Addendum to the California Transportation Plan 2025
for SAFETEA- LU Compliance
October 2007
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, GOVERNOR
State of California
DALE E. BONNER, SECRETARY
Business, Transportation and Housing Agency
WILL KEMPTON, DIRECTOR
California Department of Transportation
R. GREGG ALBRIGHT, DEPUTY DIRECTOR
Planning and Modal Programs
JOAN C. SOLLENBERGER, CHIEF
Division of Transportation Planning
October 2007
This page intentionally left blank.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary................................................................................................................ 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3
Linking Transportation Planning with Resource/ Environmental Planning................................. 3
Consultation and Comparison................................................................................................. 20
Consideration of Environmental and Natural Resource Issues— Mitigation and
Consultation ............................................................................................................................ 26
Delegated NEPA Responsibilities........................................................................................... 33
Expanded Stakeholder Engagement ...................................................................................... 34
Consistency with State and Local Planned Growth and Economic Development Patterns.... 36
Security and Emergency Management as Stand- Alone Planning Factors ............................. 38
Safety as a Stand- Alone Planning Factor ............................................................................... 42
Include Operations and Management Strategies.................................................................... 46
Include Pedestrian Walkways and Bicycle Facilities............................................................... 48
Consultation with Non- Metropolitan Local Officials and Tribal Governments ......................... 49
Other SAFETEA- LU Opportunities ......................................................................................... 50
Appendices
I. Population Map............................................................................................................... A- 1
II. Statewide and Regional Maps of Transportation and Resources Agencies .................. A- 3
III. Sample Maps for Consultation and Comparison............................................................ A- 7
IV. Collaborative Planning Concept ................................................................................... A- 15
V. Resources for Transportation Planning and Environmental Planning Data ................. A- 17
Funding for this plan was provided
by the California Department of Transportation
State Planning and Research Program.
Project Managers
Nathan Smith, Pam Korte, and
Del Deletetsky
Division of Transportation Planning
Office of State Planning
Graphic Designer
Jonathan K. Lok
This page intentionally left blank.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 1
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
The California Department of Transportation ( Department) is updating the California
Transportation Plan ( CTP) 2025 adopted in June 2006. This updated CTP 2030
Addendum ( Addendum) addresses the new requirements for statewide planning
established by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act -
A Legacy for Users ( SAFETEA- LU).
This legislation authorizes and funds federal transit and highway programs through
Fiscal Year 2009. Signed into law ( Public Law 109- 59) on August 10, 2005,
SAFETEA- LU provides $ 23.4 billion in federal funds to California. Much of
SAFETEA- LU echoes the previous two federal transportation program
authorizations, the recent Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century ( TEA- 21)
passed in 1998, and the earlier Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of
1991 ( ISTEA). However, there are some significant changes that impact the
current CTP.
While SAFETEA- LU maintains the overall structure of TEA- 21, it departs from
previous authorizations in a number of ways. The Department held an initial
“ Consultation Meeting” in January 2007 with stakeholders to discuss changes to the
CTP directed by SAFETEA- LU. Those changes that affect State planning and
policy issues are summarized here and described in more detail in the following
discussions. Together with a description of California’s compliance with each
mandate, they informed the development of this Addendum.
The goal of this CTP 2030 ( Addendum) is to enhance and preserve the State’s
valuable natural resources, while avoiding costly project overruns and delays in
planning and developing transportation infrastructure. SAFETEA- LU provides a
“ historic opportunity” for the State to achieve that goal. Over the past few years
there has been a compelling nationwide call for public agencies to become better
stewards of the environment. SAFETEA- LU has now ratified this call by directing
states to consult and compare transportation related plans, maps, and data with
federal, State, tribal, and local agencies responsible for land use management,
natural resources, environmental protection, conservation, and historic
preservation.
The State of California has been a national leader in documenting environmental
impacts caused by transportation projects and taking actions appropriate to its
stewardship role. SAFETEA- LU now provides an opportunity for California to
redouble its efforts to become a “ real steward” of the environment. It directs those
in the transportation sector to address issues collaboratively with partners in the
resources arena and to partner on solutions that respond to public expectations.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 2
The real challenge ahead at both the State and the regional planning level is
consultation and comparison of plans, maps, and data with natural resources and
environmental agencies, and the resulting mitigation and consultation that may be
required. The key will be determining how to mainstream the consideration of
environmental issues during the early planning process in order to adequately
address consultation, comparison, and mitigation requirements.
The other challenge is linking transportation planning with project level
requirements under National Environmental Protection Act ( NEPA) in order to
promote early consultation and comparison of existing plans, maps, and data
across agencies. Once again, the key for making this linkage will be determining
how to mainstream the consideration of environmental issues early in the planning
process.
Therefore this Addendum is directed at engaging transportation stakeholders in an
open dialogue with resource agencies to identify the “ first steps” in the expansion of
consultation and comparison efforts and in a discussion of potential environmental
mitigation measures. Future plan updates will build upon this Addendum’s
foundation. The more detailed “ follow- on” policies and strategies for these
consultation, comparison, and mitigation efforts will then be addressed in the next
full update of the California Transportation Plan to be initiated in 2008, and in
subsequent updates.
The focus of the remaining sections of this Addendum is to address provisions of
SAFETEA- LU that extend or broaden already existing State policies and strategies
articulated in the CTP 2025. These provisions include: delegating NEPA
responsibilities for California; expanding stakeholder engagement with an emphasis
on visualization techniques; providing access to the statewide plan and update
process on the Internet; promoting the consistency of transportation plans and
transportation improvements with State and local planned growth and economic
development patterns; adding security and safety as new stand- alone planning
factors; including operations and management strategies to ensure the preservation
and most efficient use of the existing transportation system; and reaffirming
consultation with non- metropolitan local officials and federally recognized Native
American Tribal Governments ( Tribal Governments) in the development of the long-range
statewide transportation plan and State Transportation Improvement
Program ( STIP).
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 3
Introduction
The California Transportation Plan 2030 focuses on plans, policies, and processes
that address the provisions of SAFETEA- LU while ensuring compliance with this
statute. The sections below extend or broaden already existing State policies and
strategies articulated in the CTP 2025, and provide a “ roadmap” for the next full
update of the CTP to 2035.
The Department is committed to having the best available planning information to
improve decision making. Since federal regulations require a planning horizon of
20 or more years, this Addendum takes into consideration various updated
projections and extends the CTP’s planning horizon from 2025 to 2030. A map with
updated population projections to 2030 is available for review in Appendix I. The
projections estimate that California’s population will increase to 49 million by 2030.
New data will be addressed in future updates.
Linking Transportation Planning with
Resource/ Environmental Planning
Introduction
The Final Rule for Statewide and Metropolitan Planning under SAFETEA- LU
includes an appendix that addresses the need to link transportation planning with
NEPA project development processes. This linkage could be extended to include
resource and environmental planning. Linking these planning efforts would ensure
that transportation planning and resources agencies consult and compare natural
resources and environmental information ( plans, maps, and data), as directed by
SAFETEA- LU. The desired outcome would be transportation plans and, ultimately,
projects that use natural resources information to enhance and preserve the
environment.
At the State level, a framework for considering environmental issues in the early
planning process was adopted by the California Tri- Agency Partnership
Subcommittee on Collaborative Planning. Under this “ Green Infrastructure” model
( see Figure 1), the process of planning for infrastructure begins long before a
project is proposed. Rather than beginning with a development proposal and then
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 4
determining the impacts and the necessary support infrastructure, the process
begins with the development of a “ policy infrastructure,” followed by the
consideration of the “ green infrastructure.” Building upon that solid foundation, the
“ development infrastructure,” which includes transportation projects, and the
necessary “ support infrastructure” are considered. The premise of this approach is
that consideration of critical environmental issues prior to development proposals
will result in infrastructure that supports our policy and environmental objectives.
FIGURE 1
“ Green Infrastructure” Model
Source: Tri- Agency Partnership Subcommittee on Collaborative Planning.
At the national level, the Federal Highway Administration’s ( FHWA) Planning and
Environment Linkages effort, known as Eco- logical, represents an approach to
transportation decision making that considers environmental, community, and
economic goals early in the planning stage and carries them through project
development, design, and construction. Early consideration of these factors by
Metropolitan Planning Organizations ( MPOs), Councils of Government ( COGs),
Regional Transportation Planning Agencies ( RTPAs), cities, and counties can lead
to an improved and seamless decision- making process that minimizes duplication
of effort. Early consideration at the planning stage is crucial, because the flexibility
to make significant changes decreases once projects are programmed for funding.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 5
Early consideration also promotes environmental protection and encourages
stewardship while reducing delays in project implementation. A graphic that
visually illustrates this concept appears below ( see Figure 2).
Bridging Disciplines Into A More Seamless Process
Bridging transportation planning, environmental planning, and resources staff
disciplines into a more seamless multi- agency process requires the following
support: 1) the successful implementation of context sensitive solutions; 2) the
development of data that is easily accessed and shared by planning and natural
resource staff; 3) the benchmarking of integrated, multi- agency projects that
successfully implement data- sharing processes; and 4) robust integrated planning
and scenario planning programs and tools. Some examples of current federal and
State programs that support and advance this " framework" are identified below.
FIGURE 2
Planning and Environment Linkages
Source: FHWA Brochure: Planning and Environment Linkages
http:// www. environment. fhwa. dot. gov/ ecological/ ecological. pdf.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 6
Eco- Logical Embodying the intent and principles of NEPA and Executive Order
13352 on Facilitation of Cooperative Conservation, “ Eco- Logical: An Ecosystem
Approach to Developing Infrastructure Projects” offers a framework for achieving
greater cooperative interagency conservation. Eco- Logical provides a non-prescriptive
approach that enables federal, State, tribal, and local partners involved
in infrastructure planning, design, review, and construction to work together to
make infrastructure more sensitive to wildlife and their ecosystems. It recognizes
open public and stakeholder involvement as the cornerstone for cooperative
conservation.
Context Sensitive Solutions Context sensitive solutions ( CSS) is a process that
actively engages stakeholders in transportation decision making in order to balance
community values with transportation needs. A successful CSS implementation
process can drive proactive, collaborative, and intelligent behaviors among vested
stakeholders that can result in repeated innovations. These innovations are further
fueled by the synergy and efficiency of focused direction and sustainable decisions,
as well as the increased ownership of the process by engaged stakeholders.
A robust process that embraces the CSS principles and benefits identified below
( see Figure 3) will lead to a successful inter- disciplinary and multi- disciplinary
approach that supports linking transportation and environmental planning.
Adherence to these principles creates leadership that significantly influences
stakeholders by building credibility and trust, while empowering those in the
transportation arena to be more productive partners and intelligent risk takers.
