The purpose of the Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation

Issues (Working Group) is to serve as a forum for tribal governments in the region to

discuss and coordinate transportation issues of mutual concern with the various public

planning agencies in the region, including SANDAG, Caltrans, the County of

San Diego, and the transit operators. In partnership with the

Reservation Transportation Authority, the Working Group will monitor and provide

input on the implementation of the strategies and planning activities related to

transportation mutually developed through the San Diego Regional Tribal Summit.

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA

INTERAGENCY TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP ON TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION ISSUES The Working Group may take action on any item appearing on this agenda.

Wednesday, July 24, 2013 10 a.m. to 12 noon (Refreshments hosted by the Sycuan Tribal Council) Sycuan Golf and Tennis Resort Magnolia Room 3007 Dehesa Road El Cajon, CA 92019 Staff Contact: Jane Clough, Tribal Liaison (619) 699-1909 jane.clough@sandag.org

TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION WORKSHOP

2

DIRECTIONS TO MEETING LOCATION

Sycuan Golf and Tennis Resort Magnolia Banquet Room

3007 Dehesa Road El Cajon, CA 92019

Directions from San Diego’s North County

Take Interstate 5 (I-5) South to Interstate

805 (I-805) or Interstate 15 South to I-805

Then go East on Interstate 8 (I-8)

Exit to Second Avenue and continue onto

Jamacha Road

Go left on Washington Avenue

Follow Washington Avenue through

El Cajon where it turns into Dehesa Road

Continue on Dehesa Road 2.2 miles to the

Sycuan Golf and Tennis Resort entrance

Directions from Highway 94

Go East on Highway 94 (94) past

Spring Valley until the 94 turns into

Jamacha Road

Continue straight and turn right on

Willow Glen Road

Continue on Dehesa Road 2.2 miles to the

Sycuan Golf and Tennis Resort entrance

Directions from Alpine, El Centro, and Yuma

Take I-8 West to 2nd Street (in the city of

El Cajon) and take a left

Take another left on Washington Avenue

Follow Washington Avenue through

El Cajon where it turns into Dehesa Road

Continue on Dehesa Road 2.2 miles to the

Sycuan Golf and Tennis Resort entrance

INTERAGENCY TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP ON TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION ISSUES

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

ITEM # RECOMMENDATION

1. WELCOME BY SYCUAN TRIBAL COUNCIL AND SELF INTRODUCTIONS INFORMATION

The Sycuan Tribal Council will welcome the members and public to their tribal nation.

2. PUBLIC/MEMBER COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS INFORMATION

Members of the public shall have the opportunity to address the working group on any issue within the jurisdiction of SANDAG that is not on this agenda. Anyone desiring to speak shall reserve time by completing a “Request to Speak” form and giving it to the Working Group coordinator prior to speaking. Public speakers should notify the Working Group coordinator if they have a handout for distribution to Working Group members. Public speakers are limited to three minutes or less per person. Working Group members also may provide information and announcements under this agenda item.

+3. APPROVAL OF THE MEETING SUMMARIES (Mahoss Sass, Working Group Co-Chair) APPROVE

+A January 16, 2013, meeting hosted by the Barona Band of Mission Indians +B March 27, 2013, meeting hosted by the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians

CONSENT

+4. CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2040 - LISTENING SESSION INFORMATION

The Caltrans Native American Liaison Branch and Office of State Planning cordially invite you to an upcoming Listening Session regarding the California Transportation Plan 2040, California's long-range transportation plan, and two statewide modal plans currently under development. Attached is the invitation flier for Tuesday, July 30, 2013, 10:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. hosted by the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians at the Harrah’s Rincon Hotel and Casino

+5. CALTRANS NATIVE AMERICAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE QUARTERLY MEETING

INFORMATION

The next quarterly meeting of the Native American Advisory Council (NAAC) will take place on July 31, 2013, in Valley Center, California. This is an open meeting and anyone is welcome to attend the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians at the Harrah’s Rincon Hotel and Casino. Attached is the invitation flier for anyone who is interested in attending. The NAAC meetings alternate between Northern, Central, and Southern California.

3

SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE REGIONAL PLAN TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION WORKSHOP

+6. SERIES 13 REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST: DRAFT SUBREGIONAL FORECAST (Kirby Brady, SANDAG)

INFORMATION

The purpose of the 2050 Regional Growth Forecast (Regional Forecast) is to provide a starting point for regional planning. The Regional Forecast is not intended to be a prescription for future growth. Rather, the Regional Forecast is intended to show possible future development patterns based on regional projections and local input. SANDAG staff will share the process and outcome of the Regional Forecast conducted for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan.

7. DISCUSSION ON 2050 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN NETWORK (Elisa Arias, SANDAG) DISCUSSION

San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan is in its initial stage of development. Staff will discuss with the Working Group members the 2050 Regional Transportation Network and initiate a dialogue on projects of tribal significance in the existing plan or potential projects for consideration as the current plan develops.

+8. TRIBAL LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANS (Jane Clough, SANDAG) DISCUSSION

Eight tribes included their Long-Range Tribal Transportation Plans in the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan (2050 RTP) for information purposes. This item will focus on what the elements of an RTP are and how to ensure that as many tribes as possible include theirs in San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan.

+9. DRAFT TRANSPORTATION PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA (Rachel Kennedy, SANDAG)

DISCUSSION

The SANDAG Board of Directors accepted the San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan vision and goals on May 10, 2013. In past RTPs SANDAG has utilized project evaluation criteria and performance measures informed by these goals as elements of a multistep process to develop the revenue constrained multimodal transportation network. SANDAG will be updating the criteria from the previously adopted regional plan, the 2050 RTP and its Sustainable Communities Strategy, to be used for developing a prioritized list of transportation projects for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. The Working Group will be asked to provide input on items to be considered in the update of the transportation project evaluation criteria.

10. TOPICS FOR NEXT MEETING AND ADJOURNMENT (Coleen Clementson, SANDAG)

DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION

The Working Group is asked to discuss potential topics for the next quarterly meeting which should take place in September. The Working Group is asked to discuss the location or host for the next meeting. As the July meeting was in the south, it is recommended that the next meeting be held in the north.

+ next to an agenda item indicates an attachment

4

San Diego Association of Governments

INTERAGENCY TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP ON TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION ISSUES

July 24, 2013

AGENDA ITEM NO.: 3A

Action Requested: APPROVE

APPROVAL OF MEETING SUMMARY FOR JANUARY 16, 2013 File Number 3400500

Tribes present: BARONA, VIEJAS, SYCUAN, LA JOLLA, JAMUL, IIPAY, PALA, RINCON, SAN PASQUAL

Call to order: 10:05 a.m.

1. WELCOME BY BARONA TRIBAL COUNCIL AND SELF-INTRODUCTIONS

Barona Tribal Chairman Clifford LaChappa welcomed the Working Group to Barona and made opening remarks. Barona Tribal Elder ‘Boxie’ Phoenix gave the blessing. Working Group members and members of the audience introduced themselves.

2. PUBLIC AND MEMBER COMMENTS

Tom Bumgartner of Valley Center noted the existence of his non-profit transit organization which is a member of Facilitating Access Coordinated Transportation and provides transit assistance to seniors and the disabled in the rural areas of North County.

Bill Oznicky, North County Transit District (NCTD), shared an issue that has arisen with the California Highway Patrol (CHP). The NCTD needs to make services changes because the CHP will not allow 40-foot buses to go along the route that is now the 388/389. This route was enhanced with Tribal Transit grant funding by the Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA). This ruling is making it difficult to maintain the route as planned. The route doesn’t work with shorter buses. NCTD is working with the CHP to see how this can be resolved.

Adam Geisler, La Jolla, noted that it would be good to obtain the ridership to show that this is not just tribal members using this route, but people going to and from work. Tony Largo, RTA, noted that his agency has made recommendations. It was also noted by Caltrans that the State Route 76 (SR 76) was originally a county road that was upgraded. There are broader problems on the SR 76 that should be analyzed. There needs to be road improvements along the SR 76 to improve the safety and accessibility.

Action: The Working Group would like to have the CHP attend the next meeting to explain the situation and discuss any possible options to keep the service as is without violating the ruling.

Mr. Geisler mentioned that Native Hire, a job search engine coordinated by the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association (SCTCA), has 15 new positions available at Qualcomm.

5

3. APPROVAL OF THE MEETING SUMMARY FROM SEPTEMBER 26, 2012

The meeting summary from September 26, 2012, at San Pasqual was approved. A motion was made by Dave Toler, San Pasqual, and seconded by Mr. Geisler.

CONSENT

4. REGIONAL PLAN DRAFT PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN

5. NOTICE OF PREPARATION – PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE 2050 REGIONAL PLAN

6. UPDATE ON TRIBAL SAFETY PROJECTS LED BY NATIONAL INDIAN JUSTICE CENTER

REPORTS

7. UPDATE FROM THE BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

Ryan Morris, Pacific Region Office of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), updated the Working Group members on the status of Tribal Transportation Programs through the BIA. At this time they still don’t have the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) allocations. Many tribes are facing issues with unidentified routes. There are several stimulus funding projects that have wrapped up, including the Santa Ysabel project being done by the RTA. Regarding the High-Priority Program, under MAP-21 it is a separate program under the Tribal Transportation Program (new name under MAP-21). The BIA understands that it will be funded, but has to wait for the Appropriations Committee.

Discussion

Elder Phoenix noted that Barona had a stimulus project through the RTA and that Springer and Associates was the contractor. He stated that Barona was not satisfied with Springer and Associates’ work and they should be called on it. Mr. Largo responded that there is a two-year warranty on their work and that if not notified immediately it could be the RTA that has to absorb the cost. This needs to be corrected. David Toler, San Pasqual, noted that this should be covered in insurance under ‘errors and omissions.’

8. UPDATE FROM NATIVE AMERICAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO CALTRANS

Mr. Geisler represents the Southern California tribes on the Caltrans Native American Advisory Committee (NAAC). He reported out on the following issues covered at the last NAAC meeting in Santa Rosa:

• There is a proposal to build a traffic calming roundabout at the SR 76 and County Highway S6. La Jolla opposes this project.

• Caltrans Environmental Justice planning grants are available. The deadline is in April. Tribes should look to these grants for assistance in planning.

6

• There is a white paper on tribal transportation issues for California being developed to create a

foundation for support when the next authorization comes. MAP-21 is a four-year bill, but has a two-year implementation. When the paper is done it should be brought to the Working Group for review.

• Cynthia Gomez, Native American Liaison in Governor’s Office, is looking to create Native American positions in the State Cabinet.

• New rule regarding bridge inspections. Some bridges are the responsibility of the BIA and now tribes are responsible.

• Safe Routes to School. Tribes who live outside the radius are not eligible for planning funds; there is a rural resource kit, but tribes aren’t eligible. This needs to be addressed.

• Chris Willigus, North State Transportation for Economic Development, wants to see how SANDAG has worked with tribes and developed collaborations.

• Tribal Employee Rights Office Policy – still working on adjustments.

• The Tribal Transportation Assistance Program now covers western states including Hawaii and possibly Arizona.

• The Memorandum of Understanding between Tribes and Caltrans is being reviewed in Sacramento. This is the document to allow tribes to contract directly with the state on certain functions.

9. UPDATE FROM THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TRIBAL CHAIRMEN’S ASSOCIATION REPRESENTATIVE TO SANDAG TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

Elder Phoenix has stepped down as the SCTCA representative to the SANDAG Transportation Committee. He remarked how important that nexus is for understanding, on a regular basis, issues going on in the region that affect tribes. He noted that the Working Group has done a lot over the last few years and should continue to be an advocate for tribal issues in transportation. He noted that although he stepped down, he will continue to be involved in the Working Group. Chairman Mark Romero of Mesa Grande is now the SCTCA representative on the SANDAG Transportation Committee and he hopes that this connection remains strong.

10. UPDATE ON THE REGIONAL PLAN PROCESS

As SANDAG embarks on the development of the Regional Plan, the agency - in collaboration with the SCTCA - developed a Tribal Consultation Plan for engaging the region’s tribal nations in this process. SANDAG Tribal Liaison Jane Clough briefed the Working Group on the details of the Consultation Plan and the next steps, as well as discussed general milestones of the development of the plan and the role of tribal nations in that process.

7

11. UPDATE ON FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION TRIBAL TRANSIT GRANTS (AMERICAN

RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT FUNDING)

RTA has received funding from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Tribal Transit grant program each year since Fiscal Year 2007. Submitted and received a grant for $1.2 million for capital improvements associated with the FTA Tribal Transit grant program. Mr. Largo will update the Working Group on implementation of this grant. Mr. Largo briefed the Working Group on the FTA Tribal Transit capital improvement project, which is part of the stimulus package.

• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Project – Bus stop construction. The stop preparation is done. Waiting for shelter and landscaping. Also working with Pauma (February) on transit route.

• Permits hard to get from Caltrans. ‘Everyone on Caltrans’ staff, including the janitors, vetted them.

• If you get a grant you need to give yourself lots of lead time.

• $1.2 million. Cost doubled at P&R from $220,000 but it doubled. Got a one-year extension.

• Will do some bus stop improvements.

• Got Fiscal Year 2012 Tribal Transit funding - $425,000 Operational (support the 388/389).

