Item 14 - I-15 Corridor Major Investment Study Analysis
MTDB <!pI
Metropol~an Trans~ Development Board
-
1255ImperiaIAvenue,Su~e1000 Item No. -32
San Diego. CA 92101-7490 Agenda
(619) 231-1466
FAX (619) 234-3407
Board of Directors Meeting CIP 432.1
July 13, 1995
Subject:
1-15 CORRIDOR MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION:
At the recent Board workshop meeting, a request was made for an
update on the 1-15 Corridor Major Investment Study. This report
will highlight the work to date and outline the key tasks and
milestones ahead.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the MTD Board of Directors receive this report for
information.
~
Budget ImDact
None, The study is funded by federal Section 9 planning grants
(80 percent) and local TransNet capital monies (20 percent).
DISCUSSION:
OVERVIEW
A comprehensive study of transit needs in the 1-15 corridor was
the subject of much Board discussion in 1992 and 1993, At the
urging of the Board, staff investigated the pOSSibility for a
federally sponsored study.
The 1-15 Corridor Major Investment Study formally got under way in
July 1993, when our consultant team, headed by Parsons
Brinckerhoff, began work, The original intent of the study was an
advance planning effort to evaluate long-term transit needs in the
1-15 corridor (defined as the area between Centre City San Diego
and MTDB's northern service area boundary at the North County Fair
shopping center, including the I-IS, SR 15/SR 94, and SR 163
freeway corridors; see Attachment A). The study was to conform
with the, then, federal Alternatives Analysis process,
Member Agencies:
Cllyof Chula Vllta, City 01 Coronado. City of EI Cajon, City 01 Imperial a.ach, CllyOI La Mesa, City 01 L.emon Grov.. City 01 Nalle".l City, City 01 Pow.y, City 01 San Diego e,l. 0'
Sant.., County of Sa" Diego. Stale 01 Clhlorn..
olitan Tra"sit Developme"t Board IS Coordinator 01 tl'le Metropohtar1 TranSit System and 1$ Regulatory AuthOrity for ,..I Para'ransll AdmlnlstrallOi"'
1 of 10 'or, Corpora""n, ;; San 0"'110 T,.n,;! Corpo,.',on i SO' O..go TroUe, Ine and .' San O..go & A"z~tJt'T't1995 comffEM
14
"--..-...
Since the study's beginning, two key events have taken place to
change the scope of the study:
l. In May 1994, the study scope of work was completely revised
to conform to the new federal Major Investment Study (MIS)
procedures and guidelines that replaced the old Alternatives
Analysis process, The MIS process requires a comprehensive
look at the total transportation needs in a corridor,
meaning the identification of all reasonable transit ~
highway alternatives to address those needs. Caltrans, a
co-lead in the study, will be actively involved in the
evaluation of the highway alternatives,
Because of the large number of modal, alignment, and opera-
tional variations, the study has been divided into three
phases to help narrow the options in a logical fashion that
emphasizes ongoing, proactive public involvement. Since
each subsequent phase involves a more detailed level of
analysis than the previous one, the aim is to eliminate,
early on, those alternatives that do not have a reasonable
chance of becoming the preferred alternative, All alterna-
tives considered at each study phase will be documented in
the final Evaluation Report, and they will be used for
justification of the preferred alternative recommendation.
2. In February 1994, the North San Diego County Transit
Development Board (NSDCTDB) of Directors voted to allocate
funding for adding the segment of I-IS between North County
Fair and downtown Escondido to our study. At the May 11,
1995 meeting, the Board approved amending our consultant
contract to add the NSDCTDB segment, Making this addition
allows us to evaluate the full I-IS corridor between Centre
City San Diego and downtown Escondido,
STUDY PROGRESS TO DATE
Much of the work on the study thus far has centered on three major
areas, as discussed below,
Initial Set of Alternatives
As mentioned above, the study is organized in three phases, In
the Phase 1 work now under way, we are evaluating a full spectrum
of highway and transit alternatives based on input from other
agencies, businesses, and community groups, These alternatives
include: light rail transit (LRT), higher performance rail
options, express bus system using expanded High-Occupancy-Vehicle
(HOV) lane facilities, hybrid (or combination) rail/express bus
systems, highway expansion/additions, and congestion-pricing
strategies. Order-of-magnitude cost estimates, patronage fore-
casts, and potential environmental impacts are among the factors
that will be analyzed to determine which combination of modal,
alignment, operational, and policy variations should be included
-2-
2 of 10 JUL 1 8 1995 ITEM 14
with our Initial Set of Alternatives to be carried forth for more
detailed analysis.