Many of these principles are also key to mainstreaming the consideration of
environmental issues during early planning and addressing the Department’s
environmental stewardship responsibilities.
Context sensitive solutions are achieved through a collaborative, interdisciplinary
approach engaging all stakeholders. Context sensitive solutions use innovative
and inclusive approaches that integrate and balance community, aesthetic, historic,
and environmental values with transportation safety, maintenance and performance
goals. This approach, adopted in Department policy, ensures that local needs are
in balance with broader, multimodal transportation system needs.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 7
FIGURE 3
CSS Principles and Benefits
Source: Deputy Director for Planning and Modal Programs 2006/ 07 Contract for
Performance and Innovation ( adapted).
Developing, Accessing, and Sharing Data
There is a demand for more comprehensive, timely, and accurate natural resources
and conservation data upon which to base decisions. During outreach for this
Addendum, the public highly rated the need for improved natural resources data on
a regional scale to address cumulative impacts of transportation projects. The
success of SAFETEA- LU requirements to consult and compare plans, maps, and
data is dependent upon access to complete, high quality data. Such data must be
developed to ensure informed decisions, which will in turn protect and conserve
California’s natural resources.
CSS Principles CSS Benefits
• Use interdisciplinary teams
• Involve all stakeholders
• Seek broad- based public involvement
• Use full range of communication methods
• Achieve consensus on purpose and need
• Know difference between standards and
guidelines
• Use full range of design choices
• Consider all alternatives and modes
• Maintain environmental harmony
• Consider community and social issues
• Provide aesthetic treatments and enhance-ments
• Provide a safe facility for users and commu-nity
• Track and meet all commitments
• Create lasting value for the community
• Use all resources effectively ( within time
and budget)
• Expedite acceptance by stakeholders
• Decrease cost and time for project delivery
• Decrease construction cost and time
• Add value
• Increase opportunities for partnering, shared
funding and joint use/ development.
• Facilitate sustainable decision and invest-ments
• Increase stakeholder satisfaction, ownership
and trust
• Increase mobility for all users
• Improve safety
• Ease maintenance and operations
• Protect wildlife, habitat, and natural re-sources
• Provide less impact on open space and
farmland
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 8
In addition, natural resources and conservation data developed with State
standards would reduce development costs and build regional assessments across
jurisdictions that conserve the State’s natural resources. Continued funding for
consistent data across local jurisdictions would provide the springboard for
improved data overall and create a centralized delivery mechanism.
Great Places Program The Great Places Program ( GPP) is a collaborative effort
designed to improve the protection and conservation of natural resources in
California. Jointly directed by the Resources Agency, California Business,
Transportation and Housing Agency, California Environmental Protection Agency,
and Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, the GPP seeks to enhance the
effectiveness and efficiency of land use and transportation decision making. The
program facilitates the development of accurate, comprehensive natural resources
and conservation data; has developed Geographic Information System ( GIS)
analytical tools for use by local and regional decision makers; and promotes access
to State natural resources and conservation data by the public as well as local,
regional, and State decision makers.
State, regional, and local agencies have difficultly obtaining current, high- resolution
State and local- level natural resources and planning data in order to make informed
land use, program, and project decisions. While the Resources Agency’s California
Environmental Resources Evaluation System ( CERES) program has developed the
Land Use Planning Information Network ( LUPIN) web portal ( http:// ceres. ca. gov/
planning/) for General Plans and General Plan amendments, local governments
often lack the resources and incentive to maintain content on this site. Also, habitat
information, parcel information, and California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA)
data are not available in one central location, nor are they integrated and digitized
for easy use. Because data are not usually developed with consistent standards
( classification categories and collection methods) across programs or jurisdictions,
it takes significant time and resources to collect and digitize various data sets into a
common spatial format.
Decision makers at all levels will benefit from early access to the best available,
integrated natural resources and planning spatial data. Access to this data will
make it significantly easier to:
• Reduce costs of project development and implementation.
• Develop consensus on planning projects and policies.
• Facilitate comprehensive and early program evaluation.
• Conserve and protect environmental resources.
A centralized online data access system would allow planners to find, access, and
use more natural resources and conservation information when developing regional
transportation plans, General Plans, and General Plan updates or amendments. If
infrastructure and land use planning agencies at all levels of government used this
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 9
easy access system and had access to more comprehensive natural resources and
conservation data, they could significantly reduce the time and costs of complying
with State and federal environmental laws and regulations.
California Environmental Resources Evaluation System Tremendous volumes
of data and information about California’s natural environment are generated daily
by both public and private sector organizations. Cataloging and making these
materials “ discoverable” is the primary goal of the CERES program at http://
www. ceres. ca. gov/. CERES accomplishes this via the standards based California
Environmental Information Catalog ( CEIC-- pronounced “ seek”) at http:// gis. ca. gov/
catalog/. The California GIS Council has endorsed CEIC as California’s primary
National Spatial Data Infrastructure node. CERES has also developed and
operates Internet portals around a number of environmental themes like
watersheds ( see http:// cwp. resources. ca. gov/) and land use planning ( see http://
ceres. ca. gov/ planning/) to provide “ one- stop- shops” for environmental data and
information within these domains. Finally, CERES, in partnership with NASA and
the CalSpace program at UC Davis, has developed and operates the California
Spatial Information Library ( CaSIL), a unique, no- cost, web- accessible collection of
spatial data for California.
Web Accessible Data and
Technical Document Catalog
CERES can adapt the
technology tools used for the
CEIC to serve organizational
needs and to organize and
make discoverable a full range
of technical documentation
including GIS or spatial data
( see http:// gis. ca. gov/ catalog/
for example). CEIC is fully
compliant with the federal
National Spatial Data Infrastructure ( NSDI) standards. The catalog embodies a
thesaurus or controlled vocabulary that greatly enhances data and document
cataloging and retrieval.
Web Accessible Library of
Spatial Data CERES can
provide hosting of a collection
of organizational GIS or spatial
data holdings ( see http://
gis. ca. gov/ for an example).
Library holdings are fully
cataloged, viewable as web
accessible maps and can be
made discoverable through the
CEIC referenced above.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 10
California Department of Fish and Game Biogeographic Data Branch The
Biogeographic Data Branch ( Branch) is charged with acquiring, managing, and
sharing biological- geographic data. The Branch is the State's clearinghouse for
biological data and maintains the portal to California biological databases that can
be accessed at the following California Department of Fish and Game ( DFG) web
site: http:// www. dfg. ca. gov/ bdb/. The four Branch programs listed below are of
specific interest to transportation planning:
California Natural Diversity Database The California Natural Diversity Database
( CNDDB) is a program that inventories the status and locations of rare plants and
animals in California. The CNDDB is of interest to transportation planning because
it provides capabilities to:
• Collect, research, and map all documented information for location and
condition of rare and endangered species with detailed, descriptive
information about the habitats, threats, and sources of information for each
mapped location.
• Develop and maintain, in coordination with a number of cooperating groups,
lists of rare plants and animals and maintain status ranks for rare species.
• Provide over 700 active subscribers and users with access to CNDDB data
products.
• Provide expertise to DFG staff and partner organizations on the biology and
ecology of rare taxa ( categories in the biological classification system for all
living organisms to help organize information about the natural world) and on
the proper use of the CNDDB.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 11
Sample CNDDB report showing amount of information available for each of
54,000 observation records in California.
Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program The Vegetation Classification
and Mapping Program ( VegCAMP) facilitates and oversees efforts to develop
accurate and scientifically defensible maps and classifications of vegetation and
habitat throughout the State. VegCAMP is of interest to transportation and
environmental planning because it provides capabilities to:
• Maintain and continue development on data driven vegetation classification
and mapping techniques based on the National Vegetation Classification
System and the Manual of California Vegetation.
• Produce fine- scale, attribute- rich vegetation digital map products on the
DFG’s highest priority landscapes as funding becomes available. The
ultimate goal is to produce large- scale mapping for the entire State of
California.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 12
• Consult on and provide training to external partners wishing to use the
VegCAMP methodology and standards.
• Participate in the interagency State Vegetation Memorandum of
Understanding group to promote data development and classification
standards for California.
Image comparing traditional coarse mapping ( shown with black line) compared with
fine- scale mapping with detailed classification shown as color polygons.
Biogeographic Information and Observation System Biological information is
found on the Biogeographic Information and Observation System ( BIOS). BIOS is
of interest to transportation and environmental planning because it provides:
• A keystone of data management strategy for managing biogeographic
information that exists in DFG and other organizations, and cataloging,
storing, and facilitating the sharing of that information.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 13
• A system populated with data from DFG and by collaborative arrangements
with external organizations.
• A data catalog that currently contains over 200 different spatial databases of
information, including observations of rare, common, or invasive species,
vegetation maps, and critical habitats.
Images from BIOS tutorial on analyzing fish passage data online.
California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System The California Wildlife Habitat
Relationships ( CWHR) System is a state- of- the- art information system on
California's wildlife, and is of interest to transportation planning because it provides:
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 14
• An information system that contains life history, management, and habitat
relationships information on 675 species of amphibians, reptiles, birds, and
mammals known to occur in the State.
• A system that includes larger- scale ( GIS compatible format) species range
maps of all CWHR species and development of range maps for bird and
mammal species of special concern subspecies, and numerous aquatic
species.
Image of sample CWHR range map.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 15
Scenario Planning and Integrated Planning
Scenario Planning Tools and Models Scenario planning tools provide visual and
quantitative feedback using “ sketch planning” software to illustrate the potential
effects of various “ what if” land use and transportation strategies and scenarios to
staff, the public, stakeholders, and decision makers. The Planning for Community
Energy, Economic and Environmental Sustainability ( PLACE3S) scenario planning
model used during Sacramento Area Council of Governments’ ( SACOG) Blueprint
Planning effort ( see California Regional Blueprint Planning Program below) is a
notable example. PLACE3S estimates how different growth scenarios affect
quality- of- life issues such as traffic congestion, air pollution, housing affordability,
recreational opportunities, open space, and more. INDEX is yet another GIS- based
program that uses the “ 4Ds” methodology, which includes density, diversity, design,
and destinations. PLACE3S and INDEX are two similar tools that local and regional
agencies are effectively using for public meetings and scenario planning.
In California, two of the larger MPOs ( SACOG and the San Diego Association of
Governments) are currently implementing regional applications of an integrated
planning model-- the Production Exchange Consumption Allocation System
( PECAS) model ( see discussion on integrated models below).
The eight county COGs participating in the San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Project
have adopted “ UPLAN” as their common urban modeling platform. These COGs
have worked with the UC Davis Information Center for the Environment ( ICE) to
train staff in all jurisdictions and to identify and assemble data representing
environmental constraints. This process resulted in the creation of a common
future “ base case” scenario. These agencies will continue to work together with the
public to develop alternative scenarios based on the modeling tool and Great
Places Program data. The Sierra foothill and mountain region consisting of Alpine,
Amador, and Calaveras Counties have also banded together to use UPLAN and
Great Places Program data for a joint planning process.
