REGULAR MEETING ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT ......REGULAR MEETING Thursday, July 6, 2017 10:00 a.m. –...

REGULAR MEETING

Thursday, July 6, 2017 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. SCAG Main Office 818 W. 7th Street, 12th Floor Policy Committee Room A Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 236-1800 If members of the public wish to review the attachments or have any questions on any of the agenda items, please contact Tess Rey-Chaput at (213) 236-1908 or via email at [email protected]. Agendas and Minutes for the EEC are also available at: http://www.scag.ca.gov/committees/Pages/default.aspx SCAG, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), will accommodate persons who require a modification of accommodation in order to participate in this meeting. SCAG is also committed to helping people with limited proficiency in the English language access the agency’s essential public information and services. You can request such assistance by calling (213) 236-1908. We request at least 72 hours (three days) notice to provide reasonable accommodations and will make every effort to arrange for assistance as soon as possible.

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Energy and Environment Committee Members – July 2017

Members Representing

Chair* 1. Hon. Carmen Ramirez Oxnard District 45

Vice-Chair* 2. Hon. Linda Parks Ventura County

3. Ana Beltran Westmorland ICTC

* 4. Hon. Margaret Clark Rosemead District 32

5. Hon. Ross Chun Aliso Viejo TCA Representative

6. Hon. Ned Davis Westlake Village LVMCOG

7. Hon. Paula Devine Glendale Arroyo Verdugo Cities

8. Hon. Jordan Ehrenkranz Canyon Lake WRCOG

* 9. Hon. Mitchell Englander Los Angeles District 59

10. Hon. Larry Forester Signal Hill GCCOG

11. Hon. Mike Gardner Riverside WRCOG

12. Hon. Sandra Genis Costa Mesa OCCOG

13. Hon. Ed Graham Chino Hills SANBAG

14. Hon. Jon Harrison Redlands SANBAG

15. Hon. Shari Horne Laguna Woods OCCOG

* 16. Hon. Steve Hwangbo La Palma District 18

17. Hon. Diana Mahmud South Pasadena SGVCOG

* 18. Hon. Judy Mitchell Rolling Hills Estates District 40

19. Hon. Jim Osborne Lawndale SBCCOG

* 20. Hon. Luis Plancarte Imperial County

21. Hon. David Pollock Moorpark VCOG

* 22. Hon. Deborah Robertson Rialto District 8

* 23. Hon. Laura Rosenthal Malibu District 44

24. Hon. Meghan Sahli-Wells Culver City WCCOG

25. Hon. Betty Sanchez Coachella CVAG

26. Hon. Emma Sharif Compton GCCOG

27. Hon. Diane Williams Rancho Cucamonga SANBAG

28. Hon. Edward H.J. Wilson Signal Hill GCCOG

29. Hon. Bonnie Wright Hemet WRCOG

30. Mr. Steve Schuyler Building Industry Association of Southern California (BIASC)

Ex-Officio Member

* Regional Council Member

ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE

AGENDA JULY 6, 2017

i

The Energy & Environment Committee (EEC) may consider and act upon any of the items listed on the agenda regardless of whether they are listed as Information or Action Items. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (The Honorable Carmen Ramirez, Chair) PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD – Members of the public desiring to speak on items on the agenda, or items not on the agenda, but within the purview of the Committee, must fill out and present a Public Comment Card to the Assistant prior to speaking. Comments will be limited to three (3) minutes per speaker. The Chair has the discretion to reduce the time limit based upon the number of speakers and may limit the total time for all public comments to twenty (20) minutes. REVIEW AND PRIORITIZE AGENDA ITEMS

CONSENT CALENDAR Time Page No.

Approval Item 1

1. Minutes of the June 1, 2017 Meeting Attachment

Receive and File

2. Final Update on State Route (SR) 241 Extension

Transportation Control Measure (TCM) Substitution by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA)

Attachment 8

3. 2017 Meeting Schedule of the Regional Council and

Policy Committees Attachment 17

4. 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable

Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Growth Forecast Development: Summary of Panel of Experts Meeting and Draft Preliminary Ranges of Regional and County Growth Projections

Attachment 18

5. Update on First Meetings of Five Facility-Based/Indirect

Mobile Source Measure Working Groups of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

Attachment 67

REY

Typewritten Text


AGENDA JULY 6, 2017

ii

Receive and File - continued Time Page No. 6. 2017 Active Transportation Program Augmentation

Guidelines and Sustainability Planning Grants: 2017 Active Transportation Call for Proposals

Attachment 69

INFORMATION ITEMS

7. UCLA Advanced Energy Community Project Update

(Dr. Felicia Federico, Executive Director; and Dr. Stephanie Pincetl, Director, Professor-in-Residence, California Center for Sustainable Communities, UCLA)

Attachment 20 mins. 73

8. Mobility Innovations: Modeling Challenges and Future

Transportation Technologies (Marco Anderson, SCAG Staff)


9. Planning for a Sustainable Water Future: Summary of

SCAG’s 2016-2017 Activities & Next Steps Discussion (Sarah Jepson, SCAG Staff)


10. ARB SB 375 Regional GHG Target Draft

Recommendations for the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020 RTP/SCS) and Beyond (Hasan Ikhrata, Executive Director)


11. ARB Technical Advisory Regarding Strategies to

Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways (Maggie Witt, California Air Resources Board, Research Division)



AGENDA JULY 6, 2017

iii

CHAIR’S REPORT (The Honorable Carmen Ramirez, Chair)

STAFF REPORT (Grieg Asher, SCAG Staff)

FUTURE AGENDA ITEM/S ANNOUNCEMENT/S ADJOURNMENT There will be no meeting in August 2017. The next regular meeting of the EEC is scheduled for Thursday, September 7, 2017 at the SCAG Los Angeles Office.

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE (EEC) MINUTES OF THE MEETING

THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 2017 THE FOLLOWING MINUTES ARE A SUMMARY OF ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE. AN AUDIO RECORDING OF THE MEETING IS AVAILABLE AT SCAG, 818 W. 7TH STREET, 12TH FLOOR, LOS ANGELES, CA 90017. The Energy and Environment Committee (EEC) held its meeting at the SCAG Los Angeles Office. A quorum was present. Members Present Hon. Ana Beltran, Westmoreland ICTC Hon. Ross Chun, Aliso Viejo TCA Hon. Margaret Clark, Rosemead District 32 Hon. Ned Davis, Westlake Village LVMCOG Hon. Paula Devine, Glendale Arroyo Verdugo Cities Hon. Jordan Ehrenkranz, Canyon Lake WRCOG Hon. Larry Forester, Signal Hill GCCOG Hon. Mike Gardner, Riverside WRCOG Hon. Sandra Genis, Costa Mesa OCCOG Hon. Jon Harrison, Redlands SBCTA/SBCOG Hon. Shari Horne, Laguna Woods OCCOG Hon. Steve Hwangbo, La Palma District 18 Hon. Judy Mitchell, Rolling Hills Estates District 40 Hon. Jim Osborne, Lawndale SBCCOG Hon. Linda Parks (Vice-Chair) Ventura County Hon. Greg Pettis, Cathedral City District 2 Hon. Luis Plancarte, Imperial County ICTC Hon. David Pollock, Moorpark VCOG Hon. Carmen Ramirez, Oxnard (Chair) District 45 Hon. Deborah Robertson, Rialto District 8 Hon. Laura Rosenthal, Malibu District 44 Hon. Meghan Sahli-Wells, Culver City WCCOG Mr. Steve Schuyler, Ex Officio Building Industry Association Hon. Emma Sharif, Compton GCCOG Hon. Diane Williams, Rancho Cucamonga SBCTA/SBCOG Hon. Bonnie Wright, Hemet WRCOG Members Not Present Hon. Mitchell Englander, Los Angeles District 59 Hon. Ed Graham, Chino Hills SBCTA/SBCOG Hon. Diana Mahmud, South Pasadena SGVCOG Hon. Betty Sanchez, Coachella Valley CVAG Hon. Edward Wilson, Signal Hill Gateway Cities COG

AGENDA ITEM NO. 1

July 6, 2017 - EEC Packet - Page 1 of 138

CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Honorable Carmen Ramirez, Chair, called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. and asked Hon. Sandra Genis, Costa Mesa, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD REVIEW AND PRIORITIZE AGENDA ITEMS There was no reprioritization of agenda items. ACTION ITEMS 1. Transportation Conformity Determination for 2016-2040 Regional Transportation

Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS) Amendment #2 and 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) Consistency Amendment #17-07

Rongsheng Luo, SCAG staff, stated that at the April EEC meeting, staff informed the EEC of the then pending public release of the draft conformity analysis for the 2016 RTP/SCS Amendment #2 and 2017 FTIP Consistency Amendment #17-07 (Amendments). Subsequently, the draft conformity analysis was released for a 30-day public review period and also underwent a public hearing as part of the Amendments process. A total of eight comments were received for which staff provided responses. Both the comments and SCAG’s response are reported in the proposed final Amendments document. No conformity specific comments were received.

The final conformity analysis demonstrates that the Amendments meet all transportation conformity requirements. A MOTION was made (Forester) to recommend that the Regional Council approve the transportation conformity determination for the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Amendment #2 and 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) Consistency, and direct staff to submit it to the FHWA/FTA for approval. Motion was SECONDED (Genis) and passed by the following votes: AYES: Chun, Clark, Davis, Devine, Ehrenkranz, Forester, Gardner, Genis, Harrison, Horne,

Mitchell, Osborne, Parks, Pettis, Plancarte, Pollock, Ramirez, Sahli-Wells, Sharif, Williams, Wright (21).

NOES: None (0). ABSTAIN: None (0).

2. Addendum #2 to the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy

(RTP/SCS) Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) Roland Ok, SCAG staff, stated that staff has prepared an Addendum to the 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR

for Amendment #2 of the 2016 RTP/SCS and an informational draft copy was submitted to the EEC for review on April. As discussed in in April’s presentation to EEC, staff determined that the


Addendum #2 to the 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR would not result in a substantial increase or new significant impacts when compared to the certified PEIR that was prepared for the original Plan.

No changes have occurred between April and today and the findings remain the same. As such the Addendum to the PEIR is the appropriate level for environmental review and documentation.

A MOTION was made (Gardner) to recommend that the Regional Council adopt Resolution 17-590-1 to approve Addendum #2 to the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR). Motion was SECONDED (Forester) and passed by the following votes:

AYES: Chun, Clark, Davis, Devine, Ehrenkranz, Forester, Gardner, Genis, Harrison, Horne,

Mitchell, Osborne, Parks, Pettis, Plancarte, Pollock, Ramirez, Sahli-Wells, Sharif, Williams, Wright (21).

NOES: None (0).

ABSTAIN: None (0).

CONSENT CALENDAR Approval Items 3. Minutes of the April 6, 2017 Meeting Receive and File 4. Status Update on Implementation of Indirect Mobil Source Measures in 2016 South Coast Air

Quality Management Plan (AQMP) 5. Draft Program for the 28th Annual Demographic Workshop – June 26, 2017 6. SCAG Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) Community Revitalization and

Investment Authority (CRIA) Technical Assistance and Web Tool Demonstration 7. 2017 Meeting Schedule of the Regional Council and Policy Committees

A MOTION was made (Pettis) to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion was SECONDED (Wright) and passed by the following votes: AYES: Chun, Clark, Davis, Devine, Ehrenkranz, Forester, Gardner, Genis, Harrison, Horne,

Mitchell, Osborne, Parks, Pettis, Plancarte, Pollock, Rosenthal, Sahli-Wells, Williams, Wright (20).

NOES: None (0). ABSTAIN: Ramirez, Sharif (2).


INFORMATION ITEMS 8. Water Quality Enhancement Framework Stuart McKibbin, Chief of Watershed Protection Division, Riverside County Flood Control &

Water Conservation District, stated that the District covers over 2,000 square miles in Western Riverside County and has multi-jurisdictional coverage of both the unincorporated county and cities. Given the genesis of the District, its focus has been on flood control. Although water conservation is in the agency’s name, it has not done as much in this area as it has in flood control. Water quality has now become a higher priority than flood control. The agency is unique because it is in a large jurisdiction, in three separate watersheds, and has to deal with three different Water Quality Control Boards and administer three different permits.

Mr. McKibbin and Christopher Gray, Director of Transportation, WRCOG, discussed the permit

processes and related issues. Mr. Gray stated that WRCOG had convened a working group that advocated for consideration of

a voluntary program. The Water Quality Enhancement Framework (WQEF) would create a voluntary opportunity for alternative compliance with updated MS4 permit requirement which might otherwise be cost prohibitive for many development projects. Rather than providing onsite stormwater managements systems, the WQEF would allow developers to “pay into” a regional stormwater management system that consolidates mitigation of stormwater, and combines best practices for water quality management into regional/sub regional locations.

9. San Gabriel Valley Council of Government (SGVCOG) Stormwater Management Policy and

California State Legislative Agenda Councilmember Judy Nelson, Glendora, stated that the City of Glendora has a new permit that is

challenging to comply with. Glendora previously had three (3) Total Maximum Daily (TMD) loads, now it has thirty-three (33), and the monitoring and treatment is now much more expensive. Glendora is now required to capture 85% of the first 24-hours of a storm within its jurisdiction. This means building new infrastructure to capture the water.

On November 17, 2016, the SGVCOG adopted a stormwater policy aimed at preserving and

protecting the watershed and natural environment, augmenting water supplies and supporting compliance with water quality standards in a reasonable, practical and affordable manner. Water quality and stormwater is a 2016-2017 Strategic Plan Key Initiative for the SGVCOG, in which the goal is to assist member cities in addressing their stormwater MS-4 permit requirements, with an emphasis on securing long term funding and identifying regional solutions. Key actions would include educating elected officials, city staff and the public on MS-4 permit requirements, as well as developing a policy position and advocating for regulatory and legislative solutions that assist cities in meeting MS-4 requirements, including long term funding, extended timing, and additional assistance and/or modifications to the permit.

The new policy guides the actions of the SGVCOG as it relates to stormwater and provides

direction for its legislative priorities. In January 2017, SGVCOG approved a legislative agenda aimed at supporting several legislative bills that accomplish the goals of the stormwater policy. The bills included: AB 1180 which creates a new tire fee to address stormwater pollution, SB 589 which adopts a Financial Capability Analysis, SB 541 which recommends best design practices


for water capture at public school facilities, and SB 633 which allows use of existing flood control infrastructure for stormwater conveyance.

10. SCAG Clean Cities Coalition Annual Update

Marco Anderson, SCAG Staff, stated that in coordination with other regional stakeholders and Clean Cities Coalitions, the SCAG Clean Cities program has been working on revamping its stakeholder outreach and participation. Recent project accomplishments include a half-day workshop in December 2016 on Electric Vehicle (EV) charging in multifamily housing that convened property owners, homeowner association presidents, city planners from various cities, and EV charging consultants that mainly work on charging infrastructure in multifamily dwellings. Additionally, the Coalition has met with various stakeholders from the Center for Sustainable Energy and the Los Angeles County Community Development Commission, to discuss how the region can best position itself to draw upon funds from the Volkswagen Settlement for the purposes of deploying EV charging infrastructure and building staffing capacity that will focus on EV charging infrastructure. SCAG is working on an inventory to document outreach to all jurisdictions regarding petroleum displacement from alternative fuel use, vehicle miles traveled reduction, other Clean Cities portfolio elements as possible, and to attract additional stakeholders to the Coalition. SCAG staff have pursued opportunities for Department of Energy (DOE) funds to train SCAG stakeholders on Alternative Fuel Life-Cycle Environmental and Economic Transportation (AFLEET) and other tools. Staff has continued to work closely with the other Clean Cities Coalitions in Southern California and the e4 Advanced Transportation Center to develop a coordinated regional approach to meeting the national Clean Cities goals.

11. Making Conservation A Way of Life

Erik Ekdahl, Director Office of Research, Planning, and Performance, State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board) stated that during the last five years there was an epic drought in California, the worst seen in several hundred years. This five-year drought caused severe impacts across the State, including community water sources running dry, the loss of agricultural production and jobs, depletion of groundwater basins, widespread tree death, and negative impacts to fish and wildlife. In response to the drought, on May 9, 2016 Governor Brown issued Executive Order (EO) B-37-16 to establish a long-term framework for water conservation and drought planning. Emergency conservation measures included calling for a 25 percent reduction in urban water usage. Although emergency measures are no longer in place, the Governor, in anticipation of more frequent and severe droughts in the future, on April 7, 2017 released a new EO, B-40-17. The Executive Order (Order) lifted the drought emergency for all but four counties in the state. The Order’s objective is to transition to long-term framework, “Conservation as a California Way of Life”. Under the proposed framework, five state agencies – the Department of Water Resources (DWR), the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board), the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), and the California Energy Commission (CEC), collectively referred to as the “EO Agencies” are to coordinate on implementation of the Order. Water suppliers are charged with meeting the Order’s objective through the following actions: using water more wisely, eliminating water waste, strengthening local drought resilience, and improving agricultural water use efficiency and drought planning. The EO Agencies will rely on existing authorities, ranging from


rulemaking proceedings to expanded technical assistance to evaluation and certification of new technologies in order to implement the four objectives.

CHAIR’S REPORT Chair Carmen Ramirez asked that members of the EEC contact her or SCAG staff with any future agenda items. STAFF REPORT Grieg Asher, SCAG staff, informed the Committee that the 2017 Local Profiles reports for each of SCAGs member cities, counties, and unincorporated county areas have been released and are now available on the SCAG website. Postcards were distributed during the meeting contain information about the reports and also provide a link to the SCAG website where the 2017 Local Profiles may be downloaded. FUTURE AGENDA ITEM/S None ANNOUNCEMENT/S None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Honorable Carmen Ramirez adjourned the EEC meeting at 12:01 p.m. The next regular meeting of the EEC will be held on Thursday, July 6, 2017 at the SCAG Los Angeles office.


DATE: July 6, 2017

TO: Regional Council (RC) Energy and Environment Committee (EEC)

FROM: Hasan Ikhrata, Executive Director, (213) 236-1944, [email protected]

SUBJECT: Final Update on State Route (SR) 241 Extension Transportation Control Measure (TCM) Substitution by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA)

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S APPROVAL: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and File. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The OCTA TCM substitution of the State Route 241 Extension TCM project (FTIP Project ID: ORA052) was adopted by the Regional Council on February 2, 2017. The TCM substitution had been submitted to and subsequently received concurrence from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (ARB) respectively. With these approvals, the committed TCM status of the original TCM project has been rescinded and the new TCM project is effective. The TCM substitution will be reflected through an amendment to the 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports SCAG’s Strategic Plan, Goal 1: Improve Regional Decision Making by Providing Leadership and Consensus Building on Key Plans and Policies; Objective a) Create and facilitate a collaborative and cooperative environment to produce forward thinking regional plans. BACKGROUND: TCMs are defined as transportation projects or programs that adjust trip patterns or otherwise modify vehicle use in ways that reduce air pollutant emissions, and which are specifically identified and committed to in the most recently approved Air Quality Management Plan/State Implementation Plan (AQMP/SIP). TCMs are included in an AQMP/SIP as part of the overall control strategy to demonstrate a region’s ability to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. In the SCAG region, TCM-type projects are considered committed once they have funds programmed for right-of-way or construction in an approved SCAG FTIP. When a committed TCM cannot be delivered or will be significantly delayed, the substitution of the TCM follows the process specified under the Clean Air Act §176(c). As reported previously, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) requested in September 2016 that SCAG substitute the State Route 241 Extension project, which is included as a committed TCM in the South Coast Ozone SIP (FTIP Project ID: ORA052), with the State Route 241/91 Express Lanes Connector Project.