A sampling of some key issues being evaluated includes:
0 Limited rights-of-way along the SR 163 segment raise a
concern about where rail or HOV alignments can be placed
without having to resort to extensive aerial structure
and/or tunneling sections. The Sand 6 percent grades
leading in and out of Mission Valley also present
operational challenges for rail alternatives.
0 While there are reserved rights-of-way for rail or bus
transit in the future SR IS/40th Street corridor, right-of-
way constraints and grade issues exist both to the north and
south of the Mid-City area, Access to many potential
station sites through the Kearny Mesa/Tierrasanta and
East San Diego/Golden Hill areas is limited due to
topography.
0 Kearny Mesa has become the largest employment area in the
region but, unlike Centre City, it has dispersed land use
development patterns that cannot be served easily by two or
three station locations, With parking plentiful and usually
free, the challenge will be to design effective alternatives
to single-occupant automobile tripmaking.
0 North of Kearny Mesa, the low-density suburban land use
~ patterns are of concern, since very few residents and
businesses are located within walking distance of station
locations. The results of the transit/land use component
of the study (discussed below) will be an important
consideration in determining the effectiveness of rail
options in these areas. While express bus options may be
better able to penetrate areas outside the immediate freeway
corridor, the question becomes one of how to design a system
that is cost-effective from an operating standpoint.
0 There have been several suggestions to consider higher speed
rail options (e,g., magnetic levitation trains, monorails)
to counter the long travel distances. While higher speed
modes may be desirable, compatibility with our existing LRT
system is a concern. In addition, based on our research to
date, there are few, if any, urban applications of most of
these technologies by which to judge cost-effectiveness and
rel iabil ity.
0 There are no plans to expand the current highway system
in the study area (other than the completion of the
SR IS/40th Street project). While freeway widening is
always an option, its cost-effectiveness and community/
environmental impacts may present fatal flaws. Constructing
new HOV facilities is an option that will be fully
evaluated; although, in many areas, limited rights-of-way
may require widening of the entire freeway, Policy options,
-3-
3 of 10 JUL 1 8 1995 ITEM 14
--- ---
such as expansion of SANDAG's I-IS congestion pricing
program, will be examined to see if greater efficiency of
existing highway facilities can be made.
Public Involvement
The new MIS process emphasizes .proactive public participation"
that encourages and seeks out involvement from the beginning of
the study and throughout its course, Towards this end, staff has
been actively involved in developing a process that will maximize
community involvement. As the study first got under way,
introductory meetings were held with all of the recognized
community planning groups throughout the corridor, as well as with
other civic and business groups, to acquaint them with the study.
This past fall and winter, as we began to first develop our study
alternatives, we gathered input from our Project Advisory
Committees, These are small group meetings spread throughout the
corridor. Because the study area is 35 miles long, we felt" that
smaller subgeographic group settings (there are 12 groups; see
list in Attachment B) afford the ability to concentrate on issues
of interest to the communities in a particular area. .
We have also met with other community, civic, and business groups,
as needed, to discuss specific issues. To date, we have had 125
meetings with the community,
- Technical Backoround Studies
There have been several technical background studies that have
been completed on the following subjects:
0 Hioh-Soeed Bus Svstems - This report provides background for
our express bus alternatives; it deals with other cities in
North America that have developed extensive high-speed bus
systems.
0 Hioh-Occuoancv-Vehicle (HOV) Desion Manual - This manual
serves as a resource for both MTDB and Caltrans in providing
design guidelines for alternate HOV lane designs, drop-ramp
structures, on-line stations, etc.
0 Transit/land Use Analvsis - This report assesses existing
and future potential for better integration of transit and
land use, especially around station sites. In the final
study Evaluation Report, a second phase of analysis will
make specific land use change recommendations on the final
set of alternatives under evaluation, The potential for
such changes will be used as a criterion in the selection of
a preferred alternative.