California Regional Blueprint Planning Program The California Regional
Blueprint Planning Program is a State initiative to promote the linking of
transportation, land use, housing, environment, economic development, and equity
issues when developing transportation plans and projects. Since the program
began, the State has distributed ten million dollars in funding to California MPOs
and the COGs to conduct comprehensive scenario planning. This has helped
regional leaders, local governments, and stakeholders find consensus on a
preferred growth scenario or " Blueprint” for a 20- year planning horizon, while at the
same time providing a regional framework for collaboration. Federal and State
agencies provide funding and guidance, localities make land use decisions, and
communities supply public input on needs and desires. Regions are well positioned
in this framework since they already have a regional planning process, corridor and
landscape vantage points, and a process for convening stakeholders.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 16
Regional Blueprint Planning typically consists of scenario planning; extensive public
involvement, including those who are traditionally underserved; the innovative use
of visioning tools; the incorporation of environmental and socio- economic data as
part of the visioning process; and performance measures. Through Regional
Blueprint Planning, regional transportation plans can be coordinated with other
planning efforts, such as habitat conservation plans, integrated regional water
management plans, housing plans, and local general plans. The integration and
coordination of these plans is intended to result in planning processes that are
parallel and consistent ( see Figure 4).
FIGURE 4
California’s Regional Blueprint Planning Process: Comprehensive, Collaborative,
and Integrated
Source: California’s Regional Blueprint Planning Program.
The encouragement and funding of the California Regional Blueprint Planning grant
program also demonstrates the State's strong commitment to improve Californians'
quality of life. This planning program will help regions address future housing and
mobility challenges, including congestion and air quality driven by population
growth, changing demographics, the economy, and environmental quality.
The California Regional Blueprint Planning Program should result in regional plans
for more efficient land use patterns and transportation systems that: support
improved mobility and reduced dependency on single- occupant vehicle trips;
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 17
accommodate an adequate supply of housing for all incomes; reduce impacts on
valuable habitat, productive farmland, and air quality; increase resource use
efficiency; promote a prosperous economy; and result in safe and vibrant
neighborhoods. Transportation projects arising from such planning clearly have a
head start in meeting the requirements of SAFETEA- LU.
The Department and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research sponsored
Blueprint Learning Network ( BLN) workshops in 2006 and 2007 to work with MPOs
and COGs in order to further advance their Regional Blueprint Planning efforts.
The BLN workshops provided: a common framework for planning, analysis, and
forecasting of land use, transportation, housing, and environmental factors; an
opportunity for the State and regions to accomplish the regional blueprint plans;
and an opportunity for the regions to learn together as they undertake their planning
processes.
Merced Partnership for Integrated Planning The Merced Partnership for
Integrated Planning ( PIP) program was developed as a pilot for improved
coordination to streamline the planning and the project delivery processes, avoid
environmental impacts, foster collaboration among planning, transportation, and
environmental agencies, and engage the public at the beginning of long- term
transportation planning. Membership on the PIP included FHWA, the US
Environmental Protection Agency ( US EPA), and the Department, who committed
resources to support concerted, cooperative, effective, and collaborative work
among the three agencies.
The PIP included the development of GIS tools for modeling growth and
environmental impacts in order to produce maps and tables resulting from policy
choices at public meetings. The PIP engaged all regionally relevant planning,
natural resources, and regulatory agencies in data sharing exercises to integrate
data important to each agency into the scenario testing and planning process.
Most importantly, the Merced County Association of Governments ( MCAG), the
coordinating partner in the PIP, led an extensive outreach program to engage the
community.
Resources agencies were asked what environmental factors should discourage or
constrain growth, and all agencies were asked to provide all available and relevant
data. This shared information resulted in an Environmentally Sensitive Areas map
and a Prime Agricultural Lands map, which were evaluated at a workshop attended
by representatives of resources agencies, elected officials, and city and county
planners. Contributors included over 20 federal, State, and non- governmental
organizations.
A goal of the PIP was to find a method for responsibly arriving at a consensus plan
with less conflict, particularly in the environmental review phase. Historically,
transportation plan approval has met with considerable public and agency
opposition. In contrast, MCAG approved its Regional Transportation Plan and
received no opposition during the CEQA Environmental Impact Report public
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 18
comment period. Results of the PIP model appear in Figure 5. This demonstration
program helped to define the importance of scenario planning to California’s future
integration of transportation and environmental planning.
FIGURE 5
Results of the Merced PIP
• 800 percent increase in public participation in the transportation planning process
• 89 percent of participants said they enjoyed the PIP project
• 89.1 percent of participants said they learned more about transportation issues
• 30 percent increase in awareness of the RTP among all county residents
• New issues brought to the surface from county groups who had not previously
participated in the process
• Better relationships were built at both the county and city level among civic
organizations, agencies, and residents
• RTP was approved by the MCAG Governing Board and received no opposition
during public comment periods
• Development of an Environmentally Sensitive Areas map based on shared
information from a variety of Resources Agency databases
• Development of a Prime Agricultural Lands map based on input and information from
a variety of agricultural interests
Source: Partnership for Integrated Planning Report.
Collaborative Planning Future California Transportation Plan updates will build
upon interagency collaborative planning efforts, such as the Tri- Agency
Partnership. One of the foundational documents for the Tri- Agency Partnership,
included in the Appendix to this CTP update, illustrates the integration of parallel
planning processes at the State, regional, and local levels with the engagement of
all stakeholders in sharing data and incorporating environmental considerations in
all plans. The next full update of the CTP will address policies and strategies that
continue to support these collaborative planning concepts.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 19
Integrated Land Use/ Economic/ Transportation Models Local, regional, and
State agencies make decisions on a daily basis regarding infrastructure
improvements, land use developments, and economic, social, and environmental
programs, policies, and projects. However, in many cases the complex costs,
benefits, and “ trade- offs” among various choices are unclear to decision makers
due to a lack of data and analyses capabilities. Thus, the potential benefits and
impacts of proposed projects and programs on human and natural populations and
environments are unknown. Currently, existing “ stand- alone” models and
databases used to analyze plans, programs, and projects are “ siloed” and, typically,
not linked to one another. This prevents region- wide analyses on issues such as
habitat corridors and air quality.
Recently, some regional and statewide- level modeling processes have significantly
improved. One of the major successes is the State of Oregon’s development and
application of the PECAS integrated planning model. The PECAS model shows
great promise in effectively linking economic, land use, and transportation data and
tools.
Using this model, Oregon reassessed a proposed set of major transportation
projects and saved $ 6.5 billion when it was determined that the projects would not
achieve the State’s objectives.
During 2005, UC Davis ICE conducted a year- long study for the Department of
integrated land use, economic, and transportation models, including the model that
Oregon developed. This study explored and evaluated several integrated models,
assessed whether such models could improve our ability to evaluate transportation,
economic, and land use strategies, and summarized how such models might be
useful to California’s regions and the State in better understanding these
relationships.
Integrated models have been used in other countries for a number of years. The
UC Davis study found that newly emerging integrated models ( illustrated Figure 6)
are able to effectively link economic, land use, and transportation data and tools, so
that the interactive effects among these complex systems can be more accurately
understood. By providing expanded and more reliable feedback about the
expected results of a wide variety of decisions, integrated models can help public
agencies meet multiple objectives simultaneously. Such models can also save
substantial amounts of money by improving the quality and completeness of
analysis and feedback available to decision makers.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 20
FIGURE 6
Integrated Model Framework
Source: UC Davis Integrated ( Land Use/ Economic/ Transportation) Models Studies,
2006.
Consultation and Comparison
In order to initiate the consultation and comparison process, the Department
consulted with UC Davis ICE staff to help develop a web interface highlighting
resources that transportation planners, agency staff, the public, and others can
access to bridge their understanding of transportation and environmental issues.
Under this agreement, ICE staff created a web site included in the Appendix to this
CTP update. The web site provides links to resource, environmental, and
transportation agency plans, data, and maps for consultation and comparison
during early transportation planning and subsequent activities. This web site
identifies policy or planning documents, as well as maps and data that can be used
for comparing and consulting with agencies and organizations in order to integrate
transportation, land use, environmental, and resources planning.
Early Consultation Consultation allows one or more parties to confer with other
identified parties in accordance with an established process and, prior to taking
action( s), considers the views of the other parties and periodically informs them
about action( s) taken. SAFETEA- LU directs that the CTP will be developed in
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 21
consultation with federal, State, tribal, and local agencies responsible for land use
management, natural resources, environmental protection, conservation, and
historic preservation. As transportation interacts extensively with economic
development, land use, and the environment, the direction from SAFETEA- LU is
clear that consultation will involve comparison of transportation plans to State and
tribal conservation plans or maps, and to inventories of natural or historic
resources.
This multi- agency planning theme echoes throughout this California Transportation
Plan 2030. Early consultation with other agencies is key to identifying problems
and opportunities and creating a cooperative resolution. The comparisons are
complex because of the number of jurisdictional entities and their multiple areas of
expertise and regulatory responsibilities. Even simply identifying the appropriate
resources agencies and locations is a valuable first step in this process. Examples
of a few key resources agencies include: US Army Corps of Engineers; US Fish
and Wildlife; California Department of Fish and Game; and California Department of
Parks and Recreation.
The next full update of the CTP beginning in 2008 provides an opportunity to begin
addressing the specific policies, strategies, and processes that will make early
consultation and consideration of environmental issues a priority in transportation
planning. Each new California Transportation Plan will build upon the prior effort
and document the extent to which this consultation and comparison occurs.
Consultation Meeting: A First Step On January 17, 2007, the Department held a
meeting focused on the expanded consultation requirements under SAFETEA- LU
with stakeholders from federal, State, tribal, and local governments and resource
agencies to discuss efforts at linking transportation, environmental, and resources
planning. The attendees discussed ways to improve collaborative efforts to consult
and compare plans, maps, and data, as well as consultation on mitigation
measures.
More than 60 individuals participated in the meeting, representing a broad cross-section
of agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and Tribes ( see “ Consultation
Stakeholder Participants”). Key issues were identified, and highlights of this
meeting can be viewed at the CTP link to the UC Davis web site at
http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ tpp/ offices/ osp/ ctp. html.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 22
During breakout sessions, participants discussed ways to better link transportation
and environmental planning and collaborative methods to consider environmental
issues. From these sessions five key opportunities were identified to enhance
planning processes that provide the basis for this Addendum and to guide
development of the next full plan update in 2008.
Integrated planning principles Agreement on a core set of planning principles
by all key agencies provides a prelude to cooperative planning.