AGENDA ITEM NO. 2


Working with OCTA staff, SCAG staff prepared the final analysis on the TCM substitution demonstrating that the proposed TCM substitution meets all federal requirements. As part of the substitution process, the TCM substitution request was brought before SCAG’s Transportation Conformity Working Group, for interagency consultation as required by the Clean Air Act; and it was also released for a formal 30-day public review period. No comments were received during the public comment period. As recommended by the EEC, the Regional Council adopted the TCM substitution at its meeting on February 2, 2017. Subsequently, the TCM substitution was submitted to U.S. EPA and ARB for their respective review. As part of the review process by EPA and EPA, additional technical clarification information has been provided to these agencies. Upon conclusion of their respective review, ARB issued its concurrence on the OCTA TCM substitution on May 17, 2017; EPA issued its concurrences on the TCM substitution on June 1, 2017. In accordance with the Clean Air Act, SCAG’s approval of the TCM substitution with concurrence of the EPA and ARB rescind the committed TCM status of the original TCM project and the new TCM project becomes effective. The TCM substitution will be reflected through an amendment to the 2017 FTIP. The conclusion of the TCM substitution fulfills the applicable transportation conformity requirements and allows unimpeded implementation of critical transportation projects throughout the region. FISCAL IMPACT: Work associated with this item is included in the current FY16-17 Overall Work Program (025.SCG0164.01: Air Quality Planning and Conformity). ATTACHMENTS: 1. U.S. EPA Concurrence Letter 2. ARB Concurrence Letter



REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

REY

Typewritten Text


REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 2

2017 Meeting Schedule

Regional Council and Policy Committees

All Regular Meetings are scheduled on the 1st Thursday of each month

(Approved by the Regional Council 09-01-16)

Executive/Administration Committee (EAC) 9:00 AM – 10:00 AM

Community, Economic and Human

Development Committee (CEHD)

10:00 AM – 12:00 PM

Energy and Environment Committee (EEC) 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM

Transportation Committee (TC) 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM

Regional Council (RC) 12:15 PM – 2:00 PM

January 5, 2017

February 2, 2017

March 2, 2017

April 6, 2017

May 4 – 5, 2017 (SCAG Regional Conference and General Assembly, JW Marriott Desert Springs)

June 1, 2017

July 6, 2017

August 3, 2017 (DARK)

September 7, 2017 (Note: League of California Cities Annual Conference, Sacramento, CA; Sep. 13 - 15)

October 5, 2017

November 2, 2017

December 7, 2017 (SCAG 8th Annual Economic Summit --- in lieu of the regularly scheduled

Regional Council and Policy Committees’ Meeting)

AGENDA ITEM NO. 3


DATE: July 6, 2017

TO: Community, Economic and Human Development (CEHD) Committee Energy and Environmental Committee (EEC) Transportation Committee (TC)

FROM: Frank Wen, Acting Director, Land Use and Environmental Planning, (213) 236-1854, [email protected]

SUBJECT: 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Growth Forecast Development: Summary of Panel of Experts Meeting and Draft Preliminary Regional and County Growth Projections and Next Steps

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S APPROVAL: RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR CEHD: For Information—No Action Required. RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR EEC AND TC: Receive and File. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Steve Levy, Director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy (CCSCE) will provide a status report on the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) growth forecast development, specifically, information regarding the recent panel of experts meeting, preliminary draft of SCAG region and county growth projections, and policy implications. STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal 1: Improve Regional Decision Making by Providing Leadership and Consensus Building on Key Plans and Policies, and Objective (a): Create and facilitate a collaborative and cooperative environment to produce forward thinking regional plans

Goal 4: Develop, Maintain and Promote the Utilization of State of the Art Models, Information Systems and Communication Technologies, and Objective (b): Develop, maintain and enhance data and information to support planning and decision making in a timely and effective manner BACKGROUND: Staff held the 2017 SCAG panel of demographic and economic experts meeting on May 25 and May 30, 2017 to review methodology and assumptions of population, household, and employment growth forecast for the 2020 RTP/SCS. Nineteen (19) academic scholars and leading practitioners were invited to participate on the panel (Attachment 1 Expert Panel Meeting Information Packet). The panel of experts reviewed demographic and economic trends in the national and regional growth context, discussed assumptions underlying the regional growth forecast, and provided responses to key questions on major assumptions and future trends about fertility rates, migration, and regional competitiveness and job outlook comparing with both U.S. and California.

AGENDA ITEM NO. 4


SCAG consultant Steve Levy, provided a summary from the expert panel discussion, projection methodology/key assumptions and ranges of regional growth forecast for 2020 RTP/SCS. Staff then ran the SCAG Demographic-Economic Model, considering Steve Levy’s summary of expert opinions, including the US level jobs, population, immigration, fertility trends, CA/SCAG competitiveness and ranges of regional projections, etc., to guide the development of preliminary draft growth forecasts as shown in the table below. The preliminary draft growth forecasts were provided to the expert panel members for their review and comments, and presented to SCAG Technical Working Group (TWG) on June 15, 2017 (Attachment 2 TWG Discussion Packet, June 15 2017). At today’s CEHD meeting, SCAG consultant Steve Levy will present a summary of the 2017 panel of experts meeting, discuss the regional growth forecast methodology and assumptions for the 2020 RTP/SCS growth projection, and policy implications.

SCAG Preliminary Draft Forecast for 2020 RTP/SCS

2016 2020 2030 2035 2045 2050

Imperial 67 79 104 113 133 144

Los Angeles 4,805 4,892 5,104 5,210 5,418 5,488

Orange 1,725 1,761 1,846 1,889 1,973 2,004

Riverside 747 819 948 991 1,080 1,121

San Bernardino 791 815 865 887 930 946

Ventura 359 372 396 406 426 434

SCAG 8,494 8,738 9,263 9,496 9,960 10,137

2016 2020 2030 2035 2045 2050

Imperial 187 237 261 271 289 296

Los Angeles 10,212 10,420 10,919 11,195 11,701 11,911

Orange 3,183 3,301 3,414 3,433 3,498 3,541

Riverside 2,366 2,503 2,877 3,022 3,291 3,407

San Bernardino 2,148 2,217 2,503 2,611 2,796 2,868

Ventura 856 894 930 946 978 993

SCAG 18,953 19,572 20,903 21,478 22,554 23,017

2016 2020 2030 2035 2045 2050

Imperial 50 71 84 89 97 100

Los Angeles 3,315 3,466 3,753 3,890 4,128 4,221

Orange 1,026 1,066 1,137 1,157 1,199 1,219

Riverside 715 796 953 1,013 1,120 1,162

San Bernardino 630 682 790 830 903 932

Ventura 273 283 303 311 324 328

SCAG 6,010 6,365 7,020 7,290 7,771 7,962

SCAG Preliminary Draft Forecast for Employment 2020 RTP/SCS

SCAG Preliminary Draft Forecast for Population 2020 RTP/SCS

SCAG Preliminary Draft Forecast for Households 2020 RTP/SCS


NEXT STEPS: SCAG staff will start working with stakeholders about methodology and refinement of county level growth forecasts and further disaggregate the draft preliminary forecast of population, households and employment (shown in table above) for the 2020 RTP/SCS into small areas including jurisdictional level, transportation analysis zones, etc. Staff will prepare a letter for communicating with local jurisdictions, producing the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS growth forecasting/land use data package along with the Scenario Planning Model (SPM) to initiate the bottom up local review and input process for the 2020 RTP/SCS. FISCAL IMPACT: Work associated with this item is included in the Fiscal Year 17/18 Overall Work Program (150 04096.02: Regional Growth and Policy Analysis). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Expert Panel Meeting Information Packet 2. TWG Discussion Packet, June 15 2017 3. Power Point Presentation: “SCAG Region Growth Forecast: Trends, Assumptions, Policy

Implications”


Attachment 1 Expert Panel Meeting Information Packet

CENTER FOR CONTINUING STUDY OF THE CALIFORNIA ECONOMY

385 HOMER AVENUE • PALO ALTO • CALIFORNIA • 94301

TELEPHONE: (650) 321-8550 FAX: (650) 321-5451

www.ccsce.com DATE: May 22, 2017 TO: Expert Panel Members FROM: Stephen Levy SUBJECT: Background for Our Meeting The project work began three weeks ago. As a result, this year the panel meeting is occurring before the draft regional forecasts are prepared. We will invite your feedback on the regional forecast when it is prepared. This meeting will focus on key assumptions about the national, state and regional outlook The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS forecast period extends beyond 2040 toward 2050. As such it focuses on trends and issues that affect the region’s long-term growth outlook. On June 26th SCAG is hosting the annual demographic workshop where the topics of potential job displacement and policy responses such as a guaranteed basic income will be features. While staff is interested in your comments in these early conversations, we would like to be able to revisit this topic and share insights and materials from the demographic workshop. Your input will help CCSCE develop a range of growth projections and help staff select where in the range of growth outlooks to select a baseline forecast. Issues are highlighted as they occur and a set of questions is at the end of the memo. The National and State Outlook The SCAG region job forecast is set in the context of expected overall and specific industry job growth in the nation and state. CCSCE prepared a national and state job forecast as part of our work for California MPOs including SCAG and SACOG and the assumptions and results are discussed below. National Outlook CCSCE used the REMI forecast national total population and total job forecasts. When using REMI job data, the growth rates are used as REMI uses the BEA


REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

definition and measure of job levels, which are higher than the BLS/EDD data that the forecast ties to. The REMI U.S. long-term population forecast is slightly lower than the published 2014 Census Bureau projections. This is the result of using lower birth forecasts but matching the Census Bureau’s slow upward forecast of foreign immigration levels. It should be noted that without immigration U.S. population growth slows to less than 0.1% annually and labor force growth likely turns negative after 2040. Below are the population and immigration projections from the Census Bureau in 2012 Census (used for the 2016 RTP), the Census Bureau in 2014 and REMI in 2017 for the years 2020, 30, 40 and 50.

U.S. Demographic Projections

(Millions)

Population 2020 2030 2040 2050

2012 Census/2016 RTP 336.4 358.5 380.0 399.8

2014 Census 334.5 359.4 380.2 398.2

2017 REMI 332.6 356.0 376.4 392.6

Immigration

2012 Census/2016 RTP 0.91 1.14 1.17 1.20

2014 Census 1.27 1.35 1.43 1.47

2017 REMI 1.03 1.35 1.42 1.47

Population and Labor Force, Total Jobs The selection of immigration levels is one key assumption we will discuss. REMI forecasts a higher labor force participation rate in 2050 compared to 2016. Participation rates decline to 2030 as boomers retire but are forecast to rise between 2030 and 2040 and rise even more between 2040 and 2050. This assumption produces larger job growth after 2030 than would be expected just based on population growth. Overall U.S. labor force participation rates have been steady in the past year even as more boomers retire or move into lower participation age groups. Yet rates for some groups, particularly men, remain below previous highs. Putting aside for now the question of robots and automation in general, should we consider that the sharp decline for some men, particularly those who lost blue collar jobs, was a one-time or generational phenomena and that men in the workforce in 2030 and beyond will not repeat the lower participation rates. This is the REMI forecast assumption. For example, participation rates for men aged 45-54 go from 84.7% in 2016 to 83.6% in 2024 before rebounding to 86.4% in 2040 and 88.1% in 2050. Similar rates for men 55-59 are 76.7%, 75.7%,


79.2% and 81.3%.Rates for men aged 65-69 are forecast to go up steadily from 35.8% now to 40.4% (2030), 42.6% (2040( and 44.6% (2050). Jobs by Industry The U.S. industry jobs forecast was developed by CCSCE and used input from BLS and REMI industry projections. Total U.S. job levels were at or close to the REMI forecast levels. Job growth in both outside forecasts was above average in basic industry sectors where California has a competitive advantage—including information and professional services, motion pictures and entertainment with also growth in trade related sectors. CCSCE adjusted the national industry forecasts to slow or stop growth in retail, finance and truck transportation where a variety of factors suggested slow or zero growth after 2025. Construction and defense job forecasts were raised modestly in anticipation of increased infrastructure and defense spending. California Job Forecast California is in the midst of a steady increase in the state’s share of national jobs, driven mostly by a favorable composition of national industry trends. California posted a record high 11.6% of U.S. jobs in 2018 up from 11.4% in 2012. The CCSCE forecast has the state gaining shares in some key sectors to 2025 continuing recent trends in software, pharmaceuticals, motion pictures and some professional service sectors. Basic industries sell most goods and service to customers outside the region, have broader locational choices and their growth rates are principal determinants of the relative growth of state and regional economies. California has recorded share gains in total basic jobs and several key growth sectors since 2007.


California’s favorable basic industry composition (an above average share of fast growing industries), combined with share increases in some sectors, has and will continue to increase the state’s share of national basic industry jobs. California is projected to capture 13.3% if U.S. basic jobs in 2040 and 2050 up from 13.1% in 2025, 12.8% in 2016 and 12.6% in 2007. After 2025, CCSCE held individual sector shares constant. Overall basic industry share increases after 2025 reflect a favorable industry composition.

California Share of Basic Industry Clusters

2007 2016 2025 2040 2040

HIGH TECHNOLOGY 20.5% 21.9% 21.8% 21.9% 22.0%

DIVERSIFIED MANUF 9.4% 8.4% 8.4% 8.6% 8.7%TRANSPORTATION & WHOLESALE TRADE 11.7% 12.2% 12.6% 12.6% 12.6%

PROF,TECH,SCI,MGMNT SERV 13.1% 13.5% 13.9% 14.0% 14.0%

TOURISM & ENTERTAIMENT 14.5% 15.2% 15.5% 16.5% 16.8%

GOVERNMENT 9.0% 8.6% 8.6% 8.6% 8.6%

RESOURCE BASED 17.6% 17.1% 16.5% 15.9% 15.1%

TOTAL BASIC JOBS 12.6% 12.8% 13.1% 13.3% 13.3%

Based on the state’s basic industry job growth, the share of total U.S. jobs is projected to continue increasing after 2016. The favorable composition of national job growth pushes the state share higher. The state share is projected to increase to 12.1% in 2025, 12.2% in 2040 and 12.3% in 2050.

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0%

Pharma

Software

Internet

Motion Puctures

Amusements

Sci, Tech Serv

Totat Basic

CA Share of Selected Basic Industries

2016 2007


The table below compares the current CCSCE job projections for the state and nation with those used in the 2016 RTP. The U.S. job projection for 2040 is 3% below that used in the 2016 RTP while the 2040 state job projection is 1% above the 2016 RTP projection. The major change between the two projection sets is the higher projected state share of national jobs. Note that the actual state share in 2016 (11.8%) is higher than the old 2040 projected share (11.7% based on unrounded numbers from the table). Comparison of 2016 RTP and CCSCE CA and U.S. Jobs

(Millions, CA % of U.S.)

2012 2016 2020 2040

U.S. Jobs

2016 RTP 145.4 163.6 186.2

CCSCE/REMI 2017 156.2 180.2

CA Jobs

2016 RTP 16.2 18.6 21.9

CCSCE 2017 18.4 22.1

CA Share of U.S.

2016 RTP 11.2% 11.4% 11.7%

CCSCE 2017 11.8% 12.2%

This is the national and state context for the SCAG job growth forecast.

10.0%

10.5%

11.0%

11.5%

12.0%

12.5%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2016 2025 2040 2050

CA Share of U.S. Jobs


Questions on the National and State Job Projections The U.S. population projection is slightly lower than was incorporated into the 2016 RTP with slightly higher immigration levels offset by lower birth rates. Reviewing the immigration assumptions will be an important part of our discussions. What do you think about immigration levels into the future? Should SCAG take into account the current presidential agenda for a forecast to 2050? Will the country keep an immigration level so low that labor force and GDP growth rates decline even more than projected? Is the outlook to 2025 different than the outlook beyond 2025? Both the 2016 RTP and current REMI forecast assume an increase in labor force participation rates after the current generation retires? Does that seem reasonable in projecting total job growth? The state share of basic industry and total jobs has rebounded sharply since 2012 and the new job projections reflect an ongoing but modest increase in shares based on a favorable industry composition. Do you agree? There will be a discussion of how to treat potential job displacement at a later point in the memo. Recent SCAG Region Job Trends The SCAG region share of state jobs has declined since 1990 with a large drop after the aerospace job losses in the early 1990s and another drop when the region was hit with an 80% decline in housing permits after 2007. The region rebounded after 1995 but has stayed at low share levels after 2007 as the Bay Area boomed. When the Bay Area is taken out of the data the region’s share of the remaining California jobs shows the post 1990 decline but the post 2007 decline mostly disappears with a rebound in recent years. When SCAG job growth is compared to the U.S., there is strong recovery after 1995 and since 2012 but the region’s share of U.S. remains below 1990 pre-aerospace decline levels.


44.0%

45.0%

46.0%

47.0%

48.0%

49.0%

50.0%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

SCAG Region Share of CA Jobs

59.0%

61.0%

63.0%

65.0%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

SCAG/CA‐Bay Area

4.8%

5.0%

5.2%

5.4%

5.6%

5.8%

6.0%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2017

SCAG Region Share of U.S. Jobs


An overview of basic industry job trends shows a similar picture. The region lost share to the state and nation after the 1990 aerospace slump and lost share to the state after 2007 as the Bay Area economy surged. But the region’s share of comparable basic industry jobs in the nation rebounded in the past two years and has been relatively steady since 1995.

The measure of basic industries is slightly broader at the regional level compared to the basic industry measure for the state and nation. The national basic industry data shown above have been made comparable to the regional definition. The regional definition adds state government to the government sector shown below, adds some transportation industries to the wholesale trade and transportation measure, adds some small manufacturing sectors to diversified manufacturing and resource based and adds broadcasting and telecommunications to the professional and information services cluster.

