Safety and operational improvements to existing traffic signals


TOTAL $1,200 $400 $200 $200 $200 $200 $1,200

MPO ID: LAM07 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Pedestrian Ramps Bicycle and pedestrian facilitiesDESCRIPTION: Install concrete pedestrian ramps


TOTAL $300 $100 $50 $50 $50 $50 $300

MPO ID: LAM08 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Storm Drain Improvements Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: Repair and place storm drain facilities


TOTAL $480 $160 $80 $80 $80 $80 $480

MPO ID: LAM09 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Curb, Gutter & SidewalksDESCRIPTION: Repair curb, gutter & sidewalks


TOTAL $600 $200 $100 $100 $100 $100 $600

MPO ID: LAM10 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Resurfacing Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Improvements to existing roadways including rehabilitation, resurfacing & reconstruction


TOTAL $2,300 $700 $400 $400 $400 $400 $2,300

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

24


La Mesa, City ofMPO ID: LAM11 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Lights for Overhead Undergrounding Lighting improvementsDESCRIPTION: Install new streets lights where overhead utilities have been removed


TOTAL $200 $50 $50 $50 $50 $200

MPO ID: LAM12 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Pavement Management Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: Survey and collect data of existing pavement condition and maintain database


TOTAL $150 $50 $25 $25 $25 $25 $150

MPO ID: LAM14 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Calming Safety Improvement ProgramDESCRIPTION: Install various devices to calm traffic on city streets to improve safety


TOTAL $250 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $250

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

25


Lemon Grove, City ofMPO ID: LG04 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Improvements Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Various locations - street resurfacing, pavement, drainage facilities, sidewalk improvements and signing and striping

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $2,200 $550 $550 $550 $550 $2,200

TOTAL $2,200 $550 $550 $550 $550 $2,200

MPO ID: LG06 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Signal and Transportation Traffic signal synchronization projectsDESCRIPTION: Various Locations - Traffic signal improvement, interconnect and other transportation studies


TOTAL $654 $120 $154 $154 $226 $654

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

26


National City, City ofMPO ID: NC01 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Plaza Blvd WideningDESCRIPTION: From Highland Ave. to Euclid Ave. - widen from 2 to 3 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,092 $247 $265 $254 $200 $126 $247 $265 $580RSTP $2,000 $708 $1,292 $708 $1,292

TOTAL $3,092 $955 $1,557 $254 $200 $126 $955 $1,557 $580

MPO ID: NC03 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Resurfacing Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Reconstruct and overlay streets

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $4,926 $1,032 $954 $1,020 $1,020 $900 $4,926Local Funds $2,700 $290 $290 $530 $530 $530 $530 $2,700

TOTAL $7,626 $1,322 $1,244 $1,550 $1,550 $1,430 $530 $7,626

MPO ID: NC04 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Signal Install/Upgrade Intersection signalization projectsDESCRIPTION: Install and/or upgrade traffic signals

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $675 $175 $125 $125 $125 $125 $675Local Funds $50 $50 $50

TOTAL $725 $225 $125 $125 $125 $125 $725

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

27


North County Transit DistrictMPO ID: NCTD01 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bus Associated Capital Maintenance Rehabilitation of transit vehiclesDESCRIPTION: Bus Tire Lease

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $900 $300 $300 $300 $900Local Funds $225 $75 $75 $75 $225

TOTAL $1,125 $375 $375 $375 $1,125

MPO ID: NCTD02 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Preventive Maintenance Transit operating assistanceDESCRIPTION: Bus & Rail vehicle & facility maintenance costs

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $26,578 $4,800 $5,928 $7,250 $8,600 $26,578FTA 5309 (FG) $6,878 $1,700 $1,778 $1,700 $1,700 $6,878Local Funds $8,365 $1,625 $1,927 $2,238 $2,575 $8,365

TOTAL $41,821 $8,125 $9,633 $11,188 $12,875 $41,821

MPO ID: NCTD03 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: ADA Paratransit Services Transit operating assistanceDESCRIPTION: Operating cost associated with providing ADA/Paratransit services

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $2,300 $500 $600 $600 $600 $2,300TransNet-T $820 $182 $206 $211 $221 $820Local Funds $6,248 $1,456 $1,526 $1,596 $1,670 $6,248

TOTAL $9,368 $2,138 $2,332 $2,407 $2,491 $9,368

MPO ID: NCTD05 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bus/Rail Purchase & Related Equipment Purchase new buses and rail cars to replace existDESCRIPTION: Purchase CNG replacement vehicles & related equipment (15 vehicles per year)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $14,687 $3,805 $2,804 $2,945 $5,133 $14,687FTA 5311 $997 $277 $240 $240 $240 $997Local Funds $3,389 $873 $677 $686 $1,153 $3,389TCRP $7,700 $7,700 $7,700

TOTAL $26,773 $4,955 $3,721 $3,871 $6,526 $7,700 $26,773

MPO ID: NCTD06 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bus/Rail Support Equipment & Facility Purchase of vehicle operating equipmentDESCRIPTION: Radio equipment; buildings & structures; shop & garage/furnitures & fixtures; service vehicles; information technology

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $6,703 $2,736 $3,438 $529 $6,703FTA 5309 (FG) $99 $99 $99FTA 5309 $297 $297 $297Local Funds $1,826 $776 $914 $136 $1,826

TOTAL $8,925 $3,809 $4,451 $665 $8,925

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

28


North County Transit DistrictMPO ID: NCTD07 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Fixed Route - Bus Shelters & Stops Construction of small passenger sheltersDESCRIPTION: Upgrade bus shelters & bus stops

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $694 $166 $172 $178 $178 $694Local Funds $172 $41 $43 $44 $44 $172

TOTAL $866 $207 $215 $222 $222 $866

MPO ID: NCTD16 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Oceanside-Escondido Rail ProjectDESCRIPTION: Design 22 mile light rail (Sprinter) including 15 stations and maintenance facility

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $4,900 $4,900 $4,900FTA 5309 (NS) $152,100 $84,889 $55,000 $12,211 $7,930 $3,392 $140,778STIP-RIP $6,600 $6,600 $3,600 $3,000TransNet-T $90,320 $80,148 $8,900 $1,272 $29,192 $61,128Proposition 108 $17,600 $17,600 $17,600TCRP $80,000 $80,000 $80,000

TOTAL $351,520 $189,237 $63,900 $18,383 $80,000 $11,530 $50,184 $289,806

MPO ID: NCTD16B Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Oceanside to Escondido Rail Operations Transit operating assistanceDESCRIPTION: Start-up operating cost for the Sprinter

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $16,000 $5,000 $5,000 $6,000 $16,000Local Funds $2,073 $648 $648 $777 $2,073

TOTAL $18,073 $5,648 $5,648 $6,777 $18,073

MPO ID: NCTD18 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Rail - ROW Improvements Track rehab in existing right of wayDESCRIPTION: Crosstie renewal program, street cross protection, rail structure rehabilitation, storage tracks, rail lubricators, misc. improvements

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5309 (FG) $3,275 $736 $1,189 $481 $869 $3,275Local Funds $818 $184 $297 $120 $217 $818TransNet-T $984 $238 $246 $254 $246 $984

TOTAL $5,077 $1,158 $1,732 $855 $1,332 $5,077

MPO ID: NCTD20 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Rail Vehicles & Related Equipment Purchase new buses and rail cars to replace existDESCRIPTION: Locomotive purchase/overhaul, revenue vehicles,

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5309 (FG) $1,050 $476 $574 $1,050Local Funds $583 $434 $149 $583

TOTAL $1,633 $910 $723 $1,633

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

29


North County Transit DistrictMPO ID: NCTD22 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bridge & Infrastructure Program Railroad/highway crossingDESCRIPTION: Bridges & other infrastructure improvements along rail ROW

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $1,381 $1,146 $235 $1,381FTA 5309 (FG) $10,216 $4,451 $1,595 $2,212 $1,958 $10,216Local Funds $2,900 $1,113 $685 $612 $490 $2,900

TOTAL $14,497 $5,564 $3,426 $3,059 $2,448 $14,497

MPO ID: NCTD29 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Planning Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: Local short range and other transit planning studies

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $550 $100 $150 $150 $150 $550Local Funds $139 $25 $38 $38 $38 $139

TOTAL $689 $125 $188 $188 $188 $689

MPO ID: NCTD32 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Oceanside Transit Center Parking Bus terminals and transfer pointsDESCRIPTION: At Oceanside Transit Center - build multi-level parking structure to accommodate multi-modal transit services

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $3,482 $3,482 $3,482FTA 5309 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000Local Funds $2,400 $400 $2,000 $400 $2,000TransNet-T $518 $518 $518RSTP $1,232 $1,232 $1,232TCRP $1,500 $910 $590 $910 $590

TOTAL $11,132 $8,542 $2,000 $590 $910 $400 $9,822

MPO ID: NCTD34 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Expanded Transit Service Transit operating assistanceDESCRIPTION: Operating support for existing fixed route and rail transit service

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-T $21,417 $4,134 $4,061 $4,275 $4,387 $4,560 $21,417

TOTAL $21,417 $4,134 $4,061 $4,275 $4,387 $4,560 $21,417

MPO ID: NCTD40 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Rail Station Improvements Reconstruction of transit structuresDESCRIPTION: Coaster Station Improvements - platform extension, convention center/Padres stadium design information display panel

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $212 $212 $212Local Funds $53 $53 $53

TOTAL $265 $265 $265

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

30


Oceanside, City ofMPO ID: O03 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Rancho Del Oro InterchangeDESCRIPTION: South of Vista Way at SR 78 - construct full interchange on SR 78 including westbound on/off ramps and an overcrossing

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONDemo $3,750 $500 $1,750 $1,500 $3,750TransNet-L $3,406 $2,190 $216 $500 $500 $2,306 $1,100RSTP $2,000 $1,105 $895 $2,000

TOTAL $9,156 $3,295 $1,611 $2,250 $2,000 $4,306 $4,850

MPO ID: O04 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Miscellaneous Street Improvements Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitation.DESCRIPTION: Rehabilitate streets


TOTAL $3,600 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $3,600

MPO ID: O06 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Melrose Drive ExtensionDESCRIPTION: From North Santa Fe Spur Ave. - construct a 4-lane arterial with landscaped median and sidewalks

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,094 $600 $494 $1,094

TOTAL $1,094 $600 $494 $1,094

MPO ID: O08 Capacity Status: CITITLE: College Boulevard WideningDESCRIPTION: At Buena Vista Creek between Plaza Drive and Lake Blvd - widen from 4 to 6 lanes and improve drainage facility

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $3,300 $900 $300 $2,100 $900 $300 $2,100

TOTAL $3,300 $900 $300 $2,100 $900 $300 $2,100

MPO ID: O09 Capacity Status: CITITLE: El Camino Real Bridge WideningDESCRIPTION: @ SR 78 - widen to accommodate 3 through lanes per direction


TOTAL $550 $300 $250 $550

MPO ID: O10 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SR 76 & College Interchange Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: Future construction for full interchange


TOTAL $200 $100 $100 $200

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

31


Oceanside, City ofMPO ID: O11 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SR 76 @ Melrose Interchange Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: Future construction of interchange


TOTAL $200 $100 $100 $200

MPO ID: O12 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Pala Road Extension Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: From Foussat Road to Los Arbolitos Blvd - future construction of 4-lane arterial


TOTAL $200 $100 $100 $200

MPO ID: O13 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Rehabilitation Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: From Oceanside to El Camino Real, between Morro Heights Road and northerly city boundary and on Fire Mountain - street/sidewalk rehabilitation

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,368 $175 $193 $1,000 $1,368

TOTAL $1,368 $175 $193 $1,000 $1,368

MPO ID: O14 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bridge Rehabilitation Non capacity widening or bridge reconstructionDESCRIPTION: Replace or upgrade existing bridges along San Luis Rey River

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $6,300 $1,200 $4,600 $500 $6,300

TOTAL $6,300 $1,200 $4,600 $500 $6,300

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

32


Transportation Corridor AgenciesMPO ID: TCA01 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Foothill Transportation Corridor SouthDESCRIPTION: On SR 241 from Oso Parkway to I-5 - 16-mile (5.47 in SD County) limited access toll road (4 general purposes lanes and 2 HOV lanes)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONPrivate Funds $257,360 $2,160 $50,000 $68,400 $68,400 $68,400 $2,160 $50,000 $205,200

TOTAL $257,360 $2,160 $50,000 $68,400 $68,400 $68,400 $2,160 $50,000 $205,200Note: SANDAG is pursuing an amendment to the 2030 RTP to restore 2 additional mixed flow lanes to the project description. After the adoption of the amendment to the 2030 RTP, an RTIP amendment will follow.

33


Poway, City ofMPO ID: POW01 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Maintenance Program Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Various locations - pothole patching, crack sealing, seal coasting, striping, etc.


TOTAL $5,744 $1,194 $1,013 $1,084 $1,159 $1,294 $5,744

MPO ID: POW02 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Espola Road Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: Between Twin Peaks Road and Titan Way - future widening of Espola Road from 2 to 4 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,793 $1,793 $775 $1,018RSTP $290 $290 $290

TOTAL $2,083 $2,083 $1,065 $1,018

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

34


San Diego Association of GovernmentsMPO ID: SAN03 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Freeway Service Patrol Non signalization traffic control and operatingDESCRIPTION: Joint project between SANDAG, Caltrans and CHP to alleviate traffic congestion associated with non-recurring incidents, provides rapid removal of disabled vehicles

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONPrivate Funds $2,598 $718 $720 $720 $220 $220 $2,598FSP $19,336 $8,826 $2,102 $2,102 $2,102 $2,102 $2,102 $19,336RSTP $4,621 $2,061 $512 $512 $512 $512 $512 $4,621

TOTAL $26,555 $10,887 $3,332 $3,334 $3,334 $2,834 $2,834 $26,555

MPO ID: SAN04 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: I-15 Managed Lane/Value Pricing Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: Study feasibility for value pricing on I-15 managed lane

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $234 $100 $134 $234Value Pricing Program $960 $960 $960Toll - Managed Lanes $681 $240 $220 $221 $681RSTP $250 $250 $250

TOTAL $2,125 $1,200 $570 $355 $2,125

MPO ID: SAN07 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Plan, Program & Monitor Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: Plan, program and monitor

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-H $473 $473 $473STIP-RIP $3,067 $473 $334 $334 $334 $807 $785 $3,067

TOTAL $3,540 $946 $334 $334 $334 $807 $785 $3,540

MPO ID: SAN10 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Signal Projects Intersection signalization projectsDESCRIPTION: Traffic Signal Projects - for traffic signal optimization

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $30,144 $28,938 $1,206 $29,894

TOTAL $30,144 $28,938 $1,206 $30,144

MPO ID: SAN11 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Regional Rideshare Program Ride-sharing and van-pooling programDESCRIPTION: Regional rideshare program

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $3,257 $3,257 $3,257FTA 5307 $4,200 $2,100 $700 $700 $700 $4,200TDA $544 $19 $175 $175 $175 $544APCD $686 $563 $123 $686TransNet-H $464 $464 $464STIP-RIP $14,520 $5,352 $1,738 $1,792 $1,824 $1,879 $1,935 $14,520RSTP $1,100 $1,100 $1,100

TOTAL $24,771 $12,855 $2,736 $2,667 $2,699 $1,879 $1,935 $24,771

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

35


San Diego Association of GovernmentsMPO ID: SAN13 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Transit Operations Management Cen Power, signal, and communications systemsDESCRIPTION: operations facility (control center to coordinate and integrate freeway, arterial transit & parking management system)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONITS $3,900 $2,000 $1,900 $3,900FTA 5309 (FG) $1,956 $1,956 $480 $1,476FTA 5307 $2,195 $826 $1,369 $826 $1,369Local Funds $2,971 $2,629 $342 $260 $2,711TransNet-T $960 $960 $960PTA $34 $34 $34

TOTAL $12,016 $7,445 $2,860 $1,711 $1,600 $10,416

MPO ID: SAN14 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Regional Automated Vehicle Location System Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: Installation of automated vehicle location & resource management systems, transportation management, and transit vehicles, electronic message boards & traffic signal pre-emption

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $3,390 $3,390 $3,390STIP-RIP $440 $440 $440

TOTAL $3,830 $3,830 $3,830

MPO ID: SAN16 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Automated Traveler Info System (ATIS) Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: Deploy regionwide ATIS including commercial vehicle/border and 511 telephone information system

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $3,541 $3,541 $3,541ITS $2,800 $2,000 $200 $600 $2,800TransNet-H $1,322 $959 $50 $150 $163 $1,322STIP-RIP $201 $201 $201

TOTAL $7,864 $6,500 $250 $750 $364 $7,864

MPO ID: SAN19 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: GARVEE Debt Service Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: Debt service for issue of GARVEE bonds for the I-15 ML (CAL18) project

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-IIP $59,670 $5,080 $5,459 $5,459 $5,459 $5,459 $59,670STIP-RIP $179,001 $15,241 $16,376 $16,376 $16,376 $16,376 $179,001

TOTAL $238,671 $20,321 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $238,671*Total debt service (11 years) shown

MPO ID: SAN21 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Non-motorized Projects Bicycle and pedestrian facilitiesDESCRIPTION: Lump sum for non-motorized projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-B $2,801 $2,021 $479 $301 $2,801TDA-B $2,188 $2,188 $2,188

TOTAL $4,989 $4,209 $479 $301 $4,989

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

36


San Diego Association of GovernmentsMPO ID: SAN22 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Regional Fare Technology Purchase of vehicle operating equipmentDESCRIPTION: Design, procure, and install fare collection system for all operators in the County

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $18,220 $11,676 $4,184 $2,360 $18,220Local Funds $780 $780 $780STIP-RIP $20,300 $800 $19,500 $20,300

TOTAL $39,300 $13,256 $4,184 $2,360 $19,500 $39,300

MPO ID: SAN23 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Mid-Coast Corridor ProjectDESCRIPTION: Design/construct light rail line from Old Town Transit Center to Balboa Ave; conduct alternative alignment study; begin PE from Balboa Ave to University City; mid-coast corridor planning/environmental

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5309 (NS) $640 $640 $640FTA 5307 $519 $519 $519TransNet-T $16,371 $8,017 $6,361 $398 $1,595 $8,371 $8,000TCI $537 $537 $537STIP-RIP $9,254 $1,000 $2,000 $1,000 $5,254 $4,000 $5,254TCRP $10,000 $10,000 $10,000

TOTAL $37,321 $9,713 $7,361 $2,398 $2,595 $15,254 $14,067 $23,254

MPO ID: SAN24 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Nobel Drive Station Const of new bus or rail storage/maint. facilitiesDESCRIPTION: Construct commuter rail station

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5309 $6,631 $6,631 $6,631TransNet-T $6,439 $2,146 $4,293 $6,439TCO $412 $412 $412

TOTAL $13,482 $7,043 $2,146 $4,293 $7,043 $6,439

MPO ID: SAN26 Capacity Status: CITITLE: I-15 BRT (Rolling Stock, Transit Stations)DESCRIPTION: Purchase new buses for I-15 BRT (25 replacement, 8 expansion) and build 4 transit stations along I-15 ML/BRT project (CAL18)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $22,132 $22,132 $3,550 $18,582FTA 5309 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000TransNet-T $7,100 $7,100 $5,600 $1,500TCRP $28,800 $5,700 $23,100 $5,700 $23,100

TOTAL $59,032 $34,932 $1,000 $23,100 $14,850 $44,182

MPO ID: SAN27 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: San Ysidro Intermodal Freight Facility Const of new bus or rail storage/maint. facilitiesDESCRIPTION: SD&AE Freight Yard in San Ysidro - environmental studies, design & site planning for international freight facility

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONDemo $1,280 $1,280 $1,280Local Funds $320 $320 $320

TOTAL $1,600 $1,600 $1,600

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

37


San Diego Association of GovernmentsMPO ID: SAN28 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Del Mar Bluff Stabilization Damage repair caused by unusual disastersDESCRIPTION: Stabilize bluff areas

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA5309 (NS) $3,981 $3,981 $3,981STIP-IIP $5,254 $4,500 $754 $5,254

TOTAL $9,235 $8,481 $754 $9,235

MPO ID: SAN29 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Sorrento to Miramar Double Track/Realign Exempt Category: Track rehab in existing right of wayDESCRIPTION: Realign curve, construct 2nd main track

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-IIP $27,990 $1,300 $26,690 $1,300 $26,690Proposition 116 $2,718 $715 $2,003 $715 $1,339 $664TCI $1,010 $1,010 $1,010

TOTAL $31,718 $3,025 $2,003 $26,690 $3,025 $1,339 $27,354

MPO ID: SAN30 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: San Dieguito Bridge Exempt Category: Track rehab in existing right of way.DESCRIPTION: Replace bridge and add new segment of main track to connect with passing tracks

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-IIP $855 $855 $855

TOTAL $855 $855 $855

MPO ID: SAN31 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: East Division Maintenance Facility Const of new bus or rail storage/maint. facilitiesDESCRIPTION: In Escondido - improvements to facility including electronic gates, surveillance systems, video cameras, security

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5309 $491 $491 $491FTA 5307 $2,497 $386 $2,111 $386 $2,111Local Funds $748 $97 $651 $97 $651

TOTAL $3,736 $483 $3,253 $483 $3,253

MPO ID: SAN32 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bus/Rail Rolling Stock Purchase new buses and rail cars to replace existDESCRIPTION: For MTS - Rail/bus vehicle rehabilitation and replacement purchase of bus rolling stock - 35 articulated buses, 104 40' CNG heavy duty, 16 35' CNG, 54 small vehicles

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $16,201 $1,756 $3,947 $10,498 $16,201FTA 5309 (FG) $12,003 $509 $5,119 $6,375 $12,003Local Funds $7,050 $566 $2,266 $4,218 $7,050TCRP $21,000 $21,000 $21,000

TOTAL $56,254 $21,000 $2,831 $11,332 $21,091 $56,254

San Diego Association of GovernmentsMPO ID: SAN33 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bus Station Stops & Terminals Construction of small passenger sheltersDESCRIPTION: For MTS - Spring Valley, Mira Mesa, Kearny Mesa Transit Station improvements, Grossmont station pedestrian enhancements, regional bus stop signs & improvements

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CON

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

38


FTA 5307 $1,480 $785 $601 $94 $1,480FTA 5309 $600 $600 $600Local Funds $520 $346 $150 $24 $520

TOTAL $2,600 $1,731 $751 $118 $2,600

MPO ID: SAN34 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bus/Rail Support Equipment/Facilities Purchase of equipment for existing facilitiesDESCRIPTION: For MTS - furniture replacement, building remodel, yard lighting, bus maintenance, desktop replacement, security enhancement, building & site improvements, revenue vehicles, ticket booths

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $3,348 $1,169 $1,221 $958 $3,348FTA 5309 (FG) $15,671 $6,332 $4,811 $4,528 $15,671Local Funds $4,755 $1,875 $1,508 $1,372 $4,755

TOTAL $23,774 $9,376 $7,540 $6,858 $23,774

MPO ID: SAN35 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Transit First Bus Rapid Transit Reconstruction of transit structuresDESCRIPTION: Implementation of Transit First projects

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $967 $323 $266 $378 $967FTA 5309 $885 $885 $885Local Funds $342 $181 $66 $95 $342TransNet-T $7,558 $1,965 $678 $1,845 $3,070 $7,558

TOTAL $9,752 $3,354 $1,010 $2,318 $3,070 $9,752

MPO ID: SAN36 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Signal & Communications Equipment Track rehab in existing right of wayDESCRIPTION: For MTS - transit management system

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $2,986 $898 $1,043 $1,045 $2,986FTA 5309 (FG) $2,710 $1,112 $1,040 $558 $2,710Local Funds $1,425 $503 $521 $401 $1,425

TOTAL $7,121 $2,513 $2,604 $2,004 $7,121

MPO ID: SAN37 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bus/Rail Preventive Maintenance Transit operating assistanceDESCRIPTION: For MTS - maintenance of federally funded equipment, rolling stock & facilities for bus and rail systems

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $69,600 $23,200 $23,200 $23,200 $69,600Local Funds $17,400 $5,800 $5,800 $5,800 $17,400

TOTAL $87,000 $29,000 $29,000 $29,000 $87,000

MPO ID: SAN38 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Rail Transitway/Lines Track rehab in existing right of wayDESCRIPTION: For MTS - trackway improvements, curve straightening, tie replacements, and other improvements to existing transit way; station and shelter rehabilitation

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5309 (FG) $8,074 $3,297 $2,414 $2,363 $8,074Local Funds $2,018 $824 $603 $591 $2,018

TOTAL $10,092 $4,121 $3,017 $2,954 $10,092

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

39


San Diego Association of GovernmentsMPO ID: SAN39 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Rail Electrification & Power Distribution Track rehab in existing right of wayDESCRIPTION: For MTS - cantenary improvements, station switches, grounding program

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5309 (FG) $3,106 $1,670 $777 $659 $3,106Local Funds $777 $418 $194 $165 $777

TOTAL $3,883 $2,088 $971 $824 $3,883

MPO ID: SAN40 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Metropolitan Planning Non construction related activitiesDESCRIPTION: Regional planning

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONFTA 5307 $1,830 $631 $519 $680 $1,830Local Funds $458 $158 $130 $170 $458

TOTAL $2,288 $789 $649 $850 $2,288

MPO ID: SAN41 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Replace Santa Margarita Bridge Reconstruction of transit structuresDESCRIPTION: Near Oceanside within the boundaries of Pendleton USMC Base at the Santa Margarita River - replace bridge and construct double track to Stuart Mesa and Fallbrook passing tracks

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSTIP-IIP $5,200 $2,500 $2,700 $5,200

TOTAL $5,200 $2,500 $2,700 $5,200

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

40


San Diego CountyMPO ID: CNTY05 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Channel Road Bridge Project Bicycle and pedestrian facilitiesDESCRIPTION: Design and construct an equestrian trail to cross the bridge


TOTAL $158 $52 $106 $52 $106

MPO ID: CNTY06 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Los Coches RoadDESCRIPTION: Phase I: I-8 to Los Coches; Phase II: Julian Ave to Woodside Ave - widen to provide 2 traffic lanes with left turn lane and bike lane

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $8,400 $341 $4,064 $3,349 $646 $8,400

TOTAL $8,400 $341 $4,064 $3,349 $646 $8,400

MPO ID: CNTY08 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Mission RoadDESCRIPTION: From Pepper Tree Lane to Clemmens Lane in Fallbrook - widen from 3 to 5 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $5,705 $2,100 $3,605 $5,705

TOTAL $5,705 $2,100 $3,605 $5,705

MPO ID: CNTY10 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Riverside DriveDESCRIPTION: Channel Road to Riverford - widen road to provide 2 lanes and 2 bike lanes; construct PCC curbs, gutters, sidewalks, upgrade drainage facilities, modify/install traffic signals

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $5,152 $900 $3,734 $518 $900 $4,252

TOTAL $5,152 $900 $3,734 $518 $900 $0 $4,252

MPO ID: CNTY14 Capacity Status: CITITLE: South Santa Fe AvenueDESCRIPTION: Vista City limits to San Marcos City limits - reconstruct & widen from 2 to 4 lanes including bicycle lane

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $9,764 $4,718 $1,683 $3,363 $4,718 $1,683 $3,363TransNet-H $9,200 $9,200 $9,200TransNet-78 $8,900 $8,900 $8,900Private Funds $450 $200 $250 $450

TOTAL $28,314 $4,718 $11,083 $9,150 $3,363 $4,718 $20,233 $3,363

MPO ID: CNTY16 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SR52 Forrester CreekDESCRIPTION: Drainage

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $3,000 $3,000 $3,000

TOTAL $3,000 $3,000 $3,000

Exempt Category:

41


San Diego CountyMPO ID: CNTY17 Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR54/94DESCRIPTION: Ph 1: widen from 4 to 6 lanes with intersection improvements, raised median and left turn pockets. Ph 2: on SR 94 extend Jamacha Blvd. Ph 3: on SR54 extend from Cuyamaca College east to Braham

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $392 $392 $392TransNet-L $7,842 $534 $625 $5,782 $901 $7,842

TOTAL $8,234 $534 $625 $5,782 $1,293 $8,234

MPO ID: CNTY18 Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR 56 ContributionDESCRIPTION: Final payment for County's share to City of San Diego


TOTAL $774 $300 $474 $774

MPO ID: CNTY19 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Valley Center North & SouthDESCRIPTION: From City of Escondido to Cole Grade Road - widen and reconstruct with striped center 2-way lane, bike lanes and pathways

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $35,943 $9,463 $16,120 $10,360 $35,943Local Funds $2,766 $856 $1,510 $400 $2,766

TOTAL $38,709 $10,319 $17,630 $10,760 $38,709

MPO ID: CNTY21 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bradley Avenue Overpass at SR 67 Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: From Magnolia Ave. and Graves Ave. - future widening of Bradley Ave. overpass from 2 to 4 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $382 $120 $103 $159 $382RSTP $750 $750 $750