12. CALTRANS TRANSIT GRANTS AVAILABLE

Connery Cepeda, Caltrans District 11, briefed the Working Group on the Caltrans availability of remaining SAFETEA-LU funds for three federal transit grant programs:

• FTA Section 5310, Elderly and Disabled Specialized Transit Program, estimated funding is $13 million.

• FTA Section 5316, Job Access Reverse Commute, estimated funding is $1.88 million.

• FTA Section 5317, New Freedom, estimated funding is $1.43 million.

The money allocated by Caltrans allows private, non-profit organizations and public agencies under certain circumstances to purchase accessible vehicles; other transportation equipment; and capital projects and operating expenses to serve the elderly, individuals with special needs, and the low-income population in California.

13. TOPICS FOR NEXT MEETING AND ADJOURNMENT

The Working Group discussed possible topics for the next meeting, including:

• SR 76 study/bus length issue

• Project Evaluation Criteria for the next Regional Plan

• Update on the statewide tribal white paper

8

Rincon offered to host the next meeting and the meeting date selected was March 27, 2013, at 10 a.m.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:07 p.m.

Attachments: 1. Tribal Working Group Attendance for January 16, 2013

2. Public Attendance Sheet for January 16, 2013

9

Attachment 1

10

11

12

Attachment 2

13

July 24, 2013

AGENDA ITEM NO.: 3B

Action Requested: APPROVE

APPROVAL OF THE MEETING SUMMARY FROM MARCH 26, 2013 File Number 3400500

Tribes present: BARONA, LA JOLLA, MESA, PAUMA, RINCON

1. WELCOME BY RINCON TRIBAL COUNCIL AND SELF INTRODUCTIONS

Chairman Bo Mazzetti, Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, welcomed the Working Group to the Rincon. Rincon Tribal Councilmember Frank Mazzetti led the blessing. Self-introductions were made.

2. PUBLIC/MEMBER COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS

There were no public comments or communications.

3. APPROVAL OF THE MEETING SUMMARY FROM JANUARY 16, 2013

A quorum was not met so this item was tabled.

4. TITLE VI DEMOGRAPHICS QUESTION

As a recipient of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding, SANDAG is required to collect information regarding the members of this Working Group. Information collected will be reported to the FTA without names or other identifying information. As participation in the meeting was limited, SANDAG staff suggested sending out a Survey Monkey to gather this data.

5. UPDATE FROM THE BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) distributes the majority of transportation funding to tribal nations nationwide. There is a Pacific Region office in Sacramento that manages California and the Southern California Agency located in Riverside. Steve Wilkie, Regional Roads Manager, shared the following updates with the Working Group.

Mr. Wilkie briefed the Working Group on the impact of Sequestration on the Tribal Transportation Program. He noted that the programs are funded by different sources but some financing tools might be affected.

In relation to the funding distribution for tribal transportation projects there are draft numbers, but some issues that need to be cleared up before they are finalized. The BIA Pacific Region will convene the tribes as soon as those numbers are finalized. This will probably be in late April.

One issue is the High Priority Projects (HPP) Program. This program probably won’t be funded for 2013 (approximately $30 to $35 million). This funding will go into the general fund, but will be for tribes. The Bridge Funding and HPP are not coming out of the Tribal Transportation Plan (TTP). There is $24 million for all tribes. HPP will probably be funded next year. The Pacific Region office

14

will be helping to develop projects for the HPP Program. Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act has created more flexibility for the tribes. The Director of the Pacific Region, Amy Dutschke is intent on making sure tribes have the tools they need to get their work done. She noted that when funding is predictable and the volatility is taken out it is easier to plan and have successful projects.

Discussion

Chairman Mazzetti, disagreed. The Bridge Funding and HPP Program are really important to California tribes. The changes will impact California tribes. He requested that the BIA clarify the issue. Mr. Wilkie replied that there is a lot of misinformation out there. It appears that there are big cuts, but it might not actually be the case. It is necessary to get the right numbers. On the other hand, he agreed that it was a guarantee before and now it is not.

Chairman Mark Romero, Mesa Grande, asked if this funding was discretionary. Mr. Wilkie replied that it is statutory funding. These funds are, however, flexible once they get to the tribes. There are use-it-or-lose-it clauses so the money not spent will go back and should be used for other tribal- related efforts.

6. REPORT FROM CALTRANS NATIVE AMERICAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Chairman Mazzetti represents the Southern California tribes on the Caltrans Native American Advisory Committee (NAAC). He reported out on the latest meeting held March 20, 2013, in Santa Rosa.

Issues discussed at the March NAAC included:

Round abouts: There is a mandate in California for Caltrans to look at options for traffic calming. One of those strategies is the use of roundabouts. Caltrans is considering the alternative of a roundabout on County Highway S6 in Valley Center. Some tribes in the region do not agree with this strategy.

Gus Silva, Caltrans Native American Liaison, suggested using the Working Group as a forum for community discussion on this approach.

Chairman Mazzetti also reported the new State Secretary of Transportation, Brian Kelly, announced that the High Speed Rail Authority would come under the Department of Transportation, as well as the California Transportation Commission, California Highway Patrol (CHP), and other entities, effective July 1, 2013.

40-foot Buses: There was continued discussion related to a possible waiver for buses over 40 feet on the State Route 76 (SR 76). Mr. Silva noted that the day before the last Working Group meeting the CHP inspected the fleet.

In late January the North County Transit District (NCTD) sent a letter regarding the restriction. NCTD can operate buses up to 40 feet. The bike rack is the issue, it can’t be longer than 36 inches. Mr. Silva is going to meet with the CHP and get its perspective on how the issue came up. He noted there is a new sign that says, “no vehicle longer than 40 feet.” The area commander says that NCTD is pursuing an exemption for a section of the SR 76. Not a whole waiver; just for NCTD. Caltrans is trying to find out why this is an issue now since they’ve been driving those buses for decades.

15

Tony Largo, Reservation Transportation Authority, asked why this rule was being imposed on NCTD when there are other types of vehicles like school buses and Recreational Vehicles that are over 40 feet also and are not affected.

Mr. Silva noted that Caltrans is trying to resolve this miscommunication.

7. REPORT FROM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TRIBAL CHAIRMAN’S ASSOCIATION REPRESENTATIVE TO SANDAG TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

Chairman Romero represents the Southern California Tribal Chairman’s Association (SCTCA) on the SANDAG Transportation Committee. He reported out to the Working Group on issues that have come before the Transportation Committee which may be of interest to the tribal community. He briefed the Working Group on the March 26, 2013, workshop with tribal leaders as an orientation session on the role of SANDAG in the region and an overview of the policy areas that may be of tribal concern in the San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. He shared with the Working Group that the SCTCA and SANDAG will be distributing a survey on policy issues to all of the tribes in the region to determine which are of most importance to discuss further. He also updated the Working Group the Environmental Mitigation Program and the issue of determining economic benefit. Finally, he noted that closed-circuit televisions are being installed in Trolley stations all around the region to improve transit safety.

8. UPDATE ON TRIBAL SAFETY PROJECTS LED BY NATIONAL INDIAN JUSTICE CENTER

The National Indian Justice Center (NIJC) has two new tribal transportation safety projects: (1) Road Safety Audit funded by a grant from the Caltrans Environmental Justice Program; and (2) Pedestrian Safety Audit Program funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Accelerating Safety Activities Program. NIJC briefed the Working Group on the status of this grant-funded project.

Kelly Myers, Project Manager for these NIJC projects, provided an update on the Road Safety Audits project. In April they will begin filming in the region. They are Beta testing the online classroom now. Ms. Myers also mentioned that NIJC can provide technical assistance to tribes as the Western Tribal Technical Assistance Program (TTAP). They are expanding the scope of tribal technical assistance. They also can pay for travel and tuition fees for conferences related to tribal transportation.

9. SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE REGIONAL PLAN UPDATE

In February, SANDAG launched the next regional plan, San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan, at its Board of Director’s retreat. Staff briefed the Working Group on the timeline and activities called out in the plan, reviewed the Tribal Consultation Plan, and outlined the steps related to tribal transportation that the Working Group will be responsible for through the process that contribute to the tribal consultation process.

Coming up will be the development of a survey to gage tribal interest in policy issue areas and workshops will be planned for early fall based on the results of the survey. On tribal transportation, the tribes should be reviewing their existing long-range plans and considering updating them for this process.

16

10. TRIBES AND REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANS

The NIJC is the TTAP for the Western Region. Ms. Myers discussed tribal transportation planning and the connections between Long-Range Tribal Transportation Plans and Regional Transportation Plans.

Ms. Myers noted that Tribal Transportation procedures need to be consistent with state/regional planning. Needs Assessments should be available for all tribes in the region, although they are probably 10 years old and most are out-of-date. She recognized that some tribes might be hesitant to update their TTPs because of economic development projects that they would rather keep confidential, but in the long run it will be beneficial to all to have good, reliable information on transportation needs. TTAP can assist in the development of TTPs. The process is: design, construction, operation, and maintenance. TTAP has a template that tribes can use. However, there is no one way to do it. If there are parts of data you would rather not share, just state that. The hardest issue is forecasting. It is difficult to share information. TTP funds can be used as a match. There are many cases of tribes coordinating with surrounding jurisdictions and expanding their scope.

The FHWA approves Transportation Improvement Plans (TIP) for Tribes; the BIA distributes to the State Department of Transportation. The BIA Pacific Region doesn’t have a planner right now. NIJC acting as the TTAP can bring a planner down to help tribes in San Diego do their LTTPs.

The BIA and SANDAG will be working on getting the existing tribal projects in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan. Mr. Wilkie stated that almost every tribe has a TIP.

11. TOPICS FOR NEXT MEETING AND ADJOURNMENT

The Working Group discussed possible topics for the next quarterly meeting. Suggestions included:

• California Transportation Plan

• San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan – Project Evaluation Criteria

• Results of Survey on Regional Policy Issues of Interest to Tribes

• RTA’s Tribal Transit Capital Project

• Best practices in tribal transportation and collaboration in the region

The next meeting of the Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation issues will be held on June 24, 2013, but no location was determined. SANDAG staff will follow up.

Meeting was adjourned at 12:10 p.m.

Attachments: 1. Sign-in sheet for March 26, 2013, Tribal Transportation Working Group

Key Staff Contact: Jane Clough, (619) 699-1909, jane.clough@sandag.org

17

18

19

20

21

Caltrans Mission and Vision

Caltrans Improves Mobility Across California

California Transportation Plan 2040 Listening Session

The Caltrans Native American Liaison Branch (NALB) and Office of State Planning (OSP) cordially invite you to an upcoming Listening Session regarding the California Transportation Plan 2040 (CTP 2040), California’s long-range transportation plan, and two statewide modal plans currently under development.

Purpose of Listening Session:

Establish a meaningful dialogue with California Native American Tribes about what are critical transportation issues, concerns and priorities in tribal communities and how such concerns should be considered, addressed and incorporated into the statewide transportation policy and planning frame-work – the California Transportation Plan (CTP 2040).

Provide preliminary information to attendees about the CTP 2040 update and two modal plans that are under development by Caltrans: 1) a comprehensive statewide freight plan; and 2) an update of the Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan (ITSP).

Why Tribal Representatives Should Attend:

Tribal input will be essential in guiding the direction of the CTP 2040 update so that the policy framework contained in the CTP 2040 better reflects tribal values and community needs and can inform future transportation decisions around the state.

Both the freight plan and the ITSP may directly affect or provide access to and through tribal lands throughout the state

Caltrans recognizes that the Listening Session is not formal government-to-government consultation, but a separate related informational and collaborative effort to support that process. This listening session will include information that will be important in setting the framework for future formal consultation on the CTP 2040.

Key Listening Session Information:

Date: Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Time: 10:30 am—2:30 pm

Location: Harrah’s Rincon, Burgundy Room

777 Harrah’s Rincon Way

Valley Center, CA 92802

NOTE: Lunch will be served during the session, and a $20.00 appreciation card will be provided to tribal attendees.

If you plan to attend, please RSVP to Erica Thompson at (559) 269-6703 or by e-mail to ethomp-son@vrpatechnologies.com

WEBSITE: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/californiainterregionalblueprint/index.shtml

Caltrans Headquarters - Office of State Planning and Native American Liaison Branch

1120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814

Phone: 916-653-4466 E-mail: laurie.waters@dot.ca.gov or kimberly.johtson-dodds.dot.ca.gov 916-651-6527

22

Item 4, Tribal TWG, July 24, 2013

Caltrans Mission and Vision

Caltrans Improves Mobility Across California

Caltrans Native American Advisory Committee Quarterly Meeting

The next quarterly meeting of the NAAC will be taking place on July 31, 2013 in Valley Center, CA. This is an open meeting and anyone is welcome to attend.

The Native American Advisory Committee (NAAC) was established in 1996. Its purpose is to ensure that Caltrans management receives direct advice from the California Native American Tribes on issues pertaining to all modes of transportation in California. This advisory committee contributes to the Tribal Governments' ability to take advantage of transportation opportunities and to participate within Caltrans in planning, developing and implementing transportation projects and services. It offers a chance to support government-to-government working relations. The NAAC holds a minimum of four meetings each calendar year.

Key Meeting Information:

Date: Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Time: 9:00 am—3:00 pm

Location: Harrah’s Rincon, Burgundy Room

777 Harrah’s Rincon Way

Valley Center, CA 92802

For more information, please visit our website or contact Bennie Lee (bennie.lee@dot.ca.gov) or at (916) 654-2719.