40.0%

42.0%

44.0%

46.0%

48.0%

50.0%

52.0%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2016

SCAG Region Share of CABasic Industry Jobs

4.8%

5.0%

5.2%

5.4%

5.6%

5.8%

6.0%

6.2%

6.4%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2016

SCAG Region Share of U.S. Basic Industry Jobs


In looking at recent trends in the basic industry clusters with the fastest growth prospects, the region is performing well in two sectors with a large question mark about the future in the fastest job growth sector. He region has gained share in sectors related to trade and tourism but has lost share to the nation in professional and information services where the fastest job growth and is expected to occur.

The region has maintained a steady share of U.S. jobs in clusters with job losses or slow growth. The region has an above average share in the tech manufacturing, trade and tourism sectors, a below average share in basic government and resource jobs and a close to average share in diversified manufacturing and professional and information services.

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

9.0%

10.0%

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

SCAG/U.S. Shares for Faster Growing Clusters

Whls Tr & Transp. Prof, Bus & Info Serv. Tourism & Ent

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

SCAG/U.S. Shares for Slower Growing Clusters

High Tech Manuf. Divs. Manuf.

Basic Govt Resource Based


SCAG Job Issues and Questions In the 2016 RTP the SCAG region was forecast to have job growth at a pace slightly faster than the nation but below the state job growth rate. That has been true in the years since 2012. What is your expectation for regional job growth compared to the nation and state in the years ahead? How should SCAG factor in the Trump agenda, which will likely not be determined before the regional forecast is complete? What is the outlook for trade and tourism/entertainment job growth over the longer term? Is a defense/aerospace revival likely and large or long lasting enough to effect the forecast? Can the region expect a rebound in the share of national professional and information service jobs? Do you expect federal, state and local infrastructure spending to accelerate? What regional policy actions will affect the forecast up or down? SCAG Region Population Trends and Issues The forecast of regional total population will be based on the job forecast. CCSCE will recommend to staff that they use the DOF projections of age and ethnic group growth or their own projections and adjust the detail to the projected regional total population. This incorporates the DOF assumptions on fertility and mortality rates and factors dealing with changes in the ethnic composition of the region’s population. SCAG will review the regional immigration assumptions. The current DOF projections of regional population are consistent with the 2016 RTP job projection adjusted for an assumption of lower birth rates. The DOF projections were reviewed by CCSCE for SCAG staff and input was provided to DOF. Ethan Sharygin, who developed the projections, will be at the meeting and can answer high level questions including how foreign immigration and domestic migration were projected. The DOF regional projections are shown below. I will ask Ethan to add any explanation particularly about how the Asian and multi-race populations were handled. Dowell and others can comment on how SCAG policy makers should understand the growth in the Hispanic population and the extent of generation progress in language, education, income and housing.


The race/ethnic groups in the table below were used because the household formation (headship) rates provided by DOF used these categories for the regional population.

DOF Population Projections

SCAG Region

(Millions and Percent Share)

2010 2015 2025 2040 2050

NH White 6.1 6.0 6.1 6.0 5.8

NH Black 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4

NH Other 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.3

Hispanic 8.2 8.8 9.8 11.3 12.0

Total 18.1 18.8 20.2 21.8 22.5

NH White 33.5% 32.1% 30.2% 27.5% 25.8%

NH Black 6.6% 6.5% 6.4% 6.3% 6.2%

NH Other 14.6% 14.7% 14.7% 14.5% 14.5%

Hispanic 45.3% 46.7% 48.7% 51.7% 53.5%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

The new DOF population projections are slightly lower than the 2016 RTP forecast for 2040 (explained by lower birth rate assumptions) but a larger gap appears for 2050 when DOF is projecting very slow population growth after 2040. All of this will be reviewed when CCSCE develops a forecast of regional job growth.

SCAG Region Population

(Thousands) Growth

2025 2040 2050 2025‐40 2040‐50 2016 RTP 20.1 22.1 23.3 2.0 1.2

DOF 20.2 21.8 22.5 1.6 0.7

The Relationship of Regional Population Growth to Job Growth The number of residents consistent with projected job growth in the region should decline compared to the 2016 RTP. One reason is that projected fertility rates and birth levels are lower than were assumed in the 2016 RTP growth forecast.


The second reason is that it appears that REMI assumed slightly higher labor force participation rates than were used in the 2016 RTP forecast. Higher participation rates mean that fewer working age residents are needed to fill a given job level. CCSCE will develop a preliminary population growth forecast by projecting the ratio of population to jobs for the region compared to the nation. The nation’s population-job ratio already incorporates higher labor force participation rates and lower fertility levels. The remaining step is to assess whether participation rate trends or fertility trends in the region will diverge from the national trends. It is likely that the region’s population –job ratio will decline a bit relative to the nation as the region will experience a sharper decline in fertility rates as the region has a far above average share of Hispanic population where fertility rates are declining the most.

The SCAG region has historically had a higher population-job ratio than the nation as shown above because the region’s fertility rate has been higher. This is still true although the region’s fertility rate is becoming closer to the national average and should get closer in the forecast period. Questions Are you comfortable going with the DOF age and ethnic detail? Is there an alternative? We need age and ethnic detail to project HH growth. How should we treat the growth in Hispanic population in the later years? What generational changes do you expect?

1.04

1.05

1.06

1.07

1.08

1.09

1.1

1.11

1.12

1.13

1.14

Population/Job Ratio SCAG vs U.S.


I am interested in hearing from Ethan about the composition of the “NH Other” group and why it is not growing faster. Without much detail to project age/ethnic labor force participation rates and immigration detail, is there a better/alternative approach to linking population and jobs than the proposed analysis of region/nation population-job ratios/ Do you expect the regional ratio to move closer to the national ratio as a result of falling Hispanic fertility rates? Hispanics in the DOF projection account for 51.7% of the regional population in 2040 compared to 23.9% nationally. Background for Developing the SCAG Household/Housing Forecast There is broad agreement that additions to the housing stock in the region have not kept pace with population growth resulting in increases in rents and home prices that outpace gains in income. There are a number of ways to measure this shortage. One is shown below. To keep pace with population growth and maintain the same household size as in 2007, the region would have needed to add 419,720 housing units or more than 100,000 more than were actually added according to DOF estimates. To reflect the smaller household sixes suggested by falling birth levels and an increase in older households, more than 520,000 units were needed.

311,022

419,720

521,826

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

Units Added Needed to Keep Pacewith Pop Growth

Needed to Keep Pacewith Demogrpahic

Change

SCAG Region Housing Units 2007‐2017


But just 326,000 building permits were issued during this period for housing units. This is consistent with the DOF housing stock estimates as not all permits turn into starts and a few replace existing units. Household size has increased in the region since 2000 even as the number of births has declined. In 2016 there births were 1.2% of the total population down from 1.6% in 2000.

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

SCAG Region Housing Permits

2.92

2.94

2.96

2.98

3

3.02

3.04

3.06

3.08

3.1

3.12

Household Size in SCAG Region


The household forecast will be developed by using a forecast of population by age and ethnic group as described above and household headship rates provided by DOF and modified if appropriate by feedback and additional research. DOF has provided two sets of headship rates and I am hoping Walter Schwarm will help us understand the rationale and implications. For the first round CCSCE will provide a range of household growth forecasts using different headship rates. There is the technical forecast and then there will be the policy on land use and housing adopted in the 2020 RTP/SCS. Housing has been a priority item for SCAG, which hosted a housing summit and additional housing related activities. As I understand the DOF headship rates, one set produces 120,000 added HH at the state level to 2025 while the other set, developed to match the new Housing and Community Development goal, produces 180,000 new HH by 2025, both exceeding recent growth levels. I am hoping the panel can provide advice to SCAG on likely trends in headship rates. Will young adults continue to live with their parents in current numbers or gradually move out? Will the current doubling up of households to lower rents continue indefinitely? Will 3rd and 4th generation Hispanic and Asian residents continue current multi-generational living or converge toward higher household formation rates? Will there be differences by time period remembering that the forecast goes to 2040 and beyond?

200000

210000

220000

230000

240000

250000

260000

270000

280000

290000

Births in SCAG Region


If possible, I will provide more detailed analysis of the DOF headship rate trends at the meeting. Automation, Job Displacement and Policy Responses As mentioned above, the SCAG demographic workshop will focus on these issues. Concern about the impact of technology on job levels has been around since 1945. Many jobs that existed then no longer exist. And starting in the 1970s many blue collar jobs disappeared causing transitions for workers and communities. Yet in April 2017 the U-6 broad measure of unemployment described below, fell below pre-recession levels and unemployment fell to 4.5% in the nation and labor force participation has risen slightly even as boomers retire. “U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force....” from BLS website. Job displacement will continue. The forecast question is how this will affect the forecast. CCSCE did reduce jobs in retail, finance and trucking compared to the REMI forecast but did not reduce total job levels. There has been a decline in participation rates especially for men aged 25-54 part of which is the result of incarceration rates, part of which is the result of increased disability rolls, and part of which are people simply giving up looking for work. Is this a generational effect—the result of losses in manufacturing and construction jobs, trends which have since reversed? There are always changes in the distribution of jobs and required skills. Can education and workforce policies )along with increases in the Earned Income Tax Credit) mitigate and help prepare for these transitions or will future changes be so great that policies like guaranteed basic income or guaranteed jobs be needed. Past concerns about permanent job losses were followed by mostly successful macro and workforce policies. Is this time different? SCAG seeks your input at our meeting and would like to share the demographic workshop insights and materials and get your feedback on these after the event.


Attachment 2 TWG Discussion Packet, June 15 2017

TWG Discussion Item: Preliminary Draft Range of Growth Forecasts for the 2020 RTP/SCS

June 15, 2017

SCAG Preliminary Draft Forecast for 2020 RTP/SCS

Source: SCAG Demographic-Economic Forecast Model, June 13, 2017

2016 2020 2030 2035 2045 2050

Imperial 67 79 104 113 133 144

Los Angeles 4,805 4,892 5,104 5,210 5,418 5,488

Orange 1,725 1,761 1,846 1,889 1,973 2,004

Riverside 747 819 948 991 1,080 1,121

San Bernardino 791 815 865 887 930 946

Ventura 359 372 396 406 426 434

SCAG 8,494 8,738 9,263 9,496 9,960 10,137

2016 2020 2030 2035 2045 2050

Imperial 187 237 261 271 289 296

Los Angeles 10,212 10,420 10,919 11,195 11,701 11,911

Orange 3,183 3,301 3,414 3,433 3,498 3,541

Riverside 2,366 2,503 2,877 3,022 3,291 3,407

San Bernardino 2,148 2,217 2,503 2,611 2,796 2,868

Ventura 856 894 930 946 978 993

SCAG 18,953 19,572 20,903 21,478 22,554 23,017

2016 2020 2030 2035 2045 2050

Imperial 50 71 84 89 97 100

Los Angeles 3,315 3,466 3,753 3,890 4,128 4,221

Orange 1,026 1,066 1,137 1,157 1,199 1,219

Riverside 715 796 953 1,013 1,120 1,162

San Bernardino 630 682 790 830 903 932

Ventura 273 283 303 311 324 328

SCAG 6,010 6,365 7,020 7,290 7,771 7,962

SCAG Preliminary Draft Forecast for Households 2020 RTP/SCS

SCAG Preliminary Draft Forecast for Population 2020 RTP/SCS

SCAG Preliminary Draft Forecast for Employment 2020 RTP/SCS


REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 2

CENTER FOR CONTINUING STUDY OF THE CALIFORNIA ECONOMY

385 HOMER AVENUE • PALO ALTO • CALIFORNIA • 94301

TELEPHONE: (650) 321-8550 FAX: (650) 321-5451

www.ccsce.com DATE: June 11, 2017 TO: John Cho and Frank Wen FROM: Stephen Levy SUBJECT: Projection Methodology and Key Assumptions and Ranges of

SCAG Region Growth Forecast The first point for audiences to understand is that these are projections developed by using specific assumptions. We call them forecasts at SCAG but they are really projections. This is important because we do not assign probabilities to the scenarios. I cannot say that the middle scenario (called baseline or current trends scenario) is more likely to occur. I can argue that some assumptions seem more reasonable to me but that is judgment and experience As long as audiences understand that selecting a set of projections is selecting the assumptions underlying the projections, the process is transparent. This memo sets out the assumptions underlying each projection set. The regional projection methodology begins with job projections, translates them into population projections and then projects households. The regional methodology is also based on national and state projections. The baseline scenario projections were developed with a full run of CCSCE’s models for jobs, population and households at the regional level. The low and high scenarios were developed on the basis of top level assumption differences and did not involve a full run of CCSCE’s models as explained below. All projections were helped by expert panel input. The main expert panel meeting was held on May 30th. A conference call was held on May 25th with members who could not attend on May 30th, After the May 30th meeting Dowell Myers prepared some data and charts on the Latino generation trends in the state and SCAG region. These projections are an input to the SCAG staff that are responsible for the projections brought forward for local jurisdiction input.


Jobs The baseline national job projections used the current REMI national forecast of total jobs and jobs by industry. A few sector job projections were changed but the REMI total job projection was kept for 2040. The largest downward changes were reductions in retail, finance, trucking and apparel with increases in construction, aerospace and food services. The REMI job projections were based on their population projection and a rebound in labor force participation rates after 2030. The REMI population projection incorporated a decline in birth rates and maintenance of current immigration levels in the near term. REMi projected increasing immigration levels after 2025. The California and SCAG region baseline job projections were developed using CCSCE’s multi industry projection model and assumptions about California and SCAG region shares of specific industry jobs. California’s share of U.S. jobs has risen from 11.4% in 2012 to 11.8% in 2016 driven by both share gains and a high concentration in fast growing industries. Sectors from Internet services to motion pictures to pharmaceuticals and many professional services have seen share gains since 2007. Panel members agreed that California has a favorable industry composition with regard to U.S. job growth. The CCSCE baseline projections continue a few selected share gains to 2025 but keep all sector shares of U.S. jobs constant after 2025. This is a conservative assumption. Still the overall share of U.S. jobs locating in California is projected to increase because the state has a favorable industry composition with above average shares of fast growing sectors, The SCAG projections were developed primarily using the 2010-2016 chares of state jobs in each basic industry. These shares are generally lower than shares in earlier years as the Bay Area gained shares during this period. The resulting SCAG region baseline job projections showed growth at a slightly lower pace compared to the state and slightly faster growth than jobs in the nation. Panel members were generally in agreement with the SCAG share projections. Input from the Expert Panel The expert panel members had a variety of opinions on the REMI national population and job projections.


Members agreed birth rates would be lower than was expected in the 2016 RTP growth forecast. Some members thought birth rates could fall more in the future while one or two members wondered if a rebound in birth rates would happen again as has happened before. Some members expected immigration levels to remain low, not as a result of the current administration agenda but because the incentives for workers to remain in their home countries would increase as, for example, economic growth opportunities rose in India, China, Mexico and other countries. Some members thought labor force participation would not be as high as REMI projected primarily because automation would limit job opportunities for some residents. On the other hand lower birth rates and better immigration for female immigrant children could cause an increase in female labor force participation. The Low Job Projection Scenario The conversation provided the background for developing a lower national population and job projection set. U.S. population in 2040 was lowered by approximately 8 million split between lower birth rates and lower immigration levels after 2025. And labor force participation rates were lowered. The result was approximately 7.5 million fewer U.S. jobs in 2040. The job projection was reduced more in % terms than the population projection as there were fewer residents with jobs because labor force participation was assumed to be lower and unemployment rates higher than in the baseline projection but those people still counted in the population total. Panel members mostly agreed with the CCSCE California/U.S. job share analysis. One or two members thought that the CA/US share could be slightly lower and that was assumed in the low projection scenario. Panel members mostly agreed that the SCAG/U.S. share of jobs would increase very slightly over the period to 2040. In the low projection the SCAG/U.S. share was reduced slightly as a result of the reduced CA/U.S. job share. The result was SCAG region jobs in 2040 approximately 500,000 below the baseline projection, primarily as a result of the lower U.S. job projection. The High Job Projection Scenario No panel members thought the REMI U.S. projections would be exceeded so the REMI baseline was used in developing a high SCAG region scenario. Panel members did not spend much time on thinking about a higher regional job projection.


The high regional job projection was developed by CCSCE and assumed small increases in the California share of specific U.S. industry job growth after 2025 (previously industry shares were frozen) and the assumption that SCAG region job growth would match the state growth rate. This resulted in a SCAG region job projection in 2040 that was approximately 250,000 (2.5%) higher than the baseline projection. The Low Population Projection Scenario Most of the reduced SCAG region job projection in the low scenario was the result of fewer workers relative to the population as a result of lower labor force participation and higher unemployment rates. As a result the low regional population projection is approximately 275,000 below the baseline forecast. The specific assumptions used to develop the low job projections changed the normal relationship between job and population growth in this scenario. The High Population Projection Scenario The regional population is higher than the baseline projection by approximately 300,000 in 2040 in the high scenario. The increase in population is less than it would be if all workers lived in the region and incorporates the assumption that higher job growth is driven in part by the ability of workers to live in lower cost regions and use high speed rail plus the regional metro system to connect to jobs. The Low and High Household Projection Scenarios The household headship rate projections provided by DOF were used in developing all the regional household projections. As a result households changed in the same proportion as population in both the low and high regional projection scenarios. Additional Comments The projections will be affected by regional policy choices in addition to changes in technical inputs like birth rates and immigration. Key policy choices involve housing, initiatives to increase regional economic competitiveness, success in educating the next generations of regional children, high speed rail and others.


Dowell Myers provided data on the generational progress of Latinos in the SCAG region. The proportion of native born Latino residents is increasing as are high school completion rates for the current generation. Continued success could increase labor force participation for Hispanic women (as could lower birth rates) and increase household headship rates as multi-generational living could decrease by 2040. The current household projections do not incorporate convergence of Latino and Asian headship rates after 2025 and that could push household increases higher. While the low projection incorporates some job losses from automation, they could be higher or not occurring at all. This is a subject to be discussed at the demographic workshop and pursued later in the growth forecast process. The CCSCE Regional Projections

SCAG Region (Thousands)

Jobs 2016 2020 2030 2035 2045 2050

Baseline 8,544.7 9,022.4 9,532.2 9,811.1 10,452.5 10,819.2

Low 8,544.7 8,856.1 9,197.6 9,387.3 9,822.9 10,070.9

High 8,544.7 9,107.2 9,697.0 10,015.5 10,727.3 11,124.1

Population

Baseline 18,960.8 19,521.7 20,795.5 21,359.6 22,428.9 22,929.7

Low 18,960.8 19,481.5 20,645.5 21,150.7 21,981.8 22,300.0

High 18,960.8 19,640.5 21,076.2 21,642.6 22,890.2 23,576.1

Households

Baseline 6,010.2 6,248.2 6,806.3 7,062.8 7,542.3 7,762.0

Low 6,010.2 6,235.4 6,757.2 6,993.7 7,392.0 7,548.8

High 6,010.2 6,286.3 6,899.8 7,159.8 7,700.3 7,980.8

DOF provided two sets of household headship rates, a draft version of what DOF will publish to 2030, used in the table above, and a version (higher) based on the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to reach a target of 180,000 added units per year. The higher headship rates increase the household projections between 3% and 4%. SCAG and CCSCE prepared materials for AQMD discussing historical data on forecast variations for previous SCAG growth forecasts and a discussion of possible reasons that forecasts vary from actual results. These materials are attached to this memo.