TOTAL $1,132 $870 $103 $159 $1,132

MPO ID: CNTY22 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Valley Center Road BridgeDESCRIPTION: At San Luis River - replace 2-lane structurally deficient bridge with 4-lanes with median and sidewalks

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,670 $180 $1,490 $180 $25 $1,465HBRR $6,680 $720 $5,960 $720 $100 $5,860

TOTAL $8,350 $900 $7,450 $900 $125 $7,325

MPO ID: CNTY23 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Valley Center RoadDESCRIPTION: From East of Valley Center & Cole Grade Road and extending approx. 6 miles to Rincon casino - widen from 2 to 3 lanes


TOTAL $856 $315 $541 $856

Exempt Category:

42


San Diego Metropolitan Transit SystemMPO ID: MTS22 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Reduced Price Pass Subsidy Transit operating assistanceDESCRIPTION: Subsidy for reduced price passes required by TransNet measure

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-T $22,000 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500 $22,000

TOTAL $22,000 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500 $22,000

MPO ID: MTS23 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: TransNet Expanded Service Subsidy Transit operating assistanceDESCRIPTION: Operating support for existing service

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-T $81,700 $18,700 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $81,700

TOTAL $81,700 $18,700 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $81,700

MPO ID: MTS27 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Mission Valley East Light Rail ProjectDESCRIPTION: 5.8 mile extension of SD Blue Line with 4 stations, including tunnel at SD State University campus

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $10,227 $10,227 $10,227FTA 5307 (NS) $329,958 $239,613 $65,000 $25,345 $329,958STIP-RIP $69,095 $69,095 $69,095TransNet-T $80,806 $70,854 $9,952 $80,806Local Funds $2,047 $2,047 $2,047TCI/TSM $3,734 $3,734 $3,734

TOTAL $495,867 $395,570 $65,000 $25,345 $9,952 $495,867

MPO ID: MTS27A Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Mission Valley East LRT Operating Transit operating assistanceDESCRIPTION: Start-up cost for the 5.8 mile extension of Blue Line

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $16,800 $1,600 $5,400 $5,600 $4,200 $16,800Local Funds $2,177 $207 $700 $726 $544 $2,177

TOTAL $18,977 $1,807 $6,100 $6,326 $4,744 $18,977

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

43


San Diego, City ofMPO ID: SD01 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Alvarado Canyon Road Realignment Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: From Fairmount Ave/Camino Del Rio N. to Fairmount Ave/Mission Gorge Rd - relocate intersection (CIP: 52-713)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $4,900 $1,500 $1,700 $1,700 $365 $2,635 $1,900

TOTAL $4,900 $1,500 $1,700 $1,700 $365 $2,635 $1,900

MPO ID: SD04 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Division StreetDESCRIPTION: I-5 to 43rd Street - Phase I: signal additions, drainage rehabilitation and minor street improvements; Phase II: widen to 4 lanes roadway (CIP: 52-347)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $4,364 $228 $4,136 $4,364Local Funds $1,250 $50 $1,200 $1,250

TOTAL $5,614 $278 $5,336 $5,614

MPO ID: SD05 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Euclid Avenue Improvements Plantings, landscaping, etc.DESCRIPTION: From Home Ave. to El Cajon Blvd. - street improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaping, paving and traffic calming installations (CIP: 52-699)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $200 $200 $200TransNet-L $1,000 $1,000 $350 $650

TOTAL $1,200 $200 $1,000 $350 $850

MPO ID: SD08 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Mission City Parkway BridgeDESCRIPTION: From Camino Del Rio North to over the San Diego River - construct new 2-lane bridge extending Mission City Pkwy. (CIP 53-053)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,500 $1,500 $1,500

TOTAL $1,500 $1,500 $1,500

MPO ID: SD09 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Sidewalks Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitation.DESCRIPTION: Replace & reconstruct sidewalks (CIP: 52-002/327/336/517/715)


TOTAL $3,200 $800 $800 $800 $800 $40 $3,160

MPO ID: SD102 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Otay Truck Route Widening Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: Between Britannia Blvd and POE; widen existing 2 lane truck route to 3 lanes between La Media and POE; extend truck route to Britannia by constructing a 2 lane road segment

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,730 $360 $1,370 $1,730

TOTAL $1,730 $360 $1,370 $1,730

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

44


San Diego, City ofMPO ID: SD103 Capacity Status: CITITLE: I-5/Genesse Ave InterchangeDESCRIPTION: Replace Genesee Ave overcrossing from 4-lane bridge with 6-lane bridge; between Sorrento Valley Road and La Jolla Village Drive - construct auxiliary lanes; replace Voight Drive bridge

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $24,800 $4,700 $300 $500 $1,000 $18,300 $9,940 $3,960 $10,900RSTP $963 $963 $963

TOTAL $25,763 $4,700 $300 $500 $1,000 $19,263 $9,940 $3,960 $11,863

MPO ID: SD104 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Reo Drive Improvement Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitation.DESCRIPTION: Between Albermarle and Cumberland Street - provide improvements including relocation bus stops, restriping, installing catch basins, replacing curb & gutter, etc.


TOTAL $500 $500 $500

MPO ID: SD106 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Mission Beach Bulkhead Preservation Emergency Relief (23 U.S.C. 125).DESCRIPTION: Balboa Court to Pacific Beach Drive - preserves bulkhead including replace concrete deck and restoring wall


TOTAL $150 $150 $150

MPO ID: SD107 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: North Torrey Pines Road @ Genesee Interchange reconfiguration projectsDESCRIPTION: Reconstruction of intersection (CIP 52-471)


TOTAL $100 $100 $100

MPO ID: SD108 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bayshore Bikeway Bicycle and pedestrian facilitiesDESCRIPTION: Along the bayshore bikeway in the City of San Diego at the borders of Imperial Beach (13th Street) and Chula Vista (Main Street) - design/construct class I bike path

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $2,188 $310 $1,878 $797 $80 $1,311TransNet-B $297 $54 $243 $54 $10 $233BTA $90 $90 $90

TOTAL $2,575 $454 $2,121 $941 $90 $1,544

MPO ID: SD109 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Rancho Bernardo Community ParkDESCRIPTION: SE corner of West Bernardo Drive - add center turn lane in front of park to enhance traffic operation (CIP: 29-598.0)


TOTAL $150 $150 $40 $30 $80

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

45


San Diego, City ofMPO ID: SD11 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Regents Road Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: AT&SF Railroad bridge to Governors Road - future construction of 4-lane road; construct 925-ft long bridge spanning AT&SF and portion of flood plain. (CIP 52-302,52- 303, 53-044)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $3,875 $2,280 $1,595 $3,075 $800

TOTAL $3,875 $2,280 $1,595 $3,075 $800

MPO ID: SD13 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Sunset Cliffs Blvd.DESCRIPTION: From West Point Loma Drive to Minitz Blvd. - widen from two to 4-lanes (CIP 52-698)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $100 $100 $100Local Funds $89 $89 $89

TOTAL $189 $89 $100 $189

MPO ID: SD15 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Lights Exempt Category: Lighting improvements.DESCRIPTION: Install street lights (CIP 68-012, 61-200, 38-001, 52-293, 61-201)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $2,663 $2,363 $100 $100 $100 $2,663Local Funds $800 $200 $200 $200 $200 $800

TOTAL $3,463 $2,363 $300 $300 $300 $200 $3,463

MPO ID: SD16 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Sorrento Creek Mitigation Noise attenuationDESCRIPTION: Environmental mitigation for Sorrento West project (CIP 12-134)


TOTAL $36 $36 $36

MPO ID: SD16A Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Signals Intersection signalization projectsDESCRIPTION: Install traffic signal improvements (CIP 62-001/002/316, 63-002, 68-001/010/011)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $5,670 $870 $1,600 $1,600 $1,600 $5,670

TOTAL $5,670 $870 $1,600 $1,600 $1,600 $5,670

MPO ID: SD17 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Guard Rails Guardrails, median barriers, crash cushionsDESCRIPTION: Install new and replace old guard rail along streets (CIP 68-006)


TOTAL $750 $250 $250 $250 $750

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

46


San Diego, City ofMPO ID: SD18 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Control Measures Safety Improvement ProgramDESCRIPTION: Respond to traffic concerns in residential neighborhoods (CIP 61-001, 62-279, 52-717, 33-066, 39-088)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,200 $400 $400 $400 $1,200

TOTAL $1,200 $400 $400 $400 $1,200

MPO ID: SD19 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Streamview Drive Safety Improvement Program.DESCRIPTION: 54th Street to College Ave. - improvements to reduce excessive speeds, increase safety and reduce visual impacts to landscaping (CIP 52-588)


TOTAL $293 $293 $293

MPO ID: SD20 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Master Control & Station Non signalization traffic control and operatingDESCRIPTION: Install permanent traffic count stations, update traffic signal master control system�(CIP 63-001)


TOTAL $180 $60 $60 $60 $180

MPO ID: SD21 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Earthquake Restrainers - Bridges Non capacity widening or bridge reconstructionDESCRIPTION: Seismic restraining units on city bridges susceptible to damage during earthquakes (CIP 53-037)


TOTAL $90 $30 $30 $30 $90

MPO ID: SD23 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Storm DrainsDESCRIPTION: Various drainage projects (CIP 18-001, 11-307, 12-090/091, 17-001, 17-002, 13-005, 12-127, 11-306, 52-338.8)


TOTAL $1,800 $600 $600 $600 $1,800

MPO ID: SD24 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Coastal Erosion Damage repair caused by unusual disasters.DESCRIPTION: Correct miscellaneous erosion problems along shorelines affecting city streets (CIP 52-545)


TOTAL $600 $300 $300 $600

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

47


San Diego, City ofMPO ID: SD29 Capacity Status: CITITLE: 43rd/Logan/National AvenuesDESCRIPTION: Intersection realignments at 43rd street, Logan and National Ave. (CIP 52-409)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $3,218 $284 $2,934 $3,218Local Funds $4,120 $117 $4,003 $4,120

TOTAL $7,338 $401 $4,003 $2,934 $7,338

MPO ID: SD34 Capacity Status: CITITLE: El Camino RealDESCRIPTION: From San Dieguito Road to Via De La Valle - reconstruct & widen from 2 to 4 lanes (CIP: 52-479)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $2,494 $174 $20 $2,300 $174 $20 $2,300HBRR $10,018 $698 $80 $9,240 $698 $80 $9,240

TOTAL $12,512 $872 $100 $11,540 $872 $100 $11,540

MPO ID: SD38 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Georgia St Bridge/University Ave Guardrails, median barriers, crash cushions.DESCRIPTION: Provides for bridge replacement, retaining walls and guardrails along bridge walls (CIP 52-555)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,177 $137 $1,040 $137 $1,040HBRR $6,336 $1,056 $5,280 $1,056 $5,280

TOTAL $7,513 $1,193 $6,320 $1,193 $6,320

MPO ID: SD43 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Lisbon-Imperial (CIP 52-654) Noise attenuation.DESCRIPTION: 217' east of 71st Street - improve traffic flow by adding left turn pocket from Imperial Ave. to 71st Street


TOTAL $477 $427 $50 $477

MPO ID: SD48 Capacity Status: CITITLE: National AvenueDESCRIPTION: From SR15 to 43rd Street - widen to modified 4-lane major street (CIP 52-436)


TOTAL $6,077 $3,378 $2,699 $2,795 $3,282

MPO ID: SD51 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: North Torrey Pines Road Bridge Non capacity widening or bridge reconstructionDESCRIPTION: Replace bridge at Los Penasquitos Creek (CIP 53-050)


TOTAL $50 $50 $50

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

48


San Diego, City ofMPO ID: SD59 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Sports Arena BlvdDESCRIPTION: Rosecrans Street to Midway Drive - modify and widen to 6-lane major street (CIP 52-503)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,900 $203 $1,697 $250 $150 $1,500TransNet-L $250 $175 $75 $250

TOTAL $2,150 $378 $1,772 $500 $150 $1,500

MPO ID: SD70 Capacity Status: CITITLE: W. Mission Bay BridgeDESCRIPTION: Over San Diego River - replace from 4 to 6-lane bridge with class II bike lane (CIP 52-643)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $2,160 $2,160 $2,160TransNet-L $1,512 $340 $542 $630 $882 $630HBRR $10,000 $1,360 $8,640 $1,360 $8,640

TOTAL $13,672 $1,700 $542 $11,430 $2,242 $11,430

MPO ID: SD71 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: General Fund ReimbursementDESCRIPTION: Reimbursement to City's general fund for eligible TransNet expenses


TOTAL $48,492 $16,164 $16,164 $16,164 $48,492

MPO ID: SD79 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Coast Blvd. Bluff Stabilization Damage repair caused by unusual disastersDESCRIPTION: Provides for bluff stabilization near Coast Blvd. (CIP 52-670)


TOTAL $250 $250 $250

MPO ID: SD81 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Genesee Avenue Engineering studies.DESCRIPTION: From Nobel Drive to SR 52 - widen to 6-lane major street north of Decoro Street and to a 6-lane primary arterial south of Decoro Street (CIP 52-498)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,500 $946 $353 $201 $1,500

TOTAL $1,500 $946 $353 $201 $1,500

MPO ID: SD86 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Farmosa Slough Salt Marsh Restorati Damage repair caused by unusual disastersDESCRIPTION: Provide mitigation for impacts to coastal salt marsh by Sorrento West channel (CIP 12-152)


TOTAL $40 $10 $10 $10 $10 $40

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

49


San Diego, City ofMPO ID: SD87 Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR-905 Right-of-Way AcquisitionDESCRIPTION: City's share for the SR-905 New Freeway project (CAL38) - provides for a portion of the ROW acquisition

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $4,000 $4,000 $4,000

TOTAL $4,000 $4,000 $4,000

MPO ID: SD88 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: I-5/SR 56 Interchange Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: Future construction of freeway to freeway interchange, operational improvements

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONDemo $375 $375 $375Demo - Section 115 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000CBI $1,942 $1,942 $1,942Local Funds $561 $561 $561STP $1,500 $1,500 $1,500

TOTAL $5,378 $5,378 $3,878 $1,500

MPO ID: SD90 Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR 163/Clairemont Blvd. InterchangeDESCRIPTION: From Kearny Mesa to Kearny Villa Road - widen from 4 to 6 lane prime arterial

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $6,500 $1,200 $5,300 $2,280 $4,220RSTP $4,400 $4,400 $4,400

TOTAL $10,900 $1,200 $9,700 $2,280 $8,620

MPO ID: SD93 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SR 274 (Balboa Ave) Beautification Transportation enhancement activitiesDESCRIPTION: Between I-5/805 - median landscaping (CIP: 52-496)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONSHOPP - TEA $965 $965 $965

TOTAL $965 $965 $965

MPO ID: SD96 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Resurfacing Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Resurface slurry seal city streets (CIP-001)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $3,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $3,000Local Funds $6,400 $1,600 $1,600 $1,600 $1,600 $6,400

TOTAL $9,400 $2,600 $2,600 $2,600 $1,600 $9,400

MPO ID: SD97 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: School Traffic Safety Improvements Exempt Category: Traffic signal synchronization projects.DESCRIPTION: Provide traffic control devices at various school locations (CIP 68-017)


TOTAL $300 $100 $100 $100 $300

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

50


San Marcos, City ofMPO ID: SD99 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Bridge Rails Exempt Category: Guardrails, median barriers, crash cushions.DESCRIPTION: Install new or replace old railings on bridges where existing railing does not meet current standards (CIP: 519)


TOTAL $600 $200 $100 $100 $100 $100 $600

MPO ID: SM03 Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR78/Las Posas InterchangeDESCRIPTION: Acquire ROW; modify interchange and auxiliary lanes to Rancho Santa Fe Rd.

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $3,220 $3,070 $150 $937 $2,133 $150TransNet-L $9,360 $8,180 $1,090 $90 $2,000 $6,180 $1,180RSTP $9,020 $3,320 $5,040 $660 $9,020

TOTAL $21,600 $14,570 $6,280 $750 $2,937 $8,313 $10,350

MPO ID: SM04 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Las Posas RoadDESCRIPTION: From Grand Avenue to Mission Road - widen to 6-lane arterial including new SR 78 interchange, drainage improvements and utility undergrounding

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $4,200 $4,200 $3,200 $1,000Local Funds $8,900 $7,325 $1,575 $1,350 $550 $7,000Private Funds $1,000 $1,000 $1,000

TOTAL $14,100 $12,525 $1,575 $1,350 $3,750 $9,000

MPO ID: SM07 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Rancho Santa Fe RoadDESCRIPTION: From La Costa Meadows Dr. to Island Drive - grading, utility undergrounding and construction of Rancho Santa Fe as a 4-lane arterial (CIP-008)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONPrivate Funds $6,500 $6,500 $6,500TransNet-L $2,700 $1,700 $1,000 $2,700Local Funds $10,400 $10,400 $1,700 $500 $8,200

TOTAL $19,600 $18,600 $1,000 $1,700 $500 $17,400

MPO ID: SM08 Capacity Status: CITITLE: San Elijo RoadDESCRIPTION: From Rancho Santa Fe Road to Elfin Forest Road. Construct 4-lane street improvements (CIP-010)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONPrivate Funds $4,500 $4,500 $100 $4,400

TOTAL $4,500 $4,500 $100 $4,400

51


San Marcos, City ofMPO ID: SM09 Capacity Status: CITITLE: South Santa Fe RoadDESCRIPTION: From Rancho Santa Fe Road to Bosstick Blvd. - construct new 4-lane arterial with raised medium, curb and gutter, sidewalk, utility undergrounding and traffic signal system (CIP-043)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $5,700 $370 $5,330 $370 $5,330Local Funds $2,500 $300 $2,200 $300 $2,200Private Funds $1,800 $1,000 $800 $1,000 $800

TOTAL $10,000 $1,670 $8,330 $370 $1,300 $8,330

MPO ID: SM10 Capacity Status: CITITLE: SR78/Smilax Interchange Improveme Exempt Category:DESCRIPTION: Construct new interchange (CIP-108)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $600 $50 $100 $450 $400 $200

TOTAL $600 $50 $100 $450 $400 $200

MPO ID: SM11 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Twin Oaks Valley RoadDESCRIPTION: From 'F' Street to easterly boundary of San Elijo Hills Development. (CIP-068)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $1,000 $200 $800 $1,000

TOTAL $1,000 $200 $800 $1,000

MPO ID: SM14 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Linda Vista Drive RealignmentDESCRIPTION: From Poinsettia Ave. to Las Flores Drive - construct new secondary arterial including roadway pavement, curb gutter and sidewalk (CIP-055)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $2,850 $200 $350 $2,300 $250 $300 $2,300

TOTAL $2,850 $200 $350 $2,300 $250 $300 $2,300

MPO ID: SM15 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Linda Vista DriveDESCRIPTION: From Rancho Santa Fe Rd. to Las Flores Rd. - design and construct secondary arterial street improvement (CIP-053)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONHUD $325 $125 $200 $25 $300Local Funds $120 $120 $120

TOTAL $445 $125 $320 $25 $420

MPO ID: SM19 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Grand Avenue BridgeDESCRIPTION: On Discovery between Craven & Grand - construct 4-lane arterial; and between Grand to Discovery - 6-lane arterial (CIP-042)

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $3,000 $1,200 $1,800 $1,075 $1,150 $775

TOTAL $3,000 $1,200 $1,800 $1,075 $1,150 $775

52


Santee, City ofMPO ID: SNT02 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Forester Creek ChannelizationDESCRIPTION: Forester Creek Channelization - construct Olive Lane & Mission Gorge Road bridges over flood control channel

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-H $6,800 $2,900 $3,900 $6,800Local Funds $7,384 $6,484 $900 $2,844 $484 $4,056Water Bond $4,750 $4,750 $200 $4,550RSTP $10,166 $2,966 $7,200 $2,966 $7,200

TOTAL $29,100 $14,200 $11,000 $3,900 $3,044 $8,000 $18,056

MPO ID: SNT04 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Maintenance Exempt Category: Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitation.DESCRIPTION: Minor surface repairs to major street reconstruction

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $6,880 $3,814 $770 $802 $611 $883 $6,880Local Funds $686 $686 $686

TOTAL $7,566 $4,500 $770 $802 $611 $883 $7,566

53


Solana Beach, City ofMPO ID: SB01 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Lomas Santa Fe Drive/I-5 InterchangeDESCRIPTION: Add loop ramps and auxiliary lanes on I-5 north & southbound

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $975 $208 $767 $975RSTP $7,525 $1,602 $5,923 $7,525TCRP $6,000 $6,000 $6,000

TOTAL $14,500 $1,810 $6,690 $6,000 $8,500 $6,000

MPO ID: SB02 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Lomas Santa Fe Railroad Grade Separation Const of new bus or rail storage/maint. facilitiesDESCRIPTION: On Rail ROW near Lomas Santa Fe Drive - construct railroad undercrossing and train station


TOTAL $1,000 $500 $250 $250 $1,000

MPO ID: SB03 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Nardo/Stevens Intersection ImprovementsDESCRIPTION: On Stevens Ave, 1/2 mile north & south of Nardo - widen from 2 to 4 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,523 $1,300 $223 $1,523

TOTAL $1,523 $1,300 $223 $1,523

Exempt Category:

54


U.S. Bureau of Indian AffairsMPO ID: BIA1 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Indian Reservation Roads ProgramDESCRIPTION: Various road reconstruction projects in the reservation areas of San Diego County

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONBIA $6,103 $4,318 $1,785 $170 $5,933

TOTAL $6,103 $4,318 $1,785 $170 $5,933

55


Various AgenciesMPO ID: V01 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Inland Rail Trail Bicycle and pedestrian facilitiesDESCRIPTION: From Escondido Transit Center to Oceanside Transit Center along Sprinter ROW - joint project between NCTD and cities of San Marcos, Escondido, Vista & Oceanside - 22 mile regional bikeway project

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $18,294 $2,700 $6,662 $8,932 $2,700 $15,594TDA-B $550 $350 $200 $400 $150TransNet-B $2,181 $200 $863 $1,118 $200 $1,981TEA $800 $800 $800BTA $550 $100 $450 $450 $100PTA $180 $180 $180

TOTAL $22,555 $4,230 $7,825 $10,500 $4,730 $17,825

MPO ID: V02 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Coastal Rail Trail Bicycle and pedestrian facilitiesDESCRIPTION: Multi-jurisdictional class I bike & pedestrian trail along the Coaster ROW between Cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach & San Diego

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONCMAQ $6,592 $1,755 $4,837 $1,399 $5,193TransNet-B $1,461 $391 $1,070 $391 $1,070TDA-B $651 $467 $184 $467 $184STIP-RIP $5,114 $5,114 $1,220 $3,894

TOTAL $13,818 $7,727 $6,091 $3,477 $10,341

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

56


Vista, City ofMPO ID: VISTA02 Capacity Status: CITITLE: Hacienda DriveDESCRIPTION: Between La Tortuga and So. Melrose Drive - widen & improve from two to four lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $129 $129 $129Local Funds $691 $625 $66 $691

TOTAL $820 $754 $66 $820

MPO ID: VISTA03 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Street Rehabilitation & Maintenance Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Pavement Management System

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $3,215 $815 $600 $600 $600 $600 $3,215Local Funds $1,314 $814 $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $1,314

TOTAL $4,529 $1,629 $700 $700 $700 $700 $100 $4,529

MPO ID: VISTA07 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SR-78 Corridor Enhancement Plantings, landscaping, etc.DESCRIPTION: Along SR 78 between Smilax Road and Thunder Drive - freeway landscaping

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $3,746 $2,669 $477 $150 $300 $150 $3,746Local Funds $321 $65 $256 $321TEA $1,013 $928 $85 $1,013

TOTAL $5,080 $3,662 $818 $150 $300 $150 $5,080

MPO ID: VISTA08 Capacity Status: CITITLE: West Vista WayDESCRIPTION: From Melrose Drive west to Thunder Drive - widen from 2 to 4 lanes

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONTransNet-L $1,590 $40 $1,550 $40 $1,550RSTP $990 $990 $990

TOTAL $2,580 $1,030 $1,550 $1,030 $1,550

MPO ID: VISTA12 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: East Vista Way Street Improvements Engineering studiesDESCRIPTION: From Arcadia Ave. northerly to the City limits - alignment study to widen East Vista Way from 2 to 4 lanes


TOTAL $200 $200 $200

MPO ID: VISTA13 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Roadway Rehabilitation Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitationDESCRIPTION: Repair/replace sidewalks, curbs & gutters

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $75 $75 $75TransNet-L $662 $237 $25 $200 $175 $25 $662

TOTAL $737 $312 $25 $200 $175 $25 $737

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

57


Vista, City ofMPO ID: VISTA14 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: Traffic Signals Intersection signalization projectsDESCRIPTION: Install new traffic signals and construct minor signal modifications

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $474 $74 $100 $100 $100 $100 $474TransNet-L $75 $25 $25 $25 $75

TOTAL $549 $74 $125 $125 $125 $100 $549

MPO ID: VISTA15 Capacity Status: NCITITLE: SR 78 @ Sycamore Ramp Improvement Interchange reconfiguration projectsDESCRIPTION: Eastbound SR 78 off ramp to Sycamore Avenue - construct right turn lane

TOTAL PRIOR 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 PE RW CONLocal Funds $20 $20 $20TransNet-L $115 $115 $115

TOTAL $135 $20 $115 $135

Exempt Category:

Exempt Category:

58

RTIPFund Types

APCD = Air Pollution Control District

BIA = Bureau of Indian Affairs

BTA = Bicycle Transportation Account (State)

CMAQ = Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (Federal)

CBI = Corridors and Borders Infrastructure Program (Federal)

CDBG = Community Development Block Grants (Local)

DEMO = Demonstration (Federal)

HBRR = Highway Bridge Repair & Replacement (Federal)

HUD = Housing and Urban Development (Federal)

IBRC = Innovative Bridge Research & Construction (Federal)

JARC = Jobs Access Reverse Commute (Federal)

PLH = Public Lands Highway (Federal)

RSTP = Regional Surface Transportation Program (Federal)

RTP = Recreational Trails Program (Federal)

SHOPP = State Highway Operation & Protection Program (for Caltrans use only)

STIP-IIP = State Transportation Improvement Program - Interregional Program (State)

STIP-RIP = State Transportation Improvement Program - Regional Improvement Program (State)

STP= Surface Transportation Program under FHWA Administrative Program (congressionally

directed FY 2003 appropriations)

TCI = Transit Capital Improvement Program (State, no longer exists)

TCRP = Traffic Congestion Relief Program (State)

TCSP = Transportation & Community & System Preservation (Federal)

TSM = Transportation Systems Management (State)

TDA = Transportation Development Act (State)

TDA-B = Transportation Development Act-Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities (State)

TEA = Transportation Enhancement Activities Program (Federal)

TransNet -H = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Highway (Local)

TransNet -L = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Local Streets & Roads (Local)

TransNet -T = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Transit (Local)

Section 5307 = Federal Transit Administration Urbanized Area Formula Program

Section 5309 = Federal Transit Administration Discretionary Program

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

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

Section 5311 = Federal Transit Administration Rural Program

Section 5310 = Federal Transit Administration Elderly & Disabled Program

59

RIDESHARING

SANDAG Regional TDM Program

RideLink and Regional Vanpool Program $24,771

Subtotal $24,771

TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS

Mission Valley East Light Rail Project $495,867

Oceanside-Escondido Rail Extension $351,520

I-15 Bus Rapid Transit (Rolling Stock/Stations) $59,032

Mid-Coast Corridor Project $37,321

Regional Fare Technology $39,300

Bus/Rail Vehicles Purchase $83,027

Bus/Rail Infrastructure $94,093

Other Rail Projects $63,408

Other Transit Projects (Operations/Planning) $313,085

Subtotal $1,536,653

BICYCLE FACILITIES PROJECTS

Bicycle Facilities $47,450

Subtotal $47,450

TRAFFIC FLOW IMPROVEMENTS

Caltrans/SANDAG Traffic Management System Projects $48,210

CMAQ/Local Agency Traffic Signal Improvement Projects $36,352

Subtotal $84,562

Total Transportation Control Measure Projects: $1,693,436

Total All Transportation Projects in 2004 RTIP: $4,852,372

Share of Transportation Control Measure Projects: 34.9%

Transportation Control Measure Projects2004 RTIP - San Diego Region (in $000s)

Table 3

60

61

REGIONAL EMISSIONS ANALYSIS AND MODELING PROCEDURES

INTRODUCTION

SANDAG and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) must make a determination that the 2004 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) conforms to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality. Conformity to the SIP means that transportation activities will not create new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay the attainment of the national ambient air quality standards.

On October 4, 2002, the U.S. DOT made the conformity finding of the 2002 San Diego RTIP (FY 2003 to FY 2007).

To evaluate transportation conformity of the 2004 RTIP (FY 2005 to FY 2009), emissions forecasts were prepared for the years 2010, 2014, 2020, and 2030. The air quality analysis of the 2004 RTIP is consistent with the analysis prepared for the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The SANDAG Board of Directors made a conformity determination and adopted the 2030 RTP on March 28, 2003. On that date, the Board of Directors also reaffirmed the 2002 RTIP conformity finding. The U.S. DOT made the conformity finding for the 2030 RTP on April 9, 2003.