WEBSITE: http://dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/nalb/

Caltrans Native American Lisiaon Branch

1120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814

Phone: 916-654-2719 Fax: 916-653-0001 E-mail: bennie.lee@dot.ca.gov

23

Item 5, Tribal TWG, July 24, 2013

San Diego Association of Governments

TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP

July 24, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 6

Action Requested: INFORMATION

SERIES 13 REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST: File Number 3100900 DRAFT SUBREGIONAL FORECAST

Introduction

During the past 12 months, SANDAG staff and representatives and elected officials from each of the San Diego region’s 19 jurisdictions have worked together to develop a long-range growth forecast for the San Diego region and its neighborhoods. The Series 13 Regional Growth Forecast (Regional Forecast)1 will serve as the foundation for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan, including the alternative land use and transportation scenarios and other planning documents (e.g., water, general plans) across the region. The preliminary results of that effort are described in detail below.

Overview of Forecasted Regional Growth

SANDAG projects the region’s population will grow by nearly one million people by 2050. This forecast is consistent with previous expectations, although future growth rates have been reduced due to increased domestic migration out of the region. The growth in population will drive job growth and housing demand within the region – adding nearly 500,000 jobs and more than 330,000 housing units by 2050.

Table 1: Series 13 San Diego Regional Growth Forecast Population Housing Units Jobs

Total Percent Average

Annual Change Total

Percent Average

Annual Change Total

Percent Average

Annual Change

20102 3,095,313 - 1,158,076 - 1,421,941 -

2012 3,143,429 0.8% 1,165,818 0.3% 1,450,913 1.0%

2020 3,435,713 1.1% 1,249,654 0.9% 1,624,124 1.4%

2035 3,853,698 0.8% 1,394,688 0.7% 1,769,938 0.6%

2050 4,068,759 0.4% 1,491,804 0.4% 1,911,405 0.5%

2010-2050 973,446 0.7% 333,728 0.6% 489,464 0.7%

1 SANDAG denotes forecasts by a sequential series number. The current working forecast is known as the Series 13: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast. The forecast used in the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and its Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), adopted by the SANDAG Board of Directors in October 2011, was the Series 12: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast.

2 Data from 2010 are included as reference to the United States Census for population. 2010 Housing and Jobs are sourced from the SANDAG land inventory system and California Employment Development Department. San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan will use 2012 as its reference year.

24

Much of the region’s growth will be driven by natural increase, total births minus deaths. Longer life expectancies will contribute to the aging population seen in the outer years of the forecast, while the trends of increased deaths (as a result of the older population) and net out-migration will factor into the slower growth rates anticipated in the future. By 2050, it is expected that nearly 20 percent of the population will be ages 65 and over, compared with just 12 percent today. In terms of the race and ethnic composition of the region, significant changes are on the horizon. The 2010 census revealed San Diego to now be a majority-minority region - meaning no single race or ethnic group comprises more than 50 percent of the total population. In 2010, the two dominant race and ethnic groups were non-Hispanic Whites and Hispanics, accounting for 48 percent and 32 percent of the region’s total population, respectively. By 2050, however, it is expected that Hispanics will account for over 46 percent of the total population, while the non-Hispanic White population will decline to approximately 30 percent. The Asian population is expected to increase to 15 percent; up from 11 percent in 2010. Non-Hispanic Blacks, two or more races, and “other” groups each comprise less than 5 percent of the total population today and are expected to remain relatively unchanged out to 2050.

Changing Local Plans This forecast represents a continuing trend in the San Diego region to provide more housing and job opportunities in the existing urbanized areas of the region. Since 1999, more than three quarters of the 19 jurisdictions have made or are in the process of making significant updates to their general plans. In 1999, SANDAG projected that 21 percent of future housing growth would occur in the unincorporated areas of the county under the local general plans at the time. Today, SANDAG expects 17 percent of growth to occur in the unincorporated areas, and much of that is focused in existing villages such as Lakeside, Valley Center, Ramona, and Alpine. As a result of these updates, SANDAG has identified sufficient housing opportunities in the existing general plans for the first time in nearly two decades. The forecasted growth also reflects more sustainable general plans from the local jurisdictions. At the turn of the century, about 90 percent of vacant residential land in the cities was planned for single-family use. The Series 13 Forecast shows 84 percent of housing growth by 2050 being multifamily. Local and regional conservation programs also continue to protect more of San Diego’s sensitive lands. Currently, over 50 percent of the region is preserved as open space, parks, or habitat, and SANDAG forecasts that an additional 20,000 acres will be preserved by 2050.

General Intensification of Existing Uses As a result of changing local plans, SANDAG forecasts a general intensification of existing land uses within urban communities and along key transportation corridors. For example, the National City general plan update results in opportunities for over 10,000 additional multifamily units near the Blue Line Trolley and planned Trolley connecting San Ysidro and University Towne Centre (UTC) via National City. San Marcos has drafted specific plans for the San Marcos Creek and University districts, adding mixed-use developments near Cal State-San Marcos and the SPRINTER Rail Corridor. Finally, over half of the growth in new housing will occur in the city of San Diego. Downtown will continue to thrive over the next few decades and the growth will start to spill over into areas of Barrio Logan, Golden Hill, and Uptown.

25

In terms of jobs, SANDAG expects the existing employment centers to continue to thrive. The UTC/Sorrento Valley/Torrey Mesa employment cluster will continue to be the largest job center in the region. SANDAG expects downtown to add another 30,000 jobs by 2050. The Otay Mesa border area will become a much larger job center, growing from just over 15,000 jobs today to over 45,000 by 2050. Finally, Chula Vista will add nearly 50,000 new jobs as the Chula Vista Bayfront, downtown investments, and new planned communities in eastern Chula Vista come online.

More detailed results of this growth forecast are shown by jurisdiction in Attachment 1.

SANDAG Forecasting Process

The SANDAG forecast is completed in two-steps. The first is the development of a Regional Forecast of population, housing, and jobs. The Regional Forecast establishes the framework for the next step, the subregional forecast. The Regional Forecast is developed by SANDAG with input from expert demographers, economists, developers, local planning directors, and natural resource managers. These experts review economic and demographic assumptions about fertility, migration, inflation, and other indicators. In addition to the traditional expert panel review SANDAG conducts, SANDAG also has reviewed the Regional Forecast with key stakeholders across the region, including transportation, land use, and economic development advocates.

SANDAG uses its Demographic and Economic Forecasting Model (DEFM) to develop the regional forecast. DEFM was first developed to support the Series 4 forecast in the late 1970s. DEFM uses a standard demographic (i.e., cohort-survival) economic modeling technique to estimate future growth. Forecasts developed using DEFM have had strong accuracy. Since Series 4 (1977), on average, DEFM regional forecasts have been within 4 percent of observed population growth.

The DEFM results feed the subregional allocation models to develop city- and community-level forecasts. The Series 13 subregional forecast employs a new tool called the Production, Exchange, Consumption, and Allocation System (PECAS). This new model offers several enhancements beyond the subregional forecasting models used in prior forecasts by introducing economic conditions and return on investment calculations into the projections of development, redevelopment, and infill. PECAS, in addition to new data sources, continues to rely upon the land use plans, policies, and zoning ordinances of the 18 cities, the County of San Diego, and other land use authorities.

For the development of the subregional forecast, SANDAG staff works extensively with each jurisdiction to collect and verify detailed land use inputs down to the parcel level. The data collected includes information on remaining housing capacity, zoning, existing and planned land use, as well as constraints to development (steep slopes, habitat lands, floodplains, etc.).

In addition to providing land use information, each jurisdiction is asked to provide guidance on the most likely development patterns for their jurisdiction by 2050.

A preliminary draft of the subregional forecast was presented to the Technical Working Group on June 13, 2013. SANDAG staff consulted with each jurisdiction to review these numbers and incorporate any necessary changes to the revised draft subregional forecast.

Attachments: 1. Draft Series 13 Subregional Growth Forecast

Key Staff Contact: Kirby Brady, (619) 699-6924, kirby.brady@sandag.org

26

Draft Series 13 Subregional Growth ForecastDisclaimer: This forecast represents one possibility for future growth in the San Diego region. It is intended to represent a likely prediction of future growth, but it is

not intended to be a prescription for growth. The Series 13 Regional Growth Forecast represents a combination of economic and demographic projections

and existing plans and policies.

POPULATION

Actual

2010 2020 2035 2050 2010-2020 2020-35 2035-50 Total Percent Avg Ann

Carlsbad 105,185 118,241 123,634 123,942 13,056 5,393 308 18,757 17.8% 0.4%

Chula Vista 243,916 286,744 320,297 343,752 42,828 33,553 23,455 99,836 40.9% 0.9%

Coronado 24,697 23,633 24,145 24,286 (1,064) 512 141 (411) -1.7% 0.0%

Del Mar 4,161 4,412 4,668 4,784 251 256 116 623 15.0% 0.3%

El Cajon 99,478 102,745 109,222 115,419 3,267 6,477 6,197 15,941 16.0% 0.4%

Encinitas 59,518 62,829 64,718 66,178 3,311 1,889 1,460 6,660 11.2% 0.3%

Escondido 143,951 165,051 172,890 173,253 21,100 7,839 363 29,302 20.4% 0.5%

Imperial Beach 26,324 27,510 30,354 31,579 1,186 2,844 1,225 5,255 20.0% 0.5%

La Mesa 57,065 61,092 70,151 77,411 4,027 9,059 7,260 20,346 35.7% 0.8%

Lemon Grove 25,320 26,821 28,774 30,796 1,501 1,953 2,022 5,476 21.6% 0.5%

National City 58,582 62,265 74,343 85,424 3,683 12,078 11,081 26,842 45.8% 0.9%

Oceanside 167,344 177,929 188,865 190,129 10,585 10,936 1,264 22,785 13.6% 0.3%

Poway 47,811 50,010 52,670 52,860 2,199 2,660 190 5,049 10.6% 0.3%

San Diego 1,301,617 1,454,150 1,664,684 1,766,700 152,533 210,534 102,016 465,083 35.7% 0.8%

San Marcos 83,781 98,940 108,470 112,323 15,159 9,530 3,853 28,542 34.1% 0.7%

Santee 53,413 59,488 63,518 66,279 6,075 4,030 2,761 12,866 24.1% 0.5%

Solana Beach 12,867 13,409 14,311 14,941 542 902 630 2,074 16.1% 0.4%

Vista 93,719 96,973 112,175 126,508 3,254 15,202 14,333 32,789 35.0% 0.8%

Unincorporated 486,564 543,471 625,809 662,195 56,907 82,338 36,386 175,631 36.1% 0.8%

Region Total 3,095,313 3,435,713 3,853,698 4,068,759 340,400 417,985 215,061 973,446 31.4% 0.7%

HOUSING

Actual

2010 2020 2035 2050 2010-2020 2020-35 2035-50 Total Percent Avg Ann

Carlsbad 44,422 48,390 49,978 50,212 3,968 1,588 234 5,790 13.0% 0.3%

Chula Vista 78,384 89,063 98,924 107,471 10,679 9,861 8,547 29,087 37.1% 0.8%

Coronado 9,581 9,667 9,702 9,799 86 35 97 218 2.3% 0.1%

Del Mar 2,606 2,639 2,650 2,667 33 11 17 61 2.3% 0.1%

El Cajon 35,884 36,180 38,126 40,766 296 1,946 2,640 4,882 13.6% 0.3%

Encinitas 25,481 26,131 26,633 27,667 650 502 1,034 2,186 8.6% 0.2%

Escondido 47,971 53,563 55,512 55,827 5,592 1,949 315 7,856 16.4% 0.4%

Imperial Beach 9,860 10,014 10,928 11,520 154 914 592 1,660 16.8% 0.4%

La Mesa 25,954 26,463 30,036 33,374 509 3,573 3,338 7,420 28.6% 0.6%

Lemon Grove 8,840 9,100 9,685 10,517 260 585 832 1,677 19.0% 0.4%

National City 16,200 17,423 21,090 24,812 1,223 3,667 3,722 8,612 53.2% 1.1%

Oceanside 65,014 67,965 70,812 71,248 2,951 2,847 436 6,234 9.6% 0.2%

Poway 16,476 16,853 17,602 17,800 377 749 198 1,324 8.0% 0.2%

San Diego 515,426 559,197 640,194 691,629 43,771 80,997 51,435 176,203 34.2% 0.7%

San Marcos 28,174 32,622 35,596 37,118 4,448 2,974 1,522 8,944 31.7% 0.7%

Santee 19,900 21,489 22,687 23,903 1,589 1,198 1,216 4,003 20.1% 0.5%

Solana Beach 6,521 6,583 6,870 7,118 62 287 248 597 9.2% 0.2%

Vista 30,875 31,015 35,369 40,201 140 4,354 4,832 9,326 30.2% 0.7%

Unincorporated 170,507 185,297 212,294 228,155 14,790 26,997 15,861 57,648 33.8% 0.7%

Region Total 1,158,076 1,249,654 1,394,688 1,491,804 91,578 145,034 97,116 333,728 28.8% 0.6%