Attachment


SCAG Region Growth Forecast:Trends, Assumptions, Policy

Implications

Stephen Levy, CCSCE

CEHD Meeting

July 6, 2017

Order of Presentation

• Forecast Process and Roles

• Trends in the Past 4 Years

• Key Assumptions and Role of SCAG Policy

• National Trends and Assumptions

• State Trends and Assumptions

• SCAG Region—Jobs, Population and Housing

• Next Steps and Implications for Policy


REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 3

Forecast Process and Roles

• CCSCE prepared background materials and, with staff, met/talked with expert panel members

• CCSCE prepared a first round range of SCAG region forecasts

• Staff took all of this input and ran their own models and will share their results today

Trends in the Past 4 Years

• What has happened since we met in 2013?

• The nation has seen a surge in job growth and the state and region have done even better

• The region has seen record levels of tourism, airport and hotel activity, a rebound at the ports, a surge in filming, strong growth in the Inland Empire led by logistics

• Policies have helped—expanded motion picture tax credit and more infrastructure funding


The California Surge

17.1%

23.6%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Jobs GDP

California Share of U.S. Growth 2012‐16

Share of U.S. Jobs and Growth

5.3%

2.5%

3.6%

7.5%

4.8% 4.9%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

9.0%

SCAG Region Bay Area Rest of State

2012 Share Share of 2012‐2016 Growth


Key Assumptions and Role of SCAG Policy

• National level—birth rates and life expectancy, immigration levels, labor force participation rates, industry growth

• For the state and region, the projections of industry job shares are critical. Demographic assumptions (e.g. birth and household formation rates) were provided by DOF

• SCAG has policy levers on housing, infrastructure and other economic competitiveness policies

National Trends and Assumptions

• The REMI model gave forecasts of population, jobs and jobs by industry for the U.S.

• Some members of the expert panel felt that lower immigration and labor force participation rates were possible

• There was broad agreement that birth rates would remain low and on the composition of job growth, which tends to favor California

• The panel did not have enough information to assess the impact of automation and awaited the SCAG demographic workshop and other data


State Trends and Assumptions

• The state saw a job surge (+1.8 million) between 2012 and 2016 far outpacing the nation. This was the result of a favorable industry composition and rising shares

• The favorable industry composition should push the state’s share of U.S. jobs higher over the forecast period

• The expert panel agreed that CA has a favorable industry composition and expressed concerns about housing and transportation challenges

CA Share of U.S. for Selected Basic Industry Jobs

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% 45.0%

Pharma

Software

Internet

Motion Pictures

Amusements

Sci, Tech Serv

Total Basic Jobs

2016 2007


California Share of U.S. Jobs

10.0%

10.5%

11.0%

11.5%

12.0%

12.5%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2016 2025 2040 2050

SCAG Region—Jobs, Population and Households and Housing

• CCSCE and staff project jobs first, translate jobs into population and project household growth based on headship rates and the age/ethnic composition of the population

• The job projections are based on looking at industry share trends

• The population projections look at labor supply needed to fill the jobs and birth rates

• The household projections are based on projections of household forming behavior


44.0%

45.0%

46.0%

47.0%

48.0%

49.0%

50.0%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

SCAG Region Share of CA Jobs

4.8%

5.0%

5.2%

5.4%

5.6%

5.8%

6.0%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2017



Discussion with Expert Panel

• After the early 90s aerospace decline, the region has added jobs at a slightly faster pace than the nation including the past 4 years

• The region has trailed the state growth in part recently as the Bay Area surged

• The panel agreed that unless there are significant policy successes or on the other hand failure to address housing and transportation that the region would continue to slightly outpace the nation in job growth


5.47%

5.57%

5.60%

5.63%

5.35%

5.40%

5.45%

5.50%

5.55%

5.60%

5.65%

5.70%

2016 2025 2040 2050


Translating Jobs into Population

• The expert panel was comfortable with the way job growth was translated into population growth.

• The dominant trends within the total population projection were low birth rates and the aging of the baby boomer generation

• The lower birth rates will affect school enrollment first and most and only in later years will affect number of people forming households

Households and Housing

• The technical task is to assess household forming behavior for the next 30 years. What are likely changes

• The policy challenge for SCAG and members is to develop policies to provide the needed housing

• The region starts with an acknowledged housing shortage and affordability challenge


SCAG Region Housing Units 2007‐2017

311,000

419,800

521,800

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

Units Added Needed to Keep Pace withPop Growth

Needed to Keep Pace withDemogrpahic Change

SCAG Region Housing Permits

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016


SCAG Region Foreign Born Share of Latinos by Age

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

0‐4 5‐9 10‐14 15‐19 20‐24 25‐29 30‐34 35‐39 40‐44 45‐49 50‐54 55‐59 60‐64 65‐69 70‐74 75‐79 80‐84 85‐89 90‐94

2000 2015

SCAG Region Share of Latinos Not Completed High School by Age

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0‐4 5‐9 10‐14 15‐19 20‐24 25‐29 30‐34 35‐39 40‐44 45‐49 50‐54 55‐59 60‐64 65‐69 70‐74 75‐79 80‐84 85‐89

2000 2015


Behavior Can Change—What Will the Future Bring?

• Will young adults live with their parents forever? The next generation?

• Will Latino and Asian multi‐generation living decrease by 2045?

• Will older residents live independently longer?

• And for housing, will urban living be a more preferred option for the next generation?

DOF and Expert Panel Input

• DOF provided two sets of household formation rates—both imply some catch up of the accumulated housing shortage. One set meets the state housing strategy goal of 180,00 units per year to 2030.

• The panel thought that Latino and Asian behavior would converge in 30 years and generally thought formation rates would rebound with the right housing policies

• Housing policy is a serious challenge for economic competitiveness, environmental and equity considerations and meeting Sustainable Community Strategy goals


CCSCE and SCAG Growth Forecasts

• There is only one major difference in assumptions. SCAG used the latest BLS labor force participation projections while CCSCE used the latest REMI projections

• The BLS projections are lower leading to fewer jobs but the same population (just fewer workers) and HH forecasts as CCSCE

• For looking 30 years into the future the forecasts are consistent and have consistent relationships between jobs, population and households


DATE: July 6, 2017

TO: Regional Council (RC) Community, Economic, and Human Development Committee (CEHD) Energy and Environment Committee (EEC) Transportation Committee (TC)


SUBJECT: Update on First Meetings of Five Facility-Based/Indirect Mobile Source Measure Working Groups of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S APPROVAL: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive & File. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Subsequent to the introductory working group meeting on May 8, 2017 to implement the directions of the Boards of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the SCAQMD staff has formed five facility-based mobile source measure working groups and held the first meetings of each of the five working groups on May 31 and June 1, 2017 respectively. This staff report presents highlights of the working group meetings. STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports SCAG’s Strategic Plan, Goal 1: Improve Regional Decision Making by Providing Leadership and Consensus Building on Key Plans and Policies; Objective a) Create and facilitate a collaborative and cooperative environment to produce forward thinking regional plans. BACKGROUND: As previously reported, the recently approved Final 2016 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) includes five facility-based/indirect mobile source measures seeking emission reductions from new development and redevelopment projects (EGM-01), marine ports (MOB-01), railyards (MOB-02), warehouses (MOB-03), and commercial airports (MOB-04). In addition, the SCAQMD Governing Board directed its staff to undertake a stakeholder process and draft for its consideration an indirect source rule for non-aircraft sources at commercial airports by February 2019; while the ARB Board directed its staff to report on concepts for an indirect source rule and any alternatives to control pollution from large freight facilities including ports, railyards, warehouses and distribution centers by February 2018. To implement the Boards’ directions, the SCAQMD staff held an introductory working group meeting on May 8, 2017 laying out and seeking stakeholder input on a working group process. Representing industry, government, and environmental and community groups, more than 50 stakeholders attended the meeting in person with more than 50 additional attendees via telephone and webcast. The participating stakeholders provided many comments covering a wide variety of topics.

AGENDA ITEM NO. 5


Based on the feedback received, the SCAQMD staff has formed five working groups, one for each of the five measures, with joint meetings on common topics. In addition, the SCAQMD held the first meeting of each of the five working groups on May 31 (New Development and Redevelopment Projects and Commercial Airports) and June 1 (Warehouse Distribution Centers, Commercial Marine Ports, and Railyard and Intermodal Facilities) respectively. All the first meetings included a PowerPoint Presentation by the SCAQMD staff, followed by a roundtable discussion by the working group members and other stakeholders. The staff presentation follows the same format covering the respective background, working group process – metrics, draft metrics to evaluate progress of working group, facility-based mobile source measure (FBMSM) development framework, an example of the draft working group metrics, emission sources, regulations & other commitments, state implementation plan (SIP) credit, an example of emission reduction opportunities, technologies, stakeholder input, and next steps (to view or download the staff presentations, visit http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/facility-based-mobile-source-measures). SCAQMD staff is seeking stakeholder input on potential refinements to the proposed FBMSM Development Framework, emission reduction opportunities, and metrics to determine progress of the working group process by June 30, 2017. SCAQMD staff is also seeking stakeholder feedback on potential conflicts on the proposed next working group meeting dates. The topics proposed to be considered for discussion at the next meetings include update on the Framework, implementing mechanisms, and SIP credit. Several SCAG staff from the relevant subject areas have participated in each of the five working group meetings and are reviewing the proposed development framework within their respective areas. SCAG staff will continue to actively participate in and closely monitor the working group process and will report back to the Regional Council and Policy Committee(s) as appropriate. FISCAL IMPACT: Work associated with this item is included in the current FY16-17 Overall Work Program (025.SCG0164.01: Air Quality Planning and Conformity). ATTACHMENT: None


DATE: July 6, 2017

TO: Regional Council (RC) Executive Administration Committee (EAC) Community, Economic and Human Committee (CEHD) Energy and Environment Committee (EEC) Transportation Committee (TC)

FROM: Stephen Patchan, Senior Planner, Active Transportation & Special Programs, (213) 236-1936, [email protected]

SUBJECT: 2017 Active Transportation Program Augmentation Guidelines and Sustainability Planning Grants: 2017 Active Transportation Call for Proposals

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S APPROVAL: RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR TC: For Information Only – No Action Required. RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR RC, EAC, CEHD and EEC: Receive and File. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account established through the adoption of Senate Bill 1 (SB1) provides an additional $100 million a year, starting in fiscal year 2017-18, for the California Active Transportation Program (ATP). On June 26, 2017, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) is expected to approve the 2017 ATP Augmentation Guidelines to provide direction on the allocation and programming of fiscal year (FY) 17-18, FY 18-19 funds, for a total of $200 million. The Guidelines maintain the program’s traditional funding structure of awarding grants through three competitive components: Statewide Component, Small Urban & Rural Component and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Component. SCAG’s share of the MPO Component is $40 million. The majority of new awards across all three components will be directed to the augmentation of the 2017 ATP, either through advancement of projects previously recommended for funding or to support projects that were submitted and scored, but not funded, as part of the 2017 ATP. SCAG will also re-issue the regional 2017 supplemental call for projects for planning and non-infrastructure projects to fund new project proposals that are aimed at building local capacity for future ATP funding cycles. A minimum of five (5) percent, or $2 million, will be awarded for planning and non-infrastructure projects. The supplemental call for projects will be released today, July 6, 2017, as the Sustainability Planning Grants: 2017 Active Transportation Call for Proposals. An informational workshop for potential applicants will be hosted at SCAG on July 20, 2017.

AGENDA ITEM NO. 6


STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports SCAG’s Strategic Plan Goal 2: Obtain Regional Transportation Infrastructure Funding and Promote Legislative Solutions for Regional Planning Priorities; Objective 1: Identify new infrastructure funding opportunities with State, Federal and private partners. BACKGROUND: Senate Bill (SB) 1, signed by the Governor on April 28, 2017, directs $100 million annually from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account to the ATP beginning in the 2017-18 fiscal year. Senate Bill 99 (SB 99) directs the CTC to adopt each ATP cycle on an odd-numbered year, with the next cycle for new projects scheduled for the 2019 ATP. Since SB 1 provides funding for fiscal years 2017-18 and 2018-19, the funding award schedule requires that the CTC implement an interim call for projects prior to the 2019 ATP. The 2017 ATP Augmentation will award ATP funding for fiscal years 2017-18 and 2018-19. All funding will be state funding. Therefore projects funded in the 2017 ATP Augmentation will not need to be federal-aid eligible. The funding award structure will continue to implement a Statewide Component, Small Urban & Rural Component and MPO Component. Project Eligibility & Selection Projects sponsors that were awarded funds in the 2017 ATP Statewide Component, Small Urban & Rural Component or MPO Component may apply to advance one or more of their project components into the 2017-18 and/or 2018-19 programming years. Projects that were submitted for funding in the 2017 ATP but were not selected for funding are also eligible. The original scores provided by CTC will be used for project selection. Project scores can be found at the following link: http://www.catc.ca.gov/programs/ATP/2017/Final_Scores_2017/2017_ATP_All_Score_Score_Order_rev.pdf. The deadline for projects submitted in the 2017 ATP to apply for advancement or to resubmit for new funding is August 1, 2017. More information on the application process can be found at: http://www.catc.ca.gov/programs/ATP.htm Projects that are successful in securing advanced funding will remain in the component from which they were originally funded. For example, a 2017 ATP project award funded from the Statewide Component will remain in that component and a 2017 ATP project award funded from the MPO Component will remain in that component. If there is capacity for additional projects after the advancement projects are selected, the resubmitted projects will first be considered for funding in the Statewide Component and then the MPO Component. In the event Commission staff determines that there are not enough viable projects submitted in the 2017 ATP to fully utilize the funds available in the Statewide and/or Small Urban & Rural Components of the 2017 ATP Augmentation, the Commission may elect to hold a 2017 ATP Augmentation supplemental call for projects.


MPO Component—SCAG Regional Program The augmentation of the 2017 Southern California Regional ATP will result in the programming of an additional $20 million a year, for fiscal years 2017-18 and 2018-19. Per the 2017 ATP Augmentation Guidelines, the primary framework for project selection is the same as the Statewide Component and all advancement requests and re-submittals should be provided to the CTC, as described above. The Regional Program will be developed using the 2017 Regional ATP scores and maintain funding targets per county and funding category (Implementation and Planning & Capacity Building) as established in SCAG’s 2017 Regional ATP Guidelines, which the Regional Council approved on June 2, 2016. Implementation Projects The Regional Program will be developed in collaboration with the county transportation commissions with the majority of funds (95%) dedicated to Implementation (or capital) Projects and allocated in consideration of geographic equity. The table below identifies the Implementation Project funding target estimates for each county. Please note that the funding targets are subject to change once the CTC releases the program funding estimates.

County Pop % Funding Target Imperial 1% 363,357 Los Angeles 54% 20,525,763 Orange 17% 6,381,929 Riverside 12% 4,725,853 San Bernardino 11% 4,286,289 Ventura 5% 1,716,809 Total 100% 38,000,000

Planning & Capacity Building Projects SCAG will set aside a minimum of five percent of the total cycle funding ($2 million) for Planning & Capacity Building, including planning and non- infrastructure projects. Projects will be selected from those ATP eligible projects approved on SCAG’s 2016 Sustainable Planning Grant (SPG) Phase 2 (unfunded) Project List. These projects were originally submitted in response to the ATP supplemental application that SCAG released as part of the SPG. For the SPG Phase 2 list, visit http://scag.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=9&clip_id=1049&meta_id=22064. SCAG will also re-issue the regional 2017 supplemental call for projects as the Sustainability Planning Grants: 2017 Active Transportation Call for Proposals for planning and non-infrastructure projects to fund new project proposals that are aimed at building local capacity for future ATP funding cycles. The call for projects will be released today, July 6, 2017 and posted on SCAG’s website: http://scag.ca.gov/. An informational workshop for potential applicants will be hosted at SCAG on July 20, 2017. The 2017 ATP Augmentation Guidelines only allow MPOs to re-issue the supplemental call for projects that was originally used in the 2017 ATP. Therefore, SCAG’s supplemental call for projects is limited to planning and non-infrastructure projects, as it was when first issued in 2016.