On July 23, 2004, the SANDAG Board of Directors will be asked to make a finding of conformity and to adopt the 2004 RTIP. The Board also will be asked to redetermine conformity of the 2030 RTP to the current 1-Hour ozone emissions budgets.

GROWTH FORECASTS

Every three to five years, SANDAG produces a long-range forecast of population, housing, and employment growth for the San Diego region. The most recent is the Final 2030 Cities/County Forecast, which was accepted by the SANDAG Board of Directors for use in planning studies on December 19, 2003.

The forecast process relies on three integrated forecasting models. The first one, the Demographic and Economic Forecasting Model (DEFM), provides a detailed econometric and demographic forecast for the entire region. The second one, the Interregional Commuting Model, provides a forecast of interregional commuting expected during the forecast period. The third one, the Urban Development Model, allocates the results of the first two models to subregional areas based upon the current plans and policies of the jurisdictions.

The Final 2030 Cities/County Forecast is based solely on the general and community plans of the 18 cities as adopted. For the unincorporated area, the forecast is based on the most recent (December 2002) version of the County’s GP2020 plan update, as the Board of Supervisors feels that it most accurately reflects the County’s future direction.

Attachment 1

62

SANDAG consulted with the San Diego Region Conformity Working Group (CWG) on the use of the Final 2030 Cities/County Forecast for the 2004 RTIP air quality conformity analysis. Both DOT and the EPA have concurred that approved plans should be used as input in the air quality conformity process. Table 1 shows the regional population and employment growth forecast for the San Diego region through 2030.

TABLE 1—SAN DIEGO REGIONAL POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT FORECAST

Final 2030 Cities/County Forecast

Year Total Population Total Employment

2000 2,813,833 1,384,676

2010 3,211,721 1,528,522

2020 3,528,605 1,672,883

2030 3,855,085 1,824,030

SOURCE: SANDAG, 2003

TRANSPORTATION MODELING

SANDAG follows a widely used four-step transportation modeling process to forecast travel activity in the San Diego region. Travel forecasting procedures are described in more detail in SANDAG’s Regional Transportation Models (1995) and the Preliminary 2030 Forecast Process and Model Documentation (April 2003), which are available upon request.

The estimates of regional transportation-related emissions analysis meet the requirements established in the Transportation Conformity Rule, Sections 93.122(b) and 93.122(c). These requirements relate to the procedures to determine regional transportation-related emissions, including the use of network-based travel models, methods to estimate traffic speeds and delays, and the estimation of vehicle miles of travel.

Tranplan is the transportation planning computer package used to forecast travel activity utilizing datasets that are maintained in the geographic information system (GIS). The transportation modeling steps consist of:

1. Generating average weekday person trip ends in each zone,

2. Estimating trip movements between zones using a trip distribution model,

3. Allocating trips to different forms of transportation using a mode split model, and

4. Assigning vehicle trips to road segments using a traffic assignment model.

Two iterations through the modeling process are made to reach equilibrium between transportation facilities and demand, where congested travel times from the first iteration are input to the second iteration.

63

The transportation models require two major inputs. One input is a zonal level households and land use forecast, which determines the number of trips generated. Highway and transit system networks are the other key input that affects the amount and location of vehicular travel. HIGHWAY NETWORKS The regional highway networks in the San Diego 2004 RTIP include all roads classified by local jurisdictions in their circulation elements. These roads include freeways, expressways, and the Regional Arterial System (RAS). The RAS consists of all conventional state highways, prime arterials, and selected major streets. In addition, some residential streets are included in the networks for connectivity between zones.

The route improvements and additions in the 2004 RTIP are developed as an integral part of San Diego's regional growth management and forecasting process. They are intended to provide adequate travel service that is compatible with adopted regional policies for land use and population growth. All regionally significant projects from the 2004 RTIP are included in the quantitative emissions analysis. These include all state highways, all proposed National Highway System routes, all regionally significant arterials, and all FHWA functionally classified "Other Principal Arterials." Projects included in the 2004 RTIP are listed in Chapter 3.

The networks also account for programs intended to improve the operation of the highway system, including high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes and ramp metering. Existing and proposed toll facilities also are modeled to reflect time, cost, and capacity effects of these facilities. The SR 125 South project and SR 241 are the only modeled toll facilities in the San Diego region.

In addition, several managed/HOV lanes are included in the 2004 RTIP. Facilities with proposed managed lanes include I-5, I-15, I-805, and SR 52. It is assumed that the excess capacity not utilized by carpools and transit on HOV routes with two or more lanes in the peak direction as well as reversible HOV routes would be managed so that single occupant vehicles could use these lanes under a pricing mechanism. Traffic flows would be managed so that the facility would operate at level of service C or better.

Based on the networks and programs described above, the 2004 RTIP transportation forecasts differentiate between single occupant and multioccupancy or high occupancy vehicle travel times. SANDAG normally maintains networks for 2000 (the 2030 Cities/County Forecast base year) and the years 2010, 2020, and 2030. A 2014 network also was created to conduct the air quality conformity analysis of the 2004 RTIP for the 2014 1-Hour ozone emissions budgets.

Locally funded regionally significant projects also have been included in the air quality conformity analysis. These projects are funded with TransNet funds, a 20-year half-percent local sales tax for transportation that expires in 2008, and other local revenue sources. TRANSIT NETWORKS SANDAG also maintains transit network datasets for existing and proposed transit systems. Bus speeds assumed in the transit networks are derived from modeled highway speeds and reflect the effects of congestion. Regional and express transit routes on surface streets are assumed to operate out of congestion due to priority transit treatments. Higher bus speeds may result for transit

64

vehicles operating on highways with HOV lanes and HOV bypass lanes at ramp meters, compared to those routes that operate on highways where these facilities do not exist.

Transit fares are an output of the transit network procedures, which replicate complex fare policies that differ between:

Buses which collect a flat fare of between $1.50 and $3.00 depending on the type of service,

Trolleys which charge a variable fare of between $1.25 and $2.50 depending on how many stations are traversed,

Commuter rail which has a zone-based fare of between $3.50 and $4.65,

Regional Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) which is assumed to charge a distance-based fare of between $0.14 and $0.60 per miles that replicates limited express and commuter rail fares, and

Corridor BRT which is assumed to use trolley station-based fares. Fares are assumed to remain constant in real dollars over the forecast period. Locally funded regionally significant transit projects have been included in the air quality conformity analysis of the 2004 RTIP. These transit projects also are funded with TransNet funds or other local revenue sources. Once network coding is completed, the transportation models are run for the applicable scenarios. Four highway and transit networks (2010, 2014, 2020, and 2030) were coded for the conformity analysis.

Transit projects included in the 2004 RTIP are listed in Chapter 3. TRIP GENERATION Trip generation is the first step in the transportation modeling process. Average weekday trip ends by all forms of transportation starting and ending in each zone are estimated for ten trip types: home-work, home-college, home-school, home-shop, home-other, work-other, and other-other, serve passenger, visitor, and airport.

The trip generation model works by applying trip rates to zone level growth forecasts. Trip production rates are expressed as trips per household. Trip production rates vary by trip type and structure type. Trip attractions are expressed as trips per acre of nonresidential land use or trips per household. Trip attraction rates vary by trip type and land use category. The Final 2030 Cities/County Forecast was used to produce trip generation forecasts for the years 2010, 2014, 2020, and 2030.

In recent years, urban planners have engaged in a debate about whether increasing highway capacity generates induced travel. Most opinions revolve around the following ideas:

Households will make new trips because adding highway capacity reduces the cost or time spent traveling to a location. However, travel costs or travel times will ultimately increase over time as more vehicles use a facility and the new road begins to experience congestion.

65

New facilities may cause a diversion of existing trips from more congested roads to less congested ones. New land uses along a corridor also may result in redistribution of trips to a new destination using an alternative route, but do not necessarily cause more trips overall.

SANDAG’s regional transportation model uses a relatively high trip generation rate for households (8.1 vehicle trips per day), which may account for possible increases in trip making as new facilities are built. Also, the model accounts for travel diversion among facilities. TRIP DISTRIBUTION After trip generation, trip movements between zones are determined using a trip distribution gravity model. Inputs to the trip distribution model include zone level trip generation forecasts by trip type, zone-to-zone travel times, and friction factors by trip type.

Travel times are based on the 2004 RTIP network scenarios. Highway improvements may induce longer trip lengths by allowing motorists to travel farther in the same amount of time. This effect is represented with the trip distribution model. Travel times differ between initial and final model iterations. Initial travel times reflect free-flow conditions, and final times reflect the effects of congestion. MODE CHOICE At this point in the modeling process, total person trip movements between zones are split into different forms of transportation: drive alone, 2-person carpools, 3+ person carpools, transit, and other (bicycling and walk). Trips between zone pairs are allocated to modes based on the cost and time of traveling by a particular mode compared to the cost and time of traveling by other modes. For example, vehicle trips on a congested route would be more likely to be diverted to light rail than vehicle trips on an uncongested freeway.

Income level also is considered since surveys show that high-income travelers are more concerned about the level of service offered by a mode than those with lower incomes. The mode choice model is calibrated using 1995 Travel Behavior Survey trip tables by mode and income and 1995 Regional Transit Survey transit trip characteristics. Preliminary Census 2000 journey-to-work data and 2000 onboard transit passenger counts also are used in the calibration process.

A number of data files are input to the mode choice model. These include:

Zonal incomes

Trip tables from the distribution model

Peak and off-peak period highway times

Peak period HOV times

Peak and off-peak period transit times

Transit fares

Auto driving and parking costs

Transit accessibility measures

66

Highway and transit travel time datasets differ between initial and final passes through the modeling process. Final iteration times reflect congestion effects identified in the first iteration.

The model produces a.m. peak, p.m. peak, and off-peak period trip tables for vehicles and transit riders. The a.m. peak period is from 6:00 to 9:00 in the morning and the p.m. peak period is from 3:00 to 6:00 in the afternoon. The off-peak period covers the remaining 18 hours of the day. A series of mode choice model runs were performed in the course of analyzing the 2004 RTIP scenarios through two model iterations. HIGHWAY ASSIGNMENT Highway assignment produces traffic volume estimates for all roadway segments in the system. These traffic volumes are an important input to emissions modeling.

The highway assignment model works by finding roads that provide the shortest travel time between each zone pair. Trips between zone pairs are then accumulated on road segments making up minimum paths. Highway travel times consider posted speed limits, signal delays, and congestion delays. The model computes congestion delays for each segment based on the ratio of the traffic volume to roadway capacity. Four iterations of equilibrium assignment and capacity restraint are performed within each assignment model run.

Motorists may choose different paths during peak hours when congestion can be heavy and off-peak hours when roadways are typically free flowing. For this reason, traffic is assigned separately for a.m. peak, p.m. peak, and off-peak periods.

Vehicle trip tables for each scenario reflect increased trip-making due to population growth and variations in travel patterns due to the alternative transportation facilities/networks proposed.

Model accuracy is assessed by comparing model estimated 2000 traffic volumes with actual traffic counts obtained through SANDAG's traffic monitoring program and Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) estimates of vehicle miles of travel (VMT).

POST-TRANPLAN PROCESSING

Standard Tranplan output needs to be reformatted and adjusted to be useful for emissions modeling. Several routines and computer programs have been written to accomplish the following major functions:

Correcting link specific traffic volume forecasts for calibration error

Adding in estimated travel on roads not in the transportation modeling process

Computing link speeds based on corrected link volumes, Highway Capacity Manual relationships between congestion and speed (or signal delay)

Splitting link volumes into heavy-duty truck and other traffic to obtain speed distributions by vehicle class

Preparing a data set that contains total VMT, number of trip starts, and VMT by speed category by time of day for each vehicle class

67

Post-Tranplan processing routines are performed twice. First, they are run after the initial model iteration to provide travel times for the final model iterations. Second, they are performed on the final model assignments to provide inputs for emissions modeling.

MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS MODELING

Emissions Model In October 2002, ARB released EMFAC 2002, a new emissions inventory model that calculates emissions for motor vehicles operating in California. It is an integrated model that combines emission rate data with vehicle activity to calculate regional emissions. EPA approved EMFAC 2002 for use in conformity determinations on April 1, 2003.

The EMFAC 2002 model supports calculation of emissions for the Burden mode. The Burden mode is used for calculating regional emission inventories. In this mode, the model reports total emissions as tons per day for each pollutant, by vehicle class and the total vehicle fleet. The Burden mode uses emission factors that have been corrected for ambient conditions and speeds combined with vehicle activity to calculate emissions in tons per day. Vehicle activity includes the number of vehicles, daily vehicle miles traveled, and the number of daily trips.

The air quality analysis for the 2004 RTIP was conducted using EMFAC 2002’s Burden mode. Projections of daily regional emissions were prepared for reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO).

On-road motor vehicle emissions are attributed to several different processes:

Starting exhaust

Running exhaust

Idle exhaust (calculated for heavy-duty trucks only)

Resting and diurnal evaporation

Running losses

Hot soak evaporation

Emission factors vary by vehicle class, fuel usage, and technology. Thirteen vehicle classes are modeled: passenger car, two types of light-duty trucks, medium-duty truck, two types of light-heavy-duty trucks, medium-heavy-duty truck, heavy-heavy-duty truck, line-haul vehicle, urban bus, school bus, motorcycle, and motor-home. The fuels modeled are gasoline, diesel, and electrically powered vehicles. Technology categories can be grouped into catalyst, noncatalyst, and diesel.

Emission factors for processes that vary by temperature (i.e., starting exhaust, hot soak, and running exhaust) are broken down further by specified temperature ranges. Exhaust emission factors also are broken down by speed range.

68

Regional Emissions Forecasts Regional transportation forecasts were initiated in April 2004 by updating highway and transit networks to reflect the 2004 RTIP projects. Output from the Tranplan model was then reformatted and adjusted to be useful for emissions modeling.

Countywide forecasts of average weekday ROG, NOx, and CO emissions were produced for 2010, 2014, 2020, and 2030 using the EMFAC 2002 model. The analysis years were selected to comply with Sections 93.106(a)(1) and 93.118 (a) of the Transportation Conformity Rule. According to these sections, the first horizon year (2010) must be within ten years from the base year used to validate the regional transportation model (2000), the last horizon year must be the last year of the transportation plan’s forecast period (2030), and the horizon years may be no more than ten years apart (2020). In addition, the regional emissions analysis must be conducted for the emissions budgets in the applicable SIP (ROG and NOx budgets for 2010 and 2014).

ROG and NOx emissions are based on the summer season, while CO emissions are based on the winter season.

Emissions Modeling Results An emissions budget is the part of the SIP that identifies emissions levels necessary for meeting emissions reduction milestones, attainment, or maintenance demonstrations.

The 2004 RTIP must meet the ozone motor vehicle emissions budgets contained in the 2002 1-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan. This Maintenance Plan established ROG and NOx budgets for 2010 and 2014. EPA made a budget adequacy finding on May 14, 2003. On June 26, 2003, EPA approved the Maintenance Plan and motor vehicle emissions budgets as SIP revisions. These SIP revisions became effective on July 28, 2003.

SANDAG and the U.S. DOT are required to redetermine conformity of the 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP within 18 months of EPA’s adequacy findings of any new motor vehicle emissions budgets to comply with Section 93.104(e)(2) of the Transportation Conformity Rule for initial SIP submissions. As stated above, EPA’s adequacy finding of the 1-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan budgets was issued after the 2030 RTP’s air quality conformity determination. Therefore, the regional emissions analysis for the 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP and the 2004 RTIP were developed simultaneously. That is, the 2030 RTP conformity redetermination is being conducted concurrently with the 2004 RTIP conformity finding.

The 2004 RTIP also must meet the 1993 CO emissions budget established in the CO Maintenance Plan that was approved by EPA in June 1998.

As shown in Table 2, the projected emissions of ROG, NOx, and CO from both the 2004 RTIP and the 2030 Revenue Constrained RTP are lower than the 1-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and CO Maintenance Plan emissions budgets.

ARB currently is preparing a CO Maintenance Plan for the San Diego region. This plan would update the current plan and would cover the second ten years of the maintenance period through 2018. ARB is expected to adopt the CO Maintenance Plan in July 2004 for transmittal to EPA. The Draft

69

2003 CO budget was established at 730 tons per day. This CO budget would become the applicable budget for conformity determinations for 2003 and subsequent years after EPA makes a budget adequacy finding. The projected CO emissions from the 2004 RTIP also are below the new draft CO budget.

Table 2 summarizes the 2004 RTIP and 2030 Revenue Constrained Plan air quality conformity analysis and the budget test for the current motor vehicle emissions budgets. This analysis shows that both the 2004 RTIP and the 2030 Revenue Constrained Plan (including interim years) meet the applicable budgets.

TABLE 2— 2004 RTIP AND 2030 REVENUE CONSTRAINED RTP AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS

CO ROG NOx

Year

Average Weekday Vehicle Starts

(1,000s)

Average Weekday Vehicle Miles

(1,000s)

SIP Emissions

Budget Tons/Day

CO Emissions Tons/Day

SIP Emissions

Budget Tons/Day

ROG Emissions Tons/Day

SIP Emissions

Budget Tons/Day

NOx EmissionsTons/Day

2010 15,351 87,511 1,194.87 443.12 46 44 88 84

2014 15,934 91,763 1,194.87 330.32 36 34 66 61

2020 16,887 99,207 1,194.87 231.65 36 27 66 42

2030 18,468 110,920 1,194.87 148.83 36 18 66 25

EXEMPT PROJECTS

Section 93.126 of the Transportation Conformity Rule exempts certain highway and transit projects from the requirement to determine conformity. The categories of exempt projects include safety, mass transit, air quality (ridesharing and bicycle and pedestrian facilities), and other (such as planning studies).

The 2004 RTIP programs funding for exempt projects that, according to the conformity rule, may be implemented even in the absence of a conforming transportation plan and transportation improvement program. However, these projects must be included in an interim plan or program. SANDAG followed interagency consultation procedures to determine whether projects are exempt. Exempt projects are listed in Chapter 3.


FINAL CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM (CalPERS) RESOLUTION

Introduction

This is the second reading required to amend SANDAG’s contract with PERS. The amendment will include the new actuarial base of employees consolidated from the transit agencies, MTDB and NCTD.

Discussion

CalPERS has received the “Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment to Contract” and the “Certification of Governing Body’s Action” approved by the Board last month. The 20 days of required public notice have passed and with Board approval of the Final Resolution, our new contract can become effective on July 26, 2004. The key language in the amendment may be found under Section A, paragraph 6, a:

“All benefits provided under this contract shall apply to all past service for former employees of the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board and the North County Transit District.”

The completion of the actuarials brought a change in our employer rate of 1.571 percent. This has already been estimated and included in the FY 2005 Program Budget. Because of the transfer of staff, the actuarial valuation brought a decrease of 2.412 percent to MTDB and .023 percent savings to NCTD. We have forwarded the updated cost analyses and the forms for “Contract Amendment Request” to the other agencies.


Key Staff Contact: Leslie Campbell, (619) 699-1999; [email protected]

Funds are budgeted in Work Element - Indirect Budget

Recommendation It is recommended that the Board approve the “Final Resolution” and the “Certification of Governing Body’s Action” to amend the agency’s contract with PERS to provide for the merge of employees transferred from MTDB and NCTD.


PROPOSED COMMENTS TO CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION (CPUC) REGARDING PROCESS FOR ALLOCATION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY FUNDS

Introduction

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is currently evaluating competing proposals for the long-term administration of the Public Goods Charge – Energy Efficiency funds that are collected by a surcharge to all utility ratepayers throughout the state. In the San Diego Gas & Electric territory, those fees are collected on monthly utility bills and generate approximately $37 million annually. The funds are used for energy efficiency programs that are currently administered by the CPUC, SDG&E, the San Diego Regional Energy Office (SDREO), and other non-utility entities.

The CPUC is in the process of defining a permanent administrative structure which could come from one of the five proposals

being evaluated, a combination of elements of those proposals, or an entirely different structure determined by the CPUC. In addition, other proceedings are on-going at the CPUC which could require testimony or input from the San Diego region. The stakeholders who make up the Energy Working Group (EWG) are discussing these important issues and could influence decisions that impact the citizens of this region by educating the CPUC on energy planning efforts at SANDAG. It may benefit the outcome of some proceedings if a representative from SANDAG attended these proceedings and provided input.

Discussion

The Energy Working Group (EWG) has discussed the pending decision by the CPUC regarding the future administrative structure of the Energy Efficiency funds. The EWG heard an overview of the five proposals at a recent meeting and did not take a position on any particular proposal, but did prepare comments regarding principles that should be considered by the CPUC before a decision is made. The Energy Working Group co-chair, Del Mar Councilmember Henry Abarbanel, presented a draft letter to the Regional Planning Committee at their July 2, 2004 meeting. While the RPC supported much of what was outlined in the draft letter, they did not agree with the EWG on two points: • The EWG recommended that the

administrator not be eligible to implement programs due to an inherent

Recommendation The Regional Planning Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve sending comments on the administration of Public Goods Charges to the California Public Utilities Commission for their consideration. It is also recommended that the Board of Directors authorize representation from SANDAG at the CPUC on issues that are consistent with the Regional Energy Strategy.

2

SANDAG Board of Directors July 23, 2004 – Agenda Item # 7 (APPROVE)

conflict of interest. The RPC did not agree with this position; however the RPC did request that SDG&E prepare a proposal to the EWG on how a sanctioned oversight committee of local stakeholders could be brought into the process to ensure a higher level of accountability.

• The EWG suggested that eliminating

incentives to the administrator would increase funds available for energy efficiency programs. The RPC did not believe that this significantly impacted energy efficiency program funding.

A revised version of the letter that incorporates recommended modifications by the RPC is attached for consideration. The letter is intended to inform the CPUC on energy planning efforts in the San Diego region and the principles that should be considered while they evaluate proposals for the administration of the Energy Efficiency funds. It is anticipated that the CPUC could issue a decision as early as mid-August. Other important proceedings are also underway at the CPUC which may require local input from this region, including SANDAG representation. One such proceeding is the allocation of costs associated with the Department of Water

Resources (DWR) long-term contracts that were assigned during the energy crisis of 2000-2001. While SANDAG submitted comments to the CPUC opposing the proposed cost allocation, attendance at the hearings on this issue may be more persuasive than written communication. Also, the EWG is discussing SDG&E’s Long Term Resource Plan and may recommend participation in the proceedings scheduled for September 2004. SANDAG would be positioned to provide a perspective from the San Diego region that could impact resource decisions. The basis for SANDAG’s input would be the goals and guiding principles of the Regional Energy Strategy.


Attachment

Key Staff Contact: Rob Rundle (619) 699-6949, [email protected]

No Budget Impact

3

July 23, 2004 President Michael Peevey and Members of the California Public Utilities Commission California Public Utilities Commission PUC State Building 505 Van Ness, 4th Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 Dear President Peevey and Commissioners, The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has recently been made aware that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is reviewing proceeding R.01-08-028 regarding a statewide structure for application and administration of Public Goods Funds, with a decision anticipated in August 2004. The purpose of this letter is to convey to the CPUC that SANDAG, which represents all 18 cities and the County of San Diego, considers energy planning in general, and the application and administration of Public Goods Charges (PGC) specifically, as a critical element to an effective energy plan. SANDAG is aware that the CPUC has not been informed of its recent effort to develop an energy strategy and action plan for the San Diego region. This letter will describe those efforts and also briefly outline our recent efforts to develop an energy plan that addresses the energy needs of the region as well as compliments the actions of the State pertaining to the delivery of energy. Currently, more than $37 million in Public Goods Charges are collected annually for energy efficiency programs from ratepayers in the SDG&E territory, comprised primarily of the 19 agencies that makeup SANDAG. As indicated above, SANDAG has developed an energy strategy that addresses local generation and infrastructure needs required to enhance energy reliability and complement the development of renewable energy for the San Diego region. A component of that plan is the utilization and administration of the PGC dollars, a current topic of discussion of the SANDAG Energy Working Group. As a group, SANDAG is keenly interested in the development of a PGC program that embodies the following principles:

• Local energy efficiency programs should be consistent with the guidelines established by the CPUC.

• The PGC program should be administered by a regional entity whose mission is closely

aligned with the goals of energy conservation, energy efficiency and energy education. The San Diego region is unique in the state because the investor-owned utility’s service territory is closely aligned with the jurisdictional boundaries of the county and creates the opportunity for the implementation of innovative approaches that positively impact the region’s, if not the State’s, energy problems.

• A strong local involvement in decisions about administration and implementation of PGC

programs, including accountability that reflects the energy needs of the local communities. Such accountability will ensure that the best energy efficiency programs are being implemented in, and reflect the needs of, the San Diego region. This can only be done by integrating sanctioned oversight of the program by local decision makers and stakeholders, most familiar with local needs, into the program planning and delivery process.

Attachment

4

SANDAG has a working transportation funding model that reflects many of the principles outlined above and has proven successful and responsive to local needs. A similar model is one option that could be used to implement PGC programs. Although not the subject of this letter, SANDAG has also completed a Regional Energy and Infrastructure Study and Regional Energy Strategy that address the energy and infrastructure needs of the San Diego Region through 2030. This was accomplished through a collaborative process that included representatives of the local municipalities, large and small business, environmental groups, educators, San Diego Gas & Electric, and the public. The Study was adopted in July 2003. The SANDAG Energy Working Group is meeting to determine how to best implement that strategy. The Study addresses a wide variety of issues including energy efficiency programs, the repowering of two existing generating facilities, the construction of two new generating facilities, the construction of new, local transmission facilities, the reduction on the reliance of transmitted energy, the development of renewables, the implementation of energy conservation measures and more. It is a comprehensive strategy that reflects local energy needs and calls for a comprehensive planning and implementation program that is sensitive to the environment while addressing local energy requirements. It is our hope that this brief description will entice the CPUC to want to know more about the Study when creating energy policy that affects the San Diego region. On behalf of the agencies that makeup the San Diego Association of Governments I would like to underscore our local energy policies. I hope this letter demonstrates our region’s commitment to energy planning, and the added value the region is prepared to bring to the administration and implementation of Public Goods Charge programs, based upon the principles listed above. Thank you in advance for your efforts on our behalf and for considering this letter in your deliberations regarding the Public Goods programs. Sincerely, MICKEY CAFAGNA Chair, SANDAG Board of Directors

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 04-07- 9JULY 23, 2004 ACTION REQUESTED – INFORMATION

REPORT ON NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGIONAL COUNCILS (NARC) ANNUAL CONFERENCE

NARC’s 38th Annual Conference was held in downtown Chicago, Illinois, June 26-29, 2004. Attending from SANDAG were: Past Chair, National City Councilmember Ron Morrison, Carlsbad Mayor Pro Tem Ramona Finnila, Coronado Mayor Pro Tem Phil Monroe, and Tom Larwin. The theme of this year’s annual conference was “Regions At Their Best.” Chicago – Doing Things Right

Downtown Chicago, itself, was impressive in numerous ways: it was clean, well maintained, and “bustling.” Walking at night was safe; people were out and about shopping, touring, and eating. Wide sidewalks, with a variety of urban design and landscaping treatments were abundant, not just in one area but in the fringes of downtown as well. New bus shelters were clean and modern in looks, with the typical advertising panel not detracting from its appearance. Several of us participated in two technical tours: one included visits to “Green Infrastructure” showing environmental management and “context sensitive” redevelopment along the river front of a suburban community. The other tour went into the Cabrini Green neighborhood, just north of downtown, and showed the remarkable redevelopment that is taking place with high quality multi-family housing replacing poor quality, crime-ridden tenement buildings.

We came away with a very good feeling about Chicago and the strides it has made to re-energize and redevelop at the same time. By the new residential developments that have popped up in and around downtown Chicago, it was apparent why people are moving back into the central city (the city’s population, which was in a downward spiral for decades, has reversed itself). It demonstrated to us that high-density, high-quality, and well-maintained neighborhoods with good transit and pedestrian connections can be a residential market of choice. The sessions over the four-day conference covered urban as well as rural topics, with subjects that ranged from transportation and environmental matters to economic and homeland security (and even one session devoted to Medicare issues in rural regions). The meeting started with an update of what is going on in the Chicago region, a six-county area with several hundred local jurisdictions, numerous MPOs (Metropolitan Planning Organizations), large transit operators, and many special districts. As with our region, the Chicago region’s influence is spreading beyond its traditional boundaries, and in its case, spilling over into parts of four states. Conference Sessions – A Focus On Regions at their Best A summary of the key sessions follows: • Innovation—this was an interesting

presentation that informed us that 95 percent of the attempts at innovation fail. The ingredients of success are transparency, engagement, adaptiveness, resourcefulness, and collaboration.