-4-
4 of 10 JUL 1 8 1995 ITEM 14
0 Hiah Performance Rail Technoloaies - Given the length of
the corridor, there has been a fair amount of interest in
examining alternatives that could provide a higher speed
operation than conventional light rail service. This report
summarizes various rail technologies available and offers an
assessment on costs and reliability.
FUTURE TASKS
The bulk of Phase 1 work (Initial Set of Alternatives) is
scheduled for completion this fall, As we develop the draft
Initial Set of Alternatives Report, another set of PAC meetings
will be held to review our findings and help develop recommenda-
tions for which of the alternatives to carry forth for more
detailed analysis. Based on comments received, a final draft
report will be prepared with recommendations. At that point,
formal public workshops would be conducted prior to reports to the
SANDAG Board of Directors and Caltrans management on concurrence
with the Initial Set of Alternatives. The MTD Board and the
NSDCTD Board would then make the final decisions on which
alternatives to carry into Phase 2, the Conceptual Definition of
Alternatives,
The aim of the Conceptual Definition of Alternatives phase is
to provide sufficient technical and policy guidance to reduce
the set of alternatives to no more than six mode-, operational-,
and alignment-specific options, More detailed information is
- developed on ridership potential, capital and operating costs,
operational issues, as well as general assessments of physical
environment and social/economic impacts, Phase 3 represents a
refinement of those alternatives carried forth from Phase 2.
This is where the bulk of the environmental impact and financial
analysis is conducted to present a clear picture of the trade-offs
between the alternatives, Such information will be needed by the
Board in making a decision on the preferred alternative.
In a follow-on study, preliminary engineering and environmental
documents will be prepared for the preferred alternative.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
As previously reported to the Executive Committee, our project
schedule has been adversely impacted by delays experienced by
SANDAG in updating its transportation modelling package. In
addition, the 1-15 MIS was slowed down earlier this year due to
reductions in our corridor planning staff, These two factors
combined resulted in a six-month delay to the original project
schedule. The SANDAG model updates are now complete, and
additional staff resources will be made available with the soon-
to-be-completed Mid-Coast study, MTDB and SANDAG staffs are now
developing a formalized modelling process and schedule to minimize
any further delays, The initial runs will begin this month.
-5-
5 of 10 JUL 1 8 1995 ITEM 14
->.~.... --
Once the modelling process has been finalized, we will be able to
update the 1-15 MIS schedule, It appears that the study will be
scheduled for completion in late 1997. Along with the delays
mentioned above, this date includes additional time to ensure
adequate public review at important juncture points in the study.
Key dates for Executive Committee and Board review over the next
year are as follows:
0 Executive Committee. Fall 1995 - Review of draft Initial Set
of Alternatives Report
0 Executive Committee, Winter 1995 - Review.of public and
agency comments in preparation of Final Initial Set of
Alternatives Report
0 MTD Board, SDrina 1996 - Concurrence on recommendations in
Initial Set of Alternatives Report
0 Executive Committee. Summer 1996 - Review of draft
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives Report
Through periodic agenda items, corridor planning updates'wi11 be
presented to you on the study's progress,
~,).~
omas , arWln
General Manager
TFl:DESchumacher:des:bw
AI-JULl3.132
7/5/95
Attachments: A. Study Area Maps } Board Only
B, Project Advisory Committees
-6-
6 of 10 JUL 1 8 1995 ITEM 14
---
Att. A, '_ 32. 7/13/95, CIP 432.1
"'" ~ South
09"1)10 ~ ~ Esconoido
"'0 Pkwy ) .
- . Via Ral)Cho 0,,0/<'\
NCTO ~ "-
Segment "j North County Fair
; Q<O
,. "e'\
-l~
Lake Hodges ,. . ~<:-c
~ ~.
-<'" c'S . "'\~
\:l" 0 1
~ p -
t ,
.,. "'0
'll I 0
i:' 3
,. ~
. ~
I :D
t'M Bernardo Q.
001"-0. ':'I Ctr, Dr.
\l01(\al .
"l'Ia(\ChO ~
4-5 Ranch Rancho 1
B.rnardo. Espera Rd
Indu.trial Park . Rancho
CO' . B.rnardo
"",? 0 ,
o Q ~~ '.