Schedule SCAG Supplemental Call for Projects Released—Planning and Non-Infrastructure Only

July 6, 2017

SCAG Supplemental Call for Projects Workshop July 20, 2017

2017 ATP Project submittals to Commission (postmark date) August 1, 2017

SCAG Supplemental Call for Projects Applications submittals to SCAG August 31, 2017

CTC Staff recommendation for Statewide and Small Urban & Rural Components posted

August 31, 2017

SCAG Staff recommendations for Regional Program including Supplemental Call for Projects

September 29, 2017

MPO project programming recommendations to Commission September 29, 2017

SCAG Regional Council adopts Regional Program Recommendations October 5, 2017

Commission adopts 2017 ATP Augmentation - Statewide and Small Urban & Rural Components

October 18-19, 2017

Commission adopts 2017 ATP Augmentation - MPO Component December 6-7, 2017

FISCAL IMPACT: None. Program funding is included in SCAG’s FY 2017-18 Overall Work Program (OWP) budget under project 225-3564.11. Staff’s work budget for the current fiscal year is included in FY 2017-18 OWP budget under project 050-0169.01. ATTACHMENT: PowerPoint Presentation: “2017 Active Transportation Program Augmentation Guidelines and Sustainability Planning Grants: 2017 Active Transportation Call for Proposals” [Will be provided at the meeting]


DATE: July 6, 2017

TO: Energy and Environment Committee (EEC)

FROM: Jason Greenspan, Manager, [email protected], 213-236-1859

SUBJECT: UCLA Advanced Energy Community Project Update

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S APPROVAL: RECOMMENDED ACTION: For Information Only – No Action Required. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Dr. Felicia Federico, Executive Director, and Dr. Stephanie Pincetl, Director and Professor-in-Residence, California Center for Sustainable Communities at UCLA, will present an update on the Advanced Energy Community (AEC) Project. The goal of an AEC is to meet all or almost all of a community’s energy needs with more efficient and cost-effective decentralized energy systems that produce clean energy locally. STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports SCAG’s Strategic Plan Goal 1: Improve Regional Decision Making by Providing Leadership and Consensus Building on Key Plans and Policies BACKGROUND: The AEC model is a systemic approach for accelerating the transformation of California’s low performing and energy inefficient building stock to create climate resilient communities. With support from the California Energy Commission’s Electric Program Investment Charge (EPIC) Program, the AEC Project seeks to overcome the challenges associated with deploying AECs around existing buildings in disadvantaged communities, and to generate practical, implementable knowledge. Although Southern California has made substantial progress in supporting, commercializing, and deploying clean energy technologies, the region continues to struggle to upgrade its built energy environment, particularly among disadvantaged communities. Although new buildings have vastly improved energy profiles, existing buildings continue to use substantial energy and produce significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In addition, Southern California’s stock of the worst performing (pre-1978) buildings is often concentrated in disadvantaged communities, where residents have the fewest resources to complete energy retrofits themselves, and where there are high percentages of renters with little incentive or no authority to make such improvements. Retrofitting existing buildings can be far more energy and materials efficient compared to replacing existing buildings; can reduce displacement of residents; and can address disadvantaged communities more fairly. The creation of AECs around existing buildings in disadvantaged communities is poised to become a critical pathway to achieving the state’s statutory energy and climate goals. Dr. Federico and Dr. Pincetl, will provide an overview of the AEC goals and an update on the project’s status within Los Angeles County. FISCAL IMPACT: None

ATTACHMENT: PowerPoint Presentation: Advanced Energy Community Project [To be distributed at the meeting]

AGENDA ITEM NO. 7


DATE: July 6, 2017

TO: Energy and Environment Committee (EEC)

FROM: Marco Anderson, Program Manager, SCAG Clean Cities Coordinator, [email protected], (213) 236-1879

SUBJECT: Mobility Innovations: Modeling Challenges and Future Transportation Technologies

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S APPROVAL: RECOMMENDED ACTION: For Information Only - No Action Required. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Transportation Technology was one of the themes of the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). Mobility Innovations, as referred to in the 2016 RTP/SCS, have the potential to make existing transportation choices more widely available and easier to use throughout the region. However, we face challenges and modeling uncertainty regarding the adoption rate of a wide range of public and private sector innovations. Uncertainty of innovation adoption and modeling challenges will have an impact on SCAG’s ability to meet Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets proposed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The following report will update the committee on the specific methodologies staff has proposed to model the Plug-in Electric Vehicle (PEV) charging station program, car sharing/ridesourcing policies, and connected automated vehicle (CAV) policies. STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports SCAG’s Strategic Plan Goal 1: Improve Regional Decision Making by Providing Leadership and Consensus Building on Key Plans and Policies; Objective a: Create and Facilitate a Collaborative and Cooperative Environment to Produce Forward Thinking Regional Plans. BACKGROUND: For the upcoming 2020 RTP/SCS, staff has reported to Regional Council and Policy Committees regularly beginning in September 2016 on the status and progress of finalizing SCAG’s GHG target recommendation to CARB. Clean vehicle and fuel efficiency programs are the most effective strategies to reducing GHG emissions, but also make driving more economical and thereby generate additional Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). With the anticipated impacts from this VMT rebound effect and other factors, the same level of resolve will likely not reach the last plan’s 18% per-capita GHG reduction level of achievement for year 2035. To reach the last plan’s 18% achievement for the upcoming 2020 RTP/SCS, SCAG will need to conduct additional research in GHG reduction strategies and must promote innovation and collaboration with regional stakeholders to formulate an achievable RTP/SCS. Reaching CARB staff’s recent proposed target of 21% per-capita GHG reduction for year 2035 underscores this pressing need.

AGENDA ITEM NO. 8


SCAG STRESS TEST RESULTS AND CONSIDERATIONS: SCAG, along with the other three major MPOs in California, collaborated and each conducted a technical “Stress Test” aimed to test GHG reduction strategies that would yield the most ambitious yet achievable GHG emission reductions. The purpose of the Stress Test was to quantify potential GHG emission reductions that would result from deployment of various land use and transportation strategies, such as accelerated deployment of zero emission vehicles and mobility innovations. The technical analysis and off- model assessment of potential additional GHG emission reductions from strategies included in the Stress Test were the technical basis for SCAG’s 2035 target recommendations to CARB. Since SCAG has already adopted very ambitious strategies in land use, mileage-based user fees, pricing, and transit investment in both the 2012 and 2016 RTP/SCS, staff focused the agency’s “Stress Test” and potential additional GHG emissions reductions in three strategy buckets: (a) active transportation, (b) zero emissions vehicles and (c) mobility enhancement and innovations. As indicated in the April 6, 2017 RC and Policy Committees staff reports, SCAG’s Stress Test results show that about 2 to 2.5 percentage points (2.0%-2.5%) of per capita GHG emissions could be reduced further above the 18% in 2035— but this carries with it an additional funding need of $10 billion on active transportation programs, investments, and more refined off-model assessment of mobility enhancements and innovations. SCAG’s recommendation for a regional GHG per capita reduction target of 18% in 2035, the same as achieved in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS, was conditioned upon a combination of actions or alternative equivalent measures. The ambitious and achievable initiatives, specifically related to zero emissions vehicles and mobility innovations that were included in the 2016 RTP/SCS will need to be carried through into subsequent plans:

1. Successfully transitioning from an excise tax on gasoline to a mileage based user fee, starting in 2025 to serve as one of the primary sources of funding our roadways and transit infrastructure in the 2016 RTP/SCS

2. Targeted increase in funding commitments and enabling information technology for Transportation Demand Management (TDM) from federal, state and local agencies

3. Promote potential efficiency gains from quick deployment of autonomous transportation systems and identify policy priorities to maximize sustainable outcomes from autonomous vehicles

4. Promote shared-use mobility, such as bike sharing, car sharing and ride sourcing 5. Continued leadership and partnership of state and regional partners to increase availability of State

funding for the region. 6. Continued leadership by the regional leaders to increase availability of federal funding through the

next transportation authorization and through climate change legislation 7. CARB will commit to working with MPOs, local governments, state agencies and the Legislature

to identify, pursue and secure adequate incentives and sustainable sources of funding for local and regional planning and other activities related to the implementation of SB 375

8. Promote and incentivize development of infrastructure for zero emission vehicle and alternative transportation fuel system


Moreover, SCAG’s target recommendation is also contingent on CARB’s leadership in the following technical and modeling areas:

9. Acknowledgement of the VMT rebound effect as it will be difficult to repeat SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS achievement of 18% under CARB’s clean car and fuel technology assumptions (as fuel efficiency rises, the cost of driving decreases and may result in VMT and GHG emission increases)

10. Commitment to address the issues resulting from update to the EMFAC emissions model—there should be a consistent use of the same EMFAC emissions model for target setting and target compliance

11. CARB’s commitment to address off-model adjustments – consistent treatment/analytical review for the quantification

TECHNICAL METHODOLOGIES AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MOBILITY INNOVATIONS:

ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES (ZEVs) A zero emission vehicle, or ZEV, is a vehicle that emits no exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutants or GHG under any and all operational modes and conditions. There are two types of pure ZEVs: Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEV). In addition to these two types, Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) combined BEV drivetrains with combustion engines that takeover when the battery is depleted. SCAG applied a methodology developed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in the Bay Area to measure the GHG reductions achievable through providing support for a regional network of electric vehicle charging stations. The investment plan will install a robust charging system and stations to increase the share of electric portion of PHEV usage by 10%. In addition, only ZEVs from households with at least 2 vehicles may claim these potential benefits. The 2035 reduction is estimated using the same method. Since the 2016 RTP/SCS adopted a very robust charging system, with stations in the SCAG Region that can accommodate the most ambitious ZEV penetration by the year 2035, the stress test did not yield additional benefits beyond those estimated from the 2016 RTP/SCS. VMT Reduction: 0.8% for 2035 Difference from 2016 RTP/SCS: 0.0% for 2035 MOBILITY INNOVATIONS CARSHARING The 2016 RTP/SCS included policies to encourage the use of car sharing, and ride sourcing services specifically to guide the region in maximizing the benefits of these technologies and minimize the potential for negative impacts. For the 2016 RTP/SCS scenario development process, SCAG focused on geographic locations where shared mobility services are expected to accelerate, and on the attendant VMT reductions that will be realized through potential reduction in personal vehicle ownership. The plan included policy recommendations to remove barriers to public adoption of car sharing. These include collaboration between cities and car sharing providers to allow free parking at curbside spaces, and reductions in parking requirements for buildings that include car sharing pods.


For the purposes of this stress test, SCAG refined a per/car subsidy that would increase deployment of car sharing vehicles in the most promising geographic areas. Car sharing is a near term strategy, so the deployment program is focused on reaching a critical mass of car share vehicles in the region in ten years. The cost of the program, over ten years, is approximately $140M, and an additional $77M in potential lost parking revenues for the participating cities. Since the adoption of the plan carsharing advocates have highlighted the convergence of carsharing business models and Mobility as a Service (MaaS) business models. The latter is a business model where users access shared/automated vehicles as needed. Automakers such as Ford, Volvo, and Mercedes have begun experimenting with these models in the US and Europe. SCAG classified Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) to six main groups from 35 detailed place types used for Scenario Planning Zones (SPZs), based on land use characteristics such as density and diversity (please refer to the next table). SCAG applied higher household participation rate in car sharing programs for place types with a higher housing density and diversity of uses. This assumption is consistent with the methodology provided by MTC for Caltrans’ 2040 statewide plan. SCAG assumed a 10% ~ 50% reduction in VMT for households participating in car sharing programs based on findings from a literature review. Areas with higher household density and diversity of uses will have larger VMT reductions due to their relative better access to local activities and transit services, and the higher costs associated with owning and operating a vehicle in these areas. SCAG Place Type Groups

Group Scenario Planning Model Place Types

1 City Mixed Use, City Residential, Town Mixed Use, Urban Commercial, Urban Mixed Use, High Intensity Activity Center

2 Village Commercial, Town Residential, Village Mixed Use, City Commercial, Town Commercial, Urban Residential, Industrial/Office/Residential Mixed High

3 Neighborhood Residential, Village Residential, Campus Residential, Institutional, Suburban Multi-Family

4 Neighborhood Low, Suburban Mixed Residential, Middle Intensity Activity Center, Industrial/Office/Residential Mixed Low, Office Focus

5 Residential Subdivision, Low Intensity Retail Centered Neighborhood, Parks Open Space, Mixed Office and R&D, Low Density Employment Park

6 Retail Strip Mall/Big Box, Office/Industrial, Industrial Focus, Large Lot Residential, Rural Residential, Rural Employment, Rural Ranchettes, Military


SCAG Car Sharing Assumptions

Place Type % Car Sharing

Participating Household

Participating Household VMT Reduction

With Car Sharing

1 8% - 15% 30% - 50% 2 5% - 8% 20% - 40% 3 3% - 5% 15% - 30% 4 1% - 3% 10% - 20% 5 0% - 6 0% -

VMT Reduction Calculation

For each Place Type Group: # Car sharing Households = Households x (% Car sharing Participating Household) VMT Reduction of Car sharing = # Car sharing Households * (VMT / Households) * (% Household VMT Reduction with Car Sharing)

VMT Reduction: 0.3% for 2035 Difference from 2016 RTP/SCS: 0.0% for 2035 RIDESOURCING / TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANIES Ridesourcing is a term coined by academics at UC Berkeley to refer to the provision of rides sourced from application-enabled networks of ride providers. This term is useful in distinguishing this innovation from car sharing and from carpooling. For legal purposes, the California Public Utilities Commission defines the entities, referred to as Transportation Network Companies (TNC) “as companies or organizations, operating in California that provide transportation services using an online-enabled platform to connect passengers with drivers using their personal, non-commercial, vehicles.” Essentially, TNCs add two new aspects to the vehicle-for-hire service model: peer drivers and smartphone dispatch. Lyft and Uber are the two primary examples. For the purposes of the stress test, SCAG increased the participation rate in ridesourcing, and the corresponding VMT reductions based on recent research. Several studies indicate that TNCs operate as a compliment to transit, so SCAG feels more confident in projecting VMT reduction benefits. Finally, ridesourcing companies have reported a growth in shared ridesourcing such as Lyft Line, and Uber Pool, where different riders share the same trip. For these reasons, transit agencies, and the air district have been open to exploring subsidizing ridesourcing as a first/last mile access strategy, and as an employee commute reduction strategy. The stress test analysis does not include any additional investments at this time.


For the analysis of ridesourcing, SCAG used the same six place type categories as used for our carsharing analysis. Based on the analysis of data from Lyft (a TNC), SCAG assumed a higher percentage of households using TNCs for place types with higher household density and diversity of uses. In addition, people living in these such areas are more likely to use TNCs to access transit service. While VMT is reduced for TNCs riders, it is also partially offset by the drive-alone distance from TNCs drivers who incur extra miles travelled as they drive to the pick-up locations or cruise waiting for customers. This drive-alone distance by TNC drivers is assumed to be 15% (from Lyft data) of the average trip length by each place type. SCAG Ridesourcing/TNC Assumptions

Groups Percent of Households Using TNC Percent Reduction in Household

VMT Due to TNC Use

1 20% - 25% 30% - 50% 2 10% - 15% 20% - 40% 3 5% - 7% 15% - 30% 4 1% - 3% 10% - 20% 5 0% 0% 6 0% 0%

VMT Reduction Calculation by Ridesourcing

For each Place Type Group: Number of Households using TNCs = Households x (Percent of Households Using TNC) VMT Reduction from TNCs = Number of TNC Households * (VMT/Households) * (Percent

Household VMT Reduction Due to TNC Use) VMT Increase Calculation by Ridesourcing

VMT increase due to TNC driver: assumed 2 trips per household using TNC, and increased VMT from extra miles driven by TNC drivers is 15% of the average trip length by each place type.

For each Place Type: Average Trip Length per Vehicle Trip = VMT / Number of Vehicle Trips (model output) Number of TNC Trips = Households * (Percent of Households Using TNC) * 2

o (Assumed 2 trips per household using TNC) Increased VMT from Extra Miles Driven by TNC's Drivers = 0.15 * Number of TNC Trips *

Average Trips Length per Vehicle Trips

VMT Reduction: 0.5% for 2035 Difference from 2016 RTP/SCS: 0.0% for 2035


CONNECTED AND AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES (CAVs) Connected Automated Vehicle (CAV) technologies cover a range of enabling advancements that allow vehicles to operate without driver input and coordinate with other vehicles to achieve improvements in safety and throughput. The CAV term covers on-board sensing capabilities, data integration and vehicle to vehicle (V2V) communication. CAV covers two distinct innovation paths: autonomous operation, in which vehicles rely on on-board sensing to operate without any driver input, and connected vehicle operation, in which vehicles communicate with each other and roadways. However, these two paths are being developed simultaneously and need to be integrated to achieve the full benefits promised by researchers in terms of safety and congestion reduction. Vehicle to Infrastructure (V2I) communication is another aspect of CAV deployment. The 2016 RTP/SCS proposed policies to prepare the region for the testing and deployment of vehicle automation in various forms. Currently, Uber has already begun deployment of automated vehicles (with human operators ready to intervene) in Pittsburgh. Additionally, in Europe there have been multiple pilot deployments of fully automated unmanned low speed transit vehicles. Finally, the City of Milton Keynes in the United Kingdom has deployed automated two passenger car share vehicles. For purposes of this stress test, SCAG has developed a scenario based on fully automated, full speed vehicles. The scenario does not specifically address any changes in vehicle ownership patterns. Additional reductions could be achieved if the vehicles are deployed primarily as shared vehicles, and further reductions are achievable if the fleets are coordinated with VMT efficiency in mind. Finally, automation of on-demand shared service would achieve more significant GHG reductions in certain areas. Brown et al. (2014) analyzed possible energy impacts of automated vehicles by using modified Kaya Identity (KI) method to estimate the range of energy impacts possible due to widespread adoption of CAVs. A simplified fuel demand equation can be expressed as: Fuel Demand = ∑ (Vehicle by type * UI * EI * FI ) Where: UI = use intensity (VMT/vehicle) EI = energy intensity (energy/VMT) FI = fuel intensity (liquid fuel/energy) In the example below, fuel demand (correlated to GHG) reduction from CAV is estimated to be 8%. In other words, potential GHG reduction from CAVs could be 8% or more when the fleet is fully connected and automated.

Kaya Intensity Reference Assumption

UI (Use Intensity) 121% Underserved Population + 8.7% to 15.5% (Fehr & Peers, 2016) 12% Increase in Capacity + 0.5% to 3.6% (Fehr & Peers, 2016) 2% Others (lower cost, higher productivity, etc.)

+ 2% to 9% (Fagnant & Kockelman 2013) 6%


EI (Energy Intensity) 76%

Efficient Driving

+ 20% to 30% (Brown et al., 2014) + 23% to 39% (Fagnant & Kockelman, 2013) Reduce CO2 by 3% to 8.6% (Jun Liu, AV Symposium, 2016)

10%

Lighter Vehicles + 6% to 7% (RAND 2014). 6%

Platooning + 10% to 20% (Brown et al. 2014; Caltrans 2014). 10%

FI (Fuel Intensity) 100% Electrification EVs are discussed separately in stress test 0%

Fuel Demand 92%

VMT Reduction For 100% CAV, % VMT Reduction = - 8% Assumed CAV market penetration rate is between 25% to 50%

VMT Reduction: 2.0% for 2035 Difference from 2016 RTP/SCS: 2.0% for 2035

FISCAL IMPACT: Work associated with this item is included in the Fiscal Year 16/17 Overall Work Program (17-080.SCG00153.04: Regional Assessment). ATTACHMENT: PowerPoint Presentation: Mobility Innovations: Modeling Challenges and Future Transportation Technologies [To be distributed at the meeting]


DATE: July 6, 2017

TO: Environment and Energy Committee (EEC)

FROM: Sarah Jepson, Manager, Active Transportation & Special Programs, [email protected], 213-236-1955

SUBJECT: Planning for a Sustainable Water Future: Summary of SCAG’s 2016-2017 Activities &

Next Steps Discussion EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL: RECOMMENDED ACTION: For Information Only- No Action Required. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Water is a key policy priority for the Committee and SCAG leadership. President Honorable Margaret E. Finlay highlighted water related issues among her top priorities for the year during the EAC Retreat on June 8-9, 2017. The President stated that the region needs access to clean water, to balance water resources with the growth of the region and to explore alternatives to make the region less dependent on imported water resources. The EEC serves as the primary venue for water discussions at SCAG. Over the course of the last year, the Committee has received eleven presentations on a wide-range of water-related issues that have implications for regional and local land-use and transportation planning. The Honorable Michele Martinez concluded her term as SCAG President by hosting a presidential convening of leaders in land-use, transportation, and water planning, to discuss opportunities for greater regional collaboration in meeting Southern California’s water goals. This report provides a summary of 2016-2017 EEC presentations and includes highlights from the discussion and feedback received during the presidential convening. The report serves as a resource for the EEC Chair and Committee in the development of the 2017-2018 committee outlook, and as a starting point for informing stakeholder engagement and analysis in the 2020 RTP/SCS, which SCAG staff will initiate this fall through the Local Input Process. STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports SCAG's Strategic Plan, Goal 1: Improve Regional Decision Making by Providing Leadership and Consensus Building on Key Plans and Policies/ Objective 2: Develop external communications and media strategy to promote partnerships, build consensus, and foster inclusiveness in the decision making process. BACKGROUND: Ensuring a safe and reliable water supply and water quality for Southern California—its people, businesses and environment—is central to the health and economic prosperity of the region. Southern California’s water agencies are responsible for achieving this goal, but they have limited ability to influence the location, type, and intensity of future development, which is a key driver for both water demand and supply, and also water quality.