Coordinated State infrastructure planning This is essential to local planners
who need to understand the infrastructure available for their plans and to State
planners who need to know the assumptions that are being made locally.
Resources Agencies Represented
California Resources Agency
California Department of Fish and Game
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protec-tion
California Department of Parks and Recreation
California Department of Water Resources
California Department of Conservation
Sierra Nevada Conservancy
Representatives of Local Government
California League of Cities
California State Association of Counties
Regional Council of Rural Counties
Legislative Representation
California Senate Transportation and Housing Com-mittee
Academic Representation
UC Davis Information Center for the Environment
UC Davis Road Ecology Center
Non- profit Representatives
California State Parks Foundation
Defenders of Wildlife
Federal Agencies Represented
US Environmental Protection Agency
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Department of Agriculture,
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Federal Highway Administration
Tribal Government Representatives
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
Pechanga Band of Mission Indians
Wiyot Tribe
Transportation and Housing Agencies
Represented
Business Transportation and Housing
Agency
California Department of Transportation
California Transportation Commission
Department of Housing and Community De-velopment
California Rural Counties Task Force
California Council of Governments
Other State Organizations Represented
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
California Energy Commission
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Devel-opment
Commission
CALFED Bay- Delta Program
Consultation Stakeholder Participants
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 23
Transportation planning that addresses regional impacts of multiple
projects Current funding practices often support the fragmentation of projects.
Commitment and leadership are needed to modify systemic and programmatic
barriers to the allocation of resources for " true” regional planning.
Incentives for efficient land use Current incentive is often to zone land and
permit building to yield local governments the highest sales tax revenue
possible rather than the most efficient use of land. Proposed incentives to
encourage efficient land use must be sensitive to regional differences.
The role of the State as a data, information, and education provider for
local planning Appropriately scaled statewide data will aid in making local
planning more efficient, consistent, and seamless.
Comparison Planning regulations implementing SAFETEA- LU define the
expanded consultation requirement with natural resources and environmental
agencies to include the comparison of transportation plans, maps, and data with
those of federal, State, and tribal wildlife, land management, and regulatory
agencies. During this and future updates of the CTP, the State will focus on data
sharing, especially sharing of GIS data, between agencies concerned with land use
and transportation, as well as natural, environmental, and cultural resources
systems.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 24
Source: FTA webcast, 2006.
Comparing plans, maps, and data with resources agencies will be a new activity for
most MPOs and RTPAs as they update their Regional Transportation Plans.
However, multi- agency regional planning models exist in California, most notably in
the Merced Partnership for Integrated Planning discussed earlier. Regional
Blueprint Planning, supported by BLN Workshops throughout the State, also
provides a planning model for multi- agency engagement. The State should
continue to encourage such comprehensive planning approaches that partner
transportation planning with land use and environmental planning.
An initial set of sample maps for use during the consultation and comparison
process at both the State and regional levels is included in the Appendix to this
CTP update. These infrastructure, environmental, and resources maps and tools
include, among other things, the Department’s California Transportation Investment
System ( CTIS), a statewide GIS tool that displays transportation projects included
in long- range plans, and the California Department of Fish and Game BIOS data
catalog discussed earlier.
Comparisons should be as comprehensive as possible, extending beyond simply
examining a collection of assembled maps. The data underlying the maps should
be examined for compatibility, and any problems identified should be documented
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 25
and addressed in early consultation. Analysis of the underlying data is critical, as
the analysis can lead to the identification of patterns that can be further evaluated
for their impacts on transportation, land use, and environmental resources.
The major benefits of this comparison process are: sharing data and the results of
the data analysis; identifying opportunities to partner; and optimizing input into
State and regional decision making. The desired outcomes would be enhancing
and preserving California’s environmental resources while providing for adequate
infrastructure needs, and addressing the need for public agency accountability
while becoming better stewards of the environment.
Framework to Define Consultation and Comparison Process The information
in this Addendum is only the first step in defining the actual process of consultation
and comparison of maps, plans, and data. This Addendum provides a “ framework”
of ideas for consideration and evaluation in the next full update of the CTP. The
next update will build upon this Addendum and address how to mainstream the
consideration of environmental issues during early planning and, specifically, the
consultation and comparison process among the appropriate agencies. The CTP
2035 will further address the specific policies, strategies, and processes that will
make consultation and comparison work most effectively.
The Department, with its partners and stakeholders, will continue to identify and
explore data, information, and maps and further delineate a process and framework
for consultation and comparison. While engaging the public in developing this next
plan, the Department should also address such promising concepts as “ screening”
of critical environmental and resource issues during planning and programming.
There are successful “ screening” efforts in other states to serve as benchmarks,
including Florida’s program described below.
Benchmarking: “ Efficient Transportation Decision Making ( ETDM)” The State
of Florida provides a benchmark of efficient transportation decision- making that
protects the environment. Florida has completely revamped its procedures for
planning transportation projects, conducting environmental reviews, and developing
and permitting projects. The ETDM program is built around early and continuous
agency involvement; comprehensive, up- to- date, and accurate data upon which to
base decisions; and feedback about how agency participation leads to better
transportation decisions and outcomes. Twenty- two agencies participate in ETDM.
The seven Florida Department of Transportation ( FDOT) Districts have working
interagency councils that have two opportunities to review projects prior to
significant engineering work: during the “ planning screen” and the “ programming
screen.”
The councils, called Environmental Technical Advisory Teams ( ETATs), have
access via the Internet to the latest GIS data from their own agencies and all other
agencies, as well as participating Tribes. Councils review proposals in light of the
best available data and comment on the joint web site regarding their concerns for
proposed projects. In response to this, the project proponent creates a summary of
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 26
the “ degree of effect” of the
project that incorporates all
comments. This is also made
available on the web site for all
to comment on and ensures
consistency with the councils’
comments.
Projects with large impacts are
flagged very early, and project
proponents can alter projects to
reduce concerns before
significant investments in
engineering have been made.
In some cases, projects are
entirely rerouted and in a few
cases even abandoned
because of discoveries in this
screening process.
The ETDM program ensures
agreement on NEPA “ Purpose
and Need” before projects are
funded, while maintaining
flexibility for unexpected
discoveries at the project level. The program provides a mechanism for dispute
resolution between agency partners, as well as forming the backbone of the
information system used for involving the public in the decision- making process.
Consideration of Environmental and
Natural Resource Issues— Mitigation and
Consultation
T h e C a l i f o r n i a
Transportation Plan
2025 calls for the
consi d e r a t ion of
environmental and
natural resources
through a vision of a
f u l l y integ r a t e d ,
multimodal, sustainable
transportation system.
Florida’s ETDM progress
report
A total of 265 projects have been reviewed by ETAT
participants during Planning or Programming Screens
since ETDM implementation began. The seven Districts
within FDOT have reported improvements in the follow-ing
areas:
• Agency Coordination and Problem- solving
• Long- Range Transportation Planning
• Focused Evaluations during Project Development
• Dispute Resolution Process
• Cost of Environmental Studies and Documentation
• Project Delivery timeframe
• Access to Information
• Coordination within FDOT
Source: ETDM Progress Report cited in
Greenways Newsletter, February 2007.
Sustainable Transportation
A sustainable transportation system is one that meets
people’s needs equitably, fosters a healthy environ-ment,
provides a broad, balanced system in which the
private vehicle, public transportation, bicycling, and
walking are all viable options and can be maintained
and operated efficiently and effectively over time.
Source: California Transportation Plan 2025, p. 3
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 27
This vision also supports the three outcomes ( 3Es) that define quality of life, which
include a prosperous economy and social equity, as well as a quality environment
( see Figure 7 below). This vision of a quality environment is fully supportive of the
SAFETEA- LU requirements for consultation on potential environmental mitigation
activities.
FIGURE 7
CTP 2025 Vision: The Three Es of Quality of Life
Source: California Transportation Plan 2025, p. ix
SAFETEA- LU requires states and MPOs to consider and discuss potential
environmental mitigation activities along with potential sites to carry out the
activities. This discussion is to be developed in consultation with federal, State,
and tribal wildlife, land
management , and
regulatory agencies.
While this concept applies
to the s t a t ewide
transportation plan, the
regional transportation
plans, and ultimately to
approved projects, the
statewide transportation
plan should address any
environmental mitigation
activities at a policy rather
than project level.
This concept of early
c o n s u l t a t i o n o n
environmental mitigation
“ Enhance the Environment” is a
major goal of the California
Transportation Plan 2025
Because both mobility and biodiversity are State pri-orities,
Californians in the public and private sector
must take steps to protect the State’s precious and
finite resources when planning and implementing
transportation projects… Addressing environmental
and habitat conservation issues in the earliest plan-ning
stages will help reduce time and cost of trans-portation
projects, while protecting natural environ-ments.
Source: California Transportation Plan 2025, p. 59
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 28
is based on a hierarchy that embraces the following measures: enhancing the
environment when opportunities present themselves during early transportation
planning; avoiding and minimizing impacts to the State’s natural and environmental
resources; early mitigation; and the more traditional mitigation measures. The use
of such a hierarchy of measures becomes even more relevant and compelling if a
benefit and cost analysis can be developed to demonstrate savings in delivery time
and costs.
Mitigation Measures
The hierarchy below provides an expanded scale of mitigation measures that span
early planning through project delivery. “ Enhancing the Environment” is at the top
of the hierarchy, followed by opportunities for “ avoiding” or “ minimizing” as
environmental issues are addressed during the “ early” planning process. These
initial measures are preferred to identification of lower- ranked mitigation measures
as compensation to address environmental impacts. Examples of actions that
illustrate each rank of the scale are shown in parentheses below:
Enhance A major goal of the current California Transportation Plan 2025 is to
“ Enhance the Environment.” ( Promote partnerships to address conservation
and environmental issues in early planning.)
Avoid Avoid the impact altogether by not taking certain actions or parts of
action. ( Stay away from shrubs and tree covers to avoid disturbance to
wildlife, burrow colonies, hibernacula, and nest sites.)
Minimize Minimize impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action
and its implementation. ( Surface grading, topsoil stripping, and excavation will
be minimized.)
Rectify Rectify the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment. ( Spills will be cleaned up immediately using proper remediation
procedures.)
Reduce or Eliminate Reduce or eliminate the impact over time by
preservation and maintenance during the life of the action. ( No- idling policy
for vehicles where appropriate.)
Compensate Compensate for the impact by replacing or providing substitute
resources or environments. ( Re- vegetation will be undertaken on disturbed
sites.)
Source: NEPA Federal Regulations 40 CFR Sec. 1508.20 Mitigation
Measures.