~/ ~C:-<::J'" "'
'lo~ ~~~ ~
-r\9 '-I ,. C"j
" .:;,
" "'0
-- l' .: & ~
:eC~ ~ ~
N "1 '>>, Q. ~
... ;?o 0
o 1 2M~es \-, 0\9/ ~ m
.. ~ ,~
~~~ ~i' ~ i
.!~ 0;
I ' :D
~ . ,~
, (.) $ TWin Peaks Rd.
Rancho :.l'
p.nuquito.; Carm.1
~ Ranch ...i'
f @r" 0'" '0 Poway Rd.
1.~ ~ ~
Q</>' i.... -tl~\\~ 0 Poway ~
.,,(\. ,~ ,",eC ~ e
C,armel Mtn, Bd. e'''' '...".,.'" -e :>
l~ .,.,.,'..':t III
-<), r:,'IJI" ' ,,';;'< ~ e
$ .,.... E ~ 0
~ ..' ,.{, R- if c..>
,.,.,......,.,.,.,.,.,~'" . t!!r.,~ , ,,' ! ~:~I~.g. Poway Rd.
er ~ ,-J -- ~
. o-'".~ '"
c: .. c.; P
:!{ ..,.... oway ,
-'" 1'\0.:" Poway Rd, Indu.trlal
~ ~el~'i :; Park
al . .,..~ ~poway PKWY.
. Soul..
Mira Mesa :,.. South poway Pkwy.
'# Scrlpp. Ranch North
- MTDB r I I I I I Exisling TlllIioy Lines
:.............. Prqx)sed L.RT Unes
. . -. - PolentJaJ Alignmerns
1-15 TranSit Corridor North Segment . PoIentJaJStaIIlns
A-I
7 of 10 JUL 181995 ITEM 14
1
,,0 -
1-fI."d I South Poway Pkwy,
.
~I, .
-
O\~IO I
call" ~
N "0
:; c: -
c: c I R nch BlvC
0 'iij - ScnPps a
c C' I
Mira Mesa E " Miramar
'" 0 -
U ::E , Res.voir
'" .
u
'"
Cii .
-
Mira Mesa Blvc, ,
- ~O'
I taOO
. "o~.,
c~ lear,e\\ Scripps b'
'?,,. jcanyon Rd. Ranch cr
009. i USIU "
,<-0' ",;. t-
o" - (J
.,,"... ,
:'Iou . ?
\.\0 O. ~# &
U"!; ~
~ Miramar \
~ Wy,
,"!; -
~ \
#
"0 \
c: -
'" I
Miramar Naval Air Station '> -
,... ~
c: -
.., ;;; ,
'"
" - l'
,
- N
I
. 0 2 Miles
,~f Acproxlmale Scale
" .-
" !
~ i' 01
-~ --~ .-,'"
'$>'/;1
"'-'~" .,",
,~ 1
.", I..: ...
.S'.<J 1
~<i> @
"::':':-":':, .:.:..... .. '"", . $2.
",... . '."'.',.,., , "
'...~",..,...' ....., ~ ,f'
, .
.., 0
".,. ,~Ii3,ir.e.rrlO~t,Me.:BI~i.._.__., Jl ~/,,1r~"'Of)l41. l Tierrasanta
.:::.; e .c.
~, g. ,.' Kearny I:; ~ ~S" 8^
(j . Me ~ 15 va'
"\" {- sa - ::D: .
. BalbOa Ave. if I c.1
".,.,......,'...........'...-., .
MTDB I I II I I ExIStlng T roiley I.Jnes
...'....n~____ Proposed LRT I.Jnes
1-15 Transit Corridor Mid-Segment --- Potential Aigmnents
. Potential StalIOns
A-2
8 of 10 JUl 1 8 me; ITEM 14
. - .
3alQpa ,..." I ,-sa1ooa Ave
lit .. ~ I
C.alremOr1l I ,"~ _ 2
.. , \1l I 0
.:1 "':,' . . ,'m '(:; Montgomery 0. _ ~
.
. -',"-r Field.". "
, """"'. '.
_ . . '-Aero-Dr-'" .