AGENDA ITEM NO. 9


REY

Typewritten Text

Climate change is expected to constrain California’s water resources even further, and the five-year drought brought immediate attention and concern to the state’s water future. To counter this, Governor Jerry Brown, the State Legislature and the State and Regional Water Resource Boards have moved forward more aggressively in recent years with policy and legislation to protect water resources and better align land-use and transportation planning with water planning. As these policies have rolled out, local governments have increasing been placed on the front lines of water resiliency often without the expertise and/or resources to meet new requirements. The EEC received presentations and discussed a wide-range of water issues over the course of the last year, including the following.

• Update - Southern California Superfund Sites and Groundwater Contamination in the Los Angeles (LA) Central Basin (September 1, 2016)

• Los Angeles County Water Resilience Work Plan and Funding Report (September 29, 2016) • Stormwater Funding Options (January 5, 2017) • Los Angeles County Water Resilience Work Plan and Funding Report (January 5, 2017) • Water Desalination (February 2, 2017) • Unfunded Stormwater Mandates Case and Implications for Municipalities (March 2, 2017) • Legal Challenges to California’s Stormwater Permitting Program (March 2, 2017) • Water and Energy Conservation through Multi-Agency Collaboration (March 2, 2017) • Water Quality Enhancement Framework (June 1, 2017) • San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Stormwater Management Policy and California

State Legislative Agenda (June 1, 2017) • Making Conservation a California Way of Life (June 1, 2017)

On April 26, 2017, Immediate Past President, Honorable Michele Martinez, facilitated the convening of water, land-use, and transportation agencies to discuss pathways to a more Sustainable Water Future. Approximately thirty people participated in the meeting, which was moderated by the Local Government Commission and focused on ways in which SCAG’s regional planning processes and the development of the 2020 RTP/SCS can support wholesalers, public works departments, watershed agencies, and other stakeholders in meeting the region’s water goals. Key insights and suggestions from participants included the following:

• This is an opportune time for greater collaboration. The region is challenged, but can significantly benefit from aligning planning data, processes, and policies, to serve common goals. Many planning processes will be initiated this year that could benefit from greater coordination, including watershed management plans, groundwater management plans, state general plan guidelines, and the guidelines for the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 Implementation, among others.

• Data sharing is a great place to start. SCAG’s growth forecast, VMT and transportation network data, and land-use planning scenario tool can be useful resources for water planning agencies.

• Education and information sharing is key. “Silos” across and within planning disciplines, as well as within our own agencies, remain a significant barrier to better planning.


• More people should be engaged in the conversation. Elected officials, water agencies, water districts, equity groups, etc. need more opportunities to identify and work toward common goals. Attendees expressed a preference for smaller convenings on specific water topics.

Recommendations The challenges and opportunities revealed through EEC presentations and broader regional dialogue suggest SCAG through its existing planning process and forums can continue to serve as a resource to water planning agencies and local jurisdictions as we collectively work toward a more comprehensive strategy for achieving a sustainable water future. Staff can focus their efforts in three primary areas:

1. Explore opportunities to partner with other agencies to host regional conversations on specific areas of water policy that are integrated with land-use and transportation planning (e.g., Stormwater, Groundwater Management, Growth Forecasting)

2. Engage water stakeholders as part of Open Data/Big Data committee and initiatives to better integrate water data and analysis into planning tools and resources.

3. Continue to use the Energy and Environment Committee and other SCAG forums to educate local elected officials on water planning and policy issues related to the sustainable development of the SCAG region.

Staff will provide the committee with updates on these efforts. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENT: None


DATE: July 6, 2017

TO: Regional Council (RC) Executive/Administration Committee (EAC) Community, Economic and Human Development (CEHD) Committee Energy and Environment Committee (EEC) Transportation Committee (TC)


SUBJECT: ARB SB 375 Regional GHG Target Draft Recommendations for the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020 RTP/SCS) and Beyond

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S APPROVAL: ___ RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR EAC, RC, CEHD AND TC: Receive and File RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR EEC: Information Only – No Action Required. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At its April 6, 2017 meeting, the Regional Council approved submittal to the California Air Resources Board (ARB) a recommended 18% greenhouse gas (GHG) per capita reduction target in 2035 (with conditions) for the region that is the same as the achievement in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS. The four largest MPOs (SCAG, MTC, SACOG and SANDAG) also jointly recommended an 18% GHG reduction target to ARB on May 1, 2017. This recommendation would apply to the 2020 RTP/SCS and subsequent cycles of the SCS. On June 13, 2017, ARB released a Staff Report regarding the “Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets,” including a 21% per capita reduction target for 2035 for the SCAG region which are 3 percentage points higher than the SCAG recommendation of 18%. The public comment period will end at 5pm, July 28, 2017, and ARB Board is scheduled to take action on the SB 375 Target Update at its October 26-27, 2017 meeting. With the anticipated impacts from the VMT rebound effect (i.e. better fuel efficiency leading to more driving - more VMT), in order to maintain an 18% reduction by 2035 for the 2020 RTP/SCS, SCAG will need to conduct additional studies and develop new GHG reduction strategies, and must promote innovation and further collaboration with regional stakeholders. To achieve the additional three percentage point increase to reach the 21% per capita GHG reduction by 2035, ARB has to commit to work with MPOs including SCAG, to develop additional state strategies and funding to fill the gap. SCAG will work closely with ARB, other state agencies and other MPOs in these efforts.

AGENDA ITEM NO. 10


STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports SCAG’s Strategic Plan, Goal 1: Improve Regional Decision Making by Providing Leadership and Consensus Building on Key Plans and Policies; Objective: a) Create and facilitate a collaborative and cooperative environment to produce forward thinking regional plans. BACKGROUND: Codified in 2009, California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, Senate Bill 375 (referred to as “SB 375”), calls for the integration of transportation, land use, and housing planning, and also establishes the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as part of the regional planning process. SCAG, working with the individual County Transportation Commissions (CTCs) and the subregions within the SCAG region, is responsible for complying with SB 375 in the Southern California region. One key element of compliance with SB 375 is the establishment of GHG emissions reduction targets for each region, which is done by ARB with input from the State’s MPOs. The last time that ARB established GHG emissions reduction targets was in 2010, for which ARB utilized a Regional Targets Advisory Committee (RTAC) to undertake a public process for determining the regional targets. ARB is currently in the process of updating the regional GHG reduction targets for each MPO. These new ARB targets will form the basis of the next round of RTP/SCS plans, which for SCAG will be the 2020 RTP/SCS. The SB 375 Target Setting Process has been informed by a suite of concurrent planning activities and technical exercises, including: ARB SB 32 Scoping Plan Update, the ARB Mobile Source Strategy; and the MPO Stress Test. At the April 6, 2017 meeting, SCAG Regional Council approved submittal to ARB of a recommended 18% greenhouse gas (GHG) per capita reduction target in 2035 for the region that is the same as the achievement in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS. This recommendation would apply to the 2020 RTP/SCS and subsequent cycles of the SCS, and is conditioned upon a combination of actions or alternative equivalent measures (see http://www.scag.ca.gov/committees/CommitteeDocLibrary/rc040617fullagn.pdf pages 3-9). It should be noted that the other three major MPOs (MTC, SACOG & SANDAG) all recommended the same 18% per capita reduction in 2035. On June 13, 2017, ARB released a Staff Report regarding the “Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets” including an 8% per capita reduction target for 2020 and 21% per capita reduction target in 2035 for the SCAG region. Attachment 1 includes the ARB Staff Report and please see https://arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/staff_report_sb375_target_update_june_full_report.pdf including all Appendices. While 8% per capita reduction target for 2020 is the same as the achievement in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS, the 21% per capita reduction target for 2035 are 3 percentage points higher than the SCAG recommendation of 18%. SCAG’s 2016-2040 RTP/SCS achieved an 18% per capita GHG reduction for 2035, exceeding ARB’s target of 13%. The 2016 RTP/SCS represents an ambitious plan that pushes the envelope in all strategies while protecting economic growth, job creation, and accessibility. With the anticipated impacts from the VMT rebound effect (i.e. better fuel efficiency leading to more driving - more VMT), the same level of resolve will not achieve the 18% per capita GHG reduction. The rebound effect will


reduce 5 percentage points of per capita GHG reduction. With mobility innovations and other new strategies which may fill about 2.5 percentage point of the gap, that will still leave a 2.5 percentage point gap to reach the 18% level. While SCAG will try the best to fill the 2.5 percentage point gap to reach the 18% level in the 2020 RTP/SCS, however, success is not guaranteed. Based on staff’s current assessment, we don’t believe the new 21% per capita GHG target is achievable unless with significant additional state investment and state-led strategies to reduce VMT. In addition, SCAG region has not received its fair share of funding from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, despite having almost half of the state’s population and 67% of the state’s disadvantaged community population.

ARB staff report also contains several provisions that will only constrain options and make SCAG’s efforts much more difficult, and all together will be likely to set SCAG for failure to develop an SCS to meet the GHG target. Examples include:

Focus only on VMT strategies to reduce GHG (page16, 2nd paragraph) Overreliance on SB 1 for GHG reduction (page 2 (first full paragraph) and Page 19 (last bullet)) Dismiss the significance of the rebound effects in the SCAG region (page 20, 3rd paragraph)

Acknowledging the challenge ahead with ensuring appropriate funding and other incentives are in place to support achievement of more aggressive SB 375 targets, ARB staff and our sister State agencies, will convene a VMT reduction “roundtable”, for State agencies, MPOs, and subject experts to identify and prioritize the necessary tools, resources, and State-level actions that will help regions implement key SCS strategies and policies that maximize GHG emission reductions, as well as co-benefits (please see page 25 of ARB staff report in Attachment 1). ARB held a public workshop on the proposed update to the SB 375 greenhouse gas emission reduction targets on Wednesday June 21, 2017 from 1:30 to 3:00 p.m. at the SCAG downtown Los Angeles office (818 W. 7th Street, 12th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90017). Attachment 2 includes the Workshop Notice and videoconferencing was available at the SCAG regional offices in Imperial, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura counties. Approximately 50 people attended the Workshop including representatives from local jurisdictions, business and environmental communities, among others expressing different viewpoints on the target update. Next Steps SCAG will coordinate and work with regional stakeholders, including CTCs, GLUE Council, Technical Working Groups (TWG), subregions, environmental groups, and major MPOs to promote the 18% GHG target recommendation. Staff will set up meeting to discuss further with ARB staff and provide evidence from transportation model showing the VMT rebound effect. Following the comment period ending at 5pm, July 28, 2017, ARB staff will revise the draft staff proposal, if appropriate, based on ARB Board and stakeholder input received. A final staff proposal will be made available at least 10 days prior to presentation to the Board for consideration at its October 26-27, 2017 meeting. If the Board adopts staff’s final proposal, the new SB 375 targets would become effective on January 1, 2018.


FISCAL IMPACT: Work associated with this item is included in the Fiscal Year 16/17 Overall Work Program (17-080.SCG00153.04: Regional Assessment). ATTACHMENTS: 1. ARB Staff Report “Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets.” Please see

https://arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/staff_report_sb375_target_update_june_full_report.pdf including all Appendices.

2. SB 375 Target Update Workshop Notice (Note: Videoconferencing will be available at the SCAG regional offices in Imperial, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura counties).


California Air Resources Board

Staff Report

Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets

June 2017


REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1


REY

Typewritten Text


REY

Typewritten Text

REY

Typewritten Text

REY

Typewritten Text

This document has been reviewed by the staff of the California Air Resources Board and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the California Air Resources Board, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

Electronic copies of this document are available for download from the California Air Resources Board’s Internet site at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/sb375.htm. In addition, written copies may be obtained from the Public Information Office, California Air Resources Board, 1001 I Street, 1st Floor, Visitors and Environmental Services Center, Sacramento, California 95814, (916) 322-2990.

For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in Braille, large print, audiocassette, or computer disk. Please contact CARB’s Disability Coordinator at (916) 323-4916 by voice or through the California Relay Services at 711, to place your request for disability services. If you are a person with limited English and would like to request interpreter services, please contact CARB’s Bilingual Manager at (916) 323-7053.


i

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 I.

SB 375 Target Update Context and Objectives ........................................................ 3 II.

Target Update Process ............................................................................................. 6 III.

Planning and Technical Consideration Changes Since 2010 ............................. 6 A.

Top-Down Analysis: Achieving the State’s Climate and Air Quality Goals ......... 9 B.

Bottom-Up Analysis: MPO Target Recommendations ..................................... 12 C.

Public Engagement .......................................................................................... 14 D.

Staff Recommendation for SB 375 Target Updates ................................................ 16 IV.

Proposed Targets for Year 2020 ...................................................................... 17 A.

Proposed Targets for Year 2035 ...................................................................... 18 B.

Achieving the Target Update Objectives .......................................................... 24 C.

Next Steps .............................................................................................................. 25 V.

Appendix A. MPO Target Recommendations and CARB Staff Recommendations

Appendix B. MPO Scenarios and Data Submittals

Appendix C. MPO RTP Update Schedule

Appendix D. SB 375 Program Background

Appendix E. Draft Environmental Analysis


ii

List of MPO Acronyms Used Throughout this Report AMBAG – Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments Butte CAG – Butte County Association of Governments Fresno COG – Fresno Council of Governments Kern COG – Kern Council of Governments Kings CAG – Kings County Association of Governments Madera CTC – Madera County Transportation Commission Merced CAG – Merced County Association of Governments MTC/ABAG – Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Association of Bay Area Governments SACOG – Sacramento Area Council of Governments SANDAG – San Diego Association of Governments Santa Barbara CAG – Santa Barbara County Association of Governments SCAG – Southern California Association of Governments Shasta RTA – Shasta Regional Transportation Agency San Joaquin COG – San Joaquin Council of Governments San Luis Obispo COG – San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Stanislaus COG – Stanislaus Council of Governments Tahoe MPO – Tahoe Metropolitan Planning Organization Tulare CAG – Tulare County Association of Governments


1

Introduction I.

Since passage of the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, Senate Bill (SB) 375, (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008), there has been a transformation in regional planning in California. SB 375 has raised awareness of the importance of transportation planning as a means of shaping more livable and equitable communities. It has resulted in greater communication between regional planning agencies, local governments, and stakeholders who support more sustainable land use and transportation policies. Furthermore, it has encouraged development of a new generation of regional transportation plans that include more creative thinking about smart growth and increasing mobility choices to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as well as generate numerous public health, economic, mobility, housing, and land conservation benefits associated with a lower carbon future.

Under SB 375, the California Air Resource Board (CARB) is required to establish the regional GHG emission reduction targets (targets), originally established in 2010. Statute requires regions to demonstrate achievement of those targets through a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which is an integral component of the federally required Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

At the time of this writing, adoption of the first round of SCSs by California’s 18 Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) is complete, and the second round of SCS planning is underway. Three MPO regions are in the very early stages of developing their third SCSs. To date, CARB staff reviewed the final determinations of 16 MPOs, and concluded that, if implemented, all 16 of those SCSs would achieve their targets. Two MPOs are in the process of evaluating additional strategies that would enable their SCSs to achieve their targets. Many of the MPOs indicated that they expect to exceed the original targets. CARB staff recognizes the very strong performance in these first SCSs as a major success.

CARB is in the process of updating the SB 375 targets, which will take effect in 2018, as required by the law. This staff report presents CARB staff’s proposal for updated targets and the technical and policy rationale for the proposal, based on lessons learned during the first rounds of regional SCS plan development.

The proposed targets identified in this report were developed through a coordinated analysis of what would be necessary to achieve the State’s ambitious climate and air quality goals (a “top-down” process) and MPO target recommendations (a “bottom-up” process) as inputs. CARB staff attempted to strike a balance between the bottom-up and top-down inputs and propose a set of targets that would meet the objectives defined by SB 375, principles established by the Board during adoption of the original targets in 2010, recommendations in the proposed 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan


2

Update (Scoping Plan Update), and experience gained from SB 375 implementation to date.

The process provided an opportunity to reflect on and increase our understanding of opportunities and barriers to aligning our State’s transportation and environmental goals. The challenge has been to develop supporting information for increasing regional planning targets that help achieve greater emission reduction needs, in the face of well-recognized constraints in the current funding framework for infrastructure, MPO authority, and other areas discussed in this staff report. While many of these challenges will not be resolved before the 8-year statutory clock on the target update expires, CARB staff’s proposed targets consider what MPOs could achieve with additional State policy and funding tools recommended as part of the proposed Scoping Plan Update and implementation of new transportation spending provisions, including Senate Bill 1 (SB 1). Through these commitments, the State recognizes its essential role in continuing to support development of needed resources for MPOs and local governments to successfully plan and implement their SCSs.

The purpose of this staff report is to provide the CARB Board and the public with an opportunity to discuss and comment on CARB staff’s proposed targets. This staff report describes CARB’s statutory role to establish targets, reviews the current SB 375 targets and existing SCSs prepared to date, and reflects on several State, regional, and local land use and transportation planning issues that affect SB 375 implementation. The process to develop staff’s proposed recommendation for the updated SB 375 targets, environmental analysis, and the alternatives to the proposal that were considered are discussed in this report. Finally, this staff report describes public outreach activities that have occurred to date, future opportunities for input, and next steps in CARB’s process to update the targets and support implementation.


3

SB 375 Target Update Context and Objectives II. Under SB 375, CARB is required to adopt regional GHG emission reduction targets for each of the 18 MPO regions in California, and to update those targets every eight years, with the option of revising them every four years. This is the eight-year update of the original targets CARB set in 2010, indexed to years 2020 and 2035. This section describes CARB’s role in developing SB 375 targets and staff’s objectives for the target update.

CARB’s considerations for the target update, as summarized below, are defined by relevant portions of SB 375 law, principles established during adoption of the first target setting process in the final staff report and Board Resolution 10-31, the Scoping Plan Update, along with lessons learned based on SB 375 implementation to date.

SB 375 law. CARB must consider changes in GHG emission reductions resulting from improved vehicle emission standards, changes in fuel consumption, and other measures that will reduce GHG emissions as part of the target update process. SB 375 also requires consultation between CARB, the Department of Transportation, MPOs, local governments, affected air districts, and public and private stakeholders.