Following such a hierarchy of measures may provide significant savings in project
delivery time and cost that can be demonstrated through benefit/ cost analysis. The
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 29
Department will need to coordinate with the resources agencies in order to ensure
a discussion of these measures during the next full update of the CTP in 2008.
Advanced or Early Biological Mitigation
Efforts are underway with the Department and UC Davis ICE in the area of
advanced or early biological mitigation. ICE is currently assessing ways that the
Department could improve its biological mitigation planning process through
implementation of early biological mitigation planning.
Currently, biological mitigation planning is generally implemented on a project- by-project
basis with a short time horizon of only a few years. This project- by- project
planning on short time frames has led to cost overruns as well as inefficient use of
mitigation funds. By assessing biological impacts earlier in the planning process
and mitigating for the cumulative biological impacts of many projects in a given
area, the Department can save money and provide more effective biological
mitigation. Building upon previous efforts and using tools known to be effective for
integrated analyses, biological mitigation planning will help the Department improve
early planning results by using the best available agency and university data at the
earliest conceptual consideration phase of planning.
As part of this project, ICE has integrated GIS data into a database that can be
queried by the Department’s districts, the counties, or the watersheds, and will
return biological resources expected to be impacted by programmed projects in the
area. This fruitful early planning approach has provided the capacity to predict
mitigation needs for a 10- year planning horizon for impacts to terrestrial habitats.
The approach developed by ICE could be adapted to provide early “ planning
screening” for proposed projects through continued database framework
development.
Development of a screening capacity to the ICE product would allow Department,
MPO, and RTPA biologists and planners to use agency and other data to
potentially “ triage” areas and projects in need of the most environmental planning
and to determine which projects, if programmed, may incur the highest
environmental costs. This capacity would also permit planners to practice the most
effective mitigation practice of all, avoidance, by determining that certain sites are
prohibitively impacted, and planning to move construction projects away from those
biologically sensitive and unique locations. Ultimately, this effort will help the
Department to leverage funds and form agreements with other agencies in order to
create better plans and acquire land or easements that would mitigate the
combined impacts of multiple projects in a given area or affecting any given
resource. There are pilot projects currently underway to test this concept in
watersheds in California including Elkhorn Slough.
Elkhorn Slough Pilot Project In 2001, the Department’s District 5 staff
collaborated with the Elkhorn Slough Foundation and the Nature Conservancy to
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 30
develop a partnership that would integrate regional transportation needs and
regional conservation goals for the Elkhorn Slough watershed and Northern
Monterey County. The Elkhorn Slough Early Mitigation Project ( ESEMP) builds on
previous efforts and dovetails with the statewide goal to consider mitigation on a
regional or watershed level.
The ESEMP ( see Figure 8) invests in collaborative planning and negotiations with
appropriate resources, regulatory, and planning organizations. It relies on best
available science to promote mitigation agreements that meet the needs for both
transportation mitigation and resource conservation. Using a GIS tool being
developed statewide, the project will match an inventory of specific habitat types
impacted by future transportation projects with suitable properties that would be
available for compensatory mitigation. The resulting analysis serves as a starting
point for collaborative discussions to consider strategic habitat protection and how
mitigation by the Department can fit into a larger watershed vision.
The goal of this effort is to develop a process for considering conservation
agreements and conservation area management plans that would provide for
regional- scale mitigation implemented prior to traditional transportation project
milestones. Though still in its infancy, projects like the ESEMP and other best
practices could help reinforce the benefits that consultation and collaboration with
resources agencies can yield.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 31
FIGURE 8
Elkhorn Slough Early Mitigation Project
Source: Presented at the Department’s Statewide Road Ecology Meeting hosted
by UC Davis ICE, Graphic by Kelda Wilson, the Department’s District 5 staff.
California Department of Fish and Game, California Wildlife Action Plan In
addition to calling for early mitigation consultation, SAFETEA- LU also requires that
the long- range statewide transportation plan contain a discussion of potential
environmental mitigation activities at the policy or strategic level ( rather than at the
project- specific level). The DFG California Wildlife Action Plan provides an
example of mitigation strategies and actions that would be appropriate at the
statewide level and might also provide evidence of the cost/ benefit of such an
approach. Implementation of the California Wildlife Action Plan is also an excellent
opportunity for further coordination between DFG and the Department. It will also
support broader involvement of transportation, environmental, and resources
planning staff in consultation and comparison processes through strategies such
as:
• Developing policies and incentives to facilitate better integration of wildlife
conservation considerations into local and regional planning and land use
decision making.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 32
• Having permitting agencies, county planners, and land management
agencies ensure that infrastructure development projects are designed and
sited to avoid harmful effects on sensitive species and habitats.
• Developing policies and incentives to better integrate wildlife conservation
into State and regional transportation planning and ensure its incorporation
in the earliest stages of the transportation planning process.
Role of Integrated Planning Efforts Integrated planning efforts to date, like the
Regional Blueprint Planning and the Merced Partnership for Integrated Planning,
have shown promise in addressing environmental mitigation and consultation in a
number of regions statewide. In these areas, environmental planning is being
conducted in conjunction with land use planning and transportation planning. This
is leading to proactive environmental stewardship, as opposed to reacting to
environmental concerns once projects have progressed beyond the early planning
stage. Partnerships with resources management agencies are being created with
full knowledge and participation of the agencies responsible for land use and
transportation.
There is growing consensus that integrated planning efforts have strong potential
over the long term to reduce greenhouse gases ( GHGs) by creating more efficient
land use patterns that result in reduced vehicle miles traveled. The role of the State
is to provide encouragement, information about best practices, and in some cases,
grant funding to continue to promote these integrated planning approaches. These
efforts will be further examined with the next full update of the CTP.
Goods Movement Action Plan Finally, the Goods Movement Action Plan
( GMAP), adopted in January 2007, also addresses environmental mitigation. The
GMAP recognizes that, while a robust economy depends on the efficient movement
of goods, there are also significant environmental and community consequences
resulting from these activities.
The Goods Movement Action Plan underscores the importance that California must
“ Undertake simultaneous and continuous improvement in infrastructure and
mitigation.” Therefore, State policy is to identify environmental impacts for goods
movement improvement projects and to implement the mitigations concurrently with
the projects. Actions necessary to protect public health and mitigate environmental
and community impacts must be funded and executed on a simultaneous and
continuous basis with actions necessary to improve goods movement
transportation infrastructure.
Strong mitigation will be needed if improvements are to be made to meet the
growing international trade. Advancing actions with the highest rates of return ( an
important principle articulated in the GMAP) applies to not only goods movement
transportation investments, but also to those actions with the highest potential to
improve public health and the environment.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 33
California Climate Change Initiative The CTP 2025 recognized that GHG
emissions produced from fossil fuel use have direct links to the environment and
global climate change. The Governor’s recent " California Climate Change"
initiative supports the CTP 2025 vision of sustainable transportation and improved
mobility in order to mitigate climate change in California. Executive Order S- 3- 05,
signed by the Governor on June 1, 2005, established climate change emission
reduction targets for the State ( shown below), and created the Climate Action Team
( CAT) to coordinate the statewide effort.
The Executive Order established GHG targets to:
• Reduce to 2000 emission levels by 2010.
• Reduce to 1990 emission levels by 2020.
• Reduce to 80 percent below 1990 emission levels by 2050.
The Governor also signed into law Assembly Bill ( AB) 32, the California Global
Warming Act of 2006, giving new weight to the State’s renewable energy goals.
The Governor has directed State agencies to begin implementing AB 32 and issue
recommendations in their CAT report.
The Department is a member of the CAT and is committed to implementing
transportation strategies that will help reduce fossil fueled energy and GHG
emissions. The Department’s Climate Action Program Report demonstrates the
commitment of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency and the
Department to a transportation system that supports environmental quality. The
Department’s overall approach to lowering fuel consumption and CO2 from
transportation is twofold: 1) making transportation systems more efficient through
smart land use, operational improvements, and Intelligent Transportation Systems;
and 2) institutionalizing energy efficiency and GHG emission reduction measures
into planning, project development, operations, and maintenance of State
transportation facilities, fleets, buildings, and equipment.
Delegated National Environmental Policy
Act Responsibilities
SAFETEA- LU establishes a pilot program that allows the Secretary of
Transportation to assign all or part of the Secretary’s environmental responsibilities
under NEPA and other federal environmental laws to five states: Alaska, California,
Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas. The Department applied for the Pilot Program in May
2007, submitting an application to FHWA that described the scope of the
responsibility it was requesting to assume.
The Department developed its application based on the final rules issued by FHWA
on February 12, 2007. The Department applied for the full range of involvement in
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 34
the Pilot Program, including assumption of all projects and all federal environmental
laws. Per the final rules, the application identified the following exclusions from the
Pilot Program:
• Certain projects funded by Federal Transit Administration
• High priority projects under Executive Order 13274
• Federal Lands Highway projects not designed and constructed by the
Department
The application also identified a few large projects for which the Department
requested that FHWA retain responsibility in order to provide continuity in the final
phases of the environmental review process. Finally, the application specified those
responsibilities that could not be delegated under the SAFETEA- LU Pilot Program,
including air quality conformity determinations, formal government- to- government
consultations with Tribal Governments, and planning decisions.
FHWA accepted the application, and the Department negotiated and executed a
Memorandum of Understanding ( MOU) with FHWA. This MOU describes how the
full delegation under the Pilot Program will be carried out.
Operating under the Pilot Program since July 1, 2007, the Department is now fully
responsible for NEPA requirements for delegated highway projects in the State.
Under the terms of the Pilot Program, the Department is required to comply with
FHWA's NEPA regulations and follow FHWA environmental policy and guidance.
The program will not change federal environmental protection standards. With the
Department essentially becoming the agency with federal approval authority, the
program offers the opportunity to provide a more streamlined environmental
process. Environmental protection and streamlining are fully in keeping with goals
expressed in the CTP 2025.
Expanded Stakeholder Engagement
Context sensitive solutions are achieved through a collaborative, interdisciplinary
approach engaging all stakeholders. The Department recognizes that collaboration
with local communities is needed to ensure citizens understand the local, regional,
and statewide context of long- range transportation planning. The value in
communicating the context of long- range transportation planning is gaining
consensus early in the planning process. Collaboration simultaneously builds
public support and partnerships for plans and projects that serve the public interest,
while minimizing opposition, litigation, and the need to redesign or relocate.
As part of the requirements related to the “ public involvement” process, SAFETEA-LU
requires states to develop public participation plans in consultation with
“ interested parties;” hold public meetings at convenient and accessible times and
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 35
locations; publish updates of statewide transportation plans, to the maximum extent
practicable, in electronically accessible formats ( e. g., world wide web); and employ
visualization techniques, where feasible, to depict statewide transportation plans
and to improve decision making.