JOBS

Actual

2010 2020 2035 2050 2010-2020 2020-35 2035-50 Total Percent Avg Ann

Carlsbad 64,956 77,431 83,938 85,718 12,475 6,507 1,780 20,762 32.0% 0.7%

Chula Vista 64,035 82,966 100,096 114,435 18,931 17,130 14,339 50,400 78.7% 1.5%

Coronado 28,535 29,116 29,247 29,273 581 131 26 738 2.6% 0.1%

Del Mar 4,431 4,542 4,691 4,725 111 149 34 294 6.6% 0.2%

El Cajon 37,626 41,412 45,146 49,780 3,786 3,734 4,634 12,154 32.3% 0.7%

Encinitas 25,643 27,276 28,364 29,542 1,633 1,088 1,178 3,899 15.2% 0.4%

Escondido 47,869 53,495 57,479 59,061 5,626 3,984 1,582 11,192 23.4% 0.5%

Imperial Beach 3,592 4,556 4,805 4,830 964 249 25 1,238 34.5% 0.7%

La Mesa 24,729 28,677 33,847 36,527 3,948 5,170 2,680 11,798 47.7% 1.0%

Lemon Grove 6,639 7,320 7,987 8,653 681 667 666 2,014 30.3% 0.7%

National City 26,826 30,293 32,660 39,785 3,467 2,367 7,125 12,959 48.3% 1.0%

Oceanside 41,142 48,208 52,927 54,091 7,066 4,719 1,164 12,949 31.5% 0.7%

Poway 30,235 34,012 35,809 37,199 3,777 1,797 1,390 6,964 23.0% 0.5%

San Diego 764,671 867,567 934,806 1,009,177 102,896 67,239 74,371 244,506 32.0% 0.7%

San Marcos 36,857 45,793 55,207 64,282 8,936 9,414 9,075 27,425 74.4% 1.4%

Santee 14,229 16,501 18,212 18,565 2,272 1,711 353 4,336 30.5% 0.7%

Solana Beach 7,417 8,156 8,509 8,802 739 353 293 1,385 18.7% 0.4%

Vista 35,124 40,971 48,007 48,812 5,847 7,036 805 13,688 39.0% 0.8%

Unincorporated 157,385 175,832 188,201 208,148 18,447 12,369 19,947 50,763 32.3% 0.7%

Region Total 1,421,941 1,624,124 1,769,938 1,911,405 202,183 145,814 141,467 489,464 34.4% 0.7%

Attachment 1

Projections Numeric Change by Increment Change 2010 - 2050

Projections Numeric Change by Increment Change 2010 - 2050

Projections Numeric Change by Increment Change 2010 - 2050

27

San Diego Association of Governments

INTERAGENCY TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP ON TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION ISSUES

July 24, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 8

Action Requested: INFORMATION/DISCUSSION

TRIBAL LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANS File Number 3400500

Introduction SANDAG is developing the updated of the next Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) called San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan (Regional Plan). The Regional Plan is the foundation for integrating land uses, transportation systems, infrastructure needs, and public investment strategies within a regional smart growth framework. As neighboring jurisdictions and federal lands held in trust, it is critical to understand and document the needs of tribal nations in the region in that process. This report provides some resources and information to support an effort to include Long-Range Tribal Transportation Plans (TTPs) for as many tribal nations in the region into the Regional Plan.

Discussion Tribal Transportation Planning The purpose of transportation planning is to identify broad goals to meet transportation needs. The multimodal strategies for achieving these goals can and should address current and future community land use, economic development, environment (natural and cultural), traffic demand, public safety, health, and social needs, among others. The federal government requires all land use authorities to do transportation planning - tribal and non-tribal - with public involvement and at least a 20-year horizon to assist communities in the transportation decision-making process. Tribal transportation planning in the San Diego region may be at a smaller scale, but it involves the same process:

1. Establish Policy Goals and Objectives

2. Analyze Transportation System Conditions

3. Perform Needs Analysis/Assessment

4. Set Priorities

5. Establish Funding Plan

6. Develop the Plan

7. Develop the Program

8. Implement and Monitor the Plan

28

Transportation planning provides a framework for the tribal community to make decisions about its transportation system. It’s a tool for tribal members as well. A successful process does not have to be complex; it should be suited to meet the unique needs of each tribal nation. The Federal Highway Administration has developed a guidebook and fact sheet to assist tribes in developing their long- range plan (Attachments 1 and 2). What is important to realize is that as funding becomes more and more limited, tribes that have long-range plans and can clearly justify their priority projects will be better positioned to capture scarce funding. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) encourages tribes to complete their long-range plan so that the distribution of funding is efficient and effective. 2050 RTP Effort to Incorporate Tribal Transportation Plans A suggestion from the 2010 San Diego Tribal Summit (Summit) was to incorporate TTPs in to the 2050 RTP update. This concept was discussed after the Summit at the board meeting of the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association and various tribes expressed interest in pursuing this idea. Most of the tribes in San Diego either did not have a long-range TTP or they had outdated Transportation Needs Assessments, most of which had been completed in 1998. The Working Group developed a template that met the minimum requirements of the BIA and the tribes were asked to complete their TTP based on the template (Attachment 3). SANDAG produced maps of the transportation network for each reservation showing the connections to the regional arterial network (Attachment 4 – San Pasqual example). Ultimately, eight tribes completed a Long- Range TTP and submitted them for inclusion as a technical appendix to the 2050 RTP. Next Steps The purpose of this report is to summarize what we have done in the past and to set the foundation for discussing a strategy for improving the process for this cycle of the update and including additional long-range tribal transportation plans. Attachments: 1. Transportation Decision Making 2. Transportation Decision Making: Information Tools for Tribal Governments 3. Long Range Tribal Transportation Plan 4. San Pasqual Example Key Staff Contact: Jane Clough, (619) 699-1909, jane.clough@sandag.org

29

Transportation Decision Making: Information Tools for Tribal Governments

Developing A Long Range Transportation Plan

The purpose of transportation planning is to identify broad goals to meet transportation needs. The multimodal strategies for achieving these goals should address current and future community land use, economic development, traffic demand, public safety, health, and social needs, among others.

By developing a Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), tribes will gain experience with process-related practices that can be applied as "good planning" and appreciation of linkage between Tribal transportation planning and other planning activities.

Several federal requirements call for a LRTP. Most tribes are familiar with this requirement in the Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) Program Final Rule (IRR Rule 25 CFR 170.410-415). Additional requirements for LRTPs are in the FHWA/FTA statute and regulation on Statewide and metropolitan planning (23 USC 134 and 135; and 23 CFR/49 CFR 450.214 and 450.322).

Public Involvement/Consultation with Planning Partners The IRR Rule and the FHWA/FTA Statewide and metropolitan planning process specify requirements related to public involvement.

Public involvement is an opportunity to capture the Tribal community’s values, perceived needs, establish consensus and identify issues and concerns. Public involvement is perhaps the single most important component of transportation planning.

Separate and equally important to the public involvement process is consultation with planning partners. There are consultation requirements specified in the Statewide, metropolitan and IRR statute and regulation. Consultation between planning partners is an opportunity to confer on needs of the larger community, to compare and coordinate planning approaches and generally to communicate about the mutual vision for the transportation system that often will cross over multiple jurisdictions.

Step 1: Establish Policy, Goals, and Objectives At this stage the tribe is setting the overall goals for how their transportation system should be designed, built, operated and maintained over the next 20 years.

Goals should be specific enough to guide the development of the plan but at the same time flexible enough to respond to changing conditions and implementation priorities.

Policy statements are often developed as a result of goals. No tribe will have the same priorities, and therefore each tribe may have different goals and objectives. Nevertheless, goals and objectives are developed in a consultative manner, include public involvement, are measurable, and are used to guide plan development.

Step 2: Analyze Transportation System Conditions To determine what future investments to make, tribes should evaluate the existing conditions. There are a variety of tools/techniques available to do this. Factors to consider include: o Defining the geographic limits of the transportation

system.o Defining information needed about the overall system

and the different elements of the system.o Assessing which conditions are most important for the

area’s economic and social well-being.o Determining who will use the information and why.o Defining which measures of system conditions will be

used.o Maximizing existing tools and data.

Step 3: Perform Needs Analysis Transportation system requirements should be evaluated by comparing the goals and objectives for the transportation system with the existing baseline system conditions. The needs analysis addresses the gap between current conditions and the future. How much can be implemented over the planning horizon will depend in large part on finance levels. A successful needs analysis should: o Provide technical information for goal setting.o Define the costs of meeting plan goals and objectives.o Compare transportation plan needs with available

funds.o Provide information to evaluate trade-offs between

different needs.

Step 4: Set Priorities Since transportation needs typically outweigh expected revenues, it is important to prioritize the needs identified during the transportation planning process. Some key success factors for setting priorities are: o Establish formal prioritization criteria.o Apply the same criteria to all programs and projects.o Attempt to use the same criteria used in the

development of the statewide plan.o Consider as many factors as possible in determining

program priorities.

30

Attachment 1

Step 5: Establish A Funding Plan A financial analysis of the specific projects that implement the transportation plan will help to ensure that it is realistic. Without tying transportation projects to reliable funding sources, the recommended solutions that are developed can easily become a "wish list."

The funding plan should be a multi-year financing plan based on identified needs. It should also include an analysis of the participating tribe's capabilities for financing such needs. If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs, the funding plan should contain a discussion of how additional funding will be raised or how assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that level of service standards will be met or adjusted.

Step 6: Develop the Plan Developing the plan document or "putting it all together" can be a difficult process if not approached in a systematic fashion. Key success factors for developing plans include: o Having clearly established roles and responsibilities for

who will develop the plan, how and when it will beadopted, and how and when the plan can beamended.

o Using the planning team and the public consultationprocess to help develop the outline for the plan.

o Ensure that the plan is a strategic and visionarydocument and not a "wish list".

After all the evaluation, analysis and public involvement, a recommendation is made to the Tribal Council. As decision-makers for the Tribe, Tribal Council members may want further information or may choose a different alternative than exactly what is presented by staff. With the technical analysis and information presentation, the Council can make an informed decision.

Step 7: Develop the Program Programming refers to a series of activities carried out by planners, including data assessment, appraisal of identified planning needs, and consideration of available or anticipated fiscal resources to result in the development, scheduling, and planning of a list of identified transportation improvements. The programming of projects for funding should consider timing of the need for improvements and timing for fund availability. Often, plans will require more funds than are available from federal, state, and local sources traditionally dedicated to transportation funding. The agencies engaged in planning should identify funding mechanisms to support implementation of the transportation plan or reassess their desired levels of service.

Step 8: Implement and Monitor the Plan For a plan to be successful it must be implemented effectively. Transportation planning includes continually monitoring the performance of the transportation system and ensuring that plans are being implemented to meet the intended objectives. Success factors for implementation and monitoring of the transportation plan include: o Developing an ongoing process for monitoring

progress toward plan objectives.o Establishing a decision making process.o Establishing a process for tracking conditions.o Establishing a well-defined process for how priorities

will be set.

The LRTP under the IRR Program needs to be reviewed annually and updated every five years as per 25 CFR 170.414.

Conclusion Transportation planning provides a framework for the community to make decisions about its transportation system. The LRTP is a tool for tribal members as well as the tribal decisionmakers. As you set out to develop the LRTP for your tribe, remember that the process does not need to be complex to be successful. There is no set length of pages. Through a focused set of tribal meetings, your tribe can develop a transportation plan that is suited to meet the unique needs of your tribe and can be developed with a minimal budget.

Additional Resources Transportation Planning Capacity Building Website: http://www.planning.dot.gov/tribal.asp

FHWA Tribal Transportation Planning http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/tribaltrans/index.htm

For more information contact: Tim Penney, FHWA Office of Legislative and Governmental Affairs Phone: (202) 366-2698 Email: tim.penney@dot.gov

Kenneth Petty, FHWA Office of Planning Phone: (202) 366-6654 Email: kenneth.petty@dot.gov

31

Information Tools For Tribal Governments

Developing

A Long-Range

Transportation Plan

TransporTaTion Decisionmaking

Attachment 2

32

Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.s. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.s. government assumes no liability for the use of information contained in this document.

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway administration provides high-quality information to serve government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWa periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

inTroDUcTion 2

sTeps For DeVeLoping a Long-range 4 TransporTaTion pLan public involvement/consultation 5

with planning partners establish policy goals and objectives 7 analyze Transportation system 8 conditions perform needs analysis 10 set priorities 11 establish Funding plan 11

Develop the plan 12 Develop the program 14 implement and monitor the plan 14

concLUsion 15

resoUrces 16

33

Information Tools For Tribal Governments

Developing

A Long-Range

Transportation Plan

TransporTaTion Decisionmaking

Prepared by:

FHWA Office of Planning

In Coordination with:

Bureau of Indian Affairs

FHWA Federal Lands Highway

FHWA New York Division

FHWA Resource Center

Federal Transit Administration

Publication Number: FHWA-HEP-05-053

34

The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Office of Planning

developed this document in cooperation with the Bureau of Indian Affairs

(BIA) Northwest Division, other FHWA offices (Federal Lands Highways

[FLH], New York Division, and Resource Center), and the Federal Transit

Administration (FTA) Office of Planning and Environment. The goal of this

document is to provide a tool to assist Tribal Governments in developing a

Long-Range Transportation Plan. The Transportation Decisionmaking: Informa-

tion Tools for Tribal Governments series contains modules that cover differ-

ent aspects of transportation planning. All modules identify linkage points

between Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) transportation planning and the

Statewide and metropolitan planning process. The intention of this series is

to provide an overview of fundamental and conceptual techniques as well as

notable practices. The first round of modules1 to be developed include:

• Introduction to Planning.