CARB’s 2010 Final Target Setting Staff Report and Board Resolution 10-31. The final staff report and associated Board Resolution for the 2010 SB 375 target setting process state that targets should be set to achieve a balance between goals that motivate further positive planning and action toward more sustainable communities, but not be out of reach for regions and local governments. Target updates should consider updated technical data/forecasts, advancement of technical tools and methods, measures of achievement of emission reductions, as well as advances in the measurement of co-benefits. 1

CARB’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update. The Scoping Plan

Update identifies a reduction in vehicle miles travelled (VMT) as a necessary part of the statewide strategy to achieve California’s 2030 statewide emission target. VMT reduction is to be achieved, in part, through more stringent SB 375 targets

1 See California Air Resources Board, Proposed Regional Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets for Automobiles and Light Trucks Pursuant to Senate Bill 375, August 9, 2010, https://arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/staffreport_sb375080910.pdf; and Board Resolution 10-31, September 23, 2010, https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/eo_attachment.pdf.


4

for 2035 and associated SCS planning. The Scoping Plan Update also prioritizes support for improving community health and air quality. CARB staff’s initial analysis of the Scoping Plan Update’s public health co-benefits shows that SB 375 and supportive strategies will be the primary driver for those benefits. With emphasis on more walkable, livable neighborhoods, people are able to live more active lifestyles, which leads to better health. And when GHG emissions are reduced from vehicles, other air contaminants that are harmful to human health are also reduced.

Furthermore, since the Board originally set SB 375 targets in 2010, regions across the State have developed and adopted over 18 regional plans containing SCSs, which generated many lessons learned along the way for consideration. These lessons are reflected in numerous positive changes as part of SCS planning processes, including:

More engagement and coordination between MPOs and local jurisdictions around land use policy;

Advances in modeling tools that allow more sophisticated land use and transportation scenario testing;

Increased emphasis on infill development; Increased funding allocated to public transit and active transportation; New organizational principles around which MPOs can rally public support, for

example: priority development areas and assessment of the multiple healthy community, social equity, and environmental benefits that accompany sustainable communities;

Increased public dialogue about equitable distribution of public benefits.

At the same time, MPOs and local agencies have identified challenges to implementing their current plans, principally tied to the need for additional and more flexible revenue sources to incentivize further positive planning and action toward sustainable communities.

As such, CARB staff has identified the following objectives for the SB 375 target update:

Account for GHG emission reductions that will be achieved by improved vehicle emission standards, changes in fuel composition, and other measures CARB has approved that will reduce GHG emissions in the affected regions, and


5

prospective measures CARB plans to adopt to reduce GHG emissions from other GHG emission sources2.

Update targets with the most recent technical data, forecasts, and other

information provided by the Department of Transportation, MPOs, local governments, affected air districts, and public and private stakeholders.

Account for advancement of technical tools and methods, such as consistent

standards for data and modeling assumptions, model improvements, and measures of achievement of emission reductions.

Further the objectives set forth in SB 32 and Executive Order B-30-15,

specifically targets that would, if implemented, result in greater GHG emission reductions compared to reductions that what would be achieved under currently adopted SCSs. Targets would contribute to achieving the overall statewide GHG emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, as well as support achievement of our statewide public health and air quality objectives.

Achieve a balance between goals that motivate further positive planning and action toward more sustainable communities that foster co-benefits such as improved public health outcomes, more mobility choices, more housing choices, and resource and land conservation; and remain within the reach of regions and local governments.

2 As that term is defined in subdivision (i) of Section 38505 of the Health and Safety Code and consistent with the regulations promulgated pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Division 12.5 (commencing with Section 38500) of the Health and Safety Code).


6

Target Update Process III.

This section discusses the analyses CARB staff conducted and reviewed for the SB 375 target update, as well as the public engagement process to date. This includes work by CARB staff to: review statutory, technological, and other factors affecting SB 375 since the targets were originally set in 2010; modeling scenarios to evaluate what emission reductions are needed from passenger vehicle transportation to achieve current statewide climate and air quality objectives; review of MPO target update analysis and recommendations, as well as consideration of public input.

Planning and Technical Consideration Changes Since 2010 A.

Several statutory, technological, and policy factors have changed or evolved since the original targets were set in 2010. Directionally, some present opportunities and others present additional barriers to achieving further GHG emission reductions through SB 375 targets. These factors and their implications for achieving CARB’s target update objectives are summarized below and discussed further in Appendix D. SB 375 Program Background.

New executive and statutory directives on State climate commitments. The Governor’s Executive Order B-30-15 and SB 32 (Chapter 249, Statutes of 2016) established more aggressive statewide GHG reduction goals (40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030) than were in place when the SB 375 targets were first set in 2010. CARB’s analysis shows the need for greater emission reductions from all sectors, including passenger vehicle travel, of which SB 375 is an integral part.

State air quality commitments. The federal Clean Air Act requires the State and local air districts to prepare State Implementation Plans demonstrating how the State will attain increasingly stringent air quality standards by specified dates. In March 2017, CARB adopted the State Strategy for the State Implementation Plan, a 15-year plan that outlines the strategies needed to attain the current standards in the two areas of the State with the most critical air quality challenges – the South Coast and the San Joaquin Valley air basins. The strategy includes further reduction in growth of VMT, through SB 375 and other complementary efforts.3

3 See California Air Resources Board, Revised Proposed 2016 State Strategy for the State Implementation Plan, March 7, 2017, https://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2016sip/rev2016statesip.pdf.


7

Resources to implement sustainable communities projects. Funding for building and maintaining sustainable communities transportation and landside infrastructure projects continue to be a challenge. However, the State has recently directed new funding through SB 1 Transportation Funding, Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund Transformative Climate Communities Program, and Volkswagen Settlement, that should support and incentivize greater SB 375 emission reductions.

The cost of driving. Travel behavior is influenced by a number of factors

including personal income, the costs of owning and operating a vehicle, mobility options, the time cost of travel, urbanization, and highway capacity. Since the targets were first set, there have been changes in the economy, cost of gasoline, and fuel efficiency of vehicles that have resulted in greater vehicle usage. Without additional policy intervention, like road user, congestion, and/or parking pricing, alongside expanded mobility options, vehicle travel will increase and can erode emission reductions achieved through SB 375.

Broadening technology and mobility choices. Our transportation system is

changing through proliferation of new vehicle technologies, fuels, and mobility choices. These mobility choices, if deployed correctly, present an opportunity to achieve greater GHG emission reductions through SB 375 targets.

Demographics. Since targets were set, several research projects have been

completed or are underway exploring how travel behavior may be changing with changing demographics in California. Particular interest has been paid to data showing millennials or members of “Generation Y” postpone the time they obtain a driver’s license, often live in urban locations and do not own a car, drive less if they own one, and use alternative travel modes more often. With continued implementation of already identified SB 375 strategies, as well as new strategies, that make it possible for millennials and subsequent generations to adhere to the travel and residential preferences they are exhibiting now and as they age, it is anticipated that SB 375 emission reductions will be greater than currently estimated.

Modeling tool capabilities. The modeling tools local agencies are using to quantify GHG emission reductions and other co-benefits from SB 375 strategies have continued to improve and provide decision makers with better information on the potential impacts of their land use policy and transportation investment choices. While the data and models still do not completely capture all the benefits or consequences of these strategies, their continued improvement is


8

anticipated to enable many MPOs to demonstrate the ability to achieve greater SB 375 GHG emission reductions, as well as improve strategies to reduce VMT.

Local actions. Many cities and counties have taken action to set GHG reduction

targets, develop climate action plans, and make progress toward reducing emissions since SB 375 targets were set. In some cases, these have included strategies consistent with the region’s SCS to support SB 375 emission reductions. The Scoping Plan Update recommends local governments aim to achieve a community-wide goal consistent with the statewide emission limits, and the Under 2 MOU. Efforts to update and implement local plans at these levels are anticipated to further support achievement of greater GHG emission reductions through SB 375.

New State vehicle miles traveled reduction strategy. As part of the State’s

Scoping Plan Update, the Administration also recently laid out its priorities for supporting local agencies on vehicle travel reduction going forward. Actions include developing and expanding funding and financing tools for infill development and related infrastructure, adjusting performance metrics used to select and design transportation projects, expanding investments in transit and active transportation, and developing pricing policies. All of these measures will complement and support further achievement of greater GHG emission reductions through SB 375.

Regulatory changes to support infill and transit oriented development. Governor Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 743 (Steinberg, 2013), which creates a process to change the way transportation impacts are analyzed under CEQA. Specifically, SB 743 requires the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to develop updates to the CEQA Guidelines to guide the analysis of project-level transportation impacts. Once the updated Guidelines go into effect, lead agencies will evaluate vehicle travel associated with new development as part of the project’s environmental review, and, if the impact is significant, mitigate those impacts through vehicle travel-reducing measures, which will support achievement of SB 375 goals.


9

Top-Down Analysis: Achieving the State’s Climate and Air B.Quality Goals

As mentioned earlier, climate and air quality policy has evolved since the SB 375 targets were established in 2010. Specifically, CARB has since been tasked with implementing SB 32 (Chapter 249, Statutes of 2016), which establishes a more aggressive statewide GHG reduction goal (40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030) than was in place when the SB 375 targets where first set in 2010. There is also the ongoing need to meet federal air quality standards that provide essential public health protection. Statewide, approximately 12 million Californians currently live in communities that exceed the federal standards for ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The two areas with the most critical air quality challenges include the South Coast region, and the San Joaquin Valley.

CARB is moving forward this year with updating the Scoping Plan to reflect the new statewide goal for 2030 called for in SB 32. The Scoping Plan Update addresses emission reductions from the transportation sector as a whole, and recommends strengthened SB 375 targets as a measure to achieve greater GHG reductions than would occur under currently adopted SCSs.

At the same time, the plan recognizes that targets are only one of many measures the State must take to meet its transportation sector goals. The Scoping Plan Update includes substantially greater increases in sales of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) compared to current requirements, greater increases in fuel efficiency standards for gasoline vehicles compared to current requirements, and a reduction in statewide VMT compared to currently adopted SCSs. While most of the GHG reductions from the transportation sector will come from technologies and low carbon fuels, reduction in the growth of VMT is also necessary. Figure 1 illustrates the combined contributions of GHG emission reductions envisioned for the passenger vehicle sector. The blue segment represents the GHG emission reduction contribution from VMT, which is a comparatively smaller share than the GHG emission reductions called for by advances in technology and fuels.


10

Figure 1: Statewide On-Road GHG Emissions

WTW = well-to-wheel emissions MMT CO2e = million metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent RPS = renewable portfolio standard

The Scoping Plan Update also recognizes the role reducing growth in VMT plays in supporting other important public health, equity, economic, and conservation goals. The types of strategies associated with reducing VMT growth also influence where and what types of development are put in place, with implications beyond reducing distances traveled and tailpipe emissions. Development pattern choices also play a role in influencing pollutant exposure; accessibility to jobs and services; future transportation, energy, and water infrastructure demand and costs; as well as conversion of natural and working lands; food security; watershed health; and ecosystems.

Stronger SB 375 GHG reduction targets will enable the State to make significant progress toward these goals, but alone will not provide all of the reductions needed. While currently adopted SB 375 plans achieve, in aggregate, a 17 percent reduction in statewide per capita GHG emissions relative to 2005 by 2035, the full reduction needed to meet our climate goals is on the order of a 25 percent reduction in statewide per capita GHG emissions by 2035.

Bridging the gap will require a combination of increased SB 375 targets and new State VMT reduction actions. As part of the Scoping Plan Update, CARB staff and our sister


11

State agencies have included the following recommended new State-level strategies to reduce VMT that we are beginning the process to pursue:4

Developing and expanding funding and financing mechanisms and incentives for infill development and related infrastructure (e.g. low-VMT housing rebate, reduced parking requirements, regional transit-oriented development funds, etc.) and connecting to incentives/support for regional land conservation strategies (e.g. transfer-development rights, growth boundaries, etc.).

Adjusting performance measures used to select and design transportation facilities to ensure projects harmonize with emission reductions, and increase competitiveness of transit and active transportation modes (e.g. via guideline documents, funding programs, project selection, etc.).

Expanding investments in transit and active transportation, as well as exploring

opportunities for increasing shared mobility transportation options, particularly for automated vehicles.

Developing pricing policies (e.g. low-emission vehicle zones for heavy duty, road

user, parking pricing, transit discounts).

4 See California Air Resources Board, Public Meeting to Hear Proposed Update to Senate Bill 375 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets – Staff Presentation, March 23-24, 2017, Slides 27-34, https://www.arb.ca.gov/board/books/2017/032317/17-3-7pres.pdf.


12

Bottom-Up Analysis: MPO Target Recommendations C. Since 2014, CARB staff has been working in support of a bottom-up process whereby MPOs provide target recommendations for their region, supported by technical information. This was the process followed during the original target setting in 2010. All MPOs participated in the target recommendation process and provided CARB staff with varying levels of analysis. To view MPO submittals to CARB staff, see Appendix B. MPO Scenarios and Data Submittals.

The four largest MPOs (SACOG, MTC, SCAG, and SANDAG) voluntarily conducted a hypothetical, less constrained form of scenario planning to determine what kinds of strategies and factors could generate the additional GHG emission reductions necessary to support higher SB 375 targets. As part of this analysis, CARB staff requested that these MPOs provide further information on opportunities and challenges, as well as what financial and political resources would be necessary, to further deploy the following six policy levers in their respective regions:

Land use change; More aggressive implementation of technology solutions (e.g., increased

deployment of electric vehicle infrastructure); Innovative mobility solutions (e.g., ridesourcing and autonomous vehicles); Active transportation; Pricing; and Transit

CARB staff also asked the MPOs to explore the impact of demographic changes in their regions – the millennial effect. The four MPOs submitted their findings to CARB staff in March 2017. The tests indicated that additional GHG reductions in 2035 may be achieved from land use changes, transportation investment, and technology strategies, and provided ranges of magnitude for some of the policy lever areas above.

As part of this work, the four MPOs identified several barriers to realizing the full benefits of the test ranges reported. They noted that all assumptions tested would require either additional revenue sources and or regional/State/federal rule or guidance changes. In particular, current transportation spending formulas and allocations provide little flexibility to shift funding to more sustainable transportation projects. The MPOs also cited concerns with testing further deployment of some of these policy levers at all, as they may present issues related to social justice, such as displacement and inequitable transportation cost burden.


13

Furthermore, all four MPOs identified challenges with maintaining the GHG reductions they had previously estimated would come from their currently adopted plans, primarily due to significant changes in forecasts for clean vehicle fleets. As passenger vehicle fleets get cleaner through increased fuel efficiency, the cost of driving decreases, and can lead to more driving, as well as lost gas tax revenues for funding transportation improvements.

Based on these findings and discussions with their Boards, all four of these MPOs submitted target recommendations to CARB in May 2017 of an 18 percent reduction from 2005 levels by 2035.

The eight Valley MPOs submitted target analysis information using preliminary results from their most recent model improvement effort. This work utilizes the most recent Census, American Community Survey, California Household Travel Survey data, as well as implements changes to the model structure based on CARB feedback received during their last SCS evaluation period.

The Valley MPOs’ preliminary results suggest a more accurate estimate of what their currently adopted plans would achieve, if implemented. For some Valley MPOs, this is close to a 40 percent drop from what the MPOs estimated and reported in their currently adopted SCSs, but more in line with what CARB sensitivity testing previously indicated during the SCS review process.

Similar to the big four MPOs, the Valley MPOs also identify factors that are making it difficult for them to maintain the estimated emission reduction levels of their currently adopted SCSs. While they do not quantify the magnitude of effect of these factors, they identify a variety of new strategies that go above and beyond their last SCSs that they anticipate will help offset these factors and effectively maintain currently estimated reduction levels. As such, seven of the eight Valley MPOs recommend targets for 2035 that commit to maintaining the same levels of reduction estimated for their currently adopted SCSs. Fresno COG has recommended a 2035 target of 13 percent, which exceeds the estimated reduction of their current SCS.

Of the six remaining MPOs, four submitted target analysis information that would meet or exceed their currently adopted SCSs. All acknowledged challenges in maintaining needed resource and funding levels to match performance of their previously adopted plans.


14

Public Engagement D.

Since 2014, CARB staff has also engaged in regular and ongoing dialogue with MPOs and other stakeholders to solicit target update recommendations. In August 2014, CARB staff released a preliminary draft staff report on factors to consider in development of the target update. CARB staff used that report to facilitate discussion and gather input at three public workshops in September 2014 in Diamond Bar, Fresno, and Sacramento. Input received at that time included: requests to update the placeholder targets for the MPOs in the San Joaquin Valley, incorporate best practices in the SCSs, identify and measure co-benefits, provide additional resources and funding for SCS implementation, consider GHG credit for advances in technology and electric vehicle usage, improve travel demand modeling, support for both a top-down and bottom-up approach, as well as comments on the timing for when updated targets should take effect. CARB staff incorporated this input and its proposed approach to the target update into its report to the Board on October 23, 2014. At that meeting, the Board indicated their support for staff’s proposed approach.

Throughout 2015, CARB staff continued to engage MPOs and other stakeholders following that approach. In September 2015, CARB staff sent a memorandum to the MPOs with an updated schedule and request to receive any target recommendations by spring 2016. While many of the MPOs met that deadline, some MPOs requested more time to conduct additional scenario analysis and testing. At the end of December 2016, the Valley MPOs sent CARB their preliminary target setting recommendations, and the largest four MPOs sent results from their target analyses in early March.

CARB staff conducted a second set of workshops in March 2017 in the cities of Fresno, Los Angeles, and Sacramento, to provide an update and receive feedback on MPO target analysis and recommendations received and next steps to update targets. Over 100 people attended in-person, with additional participation through webcast of the Sacramento workshop. Attendees included MPO and State agency representatives, non-governmental organizations, local jurisdictions, and private citizens. Feedback provided, included requests for performance monitoring of plan implementation, sharing of leading practices, and additional analysis for co-benefits. There was a general agreement on the need to secure additional pricing and transportation revenue and to align transportation funding with land use goals. CARB staff also provided an informational update to the Board on March 23, 2017. At that meeting, Board members acknowledged the need and challenge ahead with ensuring the appropriate funding incentives are in place to support achievement of more aggressive SB 375 targets. As a first step, the Board suggested convening a transportation funding “roundtable”, for State agencies, MPOs, and subject experts to discuss how the State could better align transportation funding with the State’s environmental goals.


15

In addition, CARB staff has also continued to meet with MPO staffs and various non-governmental organizations on both an individual and group basis to discuss the target update. Updates on the SB 375 target setting process were also presented at the Scoping Plan Update workshops for the transportation sector hosted by CARB in September 2016 and March 2017.


16

Staff Recommendation for SB 375 Target Updates IV.

CARB staff recommendations are designed to strike a balance between the bottom-up analysis provided by the MPOs and CARB’s top-down analysis to propose a set of targets that meet all the identified objectives. This set of proposed targets calls for greater per capita GHG emission reductions from SB 375 than are currently in place, which for 2035, translate into proposed targets that either match or exceed the emission reduction levels contained in the MPOs’ currently adopted SCSs.