2

SANDAG Board of Directors July 23, 2004 – Agenda Item #9 (INFORMATION)

• Homeland Security—a link between the public access television stations and homeland security was offered by the head of the Association of Public Television Stations (APTS). For San Diego, the opportunity to explore would be between ARJIS and our local station, KPBS, as a way to provide traveler information over television in case of a significant regional incident occurring.

• International Regional Issues—the head

of the Stuttgart, Germany, regional government shared trends and issues facing them. Increasing car ownership and longer trip lengths caused by a residential movement to ring communities is presenting transportation and economic challenges similar to those we face as trip patterns are increasingly dispersed in their region.

• Transportation—this was a topic of

several sessions:

o Federal TEA-21 (Transportation Equity for the 21st Century) Reauthorization—this Working Group meeting provided an update on chances for a bill this year (increasingly slim) and a need for us to continue to make sure our Conference Committee members (Senator Boxer and Congressman Filner) are up-to-date on features of the extension important to our region’s interests. There is strong unity among all regional, planning, transportation associations, and related professional societies that an extension must have increased funding levels, equivalent to the Senate version ($318 billion).

o Transportation Model Improvement

Project (TMIP)—this a federally supported and staffed effort to improve the travel demand forecasting models that we rely upon. Simulation is becoming a prominent development activity, but other improvement efforts are focused on such things of interest to us, for

example: freight/goods movement, pricing, nonmotorized travel, and the impacts of an aging population.

o “Transit at the Table”—this session

was a summary of a report about to be released by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regarding ingredients of a successful partnership between transit operators and MPOs like SANDAG. Many of the ingredients of such a partnership are in place here, especially after the changes brought about by Senate Bill (SB) 1703/Assemby Bill (AB) 361.

o “United We Ride”—this session

focused on human service agency transportation and federal (including Transportation, Energy, Health and Welfare, Justice Departments) efforts to better coordinate funding programs. It was revealed that there are 62 federal programs that provide funding for transportation and over 50 of these are outside of the DOT (Department of Transportation). A federal multi-agency task force is reviewing these programs in hopes of a more rational way of allocating federal transportation dollars, especially for human and social services.

• Environmental—there were sessions that

covered “green” development, air quality, and water quality issues. There is a growing movement to green (sustainable) development and redevelopment, as evidenced by what is happening in the Chicago region. Air quality remains a significant issue for many regions as they cope with meeting the standards.


Key Staff Contact: Thomas F. Larwin, (619) 699-1911; [email protected]

This Item Relates to Agenda Item No. 10LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIAL MEMBERSHIP ONSANDAG POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES (As of July 1, 2004)

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE BORDERS COMMITTEE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE

North County InlandMembers Mickey Cafagna, Cmte Chair Mickey Cafagna Lori Holt Pfeiler, Cmte Chair Ed Gallo Morris Vance

Mayor, City of Poway Mayor, City of Poway Mayor, City of Escondido Councilmember, City of Escondido Mayor, City of Vista

Alternates Lori Holt Pfeiler Corky Smith Judy Ritter, Councilmember Judy Ritter Ron NewmanMayor, City of Escondido Mayor, City of San Marcos Councilmember, City of Vista Councilmember, City of Vista Councilmember, City of Escondido

North County CoastalMembers Jack Feller Joe Kellejian, Cmte Chair Maggie Houlihan Crystal Crawford, Cmte Chair Christy Guerin, Cmte Vice Chair

Councilmember, City of Oceanside Mayor, City of Solana Beach Mayor, City of Encinitas Councilmember, City of Del Mar Councilmember, City of Encinitas

Alternates Ramona Finnila Christy Guerin Matt Hall David Powell David DrukerMayor Pro Tem, City of Carlsbad Councilmember, City of Encinitas Councilmember, City of Carlsbad Councilmember, City of Solana Beach Councilmember, City of Del Mar

South CountyMembers Ron Morrison Phil Monroe Patty Davis, Cmte Vice Chair Patricia McCoy, Cmte Vice Chair Steve Padilla, Cmte Chair

Councilmember, City of National City Mayor Pro Tem, City of Coronado Councilmember, City of Chula Vista Mayor Pro Tem, City of Imperial Beach Mayor, City of Chula Vista

Alternates Steve Padilla Jerry Rindone Patricia McCoy Phil Monroe Frank ParraMayor, City of Chula Vista Councilmember, City of Chula Vista Mayor Pro Tem, City of Imperial Beach Mayor Pro Tem, City of Coronado Vice Mayor, City of National City

East CountyMembers Mary Sessom, Cmte Vice Chair Jack Dale Jerry Jones David Allan Mark Lewis

Mayor, City of Lemon Grove Councilmember, City of Santee Councilmember, City of Lemon Grove Councilmember, City of La Mesa Mayor, City of El Cajon

Alternates Hal Ryan Hal Ryan Barry Jantz Hal Ryan Barry JantzCouncilmember, City of Santee Councilmember, City of Santee Councilmember, City of La Mesa Councilmember, City of Santee Councilmember, City of La Mesa

City of San DiegoMembers Jim Madaffer, Councilmember Dick Murphy, Cmte Vice Chair Jim Madaffer, Councilmember Ralph Inzunza, Councilmember Charles Lewis, Councilmember

Mayor

Alternates Scott Peters, Councilmember Jim Madaffer, Councilmember Scott Peters, Councilmember Brian Maienschein, Councilmember None

County of San DiegoMembers Dianne Jacob, Chair of Supervisors Ron Roberts, Supervisor Bill Horn, Supervisor Greg Cox, Supervisor Pam Slater-Price, Supervisor

Alternates Greg Cox, Supervisor Dianne Jacob, Chair of Supervisors Pam Slater-Price, Supervisor Pam Slater-Price, Supervisor Greg Cox, SupervisorBill Horn, Supervisor

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 04-07- 11JULY 23, 2004 ACTION REQUESTED – CERTIFY/ADOPT

CERTIFICATION OF FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTION OF REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN1

Introduction

Last December, the SANDAG Board of Directors accepted the draft RCP for public review and comment. Last March, the Board accepted the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for public review and comment. SANDAG received over 700 comments on the draft RCP and over 300 comments on the draft EIR. Based on these comments, and on

1 The Final Draft RCP and the Final Program Environmental Impact Report were mailed to Board members and alternates under separate cover. Additional copies of both documents, and compact discs containing the documents, will be available at the Board meeting.

direction from the Regional Planning Committee and input from its Technical and Stakeholders Working Groups, staff produced a Revised Working Draft RCP. The Regional Planning Committee and its Working Groups met jointly in May and June to discuss the revised working draft RCP and review comments received on the draft EIR. Additionally, at their joint meeting in June, the groups received a copy of the Preliminary Final EIR and a presentation on its contents. At their June meeting, both the Technical and Stakeholders Working Groups recommended that the Regional Planning Committee support the adoption of the RCP. The Technical Working Group made its recommendation with the caveat that SANDAG and County of San Diego staff continue to work on resolving outstanding issues related to the definition of Smart Growth Opportunity Areas in the unincorporated areas and priority for regional transportation funding (discussed below). At its July meeting, the Regional Planning Committee discussed the remaining issues and unanimously recommended that the SANDAG Board of Directors certify the RCP’s Program EIR and adopt the RCP.

Discussion

Background The RCP is a unique planning effort that stems from a regional commitment to produce a long-term comprehensive plan for the San Diego region, and state legislation (AB 361) setting forth parameters for the preparation of a regional plan. The legislation

Recommendation

The Regional Planning Committee unanimously recommends that the SANDAG Board of Directors adopt Resolution No. 2005-01 to:

! Certify the Final Program Environmental Impact Report,

! Adopt Environmental Findings pursuant to CEQA, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and

! Adopt the Regional Comprehensive Plan(RCP) for the San Diego Region.

2

SANDAG Board of Directors July 23, 2004 – Agenda Item # 11 (CERTIFY/ADOPT)

specifies that in allocating transportation resources, SANDAG must consider the extent to which each jurisdiction's general plan implements land use policies recommended in the RCP. The law also specifies that the public must be provided with opportunities to participate in decisions affecting the region's future quality of life. Based on shared goals and objectives, the Regional Comprehensive Plan: ! Identifies practical ways to connect

transportation and land use plans using smart growth principles;

! Uses transportation and land use plans to guide decisions regarding environmental and public facility investments;

! Promotes collaboration and incentives to implement regional goals and objectives;

! Establishes a context in which to address regional infrastructure financing needs; and

! Actively engages our regional neighbors and tribal governments in the planning process.

The RCP identifies challenges that we face as a region and offers guidance toward making better choices, both individually and together, providing an alternative to where we could end up if we continue with business as usual. This first Regional Comprehensive Plan is a starting point for comprehensive planning efforts in the region, and will be monitored and updated on an ongoing basis. Public Participation In addition to monthly meetings held by the Regional Planning Committee, the Technical Working Group, and the Stakeholders Working Group, more than 40 workshops and forums were held in communities around the region to gain input from residents on the RCP. Additionally, a number of community-based organizations, representing a diverse range of ethnicities, income levels, and age ranges throughout the region, performed outreach in their communities on RCP issues.

Ideas from the workshops, forums, and meetings were incorporated throughout the plan. Key Changes between the Draft RCP (December 2003) and the Final Draft RCP (July 2004) While the major recommendations of the Draft RCP remained constant, a number of additions, refinements, and clarifications were incorporated into the Final Draft RCP. These were presented in detail at the May 28, 2004 SANDAG Board meeting, and are summarized below. 1. Smart Growth Area Classification Matrix.

A matrix was added to the Urban Form chapter that identifies the land use and transportation characteristics of existing and potential smart growth areas for seven distinct categories, ranging from the metropolitan center to town centers to special use districts.

2. Principles for Developing Smart Growth Incentives. Between the release of the Draft RCP and the Final Draft RCP, principles for developing smart growth incentive programs were added to the Urban Form chapter. Types of incentive programs include directing regional transportation investments into areas of existing or planned smart growth development; providing direct financial incentives (e.g., grants) to local jurisdictions for smart growth infrastructure improvements and planning; local incentives (e.g., fee reductions, priority processing of development plans); and other federal, state, and local incentive programs.

3. Guidelines for Strengthening the Connection between Local and Regional Plans. A table setting forth guidelines for strengthening the connection between local and regional plans was added to the Implementation chapter. The guidelines will serve as a tool for local jurisdictions to

3


consider where their local plans might better connect to the goals and policy objectives of the RCP at two levels: the entire planning area and specific smart growth opportunity areas.

4. Subregional Planning and Implementation Framework. Refinements were made to the subregional planning and implementation framework of the Implementation chapter, calling for greater coordination with existing planning and implementation processes at the regional and local levels. The framework includes two types of subregional plans: (1) corridor studies that address major regional highway and transit improvements at the broader level, and (2) subarea studies that focus on local and community improvements that support regional transportation investments.

5. Strategic Initiatives. A detailed set of Strategic Initiatives was added to the Implementation chapter. The Strategic Initiatives provide an initial work program for implementing the recommended actions contained in the RCP, identifying responsible implementing entities and specific timelines to ensure accountability.

6. Performance Monitoring Baseline Report and Targets. Annual and periodic performance indicators were added to the Performance Monitoring chapter. Additionally, the chapter contains a commitment to set performance targets (short- and long-term numeric targets) after the release of the first monitoring report, scheduled for Fall 2004.

Other important changes, in addition to those described above, included more clearly articulating that local cities and the County have, and will continue to retain, local land use authority, and incorporation into the Borders chapter of the recommended actions resulting from the various strategies identified in the I-15 Interregional Partnership

(IRP) on transportation, economic development, and housing issues (see Agenda Item 12 on the I-15 IRP). Key Changes made to Address County of San Diego Comments Besides the major changes described above, additional changes were made to the plan following the May release of the Revised Working Draft RCP to address concerns raised by the County of San Diego. The two major concerns brought up by the County were: 1. Concern over the "Rural Village Core"

category contained in the smart growth classification matrix in the Revised Working Draft RCP. The County requested that the category be re-named to "Rural Community" to more closely reflect the community development concept being pursued as part of the County General Plan 2020 update. By re-naming this category and more closely relating it to the County's community development concept, the matrix would be applicable not only to freestanding rural communities such as Ramona and Fallbrook, but also could be applied to communities closer to the urbanized areas of the region, such as Lakeside.

2. Concern that the RCP over-emphasized

the importance of smart growth in the allocation of future regional transportation funds. In prioritizing funding for regional transportation projects, the Revised Working Draft RCP called for giving the "highest" priority to the implementation of smart growth by local jurisdictions in smart growth opportunity areas. The County emphasized that while certain funds should be used for smart growth, not all regional transportation funding should be allocated based upon achieving smart growth objectives, and that encouraging smart growth should not be at the expense of providing congestion relief

4


and operational improvements in deficient corridors.

Based upon discussion and direction by the Regional Planning Committee at its meeting on July 2, the following changes requested by the County were made in order to gain County support for the RCP:

! The County's requested changes to the smart growth classification matrix were made;

! The words "highest priority" were changed to "higher priority" in the Urban Form chapter and in other chapters where the concept appeared (specifically, page 74 of the Final Draft RCP); and

! Modifications were made in the Transportation and Urban Form chapters and in other relevant sections to clarify that regional transportation investments should consider important transportation needs (e.g., congestion relief, safety, connectivity, etc.) in addition to smart growth. It was clarified that SANDAG’s current transportation project evaluation criteria would be used as a starting point for developing updated evaluation criteria to align transportation priorities and smart growth.

In addition, all the other points raised in the County’s letter were addressed to the satisfaction of County Department of Planning and Land Use staff. Following this discussion, and with the incorporation of the changes discussed above, the Regional Planning Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of the final draft RCP.

Environmental Impact Report The Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Regional Comprehensive Plan was prepared in order to provide a program-level analysis of the RCP and identify

potential impacts of implementing the goals, policy objectives, and recommended actions through 2030. The EIR analyzes program-level impacts and does not identify specific impacts that may result from future projects. As such, the EIR was not prepared with sufficient detail for local agencies to tier off the document for subsequent local actions. In addition, the mitigation measures in the Final EIR do not substitute for mitigation measures that will be identified by each local agency in the future as local jurisdictions continue to implement their own development and environmental review processes. However, the mitigation measures in the Final EIR can and should be used as guidance for jurisdictions to consider. The Regional Planning Committee and its Working Groups reviewed key comments received on the draft EIR at their May 24, 2004 meeting, and received a copy of the Preliminary Final EIR and a presentation on its contents at their June 25, 2004 joint meeting. Minor clarifications have been made to the preliminary Final EIR dated June 25, 2004, though the response to comments (Appendix B) provided in the preliminary Final EIR have remained unchanged. Environmental Findings in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are contained in attachments to Resolution No. 2005-01.

Conclusion

By our region's own commitment and as called for in state law (AB 361), SANDAG has prepared the Regional Comprehensive Plan – a plan that provides a broad context in which local and regional decisions can be made that foster a healthy environment, a thriving economy, and a high quality of life for all residents. This initial RCP serves as a starting point for comprehensive regional planning in the San Diego region based on sustainability and smart growth principles. Upon adoption, SANDAG is committed to implementing the

5


plan, monitoring its progress, and updating the plan in conjunction with updates to the Regional Transportation Plan. Action by the SANDAG Board culminates the RCP preparation process and initiates the implementation phase of this first Regional Comprehensive Plan.


Key Staff Contacts: Carolina Gregor, (619) 699-1989; [email protected] and Rob Rundle; (619) 699-6949; [email protected]

Funds are budgeted in Work Element #30002

401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone (619) 699-1900 • Fax (619) 699-1905 www.sandag.org

RESOLUTION NO. 2005-01

A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SANDAG) BOARD CERTIFYING

THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

ACT; A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS; A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; AND THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION

WHEREAS, the Regional Comprehensive Plan (“Project,” or “RCP”) serves as the comprehensive framework for greater inter-governmental coordination of regional transportation and land use planning in the San Diego region, and addresses the region's housing, economic, transportation, environmental, and overall quality of life needs through establishment of a planning framework and implementation actions that aim to increase the region's sustainability and encourage "smart growth;" and

WHEREAS, the RCP is founded on the ideas of thousands of people including residents,

business owners, and local public officials, and these ideas were gathered through an extensive public participation process including more than 40 workshops and forums throughout the region, outreach by community based organizations, and monthly meetings of the Regional Planning Committee, the Regional Planning Stakeholders Working Group, and the Regional Planning Technical Working Group between March 2002 and July 2004; and

WHEREAS, the RCP recognizes that the San Diego region faces the challenge of providing

housing for a growing and diverse population at the same time that the region is beginning to run out of open land for new development, and that when taken together, the current land use plans of the 19 local jurisdictions do not accommodate the amount of growth projected in the region by 2030; and

WHEREAS, the RCP calls for a preferred planning concept that focuses on improving

connections between land use and transportation plans using smart growth principles; using land use and transportation plans to guide decisions regarding environmental and public facility investments; and focusing on collaboration and incentives to achieve regional goals and objectives; and

WHEREAS, the various chapters of the RCP address each of the major elements of planning

for our region: urban form, transportation, housing, healthy environment, economic prosperity, public facilities, borders, and investment and financing strategies for regional infrastructure needs; and

WHEREAS, the RCP looks beyond our borders and considers the planning and growth

underway in Imperial, Orange, and Riverside Counties as well as in Baja California, Mexico, and addresses social equity and environmental justice in our planning processes; and

WHEREAS, the RCP includes performance measures to monitor the region's progress toward

achieving the goals and objectives of the RCP; and

Resolution 2005-01 Page 2 of 5

WHEREAS, the RCP will function as a "living" document, evolving over time as specific

policies and programs are advanced, and will be updated periodically to reflect the region's accomplishments, add new topics that were not included in the initial RCP, and address the region's changing needs; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA,” Public Res. Code,

§21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §15000 et seq.), SANDAG is the lead agency for the Project, as the public agency responsible for regional planning; and

WHEREAS, the San Diego Association of Governments (“SANDAG”) prepared an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) (SCH# 2004011141) and provided full disclosure of the potential environmental effects of the Project; and

WHEREAS, SANDAG issued a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) of a Draft EIR on January 27, 2004 and circulated the NOP for a period of 30 days pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §§ 15082(a), 15103 and 15375; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §§ 15206 and 15082, SANDAG publicly noticed and held two public scoping meetings for the EIR. The public meeting notice was published in the San Diego Union-Tribune, North County Times, Asian Journal, La Prensa San Diego, San Diego Voice & Viewpoint, and on the SANDAG Web site at www.sandag.org. The first meeting was held on February 5, 2004 at the Cardiff-by-the-Sea County branch library in Encinitas, and the second meeting on February 9, 2004 in the City of San Diego at the Mission Valley branch public library. The purpose of the meetings was to solicit comments from the public and potential responsible agencies, including details about the scope and content of the environmental information related to the responsible agency’s area of statutory responsibility, as well as the significant environmental issues, reasonable alternatives, and mitigation measures that the responsible agency would have analyzed in the Draft EIR. Comments were received by SANDAG at the public scoping meetings, which assisted SANDAG in identifying the issues and alternatives for analysis in the Draft EIR; and

WHEREAS, five (5) written statements were received by SANDAG in response to the NOP, which assisted SANDAG in identifying the issues and alternatives for analysis in the Draft EIR; and

WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was completed and released for public review on April 2, 2004 and SANDAG initiated a 45-day public comment period by filing a Notice of Completion and Notice of Availability with the State Office of Planning and Research; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code § 20192, SANDAG also provided a Notice of

Availability to all organizations and individuals who had previously requested such notice and published a Notice of Availability for the Draft EIR on or about March 24, 2004 in newspapers of general circulation: San Diego Union-Tribune, San Diego Daily Transcript, North County Times, Asian Journal, La Prensa San Diego, and San Diego Voice & Viewpoint. In addition, SANDAG placed copies of the Draft EIR at the offices of SANDAG at 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101, and the City of San Diego Public Library, 820 E Street, San Diego, CA 92101. Additionally, the Notice of Availability was sent to all branch libraries in the San Diego region, and filed in the office of the County Clerk from April 2, 2004 to May 3, 2004. The Notice of Availability and Draft EIR also were posted on SANDAG’s Web site, at www.sandag.org; and

WHEREAS, during the 45-day comment period, SANDAG requested comments from responsible and trustee agencies, other regulatory agencies and others pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15086; and

WHEREAS, during the official public review period for the Draft EIR, SANDAG received approximately 26 written comment letters containing over 300 comments, which are included in the Final EIR; and


WHEREAS, all potential significant adverse environmental impacts were sufficiently

analyzed in the Draft EIR; and

WHEREAS, SANDAG prepared the Final EIR consisting of the Draft EIR, comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR, a list of persons, organizations and public agencies commenting of the Draft EIR, and the responses of the lead agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process. Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21092.5, SANDAG provided responses to comment to all commenting agencies on July 12, 2004; and

WHEREAS, no changes to the EIR, or comments made during or after the review period for the EIR, raise significant new information requiring recirculation or additional environmental review, as defined in State CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5; and

WHEREAS, all the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines have been satisfied by SANDAG in the EIR, which is sufficiently detailed so that all of the potentially significant environmental effects of the project have been adequately evaluated; and

WHEREAS, the EIR sufficiently analyzes a range of reasonable alternatives which would feasibly attain most of the basic project objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project, and all feasible mitigation measures necessary to avoid or substantially lessen the Project’s potential environmental impacts and these effects in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and

WHEREAS, all of the findings and conclusions made by SANDAG pursuant to this Resolution

are based upon the oral and written evidence presented to it as a whole and not based solely on the information provided in this Resolution; and

WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR which SANDAG finds are less than significant and do not require mitigation are described in Section I of Attachment A hereto; and

WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially significant but which SANDAG finds can be mitigated to a level of less than significant, through the imposition of feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section II of Attachment A hereto; and

WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially significant but which SANDAG finds cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant, despite the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section III of Attachment A hereto; and

WHEREAS, cumulative environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially

significant but which SANDAG finds can be mitigated to a level of less than significant, through the imposition of feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section IV of Attachment A hereto; and

WHEREAS, significant irreversible environmental changes that would be caused if the proposed project were implemented and which are identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section V of Attachment A hereto; and

WHEREAS, growth inducing impacts identified in the EIR and alternatives to the project that might eliminate or reduce significant environmental impacts are described in Sections VI and VII, respectively, of Attachment A hereto; and


WHEREAS, certification of the EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081 and set forth

herein, is described in Section VIII of Attachment A hereto; and

WHEREAS, recirculation of the Draft EIR is not warranted, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15090, as described in Section IX of Attachment A hereto; and

WHEREAS, the RCP serves as a guidance document; and

WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred; and

WHEREAS, prior to taking action on the Project, the SANDAG Board of Directors has heard,

been presented with, reviewed, and considered all of the information and data in the administrative record, including the Final EIR, and all oral and written evidence presented to it during all meetings and hearings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SANDAG BOARD OF DIRECTORS THAT the

foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated by this reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE SANDAG BOARD OF DIRECTORS:

Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15090, the Board certifies that the Final EIR, SCH# 2004011141, has been completed in compliance with CEQA (Public Resource Code § 21000 et seq), that the Final EIR was presented to, reviewed, and considered by the Board of Directors prior to approving the Project, and that the Final EIR represents the independent judgment and analysis of SANDAG and the Board of Directors and;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE SANDAG BOARD OF DIRECTORS FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

1. At a regular session assembled on July 23, 2004, the SANDAG Board of Directors

determined that based on all of the evidence presented, including, but not limited to, the Final EIR, written and oral testimony given at meetings and hearings, and submission of testimony from the public, organizations and regulatory agencies, the following environmental impacts associated with the Regional Comprehensive Plan are: 1) less than significant and do not require mitigation; or 2) potentially significant and some of these impacts will be avoided or reduced to a level of less than significant through the identified mitigation measures; or 3) significant and cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant.

2. For each significant environmental effect identified in the EIR, SANDAG has made a

written Finding reaching one or more of three conclusions required by State CEQA Guidelines § 15091. The first such Finding is that "[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR" (State CEQA Guidelines, §15091 (a)(1)). The second permissible Finding is that "[s]uch changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the Finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency" (State CEQA Guidelines, §15091 (a)(2)). The third potential Finding is that "[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR" (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15091 (a)(3)).


3. No comments made in the public hearings conducted by SANDAG or, any additional information submitted to SANDAG have produced significant new information requiring recirculation or additional environmental review under State CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the SANDAG Board of Directors adopt the Statement of

Overriding Considerations as required by State CEQA Guidelines § 15093 and attached hereto as Attachment B and incorporated fully by this reference; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the SANDAG Board of Directors adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Final EIR, Appendix C) as required by and in compliance with State CEQA Guidelines §§ 15091(d) and 15097, and is attached hereto as Attachment C and incorporated fully by this reference; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the SANDAG Board of Directors adopt the Regional

Comprehensive Plan for the San Diego Region.

PASSED and adopted this 23rd day of July, 2004

________________________________________ 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.

6

ATTACHMENT A

SECTION I

FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Board of Directors hereby finds that the following environmental impacts of the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) are less than significant. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no mitigation measures are required for impacts that are less than significant (Cal. Code Regs. Title 14, State CEQA Guidelines § 15126.4(a)(3)). A. Land Use Habitat Conservation Plans Because existing provisions in the subarea habitat conservation plans in place throughout nearly the entire RCP Project area require that any modifications to the plan result in better biological values, implementation of the RCP will not have a significant impact on an adopted habitat conservation plan or community conservation plan. (EIR, pp. 5.1-19 and 20.) Inducing Sprawl Future development with and without the RCP will result in greater population density in the San Diego region, however with a greater population density realized from implementation of the RCP. (EIR, pp. 5.1-20 and 21.) Because the density is increased, implementation of the RCP will not create sprawl. Thus, no significant impact would occur. B. Population/Housing/Employment Regional Employment Employment increases induced by the transfer of housing units and population under the RCP would be distributed throughout the County. (EIR, p. 5.2-5.) The projected 12,170 induced service industry jobs would be dispersed among multiple employers and not concentrated in any single employer or area. Implementation of the RCP would result in a 0.7 percent increase in employment. This is below the significant threshold of 3 percent, therefore, implementation of the RCP results in less than significant regional employment impact, and no mitigation measures are required. (Ibid.) Local Employment Employment impacts at the project level will not meet the 10 percent threshold of significance. Employment impacts are induced indirectly from increased population demand for services, and are dispersed among multiple service businesses and locations throughout the County, and, as a result,

7

a 10 percent increase in employment at a specific business is unlikely to occur. Therefore, implementation of the RCP will have a less than significant impact to local employment, and no mitigation measures are required. (EIR, pp. 5.2-5 to 6.) C. Visual Resources Visual Compatibility (Natural Areas) One of the objectives of the RCP is to preserve and maintain natural areas in urban neighborhoods, such as canyons and creeks. Natural areas in the neighborhood serve as an important element in community character. The preservation and maintenance of these areas, as identified in the RCP, is a less than significant impact to visual resources. (EIR, p. 5.3-8.) D. Transportation/Circulation Airports

Implementation of the RCP would not result in changes to air traffic patterns or otherwise increase hazards in the vicinity of any local, regional, public or private airport. Some portions of the Smart Growth Opportunity Areas may be located within the vicinity of regional airports; however, any development or redevelopment projects in these areas would be required to undergo review pursuant to CEQA, at which time airport safety issues would be addressed. In conclusion, implementation of the RCP will not result in a significant change to air traffic patterns or otherwise increase hazards in the vicinity of any airports. (EIR, p. 5.4-17.) E. Geology/Paleontology Seismic Activity and Slope Failure While the entire San Diego region is susceptible to impacts from seismic activity, all site designs will be required to be reviewed by appropriate regulatory agencies prior to construction, as required by existing laws, regulations and ordinances. Developments associated with the RCP will be required to employ design standards that consider seismically active areas and comply with the Uniform Building Code. As a result, implementation of the RCP will result in a less than significant impact from seismic events. (EIR, pp. 5.8-13 to 14.) As well, portions of the RCP would be constructed through geologic formations susceptible to slope failure. However, all projects will be required to adhere to State of California design standards and all other applicable standards already in place regarding design, grading, and construction activities. As a result, implementation of the RCP will result in a less than significant impact from slope failure. (EIR, p. 5.8-14.) F. Hydrology Water Quality Standards and Waste Discharge Requirements Because all future development would be required to adhere to water quality standards in effect at the time of development, implementation of the RCP would result in a less than significant water quality impact at the program level. (EIR, pp. 5.9-13 and 17.)