• Developing a Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).

• Developing the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

• Funding Resources.

• Public Involvement.

• Data Collection and Use.

INTRODUCTION

1.Additional modules, once developed, will be accessible on the Internet at the FHWA Tribal Planning Web site at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/tribaltrans/ and on the FHWA/FTA Transportation Planning Capacity Building Web site at http://www.planning.dot.gov/tribal.asp

Introduction to Planning

Developingan LRTP

Developing the TIP

Transportation Decision-making

InformationTools

FundingResources

PublicInvolvement

DataCollection and Use

235

The purpose of this module, Developing a Long-Range Transportation Plan

(LRTP), is to provide Tribal decisionmakers and planners with a summary

of the fundamental process for developing an LRTP. This module offers a

general framework for developing an LRTP and provides examples of note-

worthy practices by several Tribal organizations.

By developing an LRTP, Tribes will benefit from the following two key

perspectives:

1. Process-related practices that can be applied within the context of “good

planning” within a particular Tribal area.

2. An appreciation of how Tribes (and Tribal transportation planning) con-

nect to other planning activities, including IRR, Statewide, metropolitan,

and local transportation planning processes (as appropriate).

The IRR Rule (25 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 170) identifies

elements that may be included in an LRTP. The specific steps described

herein are not required by Federal statute or regulation; instead, these

steps represent a general process on how to develop an LRTP in support

of the requirements of the IRR program, as well as of the Federal Highway

Administration/Federal Transit Administration Statewide and metropolitan

planning process.

336

4

The purpose of transportation planning isto identify broad goals to meet transpor-

tation needs. The multimodal strategies for achieving these goals can and should address current and future community land use, eco-nomic development, environment (natural, human, and cultural), traffic demand, public safety, health, and social needs, among others.

There are several Federal requirements that call for an LRTP. Most Tribes are famil-iar with this requirement in the IRR Program Final Rule (IRR Rule 25 CFR 170.410-415). Additional requirements for LRTPs can be found in the FHWA/FTA statute and

STEPS FOR DEVELOPING A LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

regulation on Statewide and metropolitan planning (23 United States Code [USC] 134 and 135; and 23 CFR 450.214 and 450.322).

Generally speaking, all the Federal regula-tions and the statute mentioned above require public involvement and a 20-year horizon for the LRTP to assist communities in the trans-portation decisionmaking process. In addition, there are specific elements required for States and metropolitan areas.

For Tribal governments, the IRR Rule iden-tifies elements that may be included in the LRTP (see Figure 1); however, there are

Figure 1. Elements That May Be Included in a Long-Range Transportation Plan (Source: IRR Rule 25 CFR Part 170.411).

A comprehensive long-range transportation plan may include:

a. an evaluation of a full-range of transportation modes and connections between modes such as highway, rail, air, and water, to meet transportation needs.

B. Trip generation studies, including determination of traffic generators due to land use.

c. social and economic development planning to identify transportation improvements or needs to accommodate existing and proposed land use in a safe and economical fashion.

D. measures that address health and safety concerns relating to transportation improvements.

e. a review of the existing and proposed transportation system to identify the relationships between transportation and the environment.

F. cultural preservation planning to identify important issues and to develop a transportation plan that is sensitive to tribal cultural preservation.

g. scenic byway and tourism plans.

H. measures that address energy conservation considerations.

i. a prioritized list of short- and long-term transportation needs.

J. an analysis of funding alternatives to implement plan recommendations.

37

5

no statutory required steps or elements for a Tribal LRTP.

This outline covers a set of eight basic steps to con-sider when developing your Tribe’s LRTP. It is impor-tant to note that some textbooks outline a process with as few as four steps. The important message here is that this model can be tailored to meet each Tribe’s needs and resources. This module for Developing a Long-Range Transportation Plan is adapted for Tribes from the joint FHWA/FTA document titled Planning for Transporta-tion in Rural Areas.2 These basic steps are outlined in Figure 2 below.

The LRTP steps outlined in this module can be used to develop an LRTP as required by the IRR Rule (25 CFR 170.410 through 170.415) as well as a means for coordinating planning activities within the Statewide and metropolitan transportation planning processes (23 CFR 450.214 and 23 CFR 450.322). As noted earlier, the steps outlined are neither to be consid-ered prescriptive nor are they required. As with every

Step 1: Establish Policy Goals and Objectives

Step 2: Analyze Transportation System Conditions

Step 3: Perform Needs Analysis

Step 4: Set Priorities

Step 5: Establish Funding Plan

Step 6: Develop the Plan

Step 7: Develop the Program

Step 8: Implement and Monitor the Plan

Publ

ic In

volv

emen

t

Environment

Figure 2. Basic Steps in Developing an LRTP.

Tribe, each transportation-planning process is unique and should be tailored to best meet local community circumstances and needs.

Transportation planning provides a framework for the community to make decisions about its transporta-tion system. The LRTP is a tool for Tribal members as well as for the Tribal decisionmakers. As you set out to develop the LRTP for your Tribe, remember that a successful process does not have to be complex and that there is no set length of pages. Through a focused set of Tribal meetings, your Tribe can develop a trans-portation plan that is suited to meet the unique needs of your Tribe. These planning activities can occur with a minimal budget. Ultimately, the plan will identify long- and short-term needs that may be large or small investments. For example, the short-term budget may include either bridge improvements or perhaps only one van and one driver.

Public Involvement and Consultation With Planning Partners

Public involvement is an opportunity to capture a community’s values and perceived needs, establish consensus, and identify issues and concerns. The IRR Rule and the FHWA/FTA Statewide and metropolitan planning process specify requirements related to public involvement. In fact, public involvement is perhaps the single most important component of transporta-tion planning. Effective public involvement will result in opportunities for Tribal members to participate in the planning process. As depicted in Figure 2, public involvement should take place throughout the entire planning process, and it is an integral component to many of the steps.

Prior to adopting plans or programs, the Metropoli-tan Planning Organization (MPO) or State Department of Transportation (DOT) are required to prWwwovide citizens, affected public agencies, representatives of

2.This section is adapted from the joint FHWA/FTA document titled Planning for Transportation in Rural Areas, which can be accessed at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/rural/planningfortrans/index.html.

38

transportation agency employees, private providers of transportation, other affected employee representatives, and other interested parties with a reasonable oppor-tunity to comment on the plan. The new IRR Rule found in 25 CFR 170 identifies a set of criteria for the BIA and Tribes regarding public hearings. After consul-tation with the appropriate Tribe and other agencies, the MPO or DOT then will determine the need for public involvement (based on the criteria) for an IRR transportation improvement program and an LRTP or project. In addition, a public review of the draft IRR LRTP is required.

Separate and equally important to the public in-volvement process is consultation with planning part-ners. As described in Figure 3, there are consultation requirements specified in the Statewide, metropolitan, and IRR statute and regulation. Consultation between planning partners is an opportunity to confer on needs of the larger community, to compare and coordinate planning approaches, and to generally communicate about the mutual vision for the transportation system that often will cross over multiple jurisdictions.

6

Action Description Statutory/Regulatory References

Indian Reservation Defines consultation as “government-to-government 25 CFR 170.100-108 Roads Program communication in a timely manner by all parties about a 25 CFR 170.413

proposed or contemplated decision in order to (1) secure 25 CFR 170.424 meaningful Tribal input and involvement in the decisionmaking 25 CFR 170.435-441 process and (2) advise the Tribe of the final decision and provide an explanation.”

Statewide Defines distinct forms of cooperation or consultation to be 23 U.S.C. 135(d)-(f) Transportation undertaken by the States in the development of Statewide 23 CFR Planning long-range transportation plans and Statewide Transportation 450.104; 450.208(a)(23);

Improvement Programs with the following three types of 450.210(a); 450.214(c)(2); governments: (1) metropolitan planning organizations, 450.216(a) (2) non-metropolitan local officials, and (3) Indian Tribal areas.

Metropolitan Requires that where a metropolitan planning area includes Federal 23 U.S.C. 134(h)(3)(B) Transportation Planning public lands and/or Indian Tribal lands, the affected Federal agencies 23 U.S.C. 134(i)(5)

and Indian Tribal governments shall be involved appropriately in 23 U.S.C. 101(a)(23) the development of transportation plans and programs. The 23 CFR Transportation Management Area (TMA) Planning Certification 450.104; 450.202; 450.312(i); Review is an oversight opportunity for FHWA/FTA to ensure 450.330(a) that the metropolitan planning process in each TMA is being conducted in accordance with applicable provisions of Federal law.

Figure 3. Consultation and Public Involvement Statutory/Regulatory Requirements.

The Navajo Transit System (NTS) successfully dem-onstrated a comprehensive process for public involve-ment outreach as well as consultation with planning partners while developing the Navajo Transit System.

In developing the plan, the NTS conducted extensive outreach across three States and to more than 100 Tribal chapters. This effort brought together passengers, Tribal leaders, and representatives from the Navajo Nation, the Bureau of Indian Affairs . . . to collaborate on developing a long-range plan for the NTS. The plan demonstrates a realistic need for regional and commu-nity transportation. It includes strategies for expanding mode choices and providing access to healthcare and employment for those living in remote, isolated areas with few transportation options.3

—Transportation and planning excellence awards FY 2004, Honorable mention

3 The Navajo Transit System Long-Range Transportation Plan received an honorable mention through the Transportation Planning Excellence Awards in FY 2004. More information is available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/tpea04/tribal.htm.

39

7

Step 1: Establish Policy Goals and Objectives

The first step in developing an LRTP is to discuss the goals and objectives. At this stage, the Tribe is setting the overall goals for how the transportation system should be designed, built, operated and maintained over the next 20 years.

LRTPs should be linked to the Tribe’s land use plan and should consider a full range of modal choices and investment options such as the following:

Transportation modal choices:

• Roads. • Rail.• Transit.• Equestrian.• Air.• Water.• Bicycle.• Pedestrian.

Investment options:

• System operations.• System maintenance.• Technological improvements.• Capacity expansion.• Innovative financing/leveraging of funds.

To be most useful, the goals should be specific enough to guide the development of the plan but at the same time flexible enough to respond to changing conditions and implementation priorities. For example, the Or-ganized Village of Kake (OVK) in Alaska developed a transportation plan with a general goal to address:

…the future land use, social and economic development, traffic demand, public safety, and health and social needs for the next 20 years. The LRTP will help identify OVK’s role in the community of Kake’s development and help maintain the transportation infrastructure that is needed within Kake.

Policy statements are also often developed as a result of goals. In the policy statement below from the Bois Forte Indian Reservation 20-year transportation plan, multiple modes are identified. Emphasis is placed on an “interconnected and efficient system.” It is also important to note that this policy statement considers the transportation boundaries beyond the limits of the reservation.

The purpose of this study is to develop a guide for trans-portation improvements over a 20-year period, looking at all modes of transportation affecting the reservation. This study looks at the entire Bois Forte transportation network in order to develop a plan that links all modes together into an interconnected and efficient system. In addition, the study examines ways to connect reservation residents to other parts of the State whether it be through increased service from the Orr Regional Airport, or mass transit that links the reservation to the Iron Range cities of Minnesota.4

Additional items to consider in the development of policy goals and objectives include the following:

• Determining who will be responsible for making the policy decisions.

• Developing policy goals and objectives that involve local officials and provide for broad stakeholder and modal involvement.

• Making a clear connection to action plans.• Identifying timelines for decisions and mechanisms

for modifying and updating polices. • Determining how your Tribal plan coordinates with

neighboring communities (i.e., local or county) as well as with regional and State policies.

Goals and objectives may include qualitative and quantitative characteristics. For example, one goal may be for all members of the Tribe to have access to some form of transportation. A possible objective to achieve this goal may be to establish a dial-a-ride system, ac-cessible to all Tribal members. Figure 4 identifies NTS’ goal and objective for completing their long-range plan.

4. Bois Forte Indian Reservation 20-year Transportation Plan, March 2002

40

Figure 4. FHWA/FTA Transportation Planning Excellence Awards: 2004 Honorable Mention (co-sponsored by The American Planning Association).

Every Tribe will, of course, have different priorities and therefore different goals and objectives. Neverthe-less, the key factor is that the goals and objectives are developed in a consultative manner, including signifi-cant public involvement; are measurable; and are used to guide plan development.

Step 2: Analyze Transportation System Conditions

To determine what future investments to make, the Tribe should first evaluate the existing conditions of the transportation system. There are a variety of tools and techniques available to evaluate existing conditions.

To evaluate the existing system condition, you must first identify the types of system performance measures to use. The measurements will vary on the basis of the mode. For example, service objectives for roadways may include consideration of roadway capacity, design, and safety. Examples of transit service standards are population coverage and frequency of service.The Navajo Nation provides a good example of how the first two steps support the development of an LRTP:

in 2003, the nTs completed a long-range plan to guide the gradual strengthening and expansion of its services and facilities. This long-range plan was the first of its kind in the history of the nTs and represents a unique achievement in Tribal transportation planning. While short-range, three-year plans are commonly prepared in order to secure Federal transit funding, those plans are limited by their lack of ability to pursue the “big picture” and are not appropriate tools for implementing major changes in strategy or direction. The nTs recognized that a longer-range vision was needed to address the large-scale route restructuring and capital improvements needed for the system, including a new administrative and maintenance facility. in developing the plan, it became evident that a clear and financially sustainable long-term strategy would be necessary to meet future transit demand across the reservation. The result was a long-range plan unique in its assessment of need and in its prescription of incremental and cumulative change.