"'I ,I ,;;
c Cl's<i . '.: .,,_
G> O"'og. . 'I oF ~O
tQ ,. .--","':",:': t/' ;. oJ'
~ ~.., ,'::--" ..~ ~.
'lo ,.- ,I; 0'
cO C:i
';. .,~,' t3 IS"". M... ~ ~~ ~,
0 ~~..j".
. ~,.:,. ~ 15 0 ~~
.......' .J'. ,t:. <1'.'
w" ~ I ~~" '9,
. .. -i-
- '" . i
J ~ ' .
1 ' ~.
'- ~ -- - :Y.
:,. c: W, t~~'?-- JaCk., - . _, _ ''' 1;
I <J ,', ~ Murolly l'" .O..~., ~_,...-;,
-... ,_ .II'\.~- rr'" ..~~"
~ V'IIey~." I, "onlOzum.'~,d,
." 1'<\ .,~ .'. . "..'.". \'"
-<' . , t (!j "
~,<t-' ,:"':~::O~'!.' "~J ,
' '.. .....< O. .".. . Adams A,. , . ,..
~~ .~;~:.,. M~n .... .....~... ......
San Diego R'v., ,-C," .:.~ V.I..., .~_. _ f,!) E.\ ca\O\"l.~b\
..'..",'".. ~.'^' ',eo.... '" .'"., ' i,'
..........~-.".<<_..-...... c_, ~ ~ _:;
.....,..... . .-.-......", - CD'
" ~. gEI9J",,~I"'~ ;' ."
) sli ~ I.l.....'~!!l,
CRy Hetghl .;: ,.<.~ ..'~'
.:"~hl".9lo/l ~ !-.., North P.r1l: e.. ..
- ~ "you -.:1 ~ UnlVItrSlIY A.... ::j Vi ~ Ql
.. l l'~"
"-':':<:.:, I .... ' ~! 1IIt',:::/ ~ ~ ]
~ " uO"S"1 ,. ~ u _.
"~\" .' "1 i. \ 7( ~.z i C j
Lindbolv" 'Q;; ", · i' 'i \ ,;; I.., 0';
~~~:~:;~~~;~~;:"\',\,lil~.w~u ZooJ ~. '1;.\.(lr~,./i
'''-'0 ...., L'ur j' .. e"",,~, . /""
, '..." ", 0.", ~ .J!!l"
\~"l"'''i''" if. ' ."...,.,.~, ,.'u"".", .' t
- I; ""'~'h
.~i-..L-.~'!'~.y. .. .....-ii'W ,;; 0 I 2 Mdes
.-.~-..~. if ~ "-0'''''''''_,
~ ~ ..,
~. ~<< -"
~ ~; .~ ..... i;y..."a1A'Ie.
. Impenal Ave C')' 1':' ..
...........:.:............................... .......... }" .....,...............,I~e!!:!~~.~~,!,: ,:\..".~~,.w.-.-.... ..'
\. ii
.,.
.. National Ave
";,;,.'
I'
'<',
. '""::.=:::~,.,
MTDB I r, III Exisling Trolley wnes
I , Proposed LRT wnes
1-15 Transit Corridor South Segment -.- PotenIIai Alignments
. POl8nba1 StaIions
A-3
9 of 10 4
-~.._--
Att, B, AI 32, 7/13/95, CIP 432.1
ATTACHMENT B
1-15 CORRIDOR MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY
PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Purpose: Oriented towards community and business leaders, and other
interested members of the public, Meets two to three times per year.
Corridor divided into the following subgeographic areas, from north to south:
0 Escondido area - to be organized by North San Diego County Transit
Development Board
0 Rancho Bernardo/Lake Hodges
0 Rancho Penasquitos/Carmel Ranch/Sabre Springs/Poway
0 Mira Mesa/Scripps Ranch/Miramar Ranch North
0 HAS Miramar
0 Kearny Mesa
0 Tierrasanta/Serra Mesa/Linda Vista
0 Mission Valley
0
0 Hillcrest/Uptown/North Park
0 City Heights/Normal Heights/Kensington-Talmadge
0 Golden Hill/South Park
0 Southeast San Diego
DES:bw
AI -JULl3. #31
6/27/95
8-1
10 of 10 JUL 1 8 1995 ITEM 14 ,