8

Flood Hazards Development associated with the RCP will not significantly increase flood hazards since all drainage designs will conform to the existing flood control requirements of the applicable jurisdictions. The design measures in those requirements will reduce flood impacts related to impervious surfaces to below a level of significance. (EIR, pp. 5.9-14 and 15.) As well, existing local jurisdiction regulations require that local hydraulic studies and risk assessments be performed where a planned facility or action would encroach on a based floodplain or support incompatible floodplain development. If the study indicates significant encroachment, the development would be required to incorporate stormwater control design measures to prevent flooding. These local regulations reduce potential flood impacts to below a level of significance. (Ibid.) G. Energy Renewable Resources The RCP promotes the local production of cost-effective, environmentally sensitive energy resources, including wind, solar, and geothermal, and increases the amount of energy available for consumption associated with the projected population increase for the region. Because the provision of renewable energy sources would either offset future demands or meet existing demands for non-renewable resources, this would not be a significant impact. (EIR, p. 5.7-8 to 9.) H. Biology Encroachment by Urban Development into Resource Planning Areas Under the RCP, conversion of undeveloped land will still take place, but the RCP intends to shift development focus to compact, more environmentally friendly development patterns. The RCP includes a policy objective which calls for the preservation and maintenance of natural biological communities and species native to the region, which is consistent with the goals and objectives of various regional habitat planning efforts. (EIR, pp. 5.10-12 and 13.) The policies of the RCP direct most of the future growth in the region into areas with adopted or draft subarea plans, which designate areas suitable for development. In the event development is targeted for conservation areas, the subarea plans require offsetting conservation. (Ibid.) In summary, implementation of the RCP will not have a significant impact on resource planning areas since the RCP goals have been established to reduce impacts on sensitive biological resources.

9

SECTION II

FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS MITIGATED TO A LEVEL LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT

The SANDAG Board of Directors hereby finds that mitigation measures have been identified in the Draft EIR that will avoid or substantially lessen the following potentially significant environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The potentially significant impacts and the mitigation measures that will reduce them to a less than significant level are as follows. A. Land Use Conflict with Existing Land Use Plans Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP could result in a significant conflict with the land use planning documents for several jurisdictions in the San Diego region. These documents include general plans, Local Coastal Programs, and the Port Master Plan. (EIR, pp. 5.1-17 and 5.1-18.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.1.5 of the EIR: LU-1 Local jurisdictions shall adopt land use plan amendments, including general plan

amendments, local coastal program amendments, and an amendment to the Port Master Plan to eliminate inconsistencies between future land uses and densities identified in these plans as a result of implementing smart growth policies.

Finding Mitigation measure LU-1 will reduce this impact to below a level of significance, as it will remove the inconsistencies between adopted development densities and future densities. (EIR, p. 5.1-23.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures LU-1 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Mineral Resource Zones Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP may result in a significant indirect impact to lands currently under mineral resource extraction that fall within the identified Smart Growth Opportunity Areas (SGOA), as those lands will not be used for mineral extraction but for other uses consistent with the RCP. (EIR, p. 5.1-20.)

10

Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.1.5 of the EIR: LU-3 Local jurisdictions shall discourage conversion of MRZ-2 lands until the existing mineral

resources on that land have been exhausted, or are no longer economically feasible to process or market.

Finding Mitigation measure LU-3 discourages increased development on MRZ-2 land until the mineral resources on it have been exhausted. This mitigation measure will reduce the impact to mineral resources to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.1-23.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures LU-3 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Land Use Incompatibility Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP could result in development that is incompatible with existing development or land uses. Higher densities can result in the location of incompatible land uses, or result in increased noise conditions. (EIR, p. 5.1-22.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.1.5 of the EIR: LU-4 Project-level noise impact analysis shall be performed, where appropriate, to ensure that

changes in land uses and densities do not result in significant noise conflicts or impacts. Noise mitigation measures recommended in these analyses shall be implemented that reduce impacts associated with land use incompatibility to the levels established by each jurisdiction for the appropriate land use.

LU-5 An Urban Design Best Practices manual shall be prepared by SANDAG to establish site-

specific measures to reduce land use incompatibilities (divide an established community, noise, hazards, lighting, objectionable odors, or other operational activities).

Finding SANDAG finds that mitigation measure LU-4 will require noise impact analyses for future projects, where appropriate, so that potential noise conflicts will be identified and mitigated. Mitigation measure LU-5 requires SANDAG to establish a best practices land use manual to provide guidance on how to avoid land use conflicts, which can be used to mitigate any conflicts generated by the RCP policies. Together, these mitigation measures will reduce the potential land use compatibility impact to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.1-23.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure LU-4 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have

11

been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Mitigation measures LU-5 is within the responsibility of SANDAG. Physical Division of an Established Community Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP could physically divide an established community through creation of multiple nodes in areas where one node exists. (EIR, p. 5.1-21.) This represents a significant impact. Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.1.5 of the EIR: Mitigation Measure LU-5 Finding SANDAG finds that it will prepare an Urban Design Best Practices manual to provide guidance on how to avoid land use conflicts, which can be used to mitigate any conflicts generated by the RCP policies, including those that may physically divide established communities, as called for in mitigation measures LU-5. This mitigation measure will reduce the potential for the physical division of an existing community to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.1-24.) B. Visual Resources Scenic Highway Corridors Significant Impacts Future development along identified and eligible scenic highway corridors could include buildings which are visible from the highway, and are out of scale with the surrounding built environment. (EIR, p. 5.3-6.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.3.5 of the EIR: Vis-1 Design projects to minimize contrasts in scale and massing between the project and

surrounding natural forms and developments. Avoid large cuts and fills when the visual environment (natural or urban) would be substantially disrupted. Site or design projects to minimize their intrusion into important viewsheds and use contour grading to better match surrounding terrain.

Vis-2 Use natural landscaping to minimize contrasts between the project and surrounding areas.

Develop interchanges and transit lines at the grade of the surrounding land to limit view blockage. Contour the edges of major cut and fill slopes to provide a more natural looking finished profile.

12

Vis-3 Design landscaping to add significant natural elements and visual interest to soften the hard-edged, linear travel experience that would otherwise occur.

Vis-4 Replace and renew landscaping along corridors with road widenings, interchange projects,

and related improvements. Plan landscaping in new corridors to respect existing natural and man-made features to complement the dominant landscaping of surrounding areas.

Vis-5 Construct soundwalls of materials whose color and texture complements the surrounding

landscape and development. Use color, texture, and alternating facades to “break up” large facades and provide visual interest.

Finding SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Vis-1 and Vis-2 require project design to consider scale, massing, cuts, fill and contour, as well as buffering with landscaping to minimize impacts at the design level. Mitigation measures Vis-3 and Vis-4 require project design to utilize landscaping where appropriate to soften project impacts or complement surrounding areas. Finally, Vis-5 requires aesthetic considerations during the design of soundwalls. (EIR, p. 5.3-9.) These mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to viewsheds from scenic highway corridors to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.3-10.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Vis-1 through Vis-5 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Public Views of Significant Landscape Features or Forms (Scenic Resources) Significant Impacts Depending on the location and height of future development adjacent to oceans or bays, the potential exists that public views to these scenic resources may be substantially altered. This represents a significant visual resource impact (EIR, p. 5.3-7.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.3.5 of the EIR: Vis-1 through Vis-5, and Vis-6 Future development adjacent to the ocean or bays that could potentially impact scenic vistas

shall prepare visual simulations to determine what level of view impact the project will have on the scenic vista. Measures to reduce adverse impacts to view corridors shall be implemented. (e.g. reduce bulk and scale).

Finding SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Vis-1 and Vis-2 require project design to consider scale, massing, cuts, fill and contour, as well as buffering with landscaping to minimize impacts at the design level. Vis-3 and Vis-4 require project design to utilize landscaping where appropriate to soften project impacts or complement surrounding areas. Vis-5 requires aesthetic considerations during the design of soundwalls. Finally, Vis-6 requires preconstruction modeling of visual impacts

13

on oceans or bays so that measures to reduce the impacts can be designed as soon as possible in the planning process. (EIR, pp. 5.3-9 and 10.) These mitigation measures will reduce the potential for impacts to public views of scenic resources. (EIR, p. 5.3-10.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Vis-1 through Vis-6 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Lighting and Glare Significant Impacts Future development in the region, over the lifetime of the RCP, will increase the amount of light pollution. This represents a significant visual resource impact. (EIR, p. 5.3-7.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.3.5 of the EIR: Vis-7 Incorporate design measures into the Urban Design Best Practices Manual to reduce glare

and lighting impacts to observatories. This shall include regulations for shielding, intensities of lighting (number of lights, lumens, and wavelengths).

Finding SANDAG finds that it will add design measures to reduce glare and lighting impacts to observatories to the Urban Design Best Management Practices manual it will create, as noted in mitigation measures Vis-7. This mitigation measure will reduce impacts to regional dark sky conditions to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.3-10.) The implementation of mitigation measure Vis-7 is within the responsibility of SANDAG. Bulk and Scale (Compatibility with Community Character) Significant Impacts Increased density in existing neighborhoods may result in buildings that are of different bulk and scale than existing structures. Depending on the buildings’ location and design, the construction of larger buildings within an already established community would result in a significant visual resource impact. (EIR, p. 5.3-8.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.3.5 of the EIR: Vis-1. Finding SANDAG finds that while increased density may result in bulk and scale impacts from new projects, their impact is mitigated by Vis-1, which requires project design to consider scale, massing, cuts, fill

14

and contour at the design level.) This mitigation measure will reduce the potential for bulk and scale incompatibility to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.3-9.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Vis-1 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. C. Transportation/Circulation Conflict with Local Circulation Elements Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP will result in significant impacts to the capacity of local street systems, and represents a conflict with local circulation elements. Any expansion beyond the buildout identified in the local plans represents a conflict, and a significant impact. (EIR, p. 5.4-20.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.4.5 of the EIR: Trans-2 Local jurisdictions shall adopt Circulation Element amendments to eliminate

inconsistencies related to future roadway and intersection improvements associated with the RCP.

Finding Mitigation measure Trans-2 will reduce this impact to below a level of significance, as it will remove the potential inconsistencies between future roadway and intersection improvement that may be required with implementation of the RCP and the roadway and intersection geometries identified in the circulation elements of local jurisdictions. SANDAG also finds that such changes are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. D. Air Quality Regional Air Quality Strategy and Construction Related Emissions Significant Impacts Construction activities associated with the RCP could significantly impact the region’s air quality due to NOx emissions from construction equipment, PM10 emissions related to grading and earth moving activities, and increased vehicle trips by construction workers traveling to and from construction sites. (EIR, p. 5.5-18.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.5.5 of the EIR:

15

Air-1 For projects that exceed daily construction emissions established by SDAPCD, Best Available Control Measures (BACMs) shall be incorporated to reduce construction emissions to below daily emission standards established by SDAPCD. Appropriate BACMs will be determined on a project by project basis, and are specific to the pollutant for which the daily threshold has been exceeded. BACMs that may be appropriate for construction activities that exceed daily ROG thresholds include using precoated building materials, using high pressure/low volume paint applicators, and using lower volatility paint. BACMS that may be appropriate for construction activities that exceed daily CO, NOx or SOx thresholds include phasing of construction activities.

Finding SANDAG finds that mitigation measure Air-1 requires the phasing of construction activities such that daily emissions remain below standards established by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District, thereby reducing construction emissions impacts to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.5-19.) This mitigation measure will reduce the potential for NOx emission impacts from project construction equipment, PM10 emissions related to grading and earth moving activities, and increased vehicle trips by construction workers traveling to and from construction sites, to below a level of significance. (Ibid.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Air-1 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Localized Carbon Monoxide (CO) Impacts Significant Impacts Increased density could increase the volume of traffic flow at some existing intersections which could potentially increase the number of vehicles that are idling at roadway intersections releasing emissions and causing CO concentrations to exceed state and federal standards. This could expose sensitive receptors to localized hot spots, creating a significant air quality impact. (EIR, pp. 5.5-18 and 19.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.4.5 of the EIR:

Trans-1 Future development projects will be required to address localized traffic impacts as part of the environmental review process. Mitigation for these local impacts will be in conformance with the adopted performance measures of the lead jurisdiction. Mitigation measures can include congestion management strategies identified in SANDAG’s Congestion Management Strategies (CMS) Toolbox as summarized below:

16

CONGESTION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

Transit Access to Light Rail/Commuter Rail/Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Transit System/Service Expansion ! Local ! Express System/Service Operational Improvements ! Increased Service Frequency ! Decreased Travel Time Subscription Services Car Shipping Station Amenities & Public Transit Facility Improvements

Land Use Development Along Transit Corridors Development Around Transit Nodes Mixed-use Developments Locally Serving Commercial Interconnected Street Networks & Pedestrian Facilities

Travel Demand Management (TDM) On-Site Child Care/Cafeteria/Deli/Gym/Fitness Facilities Transit/Alternative Modes Marketing Trip Reduction Programs & Ordinances Transportation Management Associations Bicycle/Pedestrian Allowances Distributed & Remote Work Centers/Video Conferencing Alternative Work Schedules/Telework/Work-at-Home Carpool/Vanpool/Transit Programs Carpool/Vanpool Subsidies Parking Restrictions/Reduced Minimums and Maximums/Area-Wide Caps Parking Charges & Carpool/Vanpool Preferential Parking Transit Pass Subsidies Guaranteed Ride Home Program

Traffic Systems Management (TSM) Improved Traffic Control Devices ! Traffic Signal Coordination ! Adaptive Signal Control ! Signal Improvements Local Traffic Management (Monitoring and Control) & Arterial Monitoring Special Event Management Incident Management Commercial Vehicle Restrictions Advanced Traveler Information Value/Congestion Pricing Peak Period On-Street Parking Restrictions

17

Capital Park & Ride Lots (Transit) HOV/HOT Lanes/Access Roadway Widening Intersection Improvements Bicycle Facilities Pedestrian Facilities Bus Priority Treatments on Surface Streets Grade Separation/Urban Interchange

Finding SANDAG find that future traffic studies, prepared as part of the environmental review for future development projects, as required by mitigation measure Trans-1, above, will identify traffic impacts, including potential CO hot spots, and proposed mitigation measures. SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Trans-1 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. E. Noise Transportation Improvements Significant Impacts Transportation improvements associated with the RTP, which is the transportation component of the RCP, could increase the number of trucks, buses, and trains, which generate more noise per vehicle than automobiles. Furthermore, decreasing congestion would allow vehicular traffic on freeways and major arterials to move faster, increasing the noise produced by traffic in that corridor. (EIR, p. 5.6-8.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.6.5 of the EIR: Noise-1 Site planning shall be conducted in a manner that avoids impacts to noise sensitive

areas e.g., residences, hospitals, schools, libraries) and sensitive receptors. Sensitive receptors include both humans and noise-sensitive wildlife species. Typical noise mitigation includes either provision of buffers or noise attenuation features. The distance between the noise source and the sensitive receptors shall be adequate to reduce noise levels to acceptable levels (CNEL identified in local land use plan for humans, or generally accepted dBA for wildlife species) or other noise attenuation techniques, such as sound walls or landscaping may be used to reduce noise impacts to levels that are consistent with the local jurisdiction’s requirements.

18

Noise-2 Land use measures such as zoning designations shall be adopted for future development on land adjacent to transportation facilities to avoid noise and vibration impacts.

Noise-3 Where other methods are impractical, operational constraints shall be imposed (e.g.,

limits on vehicle speed, regulation of train horns). Operational constraints shall reduce the noise to the levels established by each jurisdiction for the appropriate land use.

Noise-4 Avoid noise and vibration impacts by the careful siting of facilities and the use of

noise-reducing berms, walls, or other barriers as deemed appropriate by local lead agency.

Noise-5 Improve architectural treatment (sound-proofing) to reduce interior noise. Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Noise-1 and Noise-2 require preconstruction site planning considerations and proper zoning of areas adjacent to transportation facilities to avoid noise impacts, respectively. Noise-3 requires each jurisdiction to impose operational constraints on transportation if necessary to reduce impacts. Further, Noise-4 requires proper siting of uses, and the use of noise-reducing barriers to avoid noise-associated impacts. Finally, Noise-5 will reduce noise impacts by requiring sound proofing. These mitigation measures will reduce the potential for noise impacts due to an increase in roadway traffic and location of sensitive receptors near noise to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.6-11). SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Noise-1 through Noise-5 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Smart Growth (Residential Land Use Interface) Significant Impacts High density areas will potentially be subjected to elevated noise levels due to the proximity of dwelling units to transportation systems. This represents a significant impact. (EIR, p. 5.6-11.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.6.5 of the EIR: Noise-1 through Noise-5 Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Noise-1 and Noise-2 require preconstruction site planning considerations and proper zoning of areas adjacent to transportation facilities to avoid noise impacts, respectively. Noise-3 requires each jurisdiction to impose operational constraints on transportation if necessary to reduce impacts. Further, Noise-4 requires proper siting of uses, and the use of noise-reducing barriers to avoid noise-associated impacts. Finally, Noise-5 will reduce noise impacts by requiring sound proofing. These mitigation measures will reduce the potential for

19

noise impacts due to an increase in roadway traffic and location of sensitive receptors near noise to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.6-11). SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Noise-1 through Noise-5 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Development Near Airports Significant Impacts Developments that take place within the noise contours of existing airports would have a significant impact as a result of their location. (EIR, p. 5.6-7.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.6.5 of the EIR: Noise-1, Noise-2, through Noise-5, and Noise-6 Future development projects that are located in the vicinity of regional airports shall

consider noise mitigation conditions recommended in the appropriate airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

Findings Mitigation measures Noise-1 and Noise-2 require preconstruction site planning considerations and proper zoning of areas adjacent to transportation facilities, respectively, and this advance planning will avoid noise impacts. Mitigation measure Noise-5 will reduce noise impacts by requiring sound proofing. Finally, mitigation measures Noise-6 will require that future development projects in the vicinity of regional airports to consider noise mitigation conditions in the appropriate airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. These mitigation measures will reduce the potential noise conflicts within the noise contours of existing airports to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.6-11.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Noise-1, Noise-2, Noise-5, and Noise-6 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Rail Traffic Significant Impacts Increases in rail traffic could lead to more train horns or whistles at crossings near residential areas, which can be a source of annoyance, especially at night or in early morning or evening. Proposing new receptors in the noise impact zone would result in significant noise impacts. (EIR, p. 5.6-11.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.6.5 of the EIR: Noise-1, Noise-2, and Noise-5.

20

Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Noise-1 and Noise-2 require preconstruction site planning considerations and proper zoning of areas adjacent to transportation facilities to avoid noise impacts, respectively. Noise-5 will reduce noise impacts by requiring sound proofing. These mitigation measures will reduce the potential for noise impacts due to an increase in roadway traffic and location of sensitive receptors near noise to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.6-11). SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Noise-1, Noise-2, and Noise-5 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Vibration (Intermodal Transportation) Significant Impacts Large scale construction activities to promote density may create vibrations that would potentially impact surrounding areas. (EIR, p. 5.6-10.) Increasing intermodal transportation of goods would result in a subsequent increase in noise and vibration in areas adjacent to rail corridors. Proposing new receptors in the noise and vibration impact zone would result in significant noise impacts. (EIR, p. 5.6-12.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.6.5 of the EIR: Noise-1, Noise-2 and Noise-4. Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Noise-1 and Noise-2 require preconstruction site planning considerations and proper zoning of areas adjacent to transportation facilities to avoid vibration and noise impacts, respectively. Noise-3 requires each jurisdiction to impose operational constraints on transportation if necessary to reduce impacts. Further, Noise-4 requires proper siting of uses, and the use of noise-reducing barriers to avoid vibration-associated impacts. Finally, Noise-5 will reduce noise impacts by requiring sound proofing. These mitigation measures will reduce the vibration impacts from construction, and the vibration and noise impacts from intermodal rail activity to below a level of significance. SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Noise-1, Noise-2 and Noise-4 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies.

21

F. Geology/Paleontology Paleontological Resources Significant Impacts The implementation of the RCP would result in development occurring within geologic formations with moderate to high paleontological resource potential. This represents a significant impact. (EIR, p. 5.8-14.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.8.5 of the EIR: Paleo-1 When a construction activity will significantly disturb the unweathered bedrock in areas

identified as having a moderate or high potential to support paleontological resources, a qualified researcher must be stationed on site to observe grading operations and recover scientifically valuable specimens. A certified paleontologist shall be retained (or required to be retained) by the project implementing agency prior to construction to establish procedures for surveillance and pre-construction salvage of exposed resources if fossil-bearing rock have the potential to be impacted. The monitor shall provide pre-construction coordination with contractors, oversee original cutting in previously undisturbed areas of sensitive formations, halt or redirect construction activities as appropriate to allow recovery of newly discovered fossil remains, and oversee fossil salvage operations and reporting. This measure shall be placed as a condition on all grading plans where grading is proposed in geologic units defined as having a moderate or high potential for containing fossils.

Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Paleo-1 requires, at the project-specific level, paleontological surveys to determine whether the resource value for areas to be disturbed by development warrant further paleontological monitoring and/or pre-construction salvage of resources. Qualified researchers will be able to halt or redirect construction to allow recovery of newly discovered fossil remains. This mitigation measure will reduce the paleontological resource impact to below a level of significance. (EIR, pp. 5.8-14 to 15.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Paleo-1 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies.

22

G. Hydrology/Water Resources Additional Sources of Runoff/Erosion Significant Impacts Development associated with the RCP could cause erosion due to exposed graded surfaces, excavation, stock piling, or boring, and would potentially contribute to the sediment load in surface waters, potentially creating significant impacts. (EIR, p. 5.9-13.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.9.5 of the EIR: Water -1: In areas where habitat for fish and other wildlife would be threatened by

development, alternate drainageways shall be sought to protect sensitive fish and wildlife populations. Heavy-duty sweepers, with disposal of collected debris in sanitary landfills, shall be used to effectively reduce annual pollutant loads. Catch basins and storm drains shall be cleaned and maintained on a regular basis.

Water -2: Development shall be designed to incorporate stormwater improvements, both off

and on site, that are implemented concurrently with the additional impacts created by developments associated with the RCP.

Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Water-1 and Water-2 require the implementation of stormwater drainage practices that avoid sediment deposition, such as alternative drainageways to avoid habitat, street sweeping, and catch basin maintenance, and preconstruction design to incorporate stormwater improvements. These mitigation measures will reduce the water quality impact from an increase in erosion to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.9-18.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Water-1 and Water -2 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Additional Sources of Runoff/Impervious Surfaces Significant Impacts Development associated with the RCP would result in increased impervious surfaces that would allow pollutants to accumulate on paved surfaces that would be flushed down storm drains and into the aquatic environment (i.e., lagoons, rivers, and lakes). This would constitute a significant impact. (EIR, p. 5.9-14.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.9.5 of the EIR: Water-1 and Water-2.

23

Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Water-1 and Water-2 require the implementation of stormwater drainage practices that avoid sediment deposition, such as alternative drainageways to avoid habitat, street sweeping, and catch basin maintenance, and preconstruction design to incorporate stormwater improvements. These mitigation measures will reduce the water quality impact from an increase in erosion to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.9-18.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Water-1 and Water -2 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Groundwater Resources and Recharge Significant Impacts Increased demand for ground water resources created by implementation of the RCP could significantly impact existing ground water resources. (EIR, p. 5.9-14.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.9.5 of the EIR: Water -3 Project proponents would be required to employ measures that may include

decreasing water demand for the project or reducing water use elsewhere in the same groundwater basin as determined by the local agency. Water districts relying upon groundwater may incorporate ground water recharge or other types of safe yield strategies to maintain adequate groundwater table elevations.

Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measure Water-3 requires that future projects that deplete groundwater resources replace enough of the groundwater that adequate groundwater table elevations will be maintained or reduce water use on other areas of the groundwater basin. This mitigation measure will reduce ground water impacts to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.9-18.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Water-3 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Increased Runoff Impacting Capacity of Stormwater System Significant Impacts Increased runoff resulting from developments associated with the RCP could overwhelm the existing local stormwater drainage systems. This is a significant impact. (EIR, p. 5.9-17.)

24

Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.9.5 of the EIR: Water-1 and Water-2. Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Water-1 and Water-2 require the implementation of stormwater drainage practices that avoid sediment deposition, such as alternative drainageways to avoid habitat, street sweeping, and catch basin maintenance, and preconstruction design to incorporate stormwater improvements. These mitigation measures will reduce the impacts to the stormwater drainage system to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.9-19.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Water-1 and Water -3 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. H. Biological Resources Wildlife Movement Corridors: Transportation Infrastructure Significant Impacts Future growth, including transportation projects, could potentially result in an impediment to regional wildlife movement due to habitat fragmentation; however, these regional impacts could be avoided through conditions required in adopted subarea plans. Local wildlife corridors would be affected by future growth that would not necessarily be avoided through the subarea plans. This represents a significant impact. (EIR, p. 5.10-16.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.10.5 of the EIR: Bio-1 Design development projects to minimize or eliminate impacts to natural habitats and

known sensitive resources. Development within large contiguous areas of habitat shall be minimized to reduce fragmentation of remaining habitat areas.

Bio-2 For development projects, provide for continued movement of ground-level wildlife across

rights-of-way, where the project or regional conservation plan has identified wildlife corridors through the use of appropriately-sized bridges or other openings where roads or transit features would create barriers.

Bio-3 Biological mitigation shall be directed to areas that are proposed for conservation and that

support similar or higher value habitat. These efforts shall be coordinated with resource agencies and regional habitat conservation and planning efforts.

Bio-4 Minimize impacts to oak woodlands, vernal pools, estuaries, lagoons, and other regionally

significant biotic resources; where unavoidable, replace with equal or better quality habitat to ensure no net loss of the resources.

25

Bio-5 Site development to minimize alteration of streambeds and associated riparian vegetation; where unavoidable, replace with like quality or better habitat at a ratio required by regulatory agencies with the goal of no net loss to wetlands.

Bio-6 Preserve open space areas identified in local, state and federal plans. Bio-7 Limit the disturbance to native vegetation to the extent practicable. Revegetate with native

plants where appropriate, and locate construction staging areas in previously disturbed areas.

Bio-8 Schedule the construction of projects to avoid impacts to wildlife (e.g., avoid breeding

season for sensitive species) to the extent practicable. Project-specific review shall define specific mitigation measures, such as berms and sound walls, which would reduce construction and operational noise to within regulatory standards.

Bio-9 Use appropriate water pollution control technology and best management practices to

minimize or eliminate impacts to downstream aquatic systems. Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measure Bio-1 requires pre-construction design to minimize fragmentation of habitat, and to minimize or eliminate impacts to habitat. Further, some of these impacts can be reduced through incorporation of design features such as bridges and large culverts to minimize impacts to wildlife movement, as required by mitigation measure Bio-2. Likewise, Bio-4, Bio-5, and Bio-7 require pre-project design to minimize impacts to habitat and natural land features such as streambeds, as well as mitigation at no net loss levels. Bio-3 supplements these mitigation measures by requiring that any offsite mitigation be contiguous with areas of like resources, and Bio-6 requires the preservation of open space areas identified in local, state and federal resource protection plans. To the extent a project will impact wildlife, Bio-8 calls for avoidance of the impact to the extent practicable, through proper scheduling and noise barriers. Finally, Bio-9 will reduce impacts by controlling water pollution closer to the source, thereby minimizing or eliminating downstream impacts. These mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts to wildlife movement and habitat fragmentation to below a level of significance. (EIR, pp. 5.10-16 to 17.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Bio-1 through Bio-9 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Wildlife Movement Corridors: Non-transportation Infrastructure Significant Impacts Future water, sewer, and energy development projects are anticipated to have a significant impact on native vegetation, and may significantly impact regional and local wildlife movement corridors. Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.10.5 of the EIR: Bio-1 through Bio-9.

26

Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measure Bio-1 requires pre-construction design to minimize fragmentation of habitat, and to minimize or eliminate impacts to habitat. Further, some of these impacts can be reduced through incorporation of design features such as bridges and large culverts to minimize impacts to wildlife movement, as required by mitigation measure Bio-2. Likewise, Bio-4, Bio-5, and Bio-7 require pre-project design to minimize impacts to habitat and natural land features such as streambeds, as well as mitigation at no net loss levels. Bio-3 supplements these mitigation measures by requiring that any offsite mitigation be contiguous with areas of like resources, and Bio-6 requires the preservation of open space areas identified n local, state and federal resource protection plans. To the extent a project will impact wildlife, Bio-8 calls for avoidance of the impact to the extent practicable, through proper scheduling and noise barriers. Finally, Bio-9 will reduce impacts by controlling water pollution closer to the source, thereby minimizing or eliminating downstream impacts. These mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts to wildlife movement and habitat fragmentation to below a level of significance. (EIR, pp. 5.10-16 to 17.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Bio-1 through Bio-9 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Sand Replenishment and Wildlife Nurseries Significant Impacts Sand placement, as a means of shoreline preservation, can have a significant effect on wildlife nurseries. (EIR, p. 5.10-12.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.10.5 of the EIR: Bio-10 Ensure that future coastal projects are sited and designed as to minimize impacts to

marine resources. Any unavoidable impacts to significant marine resources will be mitigated to below a level of significance in accordance with the requirements of the local jurisdiction and appropriate agency (e.g., CDFC, USFWS, NMFS).

Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measure Bio-10 requires that future coastal projects are designed to have minimal impacts, and if there are unavoidable impacts, the mitigation shall result in a no net loss habitat value. This mitigation measure will reduce the potential impacts to wildlife nurseries to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.10-16.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Bio-10 may also be within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Direct/Indirect Effect on Marine Species (Seawater Desalination)

27

Significant Impacts The development of seawater desalination facilities as a means of diversifying the regional water supply has the potential to significantly affect marine biological resources. (EIR, p. 5.10-14.) Some aquatic resources are not protected by existing federal, state and local regulations; thus, any impacts to those resources related to the development of seawater desalination facilities are significant. (EIR, p. 5.10-12.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.10.5 of the EIR: Bio-10. Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measure Bio-10 requires that future coastal projects, which would include any desalination plants, are sited and designed to have minimal impacts, and if there are unavoidable impacts, the mitigation shall result in a no net loss habitat value. This mitigation measure will reduce the potential impacts to marine biological resources to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.10-16.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Bio-10 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Aquatic Resources Significant Impacts Impacts to aquatic resources could be potentially significant. (EIR, p. 5.10-13.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.10.5 of the EIR: Bio-9 and Bio-10. Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures Bio-9 will reduce impacts by controlling water pollution closer to the source, thereby minimizing or eliminating downstream impacts. Additionally, to ensure that there are no adverse effects from improper design and siting of any RCP projects, mitigation measure Bio-10 requires that future coastal projects, which would include any desalination plants, are sited and designed to have minimal impacts, and if there are unavoidable impacts, the mitigation shall result in a no net loss habitat value. This mitigation measure will reduce the potential impacts to aquatic resources to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.10-16.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Bio-9 and Bio-10 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies.

28

I. Cultural Resources Human Remains Significant Impacts Future grading and construction activities associated with implementation of the RCP could result in significant impacts to human remains. (EIR, p. 5.11-10.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.11.5 of the EIR: Cult-1 A review of literature and historic maps, a records search, and field survey to identify the

presence or absence of cultural resources for each future development project shall be undertaken if the jurisdiction determines these studies are warranted. Prior to any development where possible impacts to significant cultural resources may occur, each cultural resource will need to be evaluated through testing programs to determine the significance/importance prior to determining mitigation of proposed impacts or providing recommendations for preservation. Historic resources may require analysis by a qualified historian or an architectural historian. Sites identified as significant/important will need to be avoided by development impacts or mitigated by completion of a data recovery program conducted in compliance with CEQA and agency guidelines. Site avoidance and preservation can include capping the site with gravel or construction fabric and 16 to 18 inches of sterile fill soil. Sites proposed for capping shall be indexed so future researchers have reasonable knowledge of the resources that have been protected. Capped sites can be landscaped with native, shallow rooted plants that are compatible with the surrounding biologic habitat. Passive uses for capped sites include trails, picnic and play areas, parking lots, and tennis or volleyball courts. A data recovery program for archaeological sites consists of excavation of a percentage of the site (determined in consultation with the local agency) to provide information necessary to answer significant research questions.

Cult-2 Develop measures to provide maximum avoidance and minimization of impacts to

significant archaeological and historical resources during development.

Cult-3 For future development projects, lead agencies shall integrate curation of all archaeological and/or historical artifacts and associated records in a regional center focused on the care, management and use of archaeological collections. Artifacts include material recovered from all phases of work, including the initial survey, testing, indexing, data recovery, and monitoring. Curated materials shall be maintained with respect for cultures and available to future generations for research.

29

Findings SANDAG finds that State CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5 imposes certain requirements on the handling of human remains accidentally discovered during excavation. Projects under the RCP are independently required to and will comply with these Guidelines. In addition, mitigation measures Cult-1 and Cult-2 require pre-construction record reviews and site surveys to identify the presence or absence of cultural resources for future projects, and further analysis and avoidance, if possible, if they are identified and are significant or important. Finally, Cult-3 requires the preservation and curation of any artifacts in a regional center so that they are available for preservation and research. As stated in Section 5.11.6 of the EIR, these mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts to human remains to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.11-12.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Cult-1 through Cult-3 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. J. Public Services/Utility Systems Water Facilities Significant Impacts The potential increase in population associated with implementation of the RCP may result in the need for new or expanded water facilities. This represents a significant impact. (EIR, p. 5.12-8.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.12.5 of the EIR: ServSys-1 Water, sewer/wastewater, and landfill providers shall update plans to ensure

adequate facilities are available to meet projected locations and intensities of growth.

ServSys-2 Future construction shall incorporate water efficient appliances (e.g., low-flush

toilets and shower heads) and xeriscaping and/or drought tolerant plant species. Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures ServSys-1 and Serv-Sys2 require planning for adequate facilities in advance of their need, as well as the use of water efficient appliances, thereby allowing for sensitive planning for facilities, as well as the most efficient use of existing and new facilities. These mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts associated with the need for new or expanded water facilities to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.12-14.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures ServSys-1 and ServSys-2 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies.

30

Water Supply Significant Impacts Potential population growth under the RCP is a significant impact on water supply. (EIR, p. 5.12-9.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.12.5 of the EIR: ServSys-1 and ServSys-2, and ServSys-4: Future development projects will be required to prepare project-level environmental

analyses, including an analysis of water supply and incorporate measures to reduce demand.

Finding SANDAG finds that mitigation measures ServSys-1 and Serv-Sys2 require planning for adequate facilities in advance of their need, as well as the use of water efficient appliances, thereby allowing for sensitive planning for facilities, as well as the most efficient use of existing and new facilities. Mitigation measure ServSys-4 will reduce this impact by requiring project-level analyses of water supplies. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the impact to below a level of significance. SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures ServSys-1, ServSys-2, and Serv-Sys-4 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Wastewater Treatment and Sewage Facilities Significant Impacts The potential increase in population associated with implementation of the RCP may result in the need for new or expanded sewer/wastewater treatment facilities. This represents a potentially significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require expansion of sewer/wastewater treatment facilities, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded facilities. (EIR, p. 5.12-14.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.12.5 of the EIR: ServSys-1 and ServSys-2. Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measures ServSys-1 and Serv-Sys2 require planning for adequate facilities in advance of their need, as well as the use of water efficient appliances, thereby allowing for sensitive planning for facilities, as well as the most efficient use of existing and new facilities. These mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts associated with the need for new or expanded sewer/wastewater treatment facilities to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.12-14.)

31

SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures ServSys-1 and ServSys-2 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Landfill Capacity Significant Impacts The potential increase in population associated with implementation of the RCP will result increase the rate of waste going to the landfill. Since many of the local landfills will reach capacity during the lifetime of the RCP, this represents a potentially significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require expansion of landfill facilities, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded facilities. (EIR, p. 5.12-14.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.12.5 of the EIR: ServSys-1 and ServSys-3 Recycled materials shall be used in future construction. Findings SANDAG finds that mitigation measure ServSys-1 requires planning for adequate facilities in advance of their need, thereby allowing for sensitive and timely planning for facilities. In addition, ServSys-3 requires that recycled materials be used in future construction. These mitigation measures will reduce the potential impact to landfills to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.12-14.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures ServSys-1 and ServSys-3 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Schools Significant Impacts The potential increase in population associated with implementation of the RCP results in the need for new or expanded school facilities. This represents a significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require the expansion of school facilities, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded facilities. (EIR, p. 5.12-15.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.12.5 of the EIR: ServSys-5 Future projects shall be required to pay School Mitigation Fees pursuant to

California Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995. These fees will assist in funding school services within the applicable school district.

32

Findings SANDAG finds that the payment of fees is an appropriate way to mitigate project-level impacts on schools, and is required by mitigation measure ServSys-5. This mitigation measure will reduce the potential impact to schools to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.12-15.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure ServSys-5 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Police and Sheriff Protection Services Significant Impacts The potential increase in population associated with implementation of the RCP will require new and expanded police and sheriff facilities and additional police officers and sheriff’s deputies. This represents a significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require the expansion of police and sheriff services, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded facilities. (EIR, p. 5.12-15.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.12.5 of the EIR: ServSys-6: Future projects shall be required to pay public facility finance fees in accordance

with the requirements of the jurisdiction in which the project is proposed. These fees will assist in funding additional police, sheriff, and fire protection services, as well as expanding and park/recreation services.

Findings SANDAG finds that the payment of fees is an appropriate way to mitigate project-level impacts on police and sheriff services, and is required by mitigation measure ServSys-6. This mitigation measure will reduce the potential impact to police and sheriff protection services to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.12-15.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure ServSys-6 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Fire Protection Services Significant Impacts The potential increase in population associated with implementation of the RCP will require new and expanded fire protection facilities and additional fire protection staff. This represents a significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require the expansion of fire protection services, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded services. (EIR, p. 5.12-15.)

33

Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.12.5 of the EIR: ServSys-6. Findings SANDAG finds that the payment of fees is an appropriate way to mitigate project-level impacts on fire protection services, and is required by mitigation measure ServSys-6. This mitigation measure will reduce the potential impact to fire protection services to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.12-15.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure ServSys-6 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. Park and Recreation Facilities Significant Impacts The potential increase in population associated with implementation of the RCP results in the need for additional park and recreation services. This represents a significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require the expansion of park and recreation facilities and services, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for these new services. (EIR, p. 5.12-15.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.12.5 of the EIR: ServSys-6. Findings

SANDAG finds that the payment of fees is an appropriate way to mitigate project-level impacts to park and recreation facilities, and is required by mitigation measure ServSys-6. This mitigation measure will reduce the potential impact to park and recreation facilities to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 5.12-15.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure ServSys-6 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies.

34

SECTION III

FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT FULLY MITIGATED TO A LEVEL LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT

A. Land Use Impacts to Vacant Lands (Including Agricultural and Open Space) Significant Impacts From a plan-to-ground perspective, future development will result in significant impacts from conversion of undisturbed vacant land, agricultural land, open space and other natural resources to urban uses. (EIR, p. 5.1-23.) While implementation of the RCP would result in less conversion of open space land than would occur without the RCP, it would result in some unavoidable impacts to these resources. (Ibid.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.1.5 of the EIR LU-2 Local jurisdictions shall discourage conversion of agricultural lands outside of planned

urbanized areas. Where proposed development significantly conflicts with established agricultural operations appropriate buffers or other appropriate measures shall be incorporated to reduce land use incompatibility impacts to below a level of significance.

Finding SANDAG finds that mitigation measures LU-2 will delay impacts to agricultural lands outside of the planned urban areas by discouraging, at the local planning and plan-to-ground levels, conversion of lands outside of planned urbanized areas, but will not guarantee that agricultural lands will not be converted. (EIR, p. 5.1-23.) Compared to the No Project/Existing Plans Alternative, the RCP will reduce the amount of these lands that are converted. (EIR, p. 6-7.) This impact remains significant and unavoidable after the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures. (EIR, p. 5.1-23.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure LU-2 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies.

35

B. Population/Housing/Employment

Local and Regional Population and Housing

Significant Impacts At the regional and local level, implementation of the RCP would result in significant population and housing impacts. (EIR, p. 5.2-4.) Mitigation No mitigation measures identified. Finding SANDAG finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the significant local population and housing impacts other than the adoption of the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative or the Reduced Intensity Alternative. (EIR, pp. 5.2-6, 6-7.) Each agency is legally mandated to accept a certain amount of housing and the associated population growth pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code §§ 66410-66499.37). Thus, it is not feasible from a legal standpoint to not accept that growth. This impact remains significant and unavoidable. (EIR, p. 5.2-6.) Regional Density Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP is expected to increase the regional density from 1.81 persons per developed acre to 1.87 persons per developed acre in 2030. This represents a 3.3% increase in regional density, and a significant impact. (EIR, p. 5.2-4.) Mitigation No mitigation measures identified. Finding SANDAG finds that there are no feasible or practicable mitigation measures to reduce the significant regional density impacts other than the adoption of the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative or the Reduced Intensity Alternative. Each agency is legally mandated to accept a certain amount of housing and the associated population growth pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act. Thus, it is not feasible from a legal standpoint to not accept that growth. This impact remains significant and unavoidable. (EIR, p. 5.2-6.)

36

This impact was originally identified as less than significant in the Draft EIR.(EIR, p. 5.2-5.) Subsequent review of the analysis of the resulted in that conclusion indicated that this impact significant and unmitigated. (EIR, pp. 5.2-4 and 5.2-5.) The density increase was determined to be 3.3%, and the threshold identifies a 3% increase as significant. (EIR, p.5.2-5) SANDAG finds that the change in this issue area from less than significant to significant and unmitigated does not require recirculation pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15088.5. The Draft EIR identified other significant and unmitigated impacts within the Population/Housing/Employment analysis section, including significant and unmitigated impacts related to local housing, local population, regional housing, and regional population. C. Transportation/Circulation Localized Traffic Impacts/Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP would have significant transportation and circulation impacts on localized roadways due to increased density. (EIR, p. 5.4-12.) Further, while implementation of the RCP and RTP will generally improve regional roadway network over what they would be without them, individual development projects will still have significant, unmitigated impacts, which will result in significant localized impacts to roadway segments and intersections. (EIR, p. 5.4-17 Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.4.5 of the EIR: Trans-1. Finding SANDAG finds that without implementation of the RCP, the regional roadway system is expected to be even more degraded because interregional commuting will continue. (EIR, p. 5.4-12.) However, even though the average travel time decreases with implementation of the MOBILITY 2030 network and smart growth principles (EIR, p. 5.4-15), some portions of the regional roadways network may get worse before they get better (EIR, p. 5.4-16). Future traffic studies, prepared as part of the environmental review for future development projects, as required by mitigation measure Trans 1, above, will identify traffic impacts and proposed mitigation measures. However, the significant impacts to transportation and circulation in regional transportation systems and local streets due to increased density is only partially mitigated by Trans-1. (EIR, p. 5.4-19.) In some instances, localized roadway and intersections may be degraded to the point that the mitigation would be to expand the roadways beyond the size identified in the local circulation element. That mitigation measure is not feasible to implement in the RCP because it is too site and situation dependent, and may have legal barriers to implementation. However, this impact remains significant and unavoidable after the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures. (EIR, p. 5.5-19.)

37

D. Energy Non-Renewable Energy Resources Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP and associated regional growth during future developments would result in an increased amount of non-renewable energy consumption throughout the region. Even with the policy goals and objectives included as part of the RCP, energy consumption associated with regional growth would likely exceed 3 percent of non-renewable energy resources. (EIR, p. 5.7-9.) Mitigation There are no feasible mitigation measures. Finding SANDAG find that there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the increase of energy consumption associated with regional growth because there are no effective ways to reduce population growth. However, the RCP has already included specific goals and objectives that reduce the consumption of non renewable energy to the extent feasible. These include increased reliance on mass transit, reduce average vehicle miles traveled, energy efficiency, promote renewable sources of energy and encourage energy efficiencies. (EIR, p. 5.7-8.) However, this impact remains significant and unavoidable. (EIR, p. 5.7-9.) E. Biological Resources Reduction in Rare, Endangered, Sensitive, or Special Status Species Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP would likely result in a reduction of the number of rare, endangered, sensitive and/or special status plants and animals; thus, these impacts are significant and unmitigated. (EIR, p. 5.10-14.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.10.5 of the EIR: Bio-1 through Bio-10. Finding Site avoidance of all impacts to rare or endangered species cannot be achieved in a regional plan. Because San Diego supports such a diversity of these resources, it is unavoidable that some individuals of some species would be lost as a result of providing housing and associated infrastructure. (EIR, p. 5.10-16.) Implementation of the RCP reduces the amount of impact to the number of rare, endangered, sensitive and/or special status plants and animals compared to

38

development under the existing general plans, however, significant impacts to these resources will still occur under the RCP. Complete avoidance of impacts to these resources is infeasible, since some of the identified SGOA sites may contain lands that are undeveloped and contain these resources. (EIR, p. 5.10-17.) SANDAG finds that mitigation measure Bio-1 requires pre-construction design to minimize fragmentation of habitat, and to minimize or eliminate impacts to habitat. Further, some of these impacts can be reduced through incorporation of design features such as bridges and large culverts to minimize impacts to wildlife movement, as required by mitigation measure Bio-2. Likewise, Bio-4, Bio-5, and Bio-7 require pre-project design to minimize impacts to habitat and natural land features such as streambeds, as well as mitigation at no net loss levels. Bio-3 supplements these mitigation measures by requiring that any offsite mitigation be contiguous with areas of like resources, and Bio-6 requires the preservation of open space areas identified in local, state and federal resource protection plans. To the extent a project will impact wildlife, Bio-8 calls for avoidance of the impact to the extent practicable, through proper scheduling and noise barriers. Bio-9 will reduce impacts by controlling water pollution closer to the source, thereby minimizing or eliminating downstream impacts. Finally, mitigation measure Bio-10 requires that future coastal projects are designed to have minimal impacts, and if there are unavoidable impacts, the mitigation shall result in a no net loss habitat value. Mitigation measures Bio-1 through Bio-10 will minimize these impacts, but the impact remains significant and unavoidable after the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures. (EIR, p. 5.10-17.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Bio-1 through Bio-10 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. F. Cultural Resources Historical and Cultural Resources Significant Impacts Due to the scale of the Propose Project, and the long history of Native American habitations in the region, future grading and construction activities associated with implementation of the RCP are expected to result in significant impacts to archaeological and historical resources along the identified SGOA. (EIR, pp. 5.11-7 to 5.11-10.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.11.5 of the EIR: Cult-1 through Cult-3 and Cult-4 Include a measure in the Urban Design Best Practices Manual requiring the integration of

historical resources into the design of future development within the SGOA. Cult-5 Local jurisdictions shall develop measures to encourage adaptive reuse of existing

historical structures within the SGOA. Cult-6 Significant historic structures and buildings that will be demolished as a part of future

projects will need to be documented by a qualified architectural historian. When local

39

jurisdictions have more strict standards regarding the treatment of historic structures, the local jurisdiction’s policies shall be used.

Finding SANDAG find that mitigation measures Cult-1 and Cult-2 require pre-construction record reviews and site surveys to identify the presence or absence of cultural resources for future projects, and further analysis and avoidance, if possible, if they are identified and are significant or important. Cult-3 requires the preservation and curation of any artifacts in a regional center so that they are available for preservation and research. Cult-4 will reduce impacts by requiring that SANDAG provide pre-construction guidance on how to integrate historical resources into SGOA projects through inclusion of best management practices in its Urban Design Best Management Practices Manual. Similarly, Cult-5 requires that local jurisdictions also develop measures to guide project proponents on adaptive reuse of historical structures within the SGOA. Finally, when a historic structure must be demolished, Cult-6 requires documentation of its existence by a qualified architectural historian. However, complete avoidance of impacts to historical resources is not feasible, and thus the RCP’s impact remains significant and unavoidable after the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures. (EIR, pp. 5.11-11 and 12.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Cult-1, Cult-2, Cult-3, Cult-5 and Cult-6 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. SANDAG will be responsible for the implementation of mitigation measures Cult-4.

40

SECTION IV FINDINGS REGARDING CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

The State CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR address cumulative impacts of the Project when the Project’s incremental effect is “cumulatively considerable.” (State CEQA Guidelines § 15130.) Cumulative impacts are two or more individual effects that, when considered together, are considerable or can compound or increase other environmental effects. (State CEQA Guidelines § 15355.) Cumulative impacts are “cumulatively considerable” when the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects. (State CEQA Guidelines §§ 15065(c), 15130.) A cumulative impact analysis may either be based on a list of past, present and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, or a summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document. (State CEQA Guidelines § 15130(b).) Due to the programmatic approach of the RCP, the cumulative analysis in the EIR uses the projections approach, and uses a study area that includes all of San Diego County, and portions of the Counties of Orange, Riverside and Imperial, as well as the border regions of Baja California in the Republic of Mexico (together, “Southern California/Northern Baja area”). The projected buildout of adopted land use plans within this area represents the cumulative projects. (EIR, p. 7-1.) A. Land Use Significant Impacts Implementation of the RCP, along with future growth in the Southern California/Northern Baja area, represents a significant cumulative land use impact on undisturbed vacant land. (EIR, p. 7-2.) However, there is no significant cumulative land use impact on adopted habitat conservation plans or general plans, or urban sprawl. (EIR, pp. 7-2 and 3.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.1.5 of the EIR: LU-1 through LU-5. Finding SANDAG finds that implementation of the RCP, along with buildout under the existing general plans in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will not have a significant impact on adopted habitat conservation plans or general plans. Any potential conflict in this area is focused within San Diego County, however the Subarea Plans under the Multiple Species Conservation Program and Multiple Habitat Conservation Program contain their own protective measures which result in this impact being less than significant from a cumulative impact perspective. (EIR, p. 7-2.) With regard to urban sprawl, similar smart growth planning efforts are underway throughout the Southern California/Northern Baja area, through development of integrated regional transportation and land use plans. When the RCP is considered with other regional planning activities in the Southern California/Northern Baja area, the cumulative impact does not create sprawl since it discourages low density development, and encourages more compact development. (EIR, pp. 7-2 and 3.) Future growth projected for the Southern California/Northern Baja area will result in a substantial amount

41

of vacant land, agricultural land, open space and other natural resources being converted to urban uses. The RCP encourages appropriate densification, and from a cumulative perspective, if the growth generated from this region is housed within San Diego County, there would be less demand, or a delayed demand, for land conversion to urban uses when compared to expected conditions under existing general plans in the Southern California/Northern Baja area. While implementation of mitigation measures LU-1 through LU-5 will reduce this impact, the cumulative impact will remain significant and unavoidable. (EIR, p. 7-2.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures LU-1 through LU-5 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. B. Population/Housing/Employment Significant Impacts Population growth and its concurrent housing and employment impacts are a significant, cumulative impact. (EIR, p. 7-3.) Mitigation There are no feasible mitigation measures. Finding SANDAG finds that population in the Southern California/Northern Baja area is growing as a result of birth rates exceeding mortality rates, and immigration rates exceeding emigration rates. Housing growth in San Diego has not kept pace with population growth. As a result of the housing demand, people are commuting to jobs in San Diego from neighboring counties, where in general housing has kept pace with demand. Although it is projected that, in Riverside and Imperial Counties, housing growth will meet demand generated by population growth, regional population growth will still significantly impact housing needs. There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this significant impact, and it remains significant and unavoidable. (EIR, p. 7-3.) C. Visual Resources Significant Impacts The RCP will not have a cumulatively considerable impact on scenic highways or development that is incompatible with existing development and community character. However, the RCP contributes to a cumulatively considerable impact on loss of views of significant landscape features and landforms, as well as nighttime views. (EIR, pp. 7-4 and 5.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.3.5 of the EIR: Vis-1 through Vis-7.

42

Finding SANDAG finds that state law requires each individual jurisdiction in the Southern California to have a Scenic Highway Element as a component of their general plans. Development guidance therein will reduce impacts from implementation of the RCP to less than significant. (EIR, p. 7-3.) Further, the RCP only guides development within San Diego County, and development outside the County will be consistent with the various general plans in effect in the Southern California area. As a result, implementation of the RCP will not contribute to a cumulatively considerable significantly impact on existing development and community character. (EIR, p. 7-5.) However, the RCP will contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact on the loss of views of significant landscape features and landforms as a result of projected growth in the Southern California/Northern Baja area. (EIR, p. 7-3.) As well, future development of the RCP when considered with all future development in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will impact nighttime views and the views from Southern California observatories. (EIR, p. 7-5.) While mitigation measures Vis-1 through 7 will reduce these impacts, the impacts remain significant and unavoidable. (Ibid.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Vis-1 through Vis-7 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. D. Transportation/Circulation Significant Impacts The RCP will contribute to cumulatively considerable significant regional transportation and local roadway impacts. (EIR, pp. 7-5 and 6.) However, there will not be any cumulative impacts on air traffic patterns or hazards near airports. (EIR, p. 7-6.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.4.5 of the EIR: Trans-1. Finding SANDAG finds that throughout the Southern California/Northern Baja area, California regional governments are developing integrated regional transportation and land use plans. These efforts will work to improve roadway conditions and off more transportation opportunities in the region. However, the daily vehicle miles traveled and the levels of service are expected to increase with future development in the Southern California/Northern Baja area. While implementation of the RCP is part of the solution, significant cumulative transportation/circulation impact will still occur despite the imposition of mitigation measure Trans-1. Accordingly, this cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable. (EIR, pp. 7-5 and 6.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Trans-1 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies.

43

E. Air Quality Significant Impacts While implementation of the RCP will not add to a cumulatively considerable impact on implementation of any air quality management plans, it will contribute to the creation of CO hotspots, creating a significant cumulative impact. (EIR, pp. 7-7 and 8.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.4.5 of the EIR: Trans-1. Finding While implementation of mitigation measure Trans-1 will reduce this impact somewhat, the RCP will still contribute to this cumulatively significant impact. Accordingly, this cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable. (EIR, pp. 7-7 and 8.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Trans-1 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. F. Energy Significant Impacts The RCPs contribution to energy impacts is cumulatively considerable and cannot be reduced to below a level of significance. (EIR, p. 7-8.) Mitigation There are no feasible mitigation measures. Finding Future population growth in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will result in an increased need for energy resources. Even with the RCPs incentives for conservation, use of alternative energy sources is not expected to significantly reduce the need for non-renewable energy sources. There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the RCPs contribution to this impact, and it remains cumulatively significant and unavoidable. (EIR, p. 7-8.)

44

G. Geology/Paleontology Significant Impacts The RCP does not contribute to a cumulative impact on geological/paleontological resources. (EIR, p. 7-9.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.8.5 of the EIR: Paleo-1. Finding SANDAG finds that modern design standards and regulations ensure that all future development in the Southern California/Northern Baja area are not susceptible to damage due to seismic events, slope failure or other project-specific geotechnical issues. (EIR, p. 7-9.) Also, while implementation of the RCP and the general plans in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will disturb geologic formations, some with moderate to high paleontological value, implementation of mitigation measures Paleo-1 will require project-specific surveys and monitoring which reduce this cumulative impact to below a level of significance. (Ibid.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Paleo-1 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. H. Hydrology/Water Resources Significant Impacts The RCP will not contribute to a cumulatively significant impact on attainment of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, or impacts to stormwater systems and flood hazards. (EIR, pp. 7-9 and 10.) However, the RCPs contribution to cumulative impacts on groundwater supplies and/or recharge is cumulatively considerable. (EIR, p. 7-10.) Mitigation The following mitigation measure is found in Section 5.9.5 of the EIR: Water-3. Finding Implementation of the RCP, along with future development under the general plans in place in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will be required to comply with applicable regional, state and federal water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, runoff regulations and best management practices, and construct/fund stormwater and drainage improvements to mitigate project-level impacts, thereby reducing cumulative impacts in these areas to below a level of significance. (EIR, pp. 7-9 and 10.) However, future population growth pursuant to the RCP and in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will result in an increased demand on groundwater supplies, and will interfere with groundwater recharge. SANDAG finds that mitigation measure Water-3, which calls for the use of safe yield strategies for groundwater use, will reduce this impact

45

to below a level of significance. (EIR, p.7-11). SANDAG also finds that mitigation measure Water-3 is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. I. Biological Resources Significant Impacts The impact of development under the RCP and the general plans in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will have a significant cumulative impact on biological resources through urbanization of undeveloped land, and destruction of wildlife resources and habitat. (EIR, pp. 7-11 and 12.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.10.5 of the EIR: Bio-1 through Bio-10. Finding SANDAG finds that since undeveloped land is generally less expensive to develop than redevelopment properties, urban growth under the RCP and in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will significantly impact biological resources through urbanization of undeveloped land, and destruction of wildlife resources and habitat, despite the RCPs policies toward densification. (EIR, pp. 7-11 and 12.) Even with preservation of some of the region’s biological resources through the MSCP, MHCP, and Riverside County MSHCP, conservation plans throughout the Southern California/Northern Baja area are not prepared or complete, and thus the cumulative area impact remains significant. Further, indirect impacts from development, such as air, noise, light and water pollution impacts, contribute to the significance of this cumulative impact. Although mitigation measures Bio-1 through 10 mitigate these impacts, they do not reduce the impacts to below a level of significance. Accordingly, this cumulative impact remains significant and unavoidable. (Ibid.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Bio-1 through Bio-10 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. J. Cultural Resources Significant Impacts The loss of cultural resources through development under in the Southern California/Northern Baja area in general is cumulatively significant. (EIR, p. 7-12.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.11.5 of the EIR: Bio-1 through Bio-10.