The Navajo Nation is by far the largest Tribal reserva-tion in the United States, covering over 26,000 square miles and comprising over 280,000 members. The NTS currently has fifteen vehicles serving seven routes. The long-range plan found that, given the continuation of historical trends, transit demand is anticipated to outpace system growth by a factor of seven over the next 20 years. It was clear that the NTS faces some unique challenges in meeting future demand within current funding levels. It also became clear that, given the real funding constraints of the past two decades, the plan would need to carefully prioritize improvements. Based on a comprehensive assessment of existing capital facili-ties and service levels, ridership data, Tribal leadership priorities, and Reservation demographics, the NTS long-range plan identified and prioritized a series of capital and service improvements over the next 20 years.5

Factors to consider when conducting a conditions analysis are as follows:

• Defining the geographic limits of the transportation system.

• Defining potential environmental (cultural, human, and natural) impacts.

• Defining information needed about the overall sys-tem and the different elements of the system (e.g., What conditions are most important for the eco-nomic and social well-being of your community?).

• Determining who is going to use the information and why.

• Defining which measures of system conditions will be used.

• Maximizing the use of existing management systems, analysis tools, and data collection procedures to pro-vide measures and data.

If data collection is beyond your current resources, it is important to remember that Federal, State, and local agencies (such as the Federal Lands, BIA, State, city, and county) are valuable resources for obtaining existing system-conditions data. The BIA maintains a database of Indian Reservation Roads. The State DOT may have data regarding operational and physical char-acteristics of the State and county system.

5. The Navajo Transit System Long-Range Transportation Plan received an honor-able mention through the FHWA/FTA Transportation Planning Excellence Awards in FY 2004. More information is available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/tpea04/tribal.htm.

841

Data sharing enables cooperating agencies to effec-tively utilize one another as a resource. Some areas, like Washington State, are working with Tribes to develop an accurate database of incidents on reservation roads. Another example of data sharing comes from the Ex-ecutive Summary of the Grand Portage Transportation Plan:

The first step taken toward completing the transporta-tion plan consisted of working with the Grand Portage Natural Resources Department to obtain the compre-hensive inventory of all roads within the reservation developed by their Geographic Information System staff. Results from the inventory were used to establish an up-to-date database of all reservation roads.6

Measurement/Monitoring of Existing System ConditionsThe steps involved in the measurement and monitoring of existing system conditions are as follows:

• Establish agreed upon measures and evaluation pro-cedures for system elements based on performance goals and objectives. A way to do this is to establish condition measures that describe the physical condi-tions of facilities or condition measures that describe levels of service or operational performance.

• Determine data and information requirements to measure progress toward policy goals and objectives that are set for the transportation system.

• Apply condition and performance measures.

Types of condition information that fall into the fol-lowing categories are shown in Table 1.

Remember that these steps are general. Many Tribes will not develop this level of detail when measuring ex-isting system conditions. For example, in the Organized Village of Kake Transportation Plan, factors considered are “weather, soil, and topography,” “community road system,” drainage, “right-of-way road ownership,” and “inventory of maintenance equipment.”

Forecasting Future ConditionsPlans are future-oriented. Although they typically re-spond to a backlog of needs, they should address future conditions and plan for them. In rural areas, straightfor-ward approaches can be used to forecast future condi-tions.

There are a number of ways to estimate travel demand within the transportation-planning context. These range from simple techniques, such as historical trend analysis, to variants of more complex computer models that require large databases of demographic and socioeconomic information to forecast travel demand. Simplified demand estimation techniques and analysis are appropriate in most Tribal planning situations.

The demand analysis should identify all perceived mobility issues, impediments, and opportunities in the region. For example, if a section of roadway is thought to be unsafe and safety improvements are proposed, then a detailed accident history should be compiled to support the assessment. Or if the transportation of the elderly and/or disabled is felt to be an important transportation need, then various findings from State, regional, and local transit needs and benefits studies should provide the supporting documentation. The State DOT will be able to provide modal data, such as traffic volumes, volume/capacity ratios, accident rates, transit ridership, and the core rail system to assist in this analysis.

Land use and economic development information can be accessed through the following:

Local Comprehensive Plans• Tribal agencies, BIA, regional, city, or county plans.• Local school districts.

Rural Development Plans• Federal, State, local (e.g., water districts, Indian

Health Service).

Table 1. Condition information and category.

Category Measure

Extent of the system— • Number of lane miles basic inventory • Number of transit vehicles • Square footage of bridges • Length of culverts, etc. • Services available

Use of system • Traffic, ridership, etc.

Physical conditions/ • Pavement, bridges, transit performance equipment

Operational conditions/ • Mobility performance • Safety

6. Grand Portage Transportation Plan Executive Summary, January 2003.

942

Census Bureau• Population statistics.• County business patterns.• American Indian and Alaska Native Service

Population.

U.S. Geological Survey• Land use and other mapping data.

Step 3: Perform Needs Analysis

Transportation system needs are most usefully assessed by evaluating the gap between the goals and objec-tives that are established for the transportation system and the baseline system conditions. The needs are the planned actions for addressing this gap. How much can be implemented over the planning horizon will depend in large part on finance levels. A successful needs analy-sis should:

• Provide technical information for setting goals. • Define the costs of meeting plan goals and

objectives. • Compare transportation plan needs with available

funds. • Provide information to evaluate trade-offs among

different needs.

In identifying the deficiencies, results from public in-volvement meetings/activities should be used as input, although these may be mostly subjective. The Grand Portage Transportation Plan states the following:

Following the gathering of the road inventory data, the first transportation steering committee meeting was held to review the inventory data and identify issues within the Grand Portage transportation system. Issues regard-ing the transportation system were also gathered from Grand Portage residents through the use of a commu-nity-wide survey mailed in June 2002. The issues were grouped into the following topics: trails and recreation; the Grand Portage National Monument; community walkability and safety; the Grand Portage Lodge and Casino; and maintenance issues. In addition, the public

was offered an additional opportunity to comment on the transportation planning process during an open house held at the Grand Portage Community Center in June 2002.

Gap AnalysisThe needs analysis can be used to determine broad but different categories of need for achieving planning goals. A first step in a needs assessment is to measure the gap between the transportation system goals and current objectives and conditions. This requires a set of goals and objectives that can be quantified and that can relate to the operational and physical condition of the transportation system. The results of this gap analysis are often referred to as deficiencies.

Evaluation of Alternative Strategies and Actions to Address the GapThe purpose of this step is to assess the cost and im-pacts on transportation system condition of alternative strategies or improvements that address transportation needs. For long-range planning purposes, the needs areas can be grouped different ways. They can be orga-nized for the different elements of the transportation system (roads, bridges, rail, etc.) and different policy goal areas (mobility, safety, preservation, economic development, environmental, etc.) that are established in the plan. Evaluation can be undertaken at a “coarse” level to consider the full range of alternative strategies and to identify those meriting further consideration. These can be then subject to a more detailed analysis.

Select Strategies and Actions—Identify CostsFor your Tribal transportation plan, remember to con-sider alternative strategies for addressing deficiencies. Once a strategy is developed, the cost of implement-ing this strategy defines the needs. The total cost of the plan improvements is important for determining implementation. This is developed by determining the cost of implementing the selected strategies. See “Cost Estimates” under Step 5.

1043

Step 4: Set Priorities

Because transportation needs typically outweigh ex-pected revenues, it is important to prioritize the needs identified during the transportation planning process. Given the often overwhelming number of potential improvements, it is important that the planning process has an agreed upon approach to project prioritization. The key success factors for setting priorities are as follows:

• Establishing formal prioritization-ranking criteria and applying it consistently.

• Applying the prioritization criteria to all programs and projects.

• Making efforts to use the same prioritization criteria as those used to develop the Statewide plan.

• Prioritizing ranking criteria that consider as many factors as possible in determining program priorities (system, multimodal, environmental, social, and economic factors). Perhaps specific projects will need to be phased over several years.

In the case of the Grand Portage Transportation Plan, the “Step 3: Needs Analysis” outlined in this module was addressed in combination with the “Step 4: Set Priorities.” This again underscores the point made earlier that Tribes should customize the process to fit their needs and available resources.

Step 5: Establish a Funding Plan

The transportation plan needs to be realistic, and usu-ally that means fundable. A financial analysis of the specific projects that implement the transportation plan will help to ensure that it is realistic. Without tying transportation projects to reliable funding, the recommended solutions that are developed can easily become a “wish list.” Principles for developing a fund-ing plan include the following:

• Including an analysis of the participating Tribe’s capabilities of financing needs.

• Basing the multiyear financing plan on the needs identified in the funding plan.

• Taking into account the possibility that funding falls short of meeting identified needs. The funding plan should contain a discussion of how additional fund-ing will be raised or how assumptions will be reas-sessed to ensure that level of service standards will be met or adjusted. If there are funding constraints, specific projects may have to be funded over several years.

Financial Planning StepsThe following steps can be used to develop the trans-portation finance analysis:

1. Identify transportation needs and solutions. 2. Develop cost estimates for solutions. 3. Assess the ability to pay for these projects

and services. 4. Develop financing policies. 5. Forecast revenue from existing and potential sources. 6. Develop a financing schedule by matching transpor-

tation projects and services to revenue projections. 7. Establish policies to govern the management of

the transportation-financing program.

These steps are not strictly sequential. For example, forecasting revenue from existing and potential sources can proceed at the same time as the identification of transportation needs.

Cost EstimatesCost estimates are necessary to compare the transpor-tation needs with available revenues. Costs should be estimated for the following:

• Maintaining the existing and proposed transporta-tion system.

• Designing and building new, expanded, or replace-ment facilities (e.g., roads, terminals, bridges).

• Acquiring new transit vehicles and related capital costs (e.g., maintenance facilities).

• Operating transportation services, such as transit or ridesharing.

• Administering and planning the transportation system.

1144

On the highway side, there are well-established unit costs that can be applied to develop needs estimates for improvements. Project development costs to consider include planning, environmental analysis and review, engineering, design, construction, right of way (prop-erty, relocation, and settlement costs), construction, and maintenance costs. Use “rough” unit prices, for example, $3,000/linear foot of new roadway, $800/linear foot of new, shared bike–pedestrian path, and $200/square foot for a new bridge. These unit prices can come from a variety of sources such as BIA, county, State, FLH, FHWA, or FTA.

Unit costs can be developed and factored for infla-tion. For other transportation modes there are less well-established methods; however, most State DOTs are now working on developing consistent assumptions and a rigorous approach for developing cost estimates for other transportation modes.

It is important to estimate transportation systems operations and maintenance costs, because these will likely consume a significant portion of the existing rev-enue resources. Estimates can usually be based on exist-ing historic data. The information required is likely to be available from the finance officer of the State, transit agency, and city or county. Estimates of new costs for facilities and services will generally be based on a com-bination of rough estimates and specific cost estimates. Detailed cost estimates based on preliminary engineer-ing, right-of-way appraisals, or operating plans only need to be done for the most immediate recommended improvements. Most of the recommended improve-ments in a long-range transportation plan will need an “order-of-magnitude” cost estimate. These estimates are

based on factors such as typical “per mile” construction costs for different types of roadways or the operating costs for similar transit services in other counties.

Step 6: Develop the Plan

Developing the plan document or “putting it all together” can be a difficult process if not approached in a systematic fashion. Key success factors for developing plans include the following:

• Having clearly established roles and responsibili-ties for who will develop the plan, how and when it will be adopted, and how and when the plan can be amended.

• Using the planning team and the public consultation process to help develop the outline for the plan.

• Ensuring that the plan is a strategic and visionary document and not a “wish list.”

Just as the Statewide, MPO, and LRTPs are the basis for the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program, for the Indian Reservation Roads Program Transporta-tion Improvement Program (IRRTIP), the LRTP is used to develop the Tribal Transportation Improvement Program and the IRRTIP.

During the planning process, all technical data and methodologies used should be documented. All refer-ences and other reports cited should also be docu-mented. A model outline for a transportation plan is provided in Figure 5.

After the evaluation, analysis, and public involve-ment process takes place, a recommendation is made to the Tribal Council. A formal presentation should be made to the decisionmaking group, presenting the technical analysis and information gathered. As deci-sionmakers for the Tribe, Tribal Council members may want further information or may choose a different alternative than exactly what is presented by Tribal staff. With the technical analysis and information presented, the Tribal Council can make an informed decision.

1245

Figure 5. General Transportation Plan Format

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYProvides an overall summary of the plan’s objectives, methodology, findings, and recommendations.

SECTION I: GOALS AND POLICY STATEMENTSThis section presents the overall vision, goals, and objec-tives developed during the planning process. These form the overall umbrella for the direction of the transportation plan in terms of plan priorities.

SECTION II: TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTChapter I. Introduction The introduction outlines the purpose of the plan, the plan participants, and the organization of the document.

Chapter II. Existing ConditionsThis section presents the existing condition of the trans-portation system in terms of:

• Roadways (road and bridge conditions, traffic volumes, safety, and other criteria).

• Public or quasi-public transportation (transit, school bus, emergency service routes and facilities, air, and water).

• Non-motorized transportation (bicycle pathways, pedestrian pathways, and equestrian routes).

• Land use and population considerations, plans and programs of other agencies and jurisdictions, and county-wide policies.