Following adoption of the CTP 2030 Addendum, the State will initiate development
of a new public participation plan based on the SAFETEA- LU requirements. The
plan will be developed in consultation with interested parties, and those parties will
be given reasonable opportunities to review, update, and evaluate the public
participation structure. This review process will be transparent and fully involve all
stakeholders.
During the development of this CTP update, the Department consulted with MPOs,
RTPAs, and Tribal Governments. In addition, in order to enhance public
participation, invitations were distributed statewide to over 8,000 stakeholders to
attend one of three public workshops held in Diamond Bar, Oakland, and Redding.
Public feedback collected during the workshops was supportive of the basic
approach and concepts identified in the earlier section on Linking Transportation
Planning and Resource/ Environmental Planning. Participants discussed: scenario
planning, sharing data, integrated models, context sensitive solutions, and Blueprint
Planning. The public was also supportive of the five key opportunities to enhance
planning processes identified by participants in the earlier Consultation Meeting.
To supplement the workshops and to provide additional methods for submitting
input, information on the CTP update was made available on the Department‘ s
website ( http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ tpp/ offices/ osp/ ctp. html). In addition, a web-based
survey was also posted to solicit public comment on specific aspects of the
Addendum and to allow for the submittal of written comments. Respondents also
had the option of providing comments by e- mail address.
These methods in total were designed to identify and engage stakeholders and to
ensure a full and more open public participation process. Finally, every effort was
made to include and document input from Native American individuals, as well as
community advocacy groups representing such diverse sectors as the elderly,
disabled, and non- motorized transportation advocates.
A report documenting all comments received on the CTP Addendum will be
published and displayed on the Department’s web site following release of this
document.
Employ Visualization Techniques to Describe Plans The Department has long
supported the use of a variety of visualization techniques ( see examples below) to
engage stakeholders during the planning process. Such techniques assist
participants by moving from general and abstract terms to more concrete images.
The Department employed visualization techniques to support outreach efforts for
the CTP update, relying extensively on stakeholder feedback through audience
response systems, otherwise known as “ clicker technology.” This clicker technology
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 36
was used to collect public input at all
three public workshops in April 2007.
The Department has encouraged the
same support for the California
Regional Blueprint Planning efforts
as well. These regional planning
efforts have extensively employed
s o p h i s t i c a t ed visua l i z a t i on
techniques, such as scenario
planning to engage and empower
their stakeholders. Whether used at
the statewide or regional level, these
visualization techniques have been
helpful in balancing stakeholder
values with transportation needs.
They have also proven invaluable in
implementing context sensitive
solutions, which are critical to the
Department’s efforts to link
transportation planning with
environmental planning. Additional
information on visualization tools and
techniques to depict statewide
transportation planning efforts is
a v a i l a b l e a t
http:// www. placematters. org/.
Consistency with State and Local Planned
Growth and Economic Development
Patterns
SAFETEA- LU expanded its environmental emphasis by adding the phrase
“ promote consistency of transportation plans and transportation improvements with
State and local planned growth and economic development patterns.” The
California Transportation Plan 2025 vision supports economic development as one
of the three outcomes that define quality of life: a prosperous economy. Beyond
that, one of the six CTP 2025 goals is to “ Support the Economy.”
The economy goal includes a number of policies and strategies for implementation:
provide incentives to promote sustainable land use decisions that integrate land
VISUALIZATION
TECHNIQUES
• Graphics
• Artist renderings and drawings
• Sketches
• Computer modeled images
• Photo- simulations and photo manipulations
• Computer presentations and simulations
• Interactive Geographic Information Systems
( GIS)
• Maps
• Models
• Flowcharts
• Interactive displays and kiosks
• Mapping through Geographic Information
Systems
• 3D Visualization
• “ Dot voting” exercises
• Visual Preference Surveys
• Audience response systems ( handheld
clicker technology)
• Scenario planning tools
Source: SAFETEA- LU Planning
Provisions. Workshop, Cambridge
Systematics, Inc. May 2006.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 37
use, housing, and transportation through regional and interregional cooperation;
increase densities to facilitate effective transit service, including encouraging
transit- oriented development within major transit corridors; provide the ability to
conveniently walk to destinations; and promote street and urban design to
encourage walking and bicycling to destinations. In addition to the vision, goal, and
strategies of the CTP, several other statewide efforts support the consistency of
transportation planning with planned growth and economic development.
Strategic Growth Plan In addition to the vision and goals addressed in the CTP
2025, current Administration initiatives support economic growth and increased
mobility. Strategies in the transportation component of the Governor’s Strategic
Growth Plan ( SGP) are focused on improving mobility and are designed to build
needed infrastructure to accommodate California’s increasing population, projected
growth, and growing economy.
California Regional Blueprint Planning Program The California Regional
Blueprint Planning Program is an additional strategy for implementing the
Governor's SGP and, specifically, the land use “ slice” of the “ Mobility
Pyramid.” ( The Mobility Pyramid is discussed in more detail below). These efforts
also mirror the current CTP 2025 policy to “ Manage Growth,” as well as the
strategies adopted to support that policy.
California Economic Development Partnership The State also promotes
economic development through an Inter- Agency Cabinet Team that leads and
coordinates the California Economic Development Partnership ( Partnership). The
Secretary of Business, Transportation and Housing is one of the three Cabinet
representatives. The Partnership itself is broad- spectrum, echoing the wide variety
of industry clusters that drive the economic engine of the State. The partners are
key industry leaders, as well as committee and organizational representatives,
including the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley, the California
Economic Leadership Network, the California Economic Vitality Conversation
Partners, and the California Partnership for International Trade.
While the principal thrust of the Partnership is the attraction and retention of jobs in
California, the CTP’s economic focus is strongly oriented toward improving the
movement of goods while at the same time recognizing the environmental and
public health impacts that result from increases in trade volumes. In general, the
CTP and Partnership initiatives are complimentary with respect to the importance of
improving California’s economy. Common themes shared between the two include
leadership, cooperation, efficient government operations, quality of life issues, and
infrastructure development.
Goods Movement Action Plan The GMAP serves as the action element for
goods movement under the umbrella of the CTP. The GMAP’s objectives include
generating jobs, developing partnerships to advance goals, and implementing those
actions with the best potential to achieve high rates of return on investments.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 38
The GMAP is a key component of the Strategic Growth Plan and involves
inventorying existing and proposed goods movement improvement projects,
establishing four “ port to border” goods movement corridors, identifying
environmental and community impacts of projects together with mitigation
strategies, and cataloging public safety and homeland security issues.
The GMAP identifies 28 of the most critical goods movement infrastructure projects
in the State ( totaling over $ 10 billion) including effects to:
• Upgrade the Alameda Corridor East through the Inland Empire.
• Develop truck climbing lanes on the I- 580 corridor in the Bay Area.
• Improve access to and through the San Pedro Bay Ports.
• Develop a new border crossing at Otay Mesa East in San Diego County.
• Develop the Port of Oakland Outer Harbor Terminal.
The timing, sequencing, and funding of corridor expansion projects will be
addressed in future efforts. Funding issues are challenging, but have been aided
by the Administration’s inclusion of rail improvements in the recently approved bond
issue for State infrastructure financing. The GMAP helps chart economic policy for
the State and is incorporated by reference into the California Transportation Plan.
County- level Economic Forecasts Lastly, the Department’s Office of
Transportation Economics provides county- level economic forecasts to assist the
local jurisdictions in developing forecasts to support their own economic
development efforts.
Security and Emergency Management as
Stand- alone Planning Factors
SAFETEA- LU requires states to identify security as a new stand- alone planning
factor for motorized and non- motorized users. While the Department supports this
separate consideration, it also recognizes that security and emergency response
efforts are inextricably linked. Clearly both are key in ensuring personal security,
system security, and the availability of emergency response services in the event of
natural or human- caused disasters. As described in the current CTP, the
Department continues to work with federal, State, and local agencies to address
security and emergency management planning.
Goal 4 of the CTP 2025 ( Enhance Public Safety and Security) identifies strategies
that support communication and coordination with other stakeholders in the security
and emergency areas. These strategies establish a basis for demonstrating
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 39
compliance with the new stand- alone security requirement of SAFETEA- LU.
These security and emergency management efforts are focused on securing the
State’s critical transportation infrastructure, e. g., California’s highways, major
seaports, airports, and mass transit systems. Efforts to evaluate securing this
infrastructure, such as full- scale exercises, are complicated and often face
considerable opposition, as disruptions to the transportation system can have far-reaching
effects on our economy. Many of these efforts are identified in the
Department’s Emergency Operations Plan ( EOP) and the Continuity of
Operations/ Continuity of Government ( COOP/ COG) Plan summarized below.
These planning efforts, as well as the additional efforts discussed below, are
incorporated into the CTP by reference as components of a stand- alone Security
and Emergency Management element. Looking forward, the security plans of other
State and local agencies will be considered for incorporation into the CTP as they
become available.
Emergency Response and Management The Incident Command System ( ICS)
is the systematic tool for the command, control, and coordination of an emergency
response. ICS allows agencies to work together using common terminology and
operating procedures for controlling personnel, facilities, equipment, and
communications at an incident scene. The ICS is considered part of the broader
incident management system as outlined in the Department of Homeland Security’s
National Incident Management System ( NIMS). NIMS covers the entire incident
management process, including command structures like ICS as well as
preparedness activities, resource management, and communications and
information management. Broadly stated, numerous agencies have statutory and
program responsibilities for the response to, and the management of incidents and
large- scale emergencies, along with related planning activities. The plans of the
Department, the Emergency Medical Services Authority, the California Highway
Patrol, and other agencies are incorporated by reference.
Emergency Operations Plan The EOP addresses preparation ( including pre-event
preparation) for natural or human- caused disasters impacting the
Department’s " external" infrastructure. This includes infrastructure such as
highways, bridges, and roadside rest areas. The EOP describes the Department’s
concept of operation in an emergency, including the use of communications
systems to effectively coordinate information flow and resources during a natural or
human- caused emergency. The EOP also addresses the Department’s support
roles with federal, State, and local agencies to ensure consistency in emergency
operations. The EOP is incorporated by reference into the CTP.
Continuity of Operations/ Continuity of Government Plan Disasters impacting
the Department’s " internal" infrastructure are addressed in the COOP/ COG Plan.
This includes infrastructure used primarily by the Department’s employees, such as
office buildings and maintenance facilities. The Department recently completed the
initial COOP/ COG Plan in accordance with Governor’s Executive Order S- 04- 06.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 40
The COOP/ COG Plan describes the Department’s strategy for meeting its
responsibilities under extreme circumstances and assesses the survivability of the
Department’s mandated and/ or vital services during a natural or human- caused
emergency or catastrophic event. The COOP/ COG Plan incorporates existing
plans, procedures, and checklists developed in previous years for responding to
natural and human- caused disasters into a single document. The approved
COOP/ COG Plan is also incorporated by reference in this California Transportation
Plan 2030 Addendum.