46

Finding SANDAG finds that although individual projects in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will have to implement site-specific cultural mitigation measures, overall trends of development in undeveloped areas and redevelopment of historical features in already urbanized areas will result in a loss of cultural resources. Mitigation measures Cult-1 through 6 will reduce some of the incremental cumulative impacts from implementation of the RCP, but will not reduce the impact to below a level of significance. Accordingly, this cumulative impact remains significant and unavoidable. (EIR, p. 7-12.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures Cult-1, Cult-2, Cult-3, Cult-5, and Cult-6 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies. SANDAG is responsible for the implementation of Cult-4. K. Public Services/Utility Systems Significant Impacts When the RCP is considered with future development under the general plans in place in the Southern California/Northern Baja area, public service and utility system impacts are significant. (EIR, p. 7-12.) Mitigation The following mitigation measures are found in Section 5.12.5 of the EIR: SErvSys-1 through ServSys-6. Finding SANDAG finds that future development in the Southern California/Northern Baja area will require increased water supplies and water transportation facilities, as well as landfill services. School service, police and fire impacts will also be cumulatively significant since additional schools, safety facilities and additional safety employees will be needed to serve the growing population. Further, public amenities such as park and recreation centers, will have to keep pace with increased growth. Future development projects will be required to analyze their project level impacts and pay mitigation fees, as appropriate, and it is expected that the fees will reduce most public service impacts to below a level of significance. However, water and waste management impacts cannot be reduced to below a level of significance, even with the imposition of mitigation fees or other mitigation measures. Accordingly, this impact remains significant and unavoidable. (EIR, p. 7-12.) SANDAG also finds that mitigation measures ServSys-1 through ServSys-6 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and that such changes have been already adopted, or if not, can and should be adopted by those other agencies.

47

SECTION V FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT

IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES The State CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR address any significant irreversible environmental changes that would be caused if the proposed project were implemented. (State CEQA Guidelines § 15126.2.) SANDAG finds that implementation of the RCP would result in permanent changes to the existing environment. While the RCP focuses development into existing urban areas and along existing or future transportation corridors, there may still be some conversion of undeveloped land to urbanized uses. These conversions are considered to be a permanent change, and would occur directly through construction of development on undeveloped land. Additionally, construction of future projects in developed areas as part of the RCP would result in localized impacts to the circulation network that are not likely to be able to be mitigated due to various issues (e.g., engineering, community character, socio-economic, loss of housing/employment, and economic feasibility). Future development projects associated with the RCP would result in a direct loss of native habitat that supports rate, threatened or endangered species, and impacts to these resources would represent a significant and irreversible environmental change. (EIR, p. 8-2.) SANDAG also finds that future development projects will require the use of non-renewable energy resources for project construction. This includes the burning of fossil fuels for construction equipment. The use of these non-renewable energy resources is considered to incrementally add to the loss of these resources, however, the impact imparted by the RCP is less than significant. (Ibid.)

48

SECTION VI FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS

A project is defined as growth inducing when it directly or indirectly fosters economic growth, population growth, or additional housing; when it removes obstacles for growth; and/or when it encourages or facilitates other activities that could significantly affect the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines § 15126.2.) Growth inducement is generally dependent on the presence or lack of existing utilities, and municipal or public services. The provision of roadways, utilities, water, and sewer service to a previously unserviced area can induce growth by removing impediments to development. Once services are extended into a project area, economic pressures to develop are anticipated. This is often characterized as urban sprawl. In addition, growth inducement can be defined as growth that makes it feasible to increase the density of development in the surrounding areas. (EIR, p. 8-1.) One of the goals of the RCP is to better balance the need for housing within the SGOAs in San Diego County. Therefore, by its very nature (potentially increasing the density of development), the RCP is growth inducing. However, the area the RCP targets for construction of these additional housing units is within existing developed areas. Therefore, it is likely that many SGOA have already established roadways and utilities, as well as water and sewer services. The placement of additional housing units in established areas may require upgrading and resizing of existing infrastructure, including water facilities. The goal of the RCP is to foster population growth in proximity to the projected job base by providing additional housing. Therefore, implementation of the RCP is growth inducing. (EIR, p. 8-1.) SANDAG finds that social considerations make it infeasible to mitigate the significant growth inducing impact. Growth will occur within southern California. The RCP accommodates a portion of that growth within San Diego County. If the RCP is not implemented, then that growth would be accommodated in other areas of Southern California, including Riverside, Imperial, and Orange Counties, and Northern Baja. If the RCP is not implemented, then growth would be induced in these surrounding areas.

49

SECTION VII FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES

CEQA requires that the EIR identify and analyze a reasonable range of reasonable alternatives to the Project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic Project objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project. (State CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6.) The SANDAG Board of Directors hereby finds that it has considered and rejected as infeasible the alternatives identified in the EIR and described below.

Together with the previously adopted 2030 RTP, the primary purpose of the RCP is to provide a comprehensive framework for greater coordination of regional transportation and land use planning so that local jurisdictions and infrastructure providers can update their plans in a manner that achieves the following objectives:

• Encourage sustainable development by making land use decisions and infrastructure investments that are good for the environment. Sustainability means planning and development that meets economic, environmental, and community needs, without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet these needs;

• Support "smart growth" through the prioritization of regional transportation funds. Smart growth is a compact, efficient and environmentally-sensitive pattern of development that provides people with additional travel, housing and employment choices by focusing future growth away from rural areas and closer to existing and planned job centers and public facilities while preserving open space and natural resources. Smart growth both complements and encourages sustainability;

• Address the region’s housing needs, recognizing that the rate of population increase is exceeding the rate of housing unit increase; and

• Achieve fairness and equity in regional planning and development processes. (EIR, p. 1-2.)

The EIR set forth the alternatives that were considered but rejected as infeasible prior to the EIR drafting stage. 1. State CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(f)(2) requires an analysis of alternative locations for the

Project. However, the RCP is a plan to guide the growth and development of areas influenced by transportation and funding decisions made by SANDAG. Since no other lands are directly influenced by SANDAG, no alternative locations are feasible or were analyzed. (EIR, p. 6-1.)

2. A “directed smart growth” alternative was rejected because directing growth to one or a few

portions of the region would not efficiently use regional transportation systems, severely increase localized impacts, and be politically infeasible and unlikely to occur. (EIR, p. 6-2.)

3. A “100% capture” alternative was rejected because it is not feasible to “capture” all 93,000

housing units that will be exported to neighboring jurisdictions, because personal behaviors drive the exportation, and political issues may inhibit local jurisdictions from amending their general plans to capture all the units. (EIR, p. 6-2.)

50

4. A “reduced economic growth” alternative was rejected because initial modeling showed that it did not actually result in a loss of overall employment, would result in sales tax revenue losses, there is no hard evidence to connect job growth with population growth, so limiting job growth may not reduce population growth, and there may be secondary effects to limiting economic growth which local governments are not aware of or prepared to address. (EIR, p. 6-3.)

5. A “new town” alternative of approximately 46,000 housing units was rejected because most

available parcels (10,000-15,000 acres) had topographical, political and/or infrastructure deficiencies, would have significant environmental impacts, and would encourage sprawl. (EIR, pp. 6-4 to 5.)

The EIR analyzed the following four alternatives to the proposed RCP: (1) No Project/Existing Plans Alternative, (2) Smart Growth Opportunity Area (SGOA) – Reduced Intensity Alternative, the (3) Smart Growth Opportunity Area – Increased Intensity Alternative, and the (4) Urban Growth Boundary Alternative. (EIR, Chapter 6.) Analysis of the No Project/Existing Plans Alterative is required by CEQA. (State CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(e).) The SGOA – Reduced Intensity and the SGOA – Increased Intensity Alternatives were selected to represent the scenarios when a smaller or greater portion of the exported units are redirected within potential smart growth opportunity areas. The Urban Growth Boundary Alternative was considered based on comments received on the NOP. These alternatives were evaluated to reduce one or more of the significant impacts identified for the Proposed Project. These four alternatives are described in more detail below and can be found in Chapter 6.0 of the Final EIR. No Project/Existing Plans Alternative Description This alternative assumes that the proposed RCP would not be adopted and implemented. Under this alternative, less smart growth development would occur in the region because no "smart growth opportunity areas" would be designated by the RCP, and no infrastructure funds would be specifically directed toward these opportunity areas to encourage smart growth development. (EIR, p. 6-5.)

Finding

SANDAG finds that the No Project/Existing Plans Alternative is not feasible because it would not meet the objectives of the Proposed Project. Specifically, this alternative would not address the region’s housing needs, recognizing that the rate of population increase is exceeding the rate of housing unit increase. Instead, development would occur in a manner that is consistent with existing land use plans. This alternative fails to meet the project objective that encourages sustainable development by making land use decisions and infrastructure investments that are good for the environment. This alternative would not support "smart growth" through the prioritization of regional transportation funds. (EIR, p. 6-6.)

51

Additionally, implementation of this alternative would result in significant impacts in the following issue areas: housing, visual resources, regional transportation/circulation, air quality, noise, energy, geology/paleontology, biological resources, cultural resources, and public services/utilities. However, in all of these issue areas, with the exception of regional housing, transportation/ circulation, air quality, energy, and biological resources impacts under this alternative would be less severe than those identified for the Proposed Project. (EIR, pp. 6-7 to 6-12.) Since this alternative does not meeting project objectives and also increases the intensity of impacts for land use, regional housing, visual resources, transportation/circulation, air quality, energy and biological resources compared to the Proposed Project, the No Project/ Existing Plans Alternative was not recommended for approval. Smart Growth Opportunity Area (SGOA) – Reduced Intensity Alternative Description This alternative is analyzed within the Final EIR as a means of reducing localized impacts associated with land use, visual quality, transportation, air quality, noise, and public services/utility systems. This alternative assumes that the basic goals, policy objectives, and actions of the RCP would be adopted; however, the future implementation strategies, funding, compacts between jurisdictions, and general plans of the 18 cities and county government would target increasing regional housing capacity by approximately 25,000 housing units instead of the 46,000 units identified for the Proposed Project. Although this alternative would result in approximately 21,000 fewer housing units in the San Diego region compared to the Proposed Project, these 21,000 housing units would likely be developed in adjoining Baja California, Riverside County, Orange County, and Imperial County, with many of the residents of these exported units still commuting into San Diego County for employment.(EIR, p. 6-12.) Finding SANDAG finds that the Smart Growth Opportunity Area (SGOA) – Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in similar impact as the Proposed Project with a similar requirement to mitigate. Significant impacts were identified for the following issue areas: land use, housing, visual resources, regional and localized transportation/circulation, air quality, noise, energy, geology/paleontology, biological resources, cultural resources, and public services/utilities. (EIR, pp. 6-13 to 6-20.) Many of these issue areas under this alternative would be less severe than those identified for the Proposed Project. However, this alternative does not achieve the project purpose of capturing growth as well as the Proposed Project. For that reason, and because this alternative does not substantially lessen the impacts of the Proposed Project and itself results in significant impacts, the Proposed Project was chosen as the Preferred Alternative. (Ibid.) State CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6 requires that the EIR identify the environmentally superior alternative. The EIR equally ranked this alternative and the Proposed Project as environmentally superior. (EIR, pp. 6-36 to 37.)

52

Smart Growth Opportunity Area – Increased Intensity Alternative Description This alternative assumes that the basic goals, policy objectives, and actions of the RCP would be adopted; however, the future implementation strategies, funding, compacts between jurisdictions, and general plans of the 18 cities and county government would increase housing capacity by approximately 75,000 housing units instead of the 46,000 units identified for the Proposed Project. This alternative analyzed the result of approximately 29,000 more housing units in the San Diego region compared to the proposed project. The development of these additional 29,000 housing units within smart growth opportunity areas and other targeted areas in the region would reduce the number of housing units that would need to be built in adjoining Baja California, Riverside County, Orange County, and Imperial County to serve the San Diego region's workforce. (EIR, p. 6-20.) Finding SANDAG finds that implementation of this alternative would result in significant impacts in the following issue areas: land use, population and housing, visual resources, regional and localized transportation/circulation, air quality, noise, energy, geology/paleontology, biological resources, cultural resources, and public services/utilities. (EIR, pp. 6-22 to 6-27.) Additionally, in many of these issue areas under this alternative the impacts would be more severe than those identified for the Proposed Project. This alternative would meet the demand for future housing needs better than the Proposed Project. Since this alternative does not substantially lessen the environmental impacts identified for the Proposed Project, this alternative was not recommended for approval. (EIR, p. 6-20.) Urban Growth Boundary Alternative Description This alternative is analyzed within the Final EIR in response to comments received during the NOP period. This alternative identifies an urban-growth boundary for the San Diego region. An urban growth boundary delineates the limits of urban growth to create a clear edge of where urban-scale development can and cannot occur. Urban growth boundaries are usually considered long-term growth-management tools. (EIR, p. 6-28.) The boundary considered in this alternative coincides with the existing San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) service area boundary. The boundary extends from the international border with Mexico in the south to Orange and Riverside counties in the north. The Pacific Ocean forms the western edge of the boundary and the coastal foothills generally provides the eastern boundary. Under this alternative, future urban development within the San Diego region would be contained within the SDCWA service area boundary. Additionally, the 46,000 additional housing units identified as part of the Proposed Project would also be developed within the SDCWA service area boundary. The boundary includes the 18 incorporated cities in San Diego, as well as the unincorporated communities of Valley Center, Fallbrook, Ramona, Alpine, and Lakeside. (EIR, p. 6-28.)

53

This alternative assumes that the basic goals, policy objectives, and actions of the RCP would be adopted, with the main difference being that the captured units would not specifically be developed in the SGOA identified for the Proposed Project, but rather dispersed within the SDCWA service area boundary. (EIR, p. 6-28.) Findings SANDAG finds that implementation of this alternative was determined to have the following significant impacts: land use, population and housing, visual resources, regional transportation/circulation, air quality, noise, energy, geology/paleontology, hydrology/ water quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and public services/ utility systems. (EIR, pp. 6-28 to 6-36.) Since this alternative would result in the same increased in population and housing, many of the service system impacts would be similar to the Proposed Project. Under this alternative, impacts to transportation/circulation, air quality, and biological resources are expected to be more severe than the Proposed Project. This alternative may result in an improvement in localized traffic for those areas that would be outside the future urban growth boundary. This alternative would meet the objectives of the Proposed Project, but was not recommended for approval since it does not substantially lessen the environmental impacts identified for the Proposed Project, and indeed has more severe impacts in the particularly key resource areas of transportation/circulation, air quality, and biology. (Ibid.)

54

SECTION VIII FINDING REGARDING CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines § 15090, the San Diego Association of Governments certifies that: 1. The EIR, State Clearinghouse No. 2004011141, is an accurate and objective statement that fully

complies with CEQA, and the State CEQA Guidelines; 2. As the decisionmaking body for the San Diego Association of Governments, the EIR was

presented to the Board of SANDAG, and the Board reviewed and considered the information in the EIR prior to approving the Regional Comprehensive Plan; and

3. The EIR reflects the San Diego Association of Governments’ independent judgment and analysis.

SECTION IX FINDING REGARDING RECIRCULATION OF THE EIR

The San Diego Association of Governments further finds that the comments or responses to comments made during the review period for the EIR, or any other public hearing on the Regional Comprehensive Plan, do not require the EIR to be recirculation pursuant to Secction 15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines because:

• There are no new significant environmental impacts that would result from implementation of the RCP;

• There is no substantial increase in the severity of any of the impacts identified in the EIR; and

• There are no additional feasible project alternatives or mitigation measures that are considerably different from those previously analyzed in the Draft EIR.

All changes made the Final EIR are clarifications of issues previously discussed in the Draft EIR.

55

ATTACHMENT B

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE 2030 REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081(b) and State CEQA Guidelines § 15093, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Board of Directors adopts and makes this statement of overriding considerations concerning the Project’s unavoidable significant impacts to explain why the Project’s benefits override and outweigh its unavoidable impacts. SANDAG hereby declares that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has identified and discussed significant effects that may occur as a result of the Project. With implementation of the mitigation measures discussed in the EIR, these effects can be mitigated to a level of less than significant except for significant and unavoidable impacts as discussed in Section III of these Findings. Significant and unavoidable impacts would occur to land use (vacant land, agricultural land and open space), population and housing (local and regional, regional density), transportation/circulation (localized impacts, conflicts with adopted circulation elements of local jurisdictions), energy (non-renewable resources), biological resources (reduction in rare, endangered, sensitive, and/or special status species), and cultural resources (historical and cultural resources). There would be cumulatively significant impacts to: land use, population and housing, visual resources, transportation/circulation, air quality, noise, energy, hydrology/water resources, biological resources, cultural resources, and public services/utility systems. SANDAG hereby declares that it has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Project. SANDAG hereby declares that to the extent any mitigation measures recommended in the EIR or administrative record could not be imposed on the Project, such mitigation measures are infeasible because they would impose restrictions on the Project that would prohibit the realization of specific legal, economic, social, and other benefits that SANDAG finds outweighs the unmitigated impacts. SANDAG further finds that except for the Project, all other alternatives set forth in the EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of Project objectives and/or of specific legal, economic, social, and other benefits that SANDAG finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives. SANDAG hereby declares that, having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project to the extent feasible by adopting the proposed mitigation measures, having considered the entire administrative record on the Project, and having balanced the economic, legal, social, technological and other benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse environmental impacts after mitigation, SANDAG has determined that the following legal, economic, social, and environmental benefits of the Project outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts and render those potential adverse environmental impacts acceptable based upon the following considerations:

56

Project Benefits Implementation of the RCP will realize these project benefits:

• Encourage sustainable development by making land use decisions and infrastructure investments that are good for the environment. Sustainability means planning and development that meets economic, environmental, and community needs, without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet these needs (Regional Comprehensive Plan Revised Working Draft, and EIR p. 3-4); and

• Support "smart growth" through the prioritization of regional transportation funds. Smart growth is a compact, efficient and environmentally-sensitive pattern of development that provides people with additional travel, housing and employment choices by focusing future growth away from rural areas and closer to existing and planned job centers and public facilities while preserving open space and making more efficient use of existing urban infrastructure. Smart growth both complements and encourages sustainability (Regional Comprehensive Plan Revised Working Draft Chapter 4); and

• Address the region’s housing needs, recognizing that the rate of population increase is exceeding the rate of housing unit increase; and

• Achieve fairness and equity in regional planning and development processes. (Regional Comprehensive Plan Revised Working Draft Chapter 6); and

• Improvement in regional air quality, since implementation of the RCP is expected to reduce the overall rate of increase of vehicle miles traveled. (EIR p.5.5-17).

• Reduction in the rate of increase of amount of fuel used, since implementation of the RCP is expected to reduce the overall rate of increase in the amount of vehicles miles traveled. (EIR p.5.7-9); and

• Improvement in the region’s quality of life as more transportation and housing opportunities are provided within the County (Regional Comprehensive Plan Document Chapters 4A and 4B).

SANDAG hereby declares that the foregoing benefits provided to the public through approval and implementation of the EIR outweighs the identified significant adverse environmental impacts of the Project that cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance. SANDAG finds that each of the Project benefits outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the EIR and therefore finds those impacts acceptable.

57

ATTACHMENT C

FINDING ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for the Project and has been adopted concurrently with these Findings, as required by Public Resources Code § 21081.6(a)(1) and State CEQA Guidelines § 15097. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) will use the MMRP to track compliance with Project mitigation measures. The MMRP will remain available for public review during the compliance period. Introduction The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that public agencies adopting Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) take affirmative steps to determine that approved mitigation measures are implemented subsequent to project approval. The lead or responsible agency must adopt a reporting and monitoring program for the mitigation measures incorporated into a project or included as conditions of approval. The program must be designed to ensure compliance with the EIR during project implementation [Public Resources Code, § 20181.6, subdivision (a)(1); State CEQA Guidelines § 15097]. This MMRP will be used by SANDAG and other local jurisdictions to ensure compliance with mitigation measures associated with the adoption of the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP). SANDAG is the lead agency under CEQA for the project. SANDAG will track the implementation of these measures, and prepare monitoring reports as necessary. Mitigation is required to address significant or potentially significant environmental impacts to: • Land Use (conflict with existing land use plans, mineral resource zones, land use incompatibility,

and physical division of an established community); • Visual Resources (scenic highway corridors, public views of scenic resources, lighting and glare,

and bulk and scale); • Transportation/Circulation (localized traffic impacts, inconsistencies with local circulation

elements); • Air Quality (regional air quality strategy and construction related NOx emissions, and localized

CO impacts); • Noise (traffic noise, residential/land use interface, developments near airports, rail traffic, and

vibration -- intermodal transportation); • Geology/ Paleontology (paleontological resources);

58

• Hydrology/Water Resources (additional sources of runoff/erosion, additional sources of runoff/impervious surfaces, groundwater resources and recharge, and increased runoff);

• Biological Resources (wildlife movement corridors- transportation and non-transportation

infrastructure, sand replenishment and wildlife nurseries, direct/indirect effects on marine species -- sweater desalination, aquatic resources, and reduction in rare, endangered, sensitive or special status species);

• Cultural Resources (historical/cultural resources and human remains); and • Public Services/Utility Systems (water facilities, water supply, wastewater treatment and sewage

facilities, landfill capacity, schools, police and sheriff protection services, fire protection services, and park/recreation facilities).

In some cases, the residual impacts remain significant even after mitigation measures are incorporated. Less than significant impacts would occur to: • Land Use (Habitat Conservation Plans and Inducing Sprawl); • Population and Housing (Regional and Local Employment); • Transportation/Circulation (Airports); • Geology/Paleontology (Seismic Activity and Slope Failure); • Hydrology/Water Resources (Water Quality Standards and Flood Hazards); • Energy (Renewable Resources); and • Biology (Encroachment by Urban Development into Resource Planning Areas).

59

Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility

Land Use

Significant conflict with the land use planning documents for several jurisdictions in the San Diego region. These documents include general plans, Local Coastal Programs, and the Port Master Plan.

LU-1: Local jurisdictions shall adopt land use plan amendments, including general plan amendments, local coastal program amendments and an amendment to the Port Master Plan to eliminate inconsistencies between future land uses and densities identified in these plans, compared to future land uses and densities identified in the RCP.

LU-1: Jurisdictions to approve land use plan amendments consistent with mitigation measure LU-1.

LU-1: During next land use plan update, or as individual projects are approved that have a higher density.

LU-1: Jurisdictions with land use authority.

Significant impacts from conversion of undisturbed vacant land, agricultural land, open space and other natural resources to urban uses from a plan-to-ground perspective. From a plan-to-plan perspective, implementation of the RCP would reduce the amount of land used to accommodate the same population levels. This would be a beneficial effect. While implementation of the RCP would result in less conversion of open space land than would occur without the RCP, it would result in some unavoidable impacts to these resources.

LU-2: Local jurisdictions shall discourage conversion of agricultural lands outside of planned urbanized areas. Where proposed development significantly conflicts with established agricultural operations appropriate buffers or other appropriate measures shall be incorporated to reduce land use incompatibility impacts to below a level of significance.

LU-2: Jurisdictions shall review current policies on agricultural preservation, if applicable, and modify these policies to reflect the requirements of mitigation measures LU2.

LU-2: During next land use plan update, or as applications for individual projects driven by the RCP are submitted.

LU-2: Local jurisdictions with land use authority and agricultural lands within their boundary.

60


Significant indirect impact to lands currently under mineral resource extraction that fall within the identified SGOA. These resource extraction area lands may realize a better and higher use with implementation of the RCP.

LU-3: Local jurisdictions shall discourage conversion of MRZ-2 lands until the existing mineral resources on that land have been exhausted, or are no longer economically feasible to process or market.

LU-3: Jurisdictions shall review current policies on mineral resource preservation, if applicable, and modify these policies to reflect the requirements of mitigation measures LU3.

LU-3: During next land use plan/resource plan update, or as applications for individual projects driven by the RCP are submitted.

LU-3: Local jurisdictions with land use authority that have MRZ-2 land within their boundaries.

Development may occur that is incompatible with existing development or land uses. Higher densities can result in the location of incompatible land uses, or result in increased noise conditions.

LU-4: Project-level noise impact analysis shall be performed, where appropriate, to ensure that changes in land uses and densities do not result in significant noise conflicts or impacts. Noise mitigation measures recommended in these analyses shall be implemented that reduce impacts associated with land use incompatibility to the levels established by each jurisdiction for the appropriate land use.

LU-5: An Urban Design Best Practices manual shall be prepared by SANDAG to establish site-specific measures to reduce land use incompatibilities (divide an established community, noise, hazards, lighting, objectionable odors, or other operational activities).

LU-4: Jurisdictions to review noise impact analyses and oversee implementation of any identified noise mitigation measures.

LU-5: SANDAG to prepare, approve, and distribute manual.

LU-4: Noise impact analysis review shall occur concurrent with CEQA review for the project. The timing for implementation of identified noise mitigation measures is dependent on the identified measures.

LU-5: SANDAG shall prepare the manual within four years of approval of the RCP.

LU-4: Local Jurisdictions are responsible for the requirements of a noise impact analysis from future project applicants.

LU-5: SANDAG will be responsible for the preparation, approval and distribution of the best management practices manual.

61


Physical division of an established community through creation of multiple nodes in areas where one node exists. This represents a significant impact.

LU-5: (see above). LU-5: SANDAG to prepare, approve, and distribute manual.

LU-5: SANDAG shall prepare the manual within four years of approval of the RCP.

LU-5: SANDAG

Visual Resources

Future development along identified and eligible scenic highway corridors could include buildings which are visible from the highway, and are out of scale with the surrounding built environment.

Vis-1: Design projects to minimize contrasts in scale and massing between the project and surrounding natural forms and developments. Avoid large cuts and fills when the visual environment (natural or urban) would be substantially disrupted. Site or design projects to minimize their intrusion into important view sheds and use contour grading to better match surrounding terrain. Vis-2: Use natural landscaping to minimize contrasts between the project and surrounding areas. Develop interchanges and transit lines at the grade of the surrounding land to limit view blockage. Contour the edges of major cut and fill slopes to provide a more natural looking finished profile.

Vis-1 through Vis-5: Jurisdiction to review project plans for incorporation of recommended design measures.

Vis-1 through Vis-5: During project design and review.

Vis-1 through Vis-5: Jurisdictions are responsible for these design requirements, when applicable, from future project applicants.

62


Vis-3: Design landscaping along highway corridors to add significant natural elements and visual interest to soften the hard-edged, linear travel experience that would otherwise occur. Vis-4: Replace and renew landscaping along corridors with road widening, interchange projects, and related improvements. Plan landscaping in new corridors to respect existing natural and man-made features to complement the dominant landscaping of surrounding areas.

Vis-5: Construct sound walls of materials whose color and texture complements the surrounding landscape and development. Use color, texture, and alternating facades to “break up” large facades and provide visual interest.

Increased density in existing neighborhoods may result in buildings that are of different bulk and scale than existing structures. Depending on the buildings’ location and design, the construction of larger buildings within an already established community would result in a significant visual resource impact.

Vis-1: (see above). Vis-1: (see above). Vis-1: (see above). Vis-1: (see above).

63


Depending on the location and height of future development adjacent to oceans or bays, the potential exists that public views to these scenic resources may be substantially altered. This represents a significant visual resource impact.

Vis-1 through Vis-5: (see above). Vis-6: Future development adjacent to the ocean or bays that could potentially impact scenic vistas shall prepare visual simulations to determine what level of view impact the project will have on the scenic vista. Measures to reduce adverse impacts to view corridors shall be implemented. (e.g. reduce bulk and scale).

Vis-1 through Vis-5: (see above). Vis-6: Jurisdictions to review visual simulations and oversee implementation of any identified visual quality mitigation measures.

Vis-1 through Vis-5: (see above). Vis-6: During project review.

Vis-1 through Vis-5: (see above).

Vis-6: Local jurisdiction.

Future development in the region, over the lifetime of the RCP, will result in regionally increase in the amount of light pollution. This represents a significant visual resource impact.

Vis-7: Incorporate design measures into the Urban Design Best Practices Manual to reduce glare and lighting impacts to observatories. This shall include regulations for shielding, intensities of lighting (number of lights, lumens, and wavelengths).

Vis-7: SANDAG to prepare, approve, and distribute manual.

Vis-7: SANDAG shall prepare the manual within four years of approval of the RCP.

Vis-7: SANDAG

64

Transportation/Circulation

Significant transportation and circulation impacts on and localized roadways due to increased density.

Trans-1: Future development projects will be required to address localized traffic impacts as part of the environmental review process. Mitigation for these local impacts will be in conformance with the adopted policies of the lead jurisdiction. Mitigation measures shall include congestion management strategies identified in Table 1 (included at the end of this MMRP).

Trans-1: Jurisdictions to review traffic impact analyses and oversee implementation of any identified traffic mitigation measures. Jurisdiction shall also ensure that strategies from the Toolbox are being used.

Trans-1: Traffic impact analysis review shall occur concurrent with CEQA review for the project. The timing for implementation of identified traffic mitigation is dependent on the identified measures.

Trans-1: Jurisdictions shall ensure that project applicants submit traffic impact analyses and that these studies incorporate recommended mitigation in the CMS Toolbox.

Potential significant conflict with the Circulation Elements for several jurisdictions in the San Diego region.

Trans-2: Local jurisdictions shall adopt Circulation Element amendments to eliminate inconsistencies related to future roadway and intersection improvements associated with the RCP.

Trans-2: Jurisdictions to approve circulation element amendments consistent with Mitigation Measure Trans-2.