Chapter III. Traffic ForecastsThis section presents historical traffic trends; population and land-use trends; population and demographic projec-tions; population distribution; future land-use map; and future traffic projections and trends.

Chapter IV. Alternative Strategies EvaluationThe alternative strategies evaluation section presents the determination of needs based upon existing conditions and traffic. It forecasts the evaluation of alternatives for traffic safety, level of service and congestion, environmental impacts, financing, community support, and consistency with plans of other agencies and jurisdictions.

Chapter V. Priorities and RecommendationsThis section presents prioritized recommendations for improvements to the area transportation system including: level of service; new corridors; road widenings; spot/ intersection widenings; realignments or channelization; traffic control or signalization; shoulder improvements; paving, bridge replacements, or other physical improve-ments; pedestrian, bicycle, or equestrian improvements; transit and transit facilities; and land-use/transportation linkages.

Chapter VI. The Financing Element of the PlanThe financing section presents cost estimates for identified improvements, potential financing options, re-assessment of identified improvements based upon financial constraints, and the 3-year transportation improvement program for the area.

Chapter VII. Implementation and MonitoringThis section provides the plan for continually monitoring the performance of the transportation system to deter-mine the progress being made in improving system performance and to identify additional areas of improvement.

SECTION III: APPENDICESA. ReferencesB. Technical Data and MethodologiesC. Excerpts from other Reports

1346

Step 7: Develop the Program

Programming refers to a series of activities carried out by transportation planners, including data assessment, appraisal of identified planning needs, and consider-ation of available or anticipated fiscal resources (i.e., funding) to result in the drawing up, scheduling, and planning of a list of identified transportation improve-ments for a given period of time. The programming of projects for funding should consider:

1. Timing of the need for improvements (e.g., when the facility falls below the locally established level of service under assumed growth rates).

2. Timing for fund availability (i.e., transportation project may need to be replaced, phased over several years).

Plans often will require more funds than are avail-able from Federal, State, and local sources traditionally dedicated to transportation funding. This means that the agencies engaged in transportation planning should identify funding mechanisms to support implementa-tion of the transportation plan or reassess their desired levels of service.

Step 8: Implement and Monitor the Plan

For a transportation plan to be successful, it must be implemented effectively, and its progress should be monitored against the plan’s objectives, thereby provid-ing a “feedback loop.” Transportation planning includes continually monitoring the performance of the trans-portation system and ensuring that plans are being implemented to meet the intended objectives.

The success factors for implementation and monitor-ing of the transportation plan include the following:

• Developing an on-going process known to partici-pants for monitoring progress toward plan objectives.

• Establishing a process for how decisions regarding implementation are to be made.

• Establishing a process for conditions tracking. • Establishing a well-defined process for how priorities

will be set.

Less effective transportation plans typically lack an effective implementation plan and monitoring mecha-nism. These are required to “keep the plan alive” and to ensure that the plan guides and shapes transportation decisions in the future. Transportation plans need to be periodically reviewed and updated to stay current. The IRR Program requires an annual review of the LRTP and updates every 5 years (see 25 CFR 170.414).

1447

Transportation planning provides a framework for the community

to make decisions about its transportation system. The LRTP is a

tool for tribal members as well as for the tribal decisionmakers. As you

set out to develop the LRTP for your tribe, remember that the process

does not need to be complex to be successful. There is no set length of

pages. Through a focused set of tribal meetings, your tribe can develop

a transportation plan that is suited to meet the unique needs of your

tribe and that can be developed with a minimal budget.

CONCLUSION

1548

RESOURCES

Planning Glossary http://www.planning.dot.gov/glossary.asp

IRR Program 25 CFR 170.410 through 170.415

Statewide and Metropolitan Planning http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/legislat.html Process: 23 USC 134 & 135; 23 CFR 49 450

A Briefing Notebook for Transportation http://www.planning.dot.gov/documents/BriefingBook/BBook. Decision-Makers Officials and Staff htm#2BB

Guide to Federal-Aid Programs and Projects http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/part1.htm#resroads

Planning for Transportation in Rural Areas http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/rural/planningfortrans/index. html

FHWA Native American Coordination http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/tribaltrans/index.htm

FHWA/FTA Transportation Planning www.planning.dot.gov Capacity Building

Indian Health Service http://www.ihs.gov

FHWA Office of Planning, Environment http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/index.htm and Realty

FTA Office of Planning and Environment http://www.fta.dot.gov/about/offices/hq/4956_4950_ENG_ HTML.htm

Federal Railroad Administration http://www.fra.dot.gov

Bureau of Transportation Statistics http://www.bts.gov

Office of Transportation Technologies http://www.ott.doe.gov

ITS Electronic Document Library http://www.its.dot.gov

Federal Aviation Administration http://www.faa.gov

ITS Joint Program Office http://www.its.dot.gov

ITS America http://www.itsa.org

The Safe Communities Services http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/safecommunities

U.S. Department of Commerce http://www.doc.gov

Job Access and Reverse Commute www.fta.dot.gov/wtw/ http://www.fta.dot.gov/ grant_programs/specific_grant_programs/ 4339_ENG_HTML.htm

Transportation Toolbox for Rural Areas http://ntl.bts.gov/ruraltransport/toolbox/ and Small Communities

National Atlas of the U. S. www.nationalatlas.gov/

U.S. Census Bureau www.census.gov

U.S. Geological Survey http://www.usgs.gov/

1649

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION WEb SITES

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials http:www.aashto.org (AASHTO)

American Planning Association (APA) http://www.planning.org

American Public Transit Association (APTA) http://www.apta.org

American Public Works Association (APWA) http://www.apwa.net

American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRA) http://www.aslra.org

Amtrak http://www.amtrak.com

Association of American Railroads (AAR) http://www.aar.org

Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO) http://www.ampo.org

Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA) http://www.ctaa.org

National Association of Towns & Townships http://www.natat.org

National Association of County Engineers (NACE) http://www.nace.org

National League of Cities (NLC) http://www.nlc.org

National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) http://www.narc.org

Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) http://www.arc.gov

50

Federal Highway AdministrationOffice of Planning HEPP-20400 Seventh Street SW, Room 3301Washington, DC 20590202-366-0106; fax 202-493-2198

Publication No. FHWA-HEP-05-053

51

Tribe Name Long Range Tribal Transportation Plan

The purpose of transportation planning is to identify broad goals to meet transportation needs of a community. Multi-modal strategies for achieving these goals can and should consider current and future community land use, economic development, environment (natural, human, and cultural), traffic demand, public safety, health, and social needs, among others.1

Background Information

Existing Transportation Conditions

1 Transportation Decision Making: Information for Tribal Governments. “Developing a Long-Range Transportation Plan.” FHWA Office of Planning.

Demographics, culture, economics, land...

Basic inventory (lane miles, services available, modes); Use of the system (traffic, ridership); Physical condition (pavement, equipment, bridges...)

52

Attachment 3

Goals and Objectives

Overall goals for how the transportation system should be designed, built, operated and maintained. Goals will be very broad statements about future conditions while objectives will be more specific about how to achieve those goals. This section can include a variety of modal choices: roads, rail, transit, equestrian, air, water, bicycle or pedestrian. This section should also consider transportation within and beyond the boundaries of tribal land. Please tailor the number of goals and objectives to the specific needs of your tribe.

1. Goal• Objective• Objective

2. Goal• Objective• Objective

3. Goal• Objective• Objective

4. Goal• Objective• Objective

Priority Projects

Please include a list of short- and long-term projects, including at least one project that involves the regional transportation network (transit, highway…). Please tailor the number projects to the specific needs of your tribe.

1. Priority Project• Brief description

2. Priority Project• Brief description

3. Priority Project• Brief description

53

LAKE

WOH

LFOR

D

VALLEY CENTER

WOODS VALLEY RD

N CANAL RD

WOODS VALLEY

LAKE WOHLFORD

PARADISE MOUNTAINLAKE

WOH

LFOR

D

SAN PASQUAL INDIAN RESERVATION

¯0 0.5 1

Miles

Existing Land UseResidentialCommercial and OfficeIndustrialPublic Facilities and UtiliesParks and RecreationAgricultureUndeveloped

Regional Arterial System

Portions of this product may contain geographicinformation copyrighted by SanGIS.

A

A©

A©

A

Aª

Aª

!"a$

!"a$

San Pasqual

Rincon

Pauma and Yuima

ESCONDIDO

Local, County, Tribal Road

DRAFT

Pala

La Jolla

Mesa Grande

Santa Ysabel

Digital Globe Copyright 2008 - All Rights Reserved

San Pasqual Example Attachment 4

54

San Diego Association of Governments

INTERAGENCY TECHNICAL WORKINGGROUP ON TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION ISSUES

July 24, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 9

Action Requested: INFORMATION/DISCUSSION

DRAFT TRANSPORTATION PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA File Number 3102000

Introduction The SANDAG Board of Directors accepted the vision and goals for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan on May 10, 2013. In past Regional Transportation Plans SANDAG has utilized project evaluation criteria and performance measures informed by the plan goals as elements of a multistep process to evaluate and prioritize transportation projects in the development of the revenue constrained multimodal transportation network. Project rankings, along with other factors such as funding availability, project readiness, and overall network connectivity, will be considered when developing the proposed multimodal transportation network alternatives for the Regional Plan.

Discussion SANDAG staff has considered initial feedback from SANDAG working groups, community-based outreach partners, other stakeholders, and the general public, in the development of the preliminary draft transportation project evaluation criteria. The preliminary draft transportation project evaluation criteria for highway corridors, High Occupancy Vehicle connectors, freeway-to-freeway connectors, transit services, rail grade separations, and goods movement are included as Attachment 1. The preliminary draft criteria incorporate capabilities of recent enhancements to the SANDAG regional modeling tools, including the Activity-Based Model and the Production, Exchange, and Consumption Allocation System. Efforts have been made to harmonize the criteria across modal categories where appropriate and new criteria have been added to assess project effects on physical activity and air quality. The methodologies for a number of existing criteria have been refined to provide for more comprehensive analysis. Active Transportation criteria also are being developed for prioritizing bicycle and pedestrian projects in the Regional Plan. The criteria utilized in Riding to 2050: The San Diego Regional Bike Plan (Riding to 2050) (Attachment 2) will serve as a starting point for the Active Transportation criteria development. Bicycle and pedestrian projects in the Regional Plan will include Safe Routes to Transit projects, which will improve bicycle and pedestrian access around transit stations, and access improvements for bicyclists and pedestrians in highway project areas, such as freeway interchanges. The Active Transportation evaluation criteria will address these combined bicycle and pedestrian projects, as well as bicycle projects identified in Riding to 2050.

55

Tribal Transportation Technical Working Group (Working Group) members are invited to review the draft Active Transportation criteria at a workshop which will be held on July 29, 2013, from 3:00 to 4:30 p.m., at SANDAG.

Next Steps SANDAG staff is currently in the process of collecting feedback on the preliminary draft evaluation criteria from SANDAG working groups, partner agencies, other stakeholders, and the general public. An expert panel also will review the preliminary draft evaluation criteria in August 2013, and a revised draft set of criteria will be developed to address comments received. In September 2013, the Transportation Committee would be asked to recommend the criteria to the SANDAG Board of Directors and action by the SANDAG Board of Directors would be requested in October 2013. Once the multimodal transportation network alternatives have been developed, performance measures will be applied to evaluate each network alternative and help in the comparison across alternatives. The organizational structure of the performance measures will be consistent with the goals of the Regional Plan. In fall 2013, SANDAG staff will present information to the Working Group on potential revisions to the plan performance measures. The plan performance measures are expected to be approved by the SANDAG Board of Directors in January 2014. Attachments: 1. Preliminary Draft Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria 2. Riding to 2050: The San Diego Regional Bicycle Plan Evaluation Criteria Summary Key Staff Contact: Rachel Kennedy, (619) 699-1929, rachel.kennedy@sandag.org

56

Preliminary Draft Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria Prepared July 10, 2013

Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals

No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation

Highway Corridor

Innovative Mobility and Planning 1 Provides Congestion ReliefWhat is the change in person-hours saved from implementing theproject?

Change in person-hours saved

2 Serves Daily Trips What is the number daily person trips served by the facility? Person volume on facility

3 Provides Access to Evacuation RoutesDoes the project provide evacuation access for regional hazard areasincluding federally recognized Indian reservations?

Proximity analysis of hazard areas (weighted by population and employment)

4Serves Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) SmartGrowth Areas

What are the share of trips on the facility serving RCP Smart GrowthAreas?

Share of trips on facility serving existing/planned Metropolitan Center, Urban Center iscalculated, using select link analysis

5 Facilitates Fastrak/Carpool and Transit MobilityDoes the project contain Fastrak/carpool/Managed Lane facilitiesand/or regional or corridor transit service?

Projects will receive points if they include FasTrak/carpool/Managed Lane facility,and/or regional or corridor transit services identified in the Regional Plan which is thenweighted by combined carpool person volume plus transit person volume

Healthy Environment and Comm 6 Located in a High Crash Rate Area Is the project located in an area with a high vehicular crash rate? Regional percentage of crash rate measured against statewide average

7 Minimizes Habitat and Residential ImpactsDoes the project minimize negative habitat and residential impacts?

Proximity analysis of preserve areas, native habitats, and residential housing stock(more than two dwelling units per acre)

A) What is the change in CO2 emissions from implementing theproject?