Among other things, the COOP/ COG Plan evaluates the Department’s ability to
perform essential functions; preserves the established line of succession and
delegation of authority for key positions within the Department; leverages the
Department’s current distributed operations as potential alternate locations;
maintains essential functions related to communications, and command and
control; protects government resources; safeguards the Department’s vital files,
records, and databases; documents tests, training, and exercises, including a
series of table top exercises; assigns responsibility at the established devolution
site; and determines the timeline for restoring services depending on the nature and
scope of the emergency.
The COOP/ COG Plan ensures the Department’s resources and assets are
protected and managed effectively during an incident that directly impacts its
internal operations and facilities. It also enables the continuation of the essential
functions that support the Department’s mission and establishes a process for
restoration.
Transit Security- Related Efforts Significant responsibility for strategic security
planning and for the reduction of California’s vulnerability to terrorism is delegated
to the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security ( OHS). The Department is a key
stakeholder to this agency, serving on the Strategic Plan Advisory Task Force to
help shape the California Statewide Emergency Management Strategic Plan. The
Department is also an active participant in several regional and statewide transit
security- related planning efforts.
Safety of public transportation has always been a priority for the Department.
Following the September 11 terrorist acts and subsequent transit attacks in India,
Spain, and Great Britain, this concern for transit security was expanded to include
transit systems large and small. The tragic hurricanes of 2005 further broadened
transit’s vital role in emergency response and recovery from disasters of all kinds.
To properly address the security threats to our public transportation infrastructure,
the Department and its partners have encouraged transit operators to develop
strategies to reduce the likelihood and impact of threats. These strategies will help
first responders and transit agencies respond to incidents in an organized manner,
minimize casualties, and quickly restore operations. The Department has
conducted a series of emergency preparedness workshops across the State to
ensure transit agencies can implement these strategies and coordinate their
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 41
activities during emergencies.
The Department conducted a successful emergency preparedness workshop in
October 2006. This event resulted in the development of standardized emergency
operations plan guidelines for various organizations, including transit agencies
statewide. OHS and the Department also hosted the first statewide “ Mass Transit
Security“ seminar. During the seminar, the public transportation sector
collaboratively addressed “ next steps” issues, identified best practices, and
developed coordination improvements to protect California transportation systems
from terrorist attacks. The Department will be collaborating in more statewide
emergency exercises.
The goal of transit emergency preparedness in the State also includes response to
a wide variety of natural hazards and threats, including earthquake, tsunami,
wildfire, and flood. Several actions are essential to meeting the transit emergency
preparedness needs facing California, including the development of the Emergency
Operations Plans for transit incident response, and providing technical assistance
to rural transit operators with regard to transit security and disaster preparedness.
These activities support and augment the Regional Transit Security Strategies of
California’s major transit operators.
The transportation infrastructure is one of the critical elements in the National
Infrastructure Protection Plan. The Department is involved in the plans and training
aspects of this effort, which relies heavily on the coordinated actions and
communication of many federal, State, and local partners. This cooperation is the
cornerstone of the CTP’s strategy for enhancing security, as many agencies are
involved in the protection of people, goods, and property including: local, State,
and federal agencies ( law enforcement, fire, and other emergency responders);
port authorities; transit properties; and numerous other agencies.
Port Security in the Goods Movement Action Plan State efforts related to port
security are addressed within the GMAP. A number of actions have been taken or
are proposed to address this serious concern. One action is the creation of the
California Maritime Security Council. The council is comprised of top officials from
the US Coast Guard, the Office of Homeland Security, and other key federal and
State agencies. A significant challenge continues to be the fact that the federal
government preempts potential State actions in many aspects of port security, so
funds to address security needs are very limited. Proposition 1B, passed by the
voters in November 2006, will build upon existing efforts at the federal, State, and
local level by funding security gaps identified by previously conducted port
vulnerability assessments.
Intelligent Transportation System Intelligent Transportation System ( ITS)
planning at the State level provides a strategic approach for identifying key
transportation issues addressing public safety and security, critical stakeholders,
and possible technology solutions that can be applied.
Included by reference in this update is the California Statewide ITS Architecture
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 42
and System Plan. This plan and the source National ITS Architecture Framework
( Version 5) are equipped to address safety as well as security issues.
The California Statewide ITS Architecture and System Plan will be consulted in
more detail during the next full update of the CTP. At that time, security issues can
be further discussed and refined as the stakeholders identified with specific kinds of
threats find their issues " mapped out" and technology responses proposed.
Safety as a Stand- alone Planning Factor
The Department led the effort to develop the California Strategic Highway Safety
Plan ( SHSP) to identify key safety needs of the State and strategies to address
those needs. The purpose of the SHSP is to guide investment decisions to achieve
significant reductions in fatalities and injuries on all of California’s public roads.
The California SHSP was approved on September 26, 2006, and will serve as the
stand- alone Safety Element for the CTP 2030 Addendum. This element
supplements the discussion of safety in the CTP 2025.
An important benefit of an SHSP is the coordination of statewide goals and safety
programs to most effectively reduce highway fatalities and injuries. The
collaborative process of developing and implementing a State SHSP brings
together and draws upon the strengths and resources of all safety stakeholders.
This will help the State and its safety partners better leverage limited resources and
work together to achieve common safety goals.
To develop the SHSP, a Steering Committee, which included representatives from
18 federal, State, and local entities, was established. A broader Stakeholder
Group, consisting of about 200 representatives from 80 different agencies, was
also formed to provide much of the content of the SHSP. Finally, the Department
held two SHSP summit meetings ( one each in northern and southern California) in
March 2006. The summits generated feedback and ideas from over 500 additional
transportation and safety policy stakeholders. A draft SHSP was then released for
public comment and comments were reviewed and incorporated as appropriate.
The California SHSP is organized around the 16 “ Challenge Areas” listed on pages
44- 45 ( see Figure 9). Each Challenge Area incorporates consideration of both
behavioral and infrastructure strategies to improve safety on public roads. The
goals for each Challenge Area were set by the SHSP team based on an analysis of
data trends and an assessment of how difficult it would be to reduce fatalities.
Now that the SHSP has been completed, teams have been established for each
Challenge Area, as well as other committees, to develop Challenge Area Safety
Needs Action Plans and a detailed Strategic Highway Safety Implementation Plan
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 43
( SHSIP). Nearly 300 individuals representing 80 different agencies and
organizations will collaboratively develop the SHSIP. The SHSIP will improve
safety on all public roads by quantifying safety issues; identifying performance
measures and targets; guiding transportation stakeholders to the most effective
safety strategies and countermeasures; identifying available funding sources; and
providing methods for monitoring and evaluating safety projects and initiatives.
The SHSIP will contain the most effective engineering, enforcement, education,
and emergency services strategies and countermeasures for each of the 16
Challenge Areas. Information on the SHSIP and status updates on implementation
are available through the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan portal at
http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ SHSP/. The SHSP will provide a foundation and framework
for understanding the long- range actions that will be needed to effectively address
California’s growing population and the State’s evolving traffic safety issues. The
approved SHSP is incorporated by reference in this California Transportation Plan.
SAFETEA- LU established a new core Highway Safety Improvement Program
( HSIP) that is structured and funded to make significant progress in reducing
highway fatalities on all public roadways.
SAFETEA- LU also introduced several other programs to improve safety on public
roadways. The legislation provides funding for a new federal Safe Routes to School
Program, which supplements the State- legislated Safe Routes to School Program.
SAFETEA- LU also introduced a new High Risk Rural Roads ( HR3) Program, which
provides funding for construction and operational improvements to address safety
problems and opportunities on rural major or minor collector roads or rural local
roads.
Preventing Collisions Programs that directly improve the safety of transportation
users include collision prevention, the mitigation of collision forces ( to reduce
injuries and property damage), and the effective response to and management of
collisions. State, local, non- profit, and private partners are engaged in planning and
implementing a wide range of safety programs. The prevention of collisions and
other incidents reduces the need for reactive strategies.
Collision prevention programs include roadway infrastructure improvements,
enforcement, public education, and vehicular technology. Whether it is enforcement
and education about driving under the influence, vehicular stability control,
graduated driver licensing, roadway improvements ( e. g., signing, rumble strips,
intelligent transportation systems), or a myriad of other programs, the prevention of
collisions has direct and indirect societal and personal benefits. Collision prevention
not only reduces deaths and injuries on our public roadways, but it also reduces
direct governmental costs for incident response and management and, at the same
time, reduces congestion and motorist delay.
California is actively engaged in the process of developing and prioritizing safety
strategies and countermeasures to prevent, mitigate, and respond to collisions as
part of the SHSP. Through the proper identification, development, prioritization, and
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 44
implementation of appropriate engineering, enforcement, education, and
emergency services strategies, the State can achieve multiple traffic safety
objectives in addition to collision prevention.
FIGURE 9
California Strategic Highway Safety Plan Challenge Area Goals
Challenge 1: Reduce Impaired Driving Related Fatalities
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of roadway user fatalities attributed to alcohol and
drug use by 15 percent from their 2004 level.
Challenge 2: Reduce the Occurrence and Consequence of Leaving the Roadway
and Head- on Collisions
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of fatalities attributed to vehicles leaving the
roadway by 15 percent from their 2004 level.
Challenge 3: Ensure Drivers are Licensed and Competent
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of fatalities attributed to drivers with no license,
invalid license, or not licensed for class of vehicle by 15 percent from their 2004 level.
Challenge 4: Increase Use of Safety Belts and Child Safety Seats
Goal: By 2010, increase statewide safety belt usage from the 2005 level of 92.5
percent to 95 percent, improve the use of child safety seats from 2005 level of 86.9
percent to 90.0 percent, and increase the percent of all vehicle occupant fatalities that
are restrained to 70 percent - this is an indicator of higher total “ observational” vehicle
occupant restraint use, because a higher percentage of vehicle occupant fatalities that
are restrained means that a higher percentage of total vehicle occupants are restrained.
Challenge 5: Improve Driver Decisions about Rights of Way and Turning
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of fatalities attributed to improper rights of way and
turning decisions by 10 percent from their 2004 level.
Challenge 6: Reduce Young Driver Fatalities
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of fatalities attributed to drivers age 15 – 20 by 15
percent from their 2004 level.
Challenge 7: Improve Intersection and Interchange Safety for Roadway Users
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of intersection crash fatalities by 15 percent from
their 2004 level.
Challenge 8: Make Walking and Street Crossing Safer
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of pedestrian fatalities attributed to vehicle collisions
by 25 percent from their 2000 level
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 45
Challenge 9: Improve Safety for Older Roadway Users
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of fatalities attributed to drivers age 65 and older by
10 percent from their 2004 level.