Trans-2: During next general plan update, or as individual conflicts arise.

Trans-2: Jurisdictions with land use authority.

65

Air Quality

Construction activities could significantly impact the region’s air quality with NOx emissions released from construction equipment, PM10 emissions related to grading and earth moving activities, and increased vehicle trips by construction workers traveling to and from construction sites.

Air-1: For projects that exceed daily construction emissions established by SDAPCD, Best Available Control Measures (BACMs) shall be incorporated to reduce construction emissions to below daily emission standards established by SDAPCD. Appropriate BACMs will be determined on a project by project basis, and are specific to the pollutant for which the daily threshold has been exceeded. BACMs that may be appropriate for construction activities that exceed daily ROG thresholds include using precoated building materials, using high pressure/low volume paint applicators, and using lower volatility paint. BACMS that may be appropriate for construction activities that exceed daily CO, NOx or Sox thresholds include phasing of construction activities.

Air-1: Jurisdictions to review grading plans to ensure project is properly phased to meet the daily emission thresholds set by the APCD.

Air-1: During project review.

Air-1: Jurisdictions are responsible for conditioning future projects so that daily construction emissions are below daily standards set by the APCD.

Increased density could increase the volume of traffic flow at soexisting intersections which coupotentially increase the numbe vehicles that are idling at roadwintersections releasing emissions and causing CO concentrations texceed state and federal standaThis could expose sensitive Trans-1: (see above). Trans-1: See above. Trans-1 See above Trans-1 See above

66

receptors to localized hot spots, creating a significant air quality impact.

Noise

Transportation improvements associated with the RTP (which is the transportation component of the RCP) could increase the number of trucks, buses, and trains, which generate more noise per vehicle than automobiles. Furthermore, decreasing congestion would allow vehicular traffic on freeways and major arterials to move faster, increasing the noise produced by traffic in that corridor. Proposing new receptors in the noise impact zone would result in significant impacts.

Noise-1: Site planning shall be conducted in a manner that avoids impacts to noise sensitive areas (e.g., residences, hospitals, schools, libraries) and sensitive receptors. Sensitive receptors include both humans and noise-sensitive wildlife species. Typical noise mitigation includes either provision of buffers or noise attenuation features. The distance between the noise source and the sensitive receptors shall be adequate to reduce noise levels to acceptable levels (CNEL identified in local land use plan for humans, or generally accepted dBA for wildlife species) or other noise attenuation techniques, such as sound walls or landscaping may be used to reduce noise impacts to levels that are consistent with the local jurisdiction’s requirements. Noise-2: Land use measures such as zoning designations shall be adopted for future development on land adjacent to transportation facilities to avoid noise and vibration impacts.

Noise-1: Jurisdictions to review site development plans and ensure that requirements set forth in mitigation measure Noise-1 are met.

Noise-2: Jurisdictions to identify and adopt land use measures that would minimize noise and vibration impacts.

Noise-3: Jurisdictions to place recommended conditions on project.

Noise-4: Jurisdictions to review site plans to ensure that

Noise-1: During the application phase of future projects.

Noise-2: During future land use plan updates.

Noise-3: Placed as a condition of project approval during project design and approval stage.

Noise-4: During project design phase.

Noise-5: Jurisdictions to verify use of treatments in project design.

Noise-1 through Noise-5: Jurisdictions approving the project.

67

Noise-3: Where other methods are impractical, operational constraints shall be imposed (e.g., limits on vehicle speed, regulation of train horns). Operational constraints shall reduce the noise to the levels established by each jurisdiction for the appropriate land use. Noise-4: Avoid noise and vibration impacts by the careful siting of facilities and the use of noise-reducing berms, walls, or other barriers as deemed appropriate by local lead agency.

Noise-5: Improve architectural treatment (sound-proofing) to reduce interior noise.

requirements set forth in mitigation measures Noise-4 are met.

Noise-5: Jurisdictions to review architectural treatment plans for the use of sound-proofing strategies, where appropriate.

High density areas will potentially be subjected to elevated noise levels due to the proximity of dwelling units to transportation systems. This represents a significant impact.

Noise-1 through Noise-5: (see above).




Developments that take place within the noise contours of existing airports would have a significant impact as a result of their location.

Noise-1, Noise-2, and Noise-5: (see above).

Noise-6: Future development projects that are located in the vicinity of regional airports shall consider noise mitigation conditions recommended in the appropriate airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan.




68

Increases in rail traffic could lead to more train horns or whistles at crossings near residential areas, which can be a source of annoyance, especially at night or in early morning or evening. Proposing new receptors in the noise impact zone would result in significant noise impacts.





Increased intermodal transportation of goods would result in a subsequent increase in noise and vibration in areas adjacent to rail corridors. Additional localized impacts could occur as a result of construction activities (e.g., pile driving) or rail activities. Proposing new receptors in the noise impact zone would result in significant noise impacts.





Geology/Paleontology

The implementation of the RCP would result in development occurring within geologic formations with moderate to high paleontological resource potential. This represents a significant impact.

Paleo-1: When a construction activity will significantly disturb the unweathered bedrock in areas identified as having a moderate or high potential to support paleontological resources, a qualified researcher must be stationed on site to observe grading operations and recover scientifically valuable specimens. A certified paleontologist shall be retained (or required to be retained) by the project implementing agency prior

Paleo-1: Jurisdictions to require paleontological monitoring, when applicable, as a condition of project approval. The monitor shall submit a report to the jurisdiction summarizing the

Paleo-1: Monitor shall be present during the trenching and grading portions of the project construction.

Paleo-1: Jurisdictions approving the project.

69

to construction to establish procedures for surveillance and pre-construction salvage of exposed resources if fossil-bearing rock have the potential to be impacted. The monitor shall provide pre-construction coordination with contractors, oversee original cutting in previously undisturbed areas of sensitive formations, halt or redirect construction activities as appropriate to allow recovery of newly discovered fossil remains, and oversee fossil salvage operations and reporting. This measure shall be placed as a condition on all grading plans where grading is proposed in geologic units defined as having a moderate or high potential for containing fossils.

monitoring and findings, if any.

Hydrology/Water Quality

Future development cause erosion due to exposed graded surfaces, excavation, stock piling, or boring, and would potentially contribute to the sediment load in surface waters, potentially creating significant impacts.

Water-1: In areas where habitat for fish and other wildlife would be threatened by development, alternate drainage ways shall be sought to protect sensitive fish and wildlife populations. Heavy-duty sweepers, with disposal of collected debris in sanitary landfills, shall be used to effectively reduce annual pollutant loads. Catch basins and storm drains shall be cleaned and maintained on a regular basis.

Water-1: Jurisdictions shall review engineering and drainage plans. Post-construction maintenance activities would be written in as project conditions/mitigation measures by

Water-1: Alternate drainageway would be identified during project design. Collection of debris, cleaning and of catch basins, and cleaning of storm drains would occur post-construction.

Water-1: Project applicant and jurisdiction.

Water-2: Future project applicants and the jurisdiction approving the project.

70

Water-2: Development shall be designed to incorporate storm water improvements, both off and on site, that are implemented concurrently with the additional impacts created by developments associated with the RCP.

the jurisdiction approving the project.

Water-2: Jurisdictions to review drainage plans.

Water-2: During project design and review.

Future development would result in increased impervious surfaces that would allow pollutants to accumulate on paved surfaces that would be flushed down storm drains and into the aquatic environment (i.e., lagoons rivers, and lakes). This would constitute a significant impact.

Water-1 and Water-2: (see above). Water-1 and Water-2: (see above).

Water-1 and Water-2: (see above).


Increased demand for ground water resources created by implementation of the RCP could significantly impact existing ground water resources.

Water-3: Project proponents would be required to employ measures that may include decreasing water demand for the project or reducing water use elsewhere in the same groundwater basin as determined by the local agency. Water districts relying upon groundwater may incorporate ground water recharge or other types of safe yield strategies to maintain adequate groundwater table elevations.

Water-3: Jurisdictions to review and monitor all discretionary actions that propose groundwater withdrawal to determine if significant impacts would occur.

Water-3: During project design and review.

Water-3: Local jurisdictions and water districts.

71

Increased runoff resulting from development projects could overwhelm the existing local stormwater drainage systems. This is a significant impact that will require mitigation at the project level.

Water-1 and Water-2: (see above). Water-1 and Water-2: (see above).



Biological Resources

Future growth, including transportation projects, could potentially result in an impediment to regional wildlife movement due to habitat fragmentation; however, these regional impacts could be avoided through conditions required in adopted subarea plans. Local wildlife corridors would be affected by future growth that would not necessarily be avoided through the subarea plans. This represents a significant impact.

Bio-1: Design development projects to minimize or eliminate impacts to natural habitats and known sensitive resources. Development within large contiguous areas of habitat shall be minimized to reduce fragmentation of remaining habitat areas. Bio-2: For development projects, provide for continued movement of ground-level wildlife across rights-of-way, where the project or regional conservation plan has identified wildlife corridors through the use of appropriately-sized bridges or other openings where roads or transit features would create barriers. Bio-3: Biological mitigation shall be directed to areas that are proposed for conservation and that support similar or higher value habitat. These efforts shall be coordinated with resource agencies and regional habitat conservation and planning efforts.

Bio-1 and Bio-2: Jurisdiction to review development plans for consistency with criteria identified in Bio-1 and Bio-2.

Bio-3: Jurisdictions to review mitigation plans for consistency with Bio-3.

Bio-4 and Bio-5: Jurisdictions to review the project development plans and make recommendations to minimize impacts to oak woodlands, vernal pools, estuaries, lagoons, native

Bio-1 and Bio-2: During project design.

Bio-3: During project review.

Bio-4, Bio-5, Bio-6, and Bio-7: During project design.

Bio-8: During project review/ as part of MMRP prepared during environmental review for the project.

Bio-9: During design of drainage system/ project plan review.

Bio-1 and Bio-2: Project applicant and jurisdiction approving project.

Bio-3: Project applicant and jurisdiction approving project.

Bio-4 and Bio-5: Project applicant/ jurisdiction approving the project/ wildlife agencies.

Bio-6: Local jurisdiction/ wildlife agencies.

Bio-7: Project applicant/ Local jurisdiction approving the project.

Bio-8: Project

72

Bio-4: Minimize impacts to oak woodlands, vernal pools, estuaries, lagoons, and other regionally significant biotic resources; where unavoidable, replace with equal or better quality habitat to ensure no net loss of the resources. Bio-5: Site development to minimize alteration of streambeds and associated riparian vegetation; where unavoidable, replace with like quality or better habitat at a ratio required by regulatory agencies with the goal of no net loss to wetlands. Bio-6: Preserve open space areas identified in local, state and federal plans. Bio-7: Limit the disturbance to native vegetation to the extent practicable. Revegetate with native plants where appropriate, and, when possible, locate construction staging areas in previously disturbed areas. Bio-8: Schedule the construction of projects to avoid impacts to wildlife (e.g., avoid breeding season for sensitive species) to the extent practicable. Project-specific review shall define specific mitigation measures, such as berms and sound walls, which would reduce construction and operational noise to within regulatory standards.

vegetation, riparian vegetation and other regionally significant biotic resources. Jurisdiction, along with the wildlife agencies will oversee mitigation for any loss of wetland habitat.

Bio-6: Jurisdictions shall not approve projects that occur within identified open space preserves.

Bio-7: Jurisdictions to review the project development plans and make recommendations to minimize impacts to native vegetation. Jurisdiction, along with the wildlife agencies will oversee mitigation for any loss of sensitive habitats.

applicant and jurisdiction approving the project.

Bio-9: Jurisdiction approving the project.

73

Bio-9: Use appropriate water pollution control technology and best management practices to minimize or eliminate impacts to downstream aquatic systems.

Bio-8: Jurisdiction shall condition future project whose construction could directly or indirectly impact wildlife on compliance with Mitigation Measure Bio-8.

Bio-9: Jurisdictions to review development plans to ensure that appropriate water pollution control measures are incorporated.

Future water, sewer, and energy development projects are anticipated to have a significant impact on native vegetation, and may significantly impact regional and local wildlife movement corridors.

Bio-1 through Bio-9: (see above). Bio-1 through Bio-9: (see above).

Bio-1 through Bio-9: (see above).


Sand placement, as a means of shoreline preservation, can have a significant effect on wildlife nurseries. SANDAG is currently monitoring the effects of the regional beach sand project, and data indicate that no long term

Bio-10: Ensure that future coastal projects are sited and designed as to minimize impacts to marine resources. Any unavoidable impacts to significant marine resources will be mitigated to below a level of significance in accordance with the

Bio-10: Jurisdictions to review development plan to insure impacts to marine resources are

Bio-10: Prior to project approval.

Bio-10: Local jurisdiction approving the project.

74

adverse impacts to marine biological resources have occurred since the project was completed.

requirements of the local jurisdiction and appropriate agency (e.g., CDFC, USFWS, NMFS).

minimized. When impacts to these resources are unavoidable, the jurisdiction shall require mitigation that results in no net loss of habitat value.

The development of seawater desalination facilities as a means of diversifying the regional water supply has the potential to significantly affect marine biological resources.

Bio-10: (see above). Bio-10: (see above).

Bio-10: (see above).

Bio-10 : (see above).

Impacts to aquatic resources could be potentially significant; however, through adherence to existing federal, state and local regulations (requiring no net loss) most of the impacts are considered reduced to below a level of significance. Some aquatic resources are not protected by existing federal, state and local regulations; thus, any impacts to those resources are significant.

Bio-9 and Bio-10: (see above). Bio-10: (see above).



Reduction of the number of rare, endangered, sensitive and/or special status plants and animals; thus, these impacts are significant and unmitigated. Site avoidance of all impacts to rare or endangered species can not be achieved in a regional plan.

Bio-1 through Bio-10: (see above). Bio-1 through Bio-10: (see above).



75

Because San Diego supports such a diversity of these resources, it is unavoidable that some individuals of some species would be lost as a result of providing housing and associated infrastructure.

Cultural Resources

Due to the scale of the Propose Project, and the long history of Native American habitations in the region, future grading and construction activities are expected to result in significant impacts to archaeological and historical resources along the identified SGOA.

Cult-1: A review of literature and historic maps, a records search, and field survey to identify the presence or absence of cultural resources for each future development project shall be undertaken if the jurisdiction determines these studies are warranted. Prior to any development where possible impacts to significant cultural resources may occur, each cultural resource will need to be evaluated through testing programs to determine the significance/importance prior to determining mitigation of proposed impacts or providing recommendations for preservation. Historic resources may require analysis by a qualified historian or an architectural historian. Sites identified as significant/important will need to be avoided by development impacts or mitigated by completion of a data recovery program conducted in compliance with CEQA and agency guidelines. Site avoidance and preservation can

Cult-1 and Cult-2: Jurisdictions to require cultural resource impact studies, when applicable, from future project applicants. Jurisdiction will review the study and oversee implementation of any identified cultural resource mitigation measures. Any resources that are recovered, identified, or destroyed shall be detailed in a report.

Cult-3: Jurisdictions shall write curation in as a condition of

Cult-1: During CEQA review for individual future projects.

Cult-2: Upon preparation of next General Plan update.

Cult-3: During identification of project conditions and mitigation measures (environmental review).

Cult-4: SANDAG shall prepare the manual within four years of approval of the RCP.

Cult-5: Upon

Cult-1: Jurisdictions are responsible for the requirements of a cultural resources impact study, when applicable, from future project applicants.

Cult-2: Local jurisdiction.

Cult-3: Local jurisdiction.

Cult-4: SANDAG will be responsible for the preparation, approval and distribution of the best management practices manual.

Cult-5: Local jurisdictions.

76

include capping the site with gravel or construction fabric and 16 to 18 inches of sterile fill soil. Sites proposed for capping shall be indexed so future researchers have reasonable knowledge of the resources that have been protected. Capped sites can be landscaped with native, shallow rooted plants that are compatible with the surrounding biologic habitat. Passive uses for capped sites include trails, picnic and play areas, parking lots, and tennis or volleyball courts. A data recovery program for archaeological sites consists of excavation of a percentage of the site (determined in consultation with the local agency) to provide information necessary to answer significant research questions. Cult-2: Develop measures to provide maximum avoidance and minimization of significant archaeological and historical resources during development. Cult-3: For future development projects, lead agencies shall integrate curation of all archaeological and/or historical artifacts and associated records in a regional center focused on the care, management and use of archaeological collections. Artifacts

project approval for any projects that will remove significant archeological resources.

Cult-4: SANDAG to prepare, approve, and distribute manual.

Cult-5: Jurisdictions shall review current policies on historic preservation, if applicable and modify these policies to reflect the requirements of mitigation measure Cult-5.

Cult-6: Project applicant will be required to retain qualified architectural historian to document the structure.

preparation of next General Plan update.

Cult-6: Prior to removal of any historic structures.

Cult-6: Project applicant and jurisdiction responsible for approving project.

77

include material recovered from all phases of work, including the initial survey, testing, indexing, data recovery, and monitoring. Curated materials shall be maintained with respect for cultures and available to future generations for research. Cult-4: Include a measure in the Urban Design Best Practices Manual requiring the integration of historical resources into the design of future developments within the SGOA. Cult 5: Local jurisdictions shall develop measures to encourage adaptive reuse of existing historical structures within the SGOA. Cult-6: Significant historic structures and buildings that will be demolished as a part of future projects will need to be documented by a qualified architectural historian. When local jurisdictions have more strict standards regarding the treatment of historic structures, the local jurisdiction’s policies shall be used.

Future grading and construction activities could result in significant impacts to human remains.

Cult-1 through Cult-3: (see above). Cult-1 through Cult-3: (see above).

Cult-1 through Cult-3: (see above).

Cult-1 through Cult-3: (see above).

78

Public Services/Utility Systems

The increase in population may result in the need for new or expanded water facilities. This represents a significant impact.

ServSys-1: Water, sewer/wastewater, and landfill providers shall update plans to ensure adequate facilities are available to meet projected locations and intensities of growth. ServSys-2: Future construction shall incorporate water efficient appliances (e.g., low-flush toilets and shower heads) and xeriscaping and/or drought tolerant plant species.

ServSys-1: Local service providers shall update their plans to reflect future locations of intensified growth.

ServSys-2: Local jurisdiction to condition projects to require water efficient appliances and xeriscaping.

ServSys-1: During next master plan update.

ServSys-2: During plan review.

.

ServSys-1: Individual service provider.

ServSys-2: Jurisdiction approving the project.

The increase in population may result in a significant impact on water supply

ServSys-1 and ServSys-2 (see above).

ServSys-4: Future development projects will be required to prepare project-level environmental analyses, including an analysis of water supply and incorporate measures to reduce demand.

ServSys-1 and ServSys-2: (see above).

ServSys-4: Local jurisdiction to require, review and approve the water supply analysis if in compliance with Mitigation Measure ServSys-4.


ServSys-4: During environmental review for development projects.


ServSys-4: Jurisdiction approving the project. Local water provider will play a role in the water supply analysis.

The increase in population may result in the need for new or expanded sewer/wastewater treatment facilities. This represents a potentially significant

ServSys-1 and ServSys-2 (see above).




79

impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require expansion of sewer/wastewater treatment facilities, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded facilities. The increase in population will result increase the rate of waste going to the landfill. Since many of the local landfills will reach capacity during the lifetime of the RCP, this represents a potentially significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require expansion of landfill facilities, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded facilities.

ServSys-1: (see above). ServSys-3: Recycled materials shall be used in future construction.

ServSys-1: (see above).

ServSys-3: Jurisdictions will adopt policies which encourage the use of recycled materials.


ServSys-3: During next General Plan Update

ServSys-1 (see above).

ServSys-3: Local jurisdictions.

The increase in population results in the need for new or expanded school facilities. This represents a significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require the expansion of school facilities, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded facilities.

ServSys-5: Future projects shall be required to pay School Mitigation Fees pursuant to California Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995. These fees will assist in funding school services within the applicable school district.

ServSys-5: Local jurisdiction to collect fees.

ServSys-5: Local jurisdiction to collect fees prior to issuance of grading permits.

ServSys-5: Future project applicants and local jurisdiction.

The increase in population will require new and expanded police and sheriff facilities and additional police officers and sheriff’s

ServSys-6: Future projects shall be required to pay public facility finance fees in accordance with the requirements of the jurisdiction in

ServSys-6: Local jurisdiction to collect fees.

ServSys-6: Local jurisdiction to collect fees prior to issuance of

ServSys-6: Jurisdiction to collect fees prior to issuance of

80

deputies. This represents a significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require the expansion of police and sheriff services, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded facilities.

which the project is proposed. These fees will assist in funding additional police, sheriff, and fire protection services, as well as expanding and park/recreation services.

grading permits. grading permits.

The increase in population will require new and expanded fire protection facilities and additional fire protection staff. This represents a significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require the expansion of fire protection services, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for new or expanded services.

ServSys-6: (see above). ServSys-6: (see above).



The increase in population results in the need for additional park and recreation services. This represents a significant impact. General population growth within San Diego County would require the expansion of park and recreation facilities and services, but implementation of the RCP further increases the need for these new services.

ServSys-6: (see above). ServSys-6: (see above).



81

CONGESTION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

Transit Access to Light Rail/Commuter Rail/Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Transit System/Service Expansion ! Local ! Express System/Service Operational Improvements ! Increased Service Frequency ! Decreased Travel Time Subscription Services Car Shipping Station Amenities & Public Transit Facility Improvements

Land Use Development Along Transit Corridors Development Around Transit Nodes Mixed-use Developments Locally Serving Commercial Interconnected Street Networks & Pedestrian Facilities

Travel Demand Management (TDM) On-Site Child Care/Cafeteria/Deli/Gym/Fitness Facilities Transit/Alternative Modes Marketing Trip Reduction Programs & Ordinances Transportation Management Associations Bicycle/Pedestrian Allowances Distributed & Remote Work Centers/Video Conferencing Alternative Work Schedules/Telework/Work-at-Home Carpool/Vanpool/Transit Programs Carpool/Vanpool Subsidies Parking Restrictions/Reduced Minimums and Maximums/Area-Wide Caps Parking Charges & Carpool/Vanpool Preferential Parking Transit Pass Subsidies Guaranteed Ride Home Program

Traffic Systems Management (TSM) Improved Traffic Control Devices ! Traffic Signal Coordination ! Adaptive Signal Control ! Signal Improvements Local Traffic Management (Monitoring and Control) & Arterial Monitoring Special Event Management Incident Management Commercial Vehicle Restrictions Advanced Traveler Information Value/Congestion Pricing Peak Period On-Street Parking Restrictions

82

Capital Park & Ride Lots (Transit) HOV/HOT Lanes/Access Roadway Widening Intersection Improvements Bicycle Facilities Pedestrian Facilities Bus Priority Treatments on Surface Streets Grade Separation/Urban Interchange

FINDING REGARDING LOCATION AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORD

The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which SANDAG’s Findings of Fact pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act are based are located at 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, California 92101. The custodian of these documents is Rob Rundle, Principal Regional Planner. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code § 21081.6(a)(2) and 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15091(e). For purposes of CEQA at these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the Project includes, but is not limited to the following: • The Notice of Preparation and all other public notices issued by SANDAG and in conjunction

with the Project. • The Draft and Final EIRs, including appendices and technical studies included or referenced in

the Draft and Final EIRs. • All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the 45-day public

comment period on the Draft EIR. • All comments and correspondence submitted to SANDAG with respect to the Project. • The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project. • All Findings and resolutions adopted by SANDAG decision makers in connection with the

Project, and all documents cited or referred to therein. • All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to

the Project prepared by P&D Environmental, consultants to SANDAG, including the subconsultants retained by P&D Environmental.

• All documents and information submitted to SANDAG by responsible, trustee, or other public

agencies, or by individuals or organizations, in connection with the Project, up through the date the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the Project.

• Minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public meetings, and public

hearings held by SANDAG, in connection with the Project.

83

• Any documentary or other evidence submitted to SANDAG at such information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings.

• Matters of common knowledge to SANDAG, including, but not limited to federal, state, and

local laws and regulations. • Any documents expressly cited in these Findings, in addition to those cited above. • Any other materials required to be in the Record of Proceedings by Public Resources Code

§ 21167.6(e).


I-15 INTERREGIONAL PARTNERSHIP (I-15 IRP) - FINAL REPORT

Introduction Funded by a grant from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), the I-15 Interregional Partnership has been working for the past three years to develop strategies that are intended to address the jobs-housing imbalance between the San Diego region and southwestern Riverside County, and the effects it has had on transportation and other regional issues. The work of the I-15 IRP has been directed by two committees: the I-15 Interregional Partnership Technical Working Group, which includes public and private sector staff from the San Diego and southwestern Riverside regions; and the I-15 Interregional Partnership Policy Committee, which includes the members of SANDAG's Borders Committee and elected officials from southwestern Riverside County. Staff from SANDAG and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) have managed the project since its inception.

The Final Report for the I-15 IRP proposes 23 strategies to address the existing jobs-housing imbalance. These strategies have been organized into four categories: housing (5), economic development (2), transportation (14), and program-related (2). The I-15 IRP Technical Working Group and Policy Committee have developed these strategies during their meetings over the past couple of years. • The housing strategies are designed to

increase the supply of housing in the San Diego region, especially for moderate income families (who make up the bulk of the households that have moved to southwestern Riverside County).

• The economic development strategies are designed to improve job growth in southwestern Riverside County through new employment opportunities in the cluster industries that drive the bi-regional economies and to facilitate greater collaboration between Riverside economic development agencies (EDAs), as well as between Riverside and San Diego EDAs.

• The transportation strategies focus on improved transportation facilities and services in the corridor to meet the growing demand.

• The program strategies are intended to assist in the implementation of the housing, economic development, and transportation strategies. These strategies focus on legislative support and community outreach.

Discussion The I-15 IRP is a voluntary compact between local elected officials representing SANDAG and the WRCOG. The I-15 IRP was formed in

Recommendation At its June 18, 2004 meeting, the I-15 IRP Policy Committee agreed by consensus to forward the Final Report to the California Department of Housing and Community Development and to the SANDAG Board of Directors and Western Riverside Council of Governments Executive Committee for approval. The Board is being asked to approve the I-15 IRP Final Report.

2

SANDAG Board of Directors July 23, 2004 – Agenda Item # 12 (APPROVE)

2001 to address the imbalance of jobs and housing that has developed between the San Diego region and southwestern Riverside County during the past ten years, and the resulting impacts on freeway congestion. The project was one of eight funded throughout the state by grants from HCD. Both WRCOG and SANDAG contributed matching funds (staff time) to the project. The three-year work program included the preparation of an Existing Conditions Report (January 2003), initiation of an ongoing public outreach program (December 2002 – June 2004), strategy development and evaluation (January 2003 – March 2004), completion of a Short-Range Strategy Report that focused on transportation strategies that could be implemented immediately (February 2003), and a draft of the final I-15 IRP Report (March 2004). The attached Final Report includes 23 strategies proposed to address the jobs-housing imbalance between the two regions and its effects, and an implementation and monitoring program. Based on the recommendation of the I-15 IRP Technical Working Group, the I-15 IRP Policy Committee accepted the “Draft Final I-15 Interregional Partnership Report” for distribution and comment on March 26, 2004. The draft report was distributed to agencies, organizations, and interested parties in the southwestern Riverside and San Diego regions, and the comment period on the report ended on May 20, 2004. Presentations about the draft report were made to a number of organizations and agencies, including several chambers of commerce, EDAs, and local jurisdictions in both counties. Changes to the report were made based on comments received during the public review period and are included in the final report. In addition to the presentations noted above, the strategies and project were reviewed by SANDAG's Transportation Committee, Borders

Committee, Regional Planning Committee, Regional Planning Technical Working Group, and Regional Housing Task Force. The Transportation Committee reviewed the Draft Final Report on June 4, 2004. Next Steps The I-15 IRP project is included in the FY 2005 Overall Work Programs (OWP) for SANDAG and WRCOG. Work on this project will be funded in part by a $240,000 partnership grant from Caltrans. SANDAG was given notice of the award of this grant on July 14. Work on the project will focus on strategy implementation. SANDAG's FY 2005 Overall Work Program calls for pursuit of strategies that focus on increased economic development opportunities in the interregional border area, more moderate income housing in the San Diego region, and improved transportation accessibility between the two regions. It also includes the preparation of an economic cluster analysis to assist in the coordination of mutually beneficial economic development policies between the two regions. This work will be overseen by the I-15 IRP Technical Working Group and I-15 Policy Committee. The Board will be updated on a regular basis as progress is made on implementation of the various strategies. GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director Attachment

Key Staff Contact: Susan Baldwin, (619) 699-1943; [email protected]

Funds are budgeted in Work Element #3003300

jde

Bound copies of the I-15 Interregional Strategy may be obtained by contacting SANDAG's Clerk of the Board at (619) 699-1912.

Date post:	23-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

COVER - FINAL · Microsoft Word - COVER - FINAL.doc Author: jde Created Date: 7/16/2004 9:22:56 PM...

Documents