Change in CO2 emissions

B) What is the change in smog forming pollutants fromimplementing the project?

Change in smog forming pollutants

9 Physical Activity Does the project increase physical activity? Increase in time engaged in moderate transportation-related physical activity

A) What percentage of the project users are from communities ofconcern?

Select link used to determine origins and destinations served, communities of concernproportion of total users estimated

B) What is the number of daily person-hours saved for communitiesof concern?

Daily person-hours saved for communities of concern population

11 Provides Accessibility to Indian Reservations What percentage of users of the project access Indian Reservations?Select link used to determine origins and destinations served, total trips to/from Indianreservation areas calculated

Vibrant Economy 12 Access to Jobs Does the project improve access to jobs? Weighted average number of jobs accessible in 30 minutes by auto

A) How many trucks are served by the project? Number of medium and heavy truck trips served by facility

B) Does the project improve average travel time for freight? Total travel time savings for medium and heavy truck classes.

14 Project Cost-Effectiveness What is the cost effectiveness of the project? Weighted project evaluation criteria divided by annualized capital costs plus projectlife operations and maintenance

8 Green House Gas (GHG) and Pollutant Emissions

13Serves Goods Movement and Relieves FreightSystem Bottlenecks/Capacity Constraints

Provides Accessibility and Congestion Relief toCommunities of Concern

10

57

Attachment 1

Preliminary Draft Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria Prepared July 3, 2013

Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals

No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation

High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Connector

Innovative Mobility and Planning 1 Serves Regional and/or Corridor Transit Routes What is the 2050 daily transit passenger ridership? Range of transit ridership using the connector

2 Provides Congestion Relief What is the number of daily person-hours saved? Number of person-hours saved

Healthy Environment & Commun 3 Minimizes Habitat and Residential Impacts Does the project minimize negative habitat and residential impacts? Proximity analysis of preserve areas, native habitats, and residential housing stock(more than two dwelling units per acre)

A) What is the change in CO2 emissions from implementing theproject?

Change in CO2 emissions

B) What is the change in smog forming pollutants fromimplementing the project?

Change in smog forming pollutants

5 Provides Access to Evacuation RoutesDoes the project provide evacuation access for regional hazard areasincluding federally recognized Indian reservations?

Proximity analysis of hazard areas (weighted by population and employment)

Vibrant Economy 6 Project Cost-Effectiveness What is the cost effectiveness of the project? Weighted project evaluation criteria divided by annualized capital costs plus projectlife operations and maintenance

Freeway Connector

Innovative Mobility & Planning 1 Provides Congestion Relief What is the change in person-hours saved from implementing theproject?

Change in person-hours saved

Healthy Environment & Commun 2 Minimizes Habitat and Residential Impacts Does the project minimize negative habitat and residential impacts?Proximity analysis of preserve areas, native habitats, and residential housing stock(more than two dwelling units per acre)

A) What is the change in CO2 emissions from implementing theproject?

Change in CO2 emissions

B) What is the change in smog forming pollutants fromimplementing the project?

Change in smog forming pollutants

4 Located in a High Crash Rate Area Is the project located in an area with a high vehicular crash rate? Regional percentage of crash rates measured against statewide averages

5 Provides Access to Evacuation RoutesDoes the project provide evacuation access for regional hazard areasincluding federally recognized Indian reservations?

Proximity analysis of hazard areas (weighted by population and employment)

Vibrant Economy 6 Serves Goods Movement How many trucks are served by the project? Number of medium and heavy truck trips served by facility

7 Project Cost-Effectiveness What is the cost effectiveness of the project? Weighted project evaluation criteria divided by annualized capital costs plus projectlife operations and maintenance

4 GHG and Pollutant Emissions

3 GHG and Pollutant Emissions

58

Preliminary Draft Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria Prepared July 3, 2013

Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals

No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation

Transit Services

Innovative Mobility and Planning 1Provides Time Competitive/Reliable TransitService

What is the percentage of the route located in priority treatment?Analysis of percentage or transit route within dedicated transit guideway; dedicatedarterial lane, interrupted rail, or managed lane; or HOV lane or arterial spottreatment

2 Serves Daily TripsWhat is the number of additional daily transit trips resulting from the project?

Change in daily transit linked trips

3 Daily System Utilization What is the daily transit utilization? Daily passenger miles/daily service seat miles (system wide)

Healthy Environment and Commu 4 GHG Emissions What is the change in CO2 emissions from implementing the project? Change in CO2 emissions

5 Physical Activity Does the project increase physical activity? Increase in time engaged in moderate transportation-related physical activity

6 Serves RCP Smart Growth AreasWhat are the share of trips on the transit service serving RCP SmartGrowth areas?

Share of trips on transit service serving existing/planned Metropolitan Center, UrbanCenter is calculated, using select link analysis

7 Provides Accessibility to Communities of Concern Does the project increase transit usage by communities of concern? Change in total transit trips by communities of concern population

8Provides Accessibility to Federally RecognizedIndian Reservations

Does the transit service serve federally recognized IndianReservations?

Change in total transit trips to/from Indian Reservations

Vibrant Economy 9 Access to Jobs Does the project increase work trips by transit? Change in daily transit linked work trips

10 Project Cost-Effectiveness What is the cost effectiveness of the project? Weighted project evaluation criteria divided by annualized capital costs plus projectlife operations and maintenance

59

Preliminary Draft Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria Prepared July 3, 2013

Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals

No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation

Rail Grade Separation

Innovative Mobility and Planning 1Peak-Day Total Delay Exposure Index (PDEI)Factor

Product of the existing average daily traffic (ADT), the total numberof trains, and an average train crossing delay time factor

Calculation based on average daily traffic, total number of trains, train crossing delayfactor, and mathematical constant

2 Pedestrian BenefitsAssign points based on number of pedestrians served in top fourhours

Grade separation pedestrian crossing counts

3 Bus Operations BenefitsAssign points based on number of buses served an hour, as well asproximity to transit center

Grade separation number of buses served

4Provides Congestion Relief for Communities ofConcern

What is the share of communities of concern population in theproximity of the project?

Ratio of communities of concern share of population within half mile of project tocommunity of concern share of regional population

Healthy Environment and Commu 5 Accident HistoryAccident history in the past five years involving vehicles, pedestrians,and bicycles with trains, not including accidents involved inattempted suicides

Number of qualifying accidents

6 Peak-Period Exposure Index FactorProduct of the existing high directional traffic and the totalmeasured blocking delay during the same three hours of the dayexperiencing the highest congestion at the crossing

Calculation based on vehicle traffic during a selected three hour period, total blockingdelay during same period, and mathematical constant for time period

7 Proximity to Noise Sensitive Receptors Assign points using rules based on proximity to sensitive receptorsProximity analysis based on rail crossing located within 200 to 500 feet of sensitivereceptors

8 Benefit to Emergency ServicesAssign points based on proximity to emergency service provider andlack of nearby alternative grade-separated crossing

Proximity analysis based on emergency service providers and alternative gradeseparation crossing

9 GHG Emissions What is the change in CO2 emissions from implementing the project? Difference in GHG based on base year with/without project.

Vibrant Economy 10 Truck Freight OperationsAssign points based on the percentage of daily traffic of Class 4 toClass 13 (as defined by FHWA)

Percentage of daily truck traffic

11 Funding RequestPoints awarded for the percentage of total project costs contributedby the local agency including funds already committed from state,federal, or other source

Percentage of local contribution

12 Project Cost-Effectiveness What is the cost effectiveness of the project? Weighted project evaluation criteria divided by annualized capital costs + project lifeoperations and maintenance

Regional Housing Needs Assessme 13 RHNAHow many low income housing units are produced by thejurisdiction?

Based on number of lower income housing units produced in accordance with RHNAAlternative 3

60

Preliminary Draft Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria Prepared July 3, 2013

Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals

No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation

Goods Movement: Maritime Project

Innovative Mobility and Planning 1Relieves Freight System Bottlenecks/CapacityConstraints and Reduces Delay

Does the project improve average travel time for freight? Based on speed or flow of freight conveyance (ability to move freight)

2Improves Freight System Management/Efficiency

Does the project include freight management systems, strategies,and/or technologies to improve efficiency, velocity?

Based on facilitation of information transmittal improving network integration

Healthy Environment and Commu 3 Improves freight system and/or modal safetyDoes the project accommodate features that enhance safety and/orenhance national security?

Analysis whether project increases movement of military cargo; provides a bufferbetween freight and non-freight modes; and enhances safety

4 Minimizes Community Impacts Does project minimize/address community impacts? Does the project provide a buffer between freight uses and residential development?

5 Minimizes Habitat and Residential Impacts Does the project minimize/address environmental/habitat impacts?Proximity analysis of preserve areas, native habitats, and residential housing stock(more than two dwelling units per acre)

6 Minimizes Communities of Concern ImpactsWhat is the share of Communities of Concern in the proximity of theproject?

Ratio of Communities of Concern share of population within half mile of project toCommunities of Concern share of regional population

7 GHG Emissions Does the project have the potential to reduce GHG?Assign points if project employs technology or other project element that has thepotential reduces GHG (e.g., shore power)

Vibrant Economy 8 Throughput How much additional freight can be accommodated by the project? Capacity for additional freight

9 Project Cost-EffectivenessHow does the project rank against others with respect to cost/projectcapacity?

Total capital cost/increased capacity in tons

Goods Movement: Rail Intermodal

Innovative Mobility and Planning 1Relieves Freight System Bottlenecks/CapacityConstraints and Reduces Delay

Does the project improve average travel time for freight? Based on intermodal transfer time and travel time

2Improves Freight System Management/Efficiency

Does the project include freight management systems, strategies,and/or technologies to improve efficiency, velocity?

Based on facilitation of information transmittal improving network integration

Healthy Environment and Commu 3 Improves freight system and/or modal safetyDoes the project accommodate features that enhance safety and/orenhance national security?

Based on whether project includes risk abatement features or safety enhancements

4 Minimizes Community Impacts Does project minimize/address community impacts? Does the project provide a buffer between freight uses and residential development?

5 Minimizes Habitat and Residential Impacts Does the project minimize/address environmental/habitat impacts?Proximity analysis of preserve areas, native habitats, and residential housing stock(more than two dwelling units per acre)

6 Minimizes Communities of Concern ImpactsWhat is the share of communities of concern population in theproximity of the project?

Ratio of communities of concern share of population within half mile of project tocommunities of concern share of regional population

7 GHG Emissions Does the project have the potential to reduce GHG?Assign points if project employs technology or other project element that has thepotential reduces GHG (e.g., shore power)

Vibrant Economy 8 Throughput How much additional freight can be accommodated by the project? Capacity for different car loads

9 Project Cost-EffectivenessHow does the project rank against others with respect to cost/projectcapacity?

Total capital costs/increased capacity in tons

61

Preliminary Draft Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria Prepared July 3, 2013

Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals

No. Criteria Description Proposed Calculation

Goods Movement: Air Cargo

Innovative Mobility and Planning 1Relieves Freight System Bottlenecks/CapacityConstraints and Reduces Delay

Does the project improve average travel time for freight? Based on speed or flow of freight conveyance (ability to move freight)

2Improves Freight System Management/Efficiency

Does the project include freight management systems, strategies,and/or technologies to improve efficiency, velocity?

Based on facilitation of information transmittal improving network integration

Healthy Environment and Commu 3 Improves freight system and/or modal safetyDoes the project accommodate features that enhance safety and/orenhance national security?

Analysis whether project provides a buffer between freight and non-freight modes;enhances national security; and enhances safety

4 Minimizes Community Impacts Does project minimize/address community impacts? Does the project provide a buffer between freight uses and residential development?

5 Minimizes Habitat and Residential Impacts Does the project minimize/address environmental/habitat impacts?Proximity analysis of preserve areas, native habitats, and residential housing stock(more than two dwelling units per acre)

6 Minimizes Communities of Concerns ImpactsWhat is the share of communities of concern populations in theproximity of the project?

Ratio of communities of concern share of population within half mile of project tocommunities of concern share of regional population

7 GHG Emissions Does the project have the potential to reduce GHG?Assign points if project employs technology or other project element that has thepotential reduces GHG (e.g., shore power)

Vibrant Economy 8 Throughput How much additional freight can be accommodated by the project? Capacity for additional freight

9 Project Cost-EffectivenessHow does the project rank against others with respect to cost/projectcapacity?

Total capital cost/increased capacity in tons

62

RIDING TO 2050: THE SAN DIEGO REGIONAL BICYCLE PLAN EVALUATION CRITERIA SUMMARY

The following is a summary of the evaluation criteria used to prioritize projects for inclusion in the Regional Bicycle Network identified in Riding to 2050: The San Diego Regional Bicycle Plan. The criteria include three components:

1. Demand‐Based Criteria

2. Facilities‐Based Criteria

3. Cost‐to‐Need Ratio

Demand‐Based Criteria

Location in Metropolitan Center/Urban Center/Town Center Smart Growth Opportunity Areas

Facilities‐based Criteria:

1. Fills in facility gaps

2. Existence of funding for unbuilt segment

3. Crash density in project area

4. Number of public comments received regarding segment

Cost‐to‐Need Ratio

Cost‐to‐Need Ratio = (Demand‐based score + Facilities‐based score)/Cost weighted by facility type

These criteria will be significantly refined to address the variety of bicycle and pedestrian projects that will be included in the Regional Plan.

63

Attachment 2