Challenge 10: Reduce Speeding and Aggressive Driving
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of fatalities attributed to speeding and other forms of
aggressive driving by 15 percent from their 2004 level.
Challenge 11: Improve Commercial Vehicle Safety
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of commercial vehicle crash fatalities by 10 percent
from their 2004 level.
Challenge 12: Improve Motorcycle Safety
Goal: By 2010, decrease the number of motorcycle rider fatalities by 10 percent from
their 2004 level.
Challenge 13: Improve Bicycling Safety
Goal: By 2010, reduce the number of bicycle roadway fatalities by 25 percent from their
2000 level.
Challenge 14: Enhance Work Zone Safety
Goal: By 2010, reduce work zone fatalities by 10 percent from their 2004 level.
Challenge 15: Improve Post Crash Survivability
Goal: By 2010, reduce crash- related fatalities in California at least 5 percent from their
2004 level through focused improvements in Emergency Medical Services ( EMS)
system communications, response and safety education.
Challenge 16: Improve Safety Data Collection, Access, and Analysis
Goal: Improve the quality, timeliness, accessibility, and usefulness of traffic safety data.
Source: California Strategic Highway Safety Plan, 2006.
Tribal Issue As stated in the SHSP, “ The importance of timely, accurate, and
consistent collision data cannot be emphasized enough. The who, what, when,
where, why, and how of crashes need to be recorded in a uniform and consistent
format statewide.” The SHSP points out that good data is lacking in many areas
and includes Challenge Area 16, “ Improve Safety Data Collection, Access and
Analysis,” to address this issue.
A key implementation issue for this challenge area was raised during consultation
with Tribal Governments on this Addendum. Tribal Government representatives
noted that traffic safety data is unavailable or limited for Tribal roads. The
California SHSP directs the State to “ identify if or where data are missing that
affects project development and implementation.” In order for projects on tribal
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 46
roads to compete with all other safety needs, collision data affecting tribal roads will
need to be collected.
Include Operations and Management
Strategies
SAFETEA- LU directs that the long- range statewide transportation plan include
operations and management strategies, investments, procedures, and other
measures to ensure the preservation and most efficient use of the existing
transportation system.
One of the goals of the current CTP is to “ Preserve and Maintain the Transportation
System.” This goal is being implemented through the transportation component of
the Governor's Strategic Growth Plan represented graphically as the “ Mobility
Pyramid” depicted in Figure 10. This pyramid provides a strategic framework for
investing in California’s “ complete transportation system.”
The Transportation Management System ( TMS) Master Plan concepts guided the
early development of the Mobility Pyramid. The SGP is based on a key premise
that investments in mobility throughout the State’s multimodal transportation system
yield significant improvements in congestion relief. The Mobility Pyramid outlines
the strategies to be used to achieve the outcome of reduced congestion.
The base of the pyramid is as important as the apex. System monitoring and
preservation are a basic foundation upon which other strategies are built. System
expansion and completion will provide the desired mobility benefits to the extent
that investments in and implementation of the strategies below it establish a solid
platform. Operational improvements, Intelligent Transportation Systems, traveler
information, traffic control, and incident management and prevention will directly
benefit mobility while reducing demand for transportation resources. Existing
s t r a t e g ie s, inc l u d ing
strategies that support
operational improvements
and incident management,
will be reviewed during the
next update of the CTP in
2008.
The complete transportation
system approach of the
pyramid is fully dependent on
transportation planning
strategies that create a
c o l l a b o r a t ive wor k i ng
environment and promote a
comprehensive methodology
to reduce congestion, improve mobility, and enhance safety.
“ The Strategic Growth Plan is a historic and com-prehensive
infrastructure investment package,
and the transportation component of the plan will
decrease congestion, improve travel times and
increase safety, while addressing economic and
population growth.”
Will Kempton, Director
California Department of Transportation
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 47
FIGURE 10
Mobility Pyramid: Transportation Component of
Governor's Strategic Growth Plan
Source: GoCalifornia ( pyramid modified October 2007).
The Department, with the MPOs, will prepare Corridor System Management Plans
( CSMPs) to support the strategies for this complete transportation system
management approach. The CSMP provides a multi- disciplinary and multi-functional
approach through all stages of plan development including
representatives from: traffic operations, planning, maintenance, and enforcement;
other functions such as design, programming, project management, and
environmental; and regional transportation planning agencies, congestion
management agencies, and modal operators.
The final plans will ultimately be a comprehensive guide for managing, operating,
and improving transportation corridors among all the partners, and provide the
basis for prioritizing improvement timing and resources. The Department will use
the plans to assess current performance and to identify causal factors for
congestion. Based on testing of alternative improvement scenarios ( typically
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 48
through micro- simulation or macro- simulation), the Department will then propose
the best mix of improvements, strategies, and actions to enhance movement,
improve travel times, increase reliability, improve safety, and preserve resources
within the corridors.
The CSMP supports the SAFETEA- LU provisions for increased emphasis on
system and corridor management and performance measurement in metropolitan
transportation plans as well as for real- time traveler information. The California
Transportation Commission requires the submission of CSMPs for those corridors
with Corridor Mobility Improvement Account funding under the Highway Safety,
Traffic Reduction, Air Quality and Port Security Bond Act of 2006.
Accountability The Governor’s Executive Order S- 02- 07 establishes guidelines
and procedures for spending the bond funds efficiently, effectively, and in the best
interests of Californians. It also directs the Department of Finance to create a web
site to provide public access to information on how bond proceeds are being
utilized. The Department has established a web- based three- part accountability
structure for the infrastructure bonds that includes Front- End Accountability, In-
Progress Accountability, and Follow- Up Accountability.
The Mobility Pyramid includes System Monitoring and Evaluation as its foundation
and, therefore, strongly supports accountability. Efforts to expand and improve
monitoring and evaluation capabilities will provide information to monitor and
measure system performance, direct transportation spending to the most effective
mix of investments, and assess effectiveness of these choices. Improved real- time
data collection through implementation of more robust monitoring systems like the
Performance Measurement System ( PeMS) is key to knowing how the system is
performing, establishing performance measures, and increasing accountability for
spending transportation bonds and other transportation dollars efficiently and
effectively for the highest mobility outcomes.
Include Pedestrian Walkways and Bicycle
Facilities
SAFETEA- LU requires that investments in pedestrian walkways and bicycle
transportation facilities be specifically listed within programming documents.
Walking and bicycling are also addressed in the recently adopted California SHSP.
Two of the 16 Challenge Areas within the SHSP address pedestrians and bicyclists,
and a third identifies the data collection requirements to support these and other
transportation modes. More importantly, the Department is developing a separate,
stand- alone Bicycling and Walking Element to the CTP.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 49
Consultation with Non- Metropolitan Local
Officials and Tribal Governments
SAFETEA- LU reaffirmed the requirement for consultation with the RTPAs and
Tribal Governments to ensure that rural and tribal issues are addressed. This
requirement provides an opportunity to begin addressing these consultation issues
in this Addendum and to commit to resolve those issues ( and any newly identified
issues), in the next full CTP update scheduled in 2008.
Consultation to Date The agencies and tribes consulted with in the development
of the current CTP are listed in the public participation section ( Appendix IV of the
CTP 2025). Potential stakeholders identified by SAFETEA- LU have been
consulted for this CTP Addendum and they will be included in all future CTP
updates. Many of these stakeholders also participated in the consultation meeting
in January 2007.
During the development of this Addendum, consultation sessions were held with
each MPO and RTPA non- metropolitan planning organization throughout the State,
as well as with Tribal Governments. The issues they raised are addressed below.
Addressing Rural Issues While the current CTP addressed a number of rural
issues, this Addendum reaffirms the importance of the Interregional Road System
to the rural counties as the backbone for the rural transportation system;
emphasizes importance of Focus Routes and High Emphasis Routes for goods
movement; and recognizes the critical linkage that East/ West connector routes
provide to economic prosperity.
Addressing Tribal Government Consultation Issues The Department will
continue to enhance ongoing consultation efforts with Tribal Governments, in order
to ensure their perspectives and issues are addressed in this update or, as
appropriate, in the next full update to the CTP. Tribal Governments were
represented on the Policy Advisory Committee that guided the development of this
Addendum. They also participated in the consultation meeting to begin addressing
SAFETEA- LU on January 17, 2007. Tribal Governments were also consulted at
the Native American Advisory Committee ( NAAC) meeting in Woodland on
February 21, 2007. Finally, the Department consulted with Tribal Governments at
three regional meetings statewide ( in the north, central, and south regions) in early
2007 in order to ensure their perspectives and issues are addressed in this update
or, as appropriate, in the next full update.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | 50
Other SAFETEA- LU Opportunities
Coordinated Public Transit- Human Services Transportation Plans Receipt of
three significant federal transit program funds – Federal Transit Administration
Sections 5310, 5316, and 5317 – is contingent upon having a locally developed
coordinated public transit- human services transportation plan ( coordinated plan).
The State, in its role as the designated recipient for these funds, must certify that
projects selected for funding are derived from a coordinated plan. Fulfilling this
federal mandate ensures that projects receiving these funds minimize service
duplication, thereby enhancing human services transportation statewide. The
Department has contracted with a consultant to develop a template to be used by
the RTPAs in preparing these coordination plans. The MPOs will be developing
their own plans.
California State Rail Plan Update The California State Rail Plan was approved in
late 2005 and highlights some significant problems with maintaining and expanding
the rail infrastructure to meet burgeoning cargo flows into the State. Changes
brought about by SAFETEA- LU may provide credit mechanisms to allow railroads
to build for the future. The next version of the California State Rail Plan is under
development, and will include discussion of the Department's vision for the intercity
rail passenger service and the changes made possible in goods movement by
SAFETEA- LU. The California State Rail Plan helps chart policy for the State, and
is incorporated by reference into the California Transportation Plan.
Appendices
October 2007
This page intentionally left blank.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 1
Appendix I
Population Map
Regional Projected 2030 Population
Source: State of California, Department of Finance, Population Projections for
California and Its Counties 2000- 2050, Sacramento, California, July 2007.
This page intentionally left blank.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 3
Appendix II
Statewide and Regional Maps of Transportation and
Resources Agencies
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 4
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 5
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 6
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 7
Appendix III
Sample Maps for Consultation and Comparison
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 8
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 9
Screenshot of DFG California Natural Diversity Database ( CNDDB)
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 10
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 11
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 12
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 13
This page intentionally left blank.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 15
Appendix IV
Collaborative Planning Concept
This page intentionally left blank.
California Transportation Plan 2030 | A- 17
Appendix V
Resources for Transportation Planning and
Environmental Planning Data
This page intentionally left blank.