DATE: June 12, 2018
SUBJECT:
Title
INFORMATIONAL UPDATE ON THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS’ REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY
Body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In October 2011, the Board of Directors for the San Diego Association of Governments approved the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy, a blueprint devised to balance the region’s mobility modes for the next 30 years. The ultimate plan may include a combination of projects, including freeway widening, new trolley routes, additional bicycle paths, expanded bus service, and other mobility improvements. The mix and number of projects will be limited to the funds available and restrictions on how the funds can be spent. The Sustainable Communities Strategy addresses how the San Diego region over the years will reduce greenhouse gas emissions to state mandated levels.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
Accept the informational update
Body
FISCAL IMPACT:
There are no fiscal impacts to the District.
Compass Strategic Goals:
This agenda item supports the following Strategic Goal(s).
• A vibrant waterfront destination where residents and visitors converge.
• A Port with a comprehensive vision for Port land and water uses integrated to regional plans.
• A Port that is a safe place to visit, work and play.
• A financially sustainable Port that drives job creation and regional economic vitality.
DISCUSSION:
The San Diego region’s economy and its quality of life are largely dependent on the ease of mobility throughout the county and the availability of transportation options for residents and visitors.
Much of the job of planning and paying for public street and road improvements, mass transit, bike paths, and other transportation projects in the region resides with the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), the metropolitan planning organization for the county.
The blueprint for SANDAG’s work plan is San Diego Forward: the 2019-2050 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). The RTP and SCS were approved in October 2011 by the SANDAG Board of Directors, which is comprised of mayors and city councilmembers from San Diego County’s 18 cities, as well as members of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors.
The RTP and the SCS strive to create a balanced transportation system throughout the region over the next 30 years. It’s a daunting task since the system has to serve a diverse mobility mix that includes low-wage workers, suburban commuters, freight movers, active duty and civilian military, students, tourists, retirees, and the county’s 18 federally-recognized Native American tribes - the most of any county in the U.S.
At the same time, the SCS requires that the transportation plan reduce greenhouse gas emissions over time to state mandated levels. The San Diego region is the first in the state to have a regional transportation plan and a sustainable communities strategy.
The RTP envisioned $214 billion in local, state, and federal transportation funds flowing into the region over the next nearly four decades to pay for transportation projects. Under the plan, about 36 percent would be spent on transit projects over the first 10 years and 34 percent of the funding would pay for the addition of high occupancy vehicle lanes on existing freeways. Another 21 percent would be spent on local roads and streets.
In 2016, The SANDAG Board approved placing Measure A - a regional half-cent sales tax for transportation projects -- before voters. The ballot measure would have raised an estimated $18 billion over 40 years, and allowed SANDAG to leverage that money for additional state and federal funding. But Measure A was defeated in November 2016.
With Measure A’s defeat, SANDAG staffers are now analyzing three funding scenarios out to 2050: “low” revenue of about $100 billion in existing funds only; “medium” revenue of about $150 billion in existing money plus a local sales tax and state and federal funds; and “high” revenue of about $200 billion in existing funds, plus a future regional funding measure and leveraged money.
The SANDAG Board may select a preferred funding scenario as early as fall 2018.
General Counsel’s Comments:
The Office of the General Counsel reviewed this agenda as to form and legality.
Environmental Review:
The proposed presentation does not constitute a “project” under the definition set forth in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378 because no direct or indirect changes to the physical environment would occur. CEQA requires that the District adequately assess the environmental impacts of projects and reasonably foreseeable activities that may result from projects prior to the approval of the same. Any project developed as a result of Board’s action or direction that requires the District or the Board’s discretionary approval resulting in a physical change to the environment will be analyzed in accordance with CEQA prior to such approval. CEQA review may result in the District, in its sole and absolute discretion, requiring implementation of mitigation measures, adopting an alternative, including without limitation, a “no project alternative” or adopting a Statement of Overriding Consideration, if required. The current Board direction in no way limits the exercise of this discretion. Therefore, no further CEQA review is required.
In addition, the proposed presentation complies with Section 35 of the Port Act, which allows the Board to do all acts necessary and convenient for the exercise of its powers. The Port Act was enacted by the California Legislature and is consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine. Consequently, the proposed Board action is consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine.
The proposed presentation does not allow for “development,” as defined in Section 30106 of the California Coastal Act, or “new development,” pursuant to Section 1.a. of the District’s Coastal Development Permit (CDP) Regulations because they will not result in, without limitation, a physical change, change in use or increase the intensity of uses. Therefore, issuance of a Coastal Development Permit or exclusion is not required. However, development within the District requires processing under the District’s CDP Regulations. Future development, as defined in Section 30106 of the Coastal Act, will remain subject to its own independent review pursuant to the District’s certified CDP Regulations, PMP, and Chapters 3 and 8 of the Coastal Act. The Board’s direction or action in no way limits the exercise of the District’s discretion under the District’s CDP Regulations. Therefore, issuance of a CDP or exclusion is not required at this time.
Equal Opportunity Program:
Not applicable.
PREPARED BY:
Ronald Powell,
Program Manager, Government & Civic Relations