SB 375 calls for CARB to set GHG emission reduction targets in any metric deemed appropriate by CARB. The SB 375 targets are in units of percent per capita reduction in GHG emissions from automobiles and light trucks relative to 2005, this excludes reductions anticipated from implementation of State technology and fuels strategies, and any potential future State strategies such as statewide road user pricing. CARB staff believes that to achieve the intent of the legislation and to maximize community co-benefits, the per capita GHG emission reduction targets should be achieved predominantly through strategies that reduce VMT.

As proposed, CARB staff’s proposed targets would result in an additional reduction of greenhouse gas emissions of over 10 million metric tons of CO2 per year in 2035 compared to the current targets.

CARB staff recommendations for the individual MPO region targets pursuant to SB 375 are described in the following sections. See Appendix A. MPO Target Recommendations and CARB Staff Recommendations for additional detail.


17

Proposed Targets for Year 2020 A.

The year 2020 is the first SB 375 milestone year, and while transportation planning for 2020 is essentially done, with some MPOs adopting their next SCSs in 2020 and 2021, CARB staff does not expect future MPO SCS planning to change current projected GHG emission reductions for 2020. CARB staff views updates to the 2020 targets as a clean-up step and an important indicator to monitor success of SB 375 and SCSs going forward. Thus, CARB staff proposes to bring the 2020 targets in-line with the projected GHG emission reductions of the MPOs’ most recent, adopted SCS. Table 1 shows CARB’s draft proposed target for each MPO for 2020 compared to CARB’s currently adopted targets from 2010, and the MPO target recommendations for 2020.

Table 1: 2020 Target

MPO Currently Adopted Target

MPO-Recommended

Target

CARB Draft Proposed

Target MTC/ABAG -7% - -10% SACOG -7% - -7% SANDAG -7% - -15% SCAG -8% - -8% Fresno COG

-5%

-6% -6% Kern COG -9% -9% Kings CAG -5% -5% Madera CTC -10% -10% Merced CAG -10.1% -10% San Joaquin COG -12 to -13% -12% Stanislaus COG -12 to -13% -12% Tulare CAG -13 to -14% -13% AMBAG 0% -3% -3% Butte CAG 1% - -6% San Luis Obispo COG -8% -8% -8% Santa Barbara CAG 0% -13% -13% Shasta RTA 0% - -4% Tahoe MPO -7% -8.8% -8%


18

Proposed Targets for Year 2035 B.

The target update process is most heavily focused on updating the 2035 target. CARB staff considered a number of factors in its assessment of what might be ambitious and achievable by 2035 for each of the MPOs. Based on the best available information from both the MPO’s recent analysis results, staff’s look at the current research on potential new strategy areas, as well as new revenue sources and action commitments by the State to support further local action, CARB staff believe the weight of evidence suggests higher target levels than the current targets, and in some cases, than the target levels recommended by the MPOs are within reach. Additional opportunities and considerations include:

Additional and Enhanced Strategies. It is important to note that as part of the bottom-up analysis and MPO target recommendation process most MPOs have acknowledged the potential for and committed to incorporating additional or enhanced strategies in future SCSs, compared to what is included in their currently adopted SCSs. Table 2 summarizes the strategy areas and quantitative analysis results that the four largest MPOs provided to CARB and considered in their recommendations, showing potential for additional and enhanced incorporation of land use, transit, active transportation, vehicle technology support, and enhanced mobility strategies. While quantitative values were not analyzed or provided for every policy lever area, CARB staff acknowledges the potential for additional GHG reductions in these policy lever areas.


19

Table 2: Summary of Quantitative Results Provided by the MPOs

Strategy Type SACOG* MTC* SANDAG* SCAG*

Land Use

-4%

Value Not Provided -2%

-0.1% Transit


Active Transportation Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided -0.4%

TDM/TSM Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided

Regional/Local Pricing Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided

Vehicle Technology: ZEV -1% Value Not Provided -20% Value Not

Provided

Enhanced Mobility: CAVs Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided


Demographic Changes Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided

Value Not Provided

*MPO values are not fiscally constrained

Additional Funding Resources and Tools. As part of the bottom-up target recommendation process, MPOs have identified several challenges to incorporating the additional or enhanced strategies discussed above to achieve higher targets; primarily declining transportation revenue, fixed transportation spending allocations, and local authority considerations. MPOs and local agencies have identified the need for additional funding resources and tools that provide the needed incentives to add and enhance strategies and transition to a transportation system that offers true alternative mobility options. Since the time MPO target recommendations were developed, however, new funding through passage of SB 1, as well as through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund Transformative Climate Communities Program, and the Volkswagen Settlement Investments, totaling over $53 billion in new funding over the next 10 years, has been identified to provide incentives for SB 375 implementation that, in most


20

cases, were not analyzed.5 In addition, some jurisdictions have recently passed local tax measures that can assist in SCS implementation.

Furthermore, as part of the Scoping Plan Update, CARB staff and our sister State agencies have identified and recommended new State commitments for resource and regulatory support related to SCS strategy areas that were not analyzed as part of the MPO recommendations. While the full anticipated benefits of these statewide strategies cannot be counted toward meeting the SB 375 targets, they are expected to provide ancillary support to MPOs for adopting additional or enhanced strategies that may be counted toward the targets. For example, GHG reductions coming from statewide pricing will be accounted for by the State, but MPOs will be able to take credit for strategies resulting from investment of pricing revenues. CARB staff and our sister State agencies will convene a VMT reduction “roundtable”, for State agencies, MPOs, and subject experts to help further develop these new State-level actions, in a way that that will help regions implement key SCS strategies and policies that maximize GHG emission reductions, as well as co-benefits.

Rebound Effect. MPOs cite a rebound effect, of increased overall driving due to increasing vehicle fuel efficiency, as a significant factor making it difficult to maintain their previous estimates of SCS GHG emission reductions. An evaluation of CARB’s independent analysis of the rebound effect as part of its Advanced Clean Car Regulation6 and U.S. EPA’s Mid-Term Review7, CARB staff expects the impact to be minimal, on the order of approximately 1 percent increase by 2035.

Modeling Factors. CARB staff is committed to work with the MPOs on standardizing modeling assumptions and methods affecting target achievement calculations as part of updating CARB’s methodology for reviewing emission

5 See Senate Bill 1: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB1; Assembly Bill 2722 (Transformative Climate Communities): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB2722; Volkswagen Settlement: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/vw_info/vsi/vw-zevinvest/vw-zevinvest.htm 6 See California Air Resources Board, LEV III Economic Analysis Technical Support Document, Appendix S, December 7, 2011, https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/leviiighg2012/levapps.pdf. 7 See US Environmental Protection Agency, The Rebound Effect from Fuel Efficiency Standards: Measurement and Projection to 2035, https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100N11T.PDF?Dockey=P100N11T.PDF.


21

reductions from SCSs. The update will help the program better account for emission reductions, as well as provide greater certainty to MPOs that exogenous modeling factors will not detract from their ability to achieve higher targets.

Based on these considerations, CARB staff estimate that through different combinations of strategies in each region, most MPOs may be able achieve additional reductions on the order of 1 to 5 percent compared to each of their currently adopted SCSs. CARB staff’s target recommendations apply this estimate differently across the regions, recognizing that regional differences continue to affect what can be achieved in each region and that different individual targets continue to be appropriate.

For the four large MPOs, CARB staff took the midpoint of the reduction range (3 percent) and applied it to the emission reduction estimate for their currently adopted SCS to come up with their individual target recommendations. For the Valley MPOs, CARB staff applied a stepped reduction range of 1 to 2 percent additional reduction compared to their adopted SCSs, reasoning that certain strategies would not yield as high a benefit as in the more urbanized MPOs. For the remaining six MPOs, recognizing that overall rate of growth is expected to be slow compared to the other MPO regions and that travel patterns in these regions are also unique, particularly for those that are recreation and vacation destinations, CARB staff recommend targets in line with at minimum maintaining reduction ranges of their currently adopted SCSs. See Appendix A. MPO Target Recommendations and CARB Staff Recommendations for additional detail.

Table 3 shows the currently adopted target, estimated reductions with currently adopted plan, MPO target recommendation, and CARB staff’s draft proposed target for each MPO for year 2035.


22

Table 3: 2035 Target

MPO 2035

Current Target

Current SCS Performance

MPO Recommended

Target

CARB Staff Proposed

Target MTC/ABAG -15% -16% -18% -19% SACOG -16% -16% -18% -19% SANDAG -13% -18%* -18% -21% SCAG -13% -18% -18% -21% Fresno COG

-10%

-10%* -13% -13% Kern COG -13%* -13% -15% Kings CAG -12%* -12% -13% Madera CTC -15%* -15 to -20% -16% Merced CAG -12.7%* -12.7% -14% San Joaquin COG 14%* -14 to -15% -16% Stanislaus COG 14%* -14 to -15% -16% Tulare CAG 15%* -15 to -16% -16% AMBAG -5% -6% -6% -6% Butte CAG 1% -7% -7% -7% San Luis Obispo COG -8% -10.9% -8% -11% Santa Barbara CAG 0% -15% -17% -17% Shasta RTA 0% -0.5% -3.5% -4% Tahoe MPO -5% -5% -5% -5%

Italics indicates an SCS that is adopted but not yet evaluated by CARB *Based on preliminary updated modeling analysis provided by SANDAG and the Valley MPOs.

At the personal travel level, CARB staff’s proposed targets are equivalent to reducing VMT a half a mile per person per day. When considering a person’s daily travel patterns, this would translate into individuals having the option to combine multiple different travel options, such as one bike or transit to work day a month, carpooling or vanpooling, one telecommute day a month, and biking and walking for grocery or other errands.

Figure 2 illustrates what these SB 375 target levels mean in aggregate, within the context of advancing progress toward our statutory climate and air quality goals. CARB staff’s top-down analysis estimates that SB 375 and other VMT reduction strategies need to provide a 25 percent reduction in statewide per capita greenhouse gas emissions relative to 2005 by 2035 to meet these goals (shown as the “Scoping Plan Need” dashed line). CARB staff’s proposed targets would achieve about 20 percent


23

reduction in statewide per capita GHG reduction, compared to a roughly 17 percent per capita reduction being proposed by the MPOs; the 17 percent reduction in aggregate is nearly equivalent to their currently adopted SCSs and the Scoping Plan Update baseline. Also shown, are the current SB 375 targets, which achieve about a 13 percent statewide per capita GHG reduction.

Figure 2: SB 375 Targets Relative to Scoping Plan Need

13.4% 17.7% 17.6% 19.9%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

2010 Targets Adopted SCSPerformance

MPO TargetRecommendation

Staff ProposedTarget

GHG

Red

uctio

n Re

lativ

e to

200

5 Scoping Plan Need

Note: Adopted SCS Performance is reflected in 2017 Scoping Plan Update Baseline

Scoping Plan Baseline

Scoping Plan Need


24

Achieving the Target Update Objectives C.

CARB staff’s proposed targets are consistent with the SB 375 target update objectives discussed in Section II. CARB staff’s approach relied on MPO generated information as a foundation, reviewed and supplemented with the latest available information, methods, and data for capturing the benefits of potential SCS strategies. Additionally, the proposed targets recognize the need and importance for continued local and State partnership to meet the State’s overall VMT reduction goal.

MPO Input. The proposed targets use MPO generated information as the foundation for target setting. MPO baseline information, forecasts, and expertise related to what may be feasible is an important component of the target recommendation. The proposed targets are intended to achieve a balance between goals that motivate positive action, but are not out of reach for regions and local governments.

Best Available Information. The proposed targets are based on analyses performed using the best available models and tools and the latest methods and data. While transportation modeling tools used to quantify GHG emission reductions from SCS strategies continue to improve, they still do not completely capture all the benefits or consequences of SCS planning. The methods and data for capturing the benefits of potential SCS strategies have and will continue to improve as well. The proposed targets recognize improvements since the last target cycle, and the likelihood that tools and methods will continue to improve in their ability to quantify SCS GHG emission reductions and other co-benefit effects.

Local and State Partnership. The proposed targets also recognize that

additional State policy and funding tools are being developed to support further VMT reduction that will both help the State overall in achieving needed emission reductions and support MPOs in their ability to achieve higher targets by 2035. The proposed targets are intended to share responsibility and partnership toward meeting the overall goal. See Section III-B, for further discussion on work underway to develop additional State-level assistance and tools.


25

Next Steps V. CARB is required under SB 375 to update the targets no later than 2018, which is eight years from the time targets were first established in 2010. The purpose of this staff report is to provide the Board and public with an opportunity to discuss and comment on CARB staff’s proposed targets. This section describes next steps in CARB’s process to update the SB 375 targets and associated program components, including future opportunities for input.

CARB staff will present this staff proposal at a series of public workshops around the State in June 2017 to solicit stakeholder feedback and input. Concurrently, as the lead agency for the target-setting process, CARB prepared a Draft Environmental Analysis pursuant to its certified regulatory program to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Public Resources Code § 21080.5). The Draft Environmental Analysis provides a programmatic level of analysis of the potential direct and indirect environmental impacts associated with updating the regional GHG targets. The analysis is based on the reasonably foreseeable compliance responses associated with the implementation of SCSs designed to achieve the regional targets. The Draft Environmental Analysis is being circulated to the public and other agencies for a 45-day review and comment, and is incorporated as Appendix E of this report.

At the same time, acknowledging the challenge ahead with ensuring appropriate funding and other incentives are in place to support achievement of more aggressive SB 375 targets, CARB staff and our sister State agencies, will convene a VMT reduction “roundtable”, for State agencies, MPOs, and subject experts to identify and prioritize the necessary tools, resources, and State-level actions that will help regions implement key SCS strategies and policies that maximize GHG emission reductions, as well as co-benefits.

Following the comment period, CARB staff will revise the draft staff proposal, if appropriate, based on Board and stakeholder input received. CARB staff will also prepare a document with written responses to comments raising significant environmental issues related to the Draft Environmental Analysis and requiring a written response under CARB’s certified regulatory program and CEQA, and prepare a Final Environmental Analysis. A final staff proposal, the written responses to environmental comments, and Final Environmental Analysis will be made available at least 10 days prior to presentation to the Board for consideration in the fall of 2017. If the Board adopts staff’s final proposal, the new SB 375 targets would become effective on January 1, 2018.


26

MPOs prepare SCSs according to their respective update schedules, which mean the next set of SCSs subject to updated targets will be prepared at different times over the next four years (see Appendix C for the MPO RTP update schedule). SCSs adopted in 2018 would be subject to the updated targets.8

Once target updates are adopted, CARB staff plans to turn its attention to revising and updating the Technical Review Methodology to reflect technical changes since the original publication, and to make clear CARB staff’s recommendations for SCS reviews subject to the new targets. CARB staff will also continue working on tracking near-term indicators of SCS implementation to provide a basis for understanding whether the intended benefits of SB 375 are beginning to accrue and are benefiting communities equitably. CARB staff will seek to engage stakeholders in both these processes through multiple forums, including: the formation of collaborative stakeholder working groups, continued regular meetings with MPO and non-governmental organization stakeholders, individual meetings with other stakeholders, as requested, as well as through periodic updates on implementation efforts at Board meetings.

While the target numbers themselves are a key focus of this staff report and SB 375 implementation, the land use and transportation strategies that underpin the SCSs are equally, if not more, important to assess the ambitiousness of the plans. Now that the SB 375 program is in its eighth year of implementation, indicators of policy change and SCS implementation are becoming available. In addition to fulfilling CARB’s obligations to set targets and to determine whether SCSs achieve the targets, CARB staff plans to turn its attention to tracking near-term indicators of SCS implementation, land use change, sustainable development, and public health outcomes. The goal is to gain an understanding of whether the strategies in SCSs are working, and whether the intended benefits of SB 375 are beginning to accrue and are benefiting communities equitably. See Appendix D. SB 375 Program Background for further discussion.

8 California Air Resources Board staff expects MPOs that adopt an SCS or have a draft SCS released in 2017 to maintain good progress by outperforming their current targets, but the new targets will not officially take effect until 2018.


Matthew Rodriquez Secretary for

Environmental Protection

The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our website: http://www.arb.ca.gov.

California Environmental Protection Agency

Printed on Recycled Paper

Air Resources Board Mary D. Nichols, Chair

1001 I Street • P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, California 95812 • www.arb.ca.gov Edmund G. Brown Jr.

Governor

NOTICE OF PUBLIC WORKSHOPS ON THE PROPOSED UPDATE TO THE SENATE BILL 375 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION

REDUCTION TARGETS The California Air Resources Board (CARB or Board) staff will host three public workshops throughout the State during June 2017 to seek public input on a draft proposal to update the regional passenger vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets for California’s Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO). At the workshops, CARB staff will present information on the target update process, share MPO target recommendations received, as well as seek public input on the proposed updated targets. The Draft Staff Report and the Draft Environmental Analysis on the Proposed Update to the Senate Bill 375 GHG Emission Reduction Targets will be available prior to the workshops at the following web link: https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/sb375.htm Workshop Information: The workshops will be held at the locations and dates shown below. All workshops will follow the same format and presentation.

Date and Time Public Workshop Location

June 20, 2017 5:30pm – 7:00pm

Kern Council of Governments 1401 19th Street, 3rd Floor

Bakersfield, CA 93301

June 21, 2017 1:30pm – 3:00pm

Southern California Association of Governments 818 West 7th Street, 12th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90017

June 28, 2017 1:30pm – 3:00pm

Metropolitan Transportation Commission 375 Beale Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

Background: Senate Bill 375 (SB 375), the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, requires MPOs to add a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) to their Regional Transportation Plans. The intent of the SCS is to better integrate land use and transportation policies to meet long-term sustainability goals. To help guide these regional planning efforts, CARB is required to establish regional GHG emission reduction targets for 2020 and 2035. CARB adopted initial targets for the


http://www.arb.ca.gov/

REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 2

2

MPO regions in 2010. CARB is required to update the targets at least every eight years, and may revise them every four years. In August 2014, CARB staff released a preliminary draft staff report on the status of SB 375 efforts and factors that ARB could consider during development of the methodology to update the targets. CARB staff discussed this preliminary draft staff report at three public workshops during September 2014 and presented the report to the Board in October 2014. Since that time, CARB staff continued to engage stakeholders and the MPOs on the target update process through regular stakeholder meetings, additional public workshops, and an informational report to the Board in March 2017. The June 2017 workshops are an opportunity for the public to learn more about, as well as provide feedback to CARB staff on the draft proposal for target updates. We encourage your participation and look forward to your input. For any questions regarding these workshops, please contact Ms. Lezlie Kimura Szeto, Manager of the Sustainable Communities Policy and Planning Section at [email protected] or call (916) 327-5985. More information about CARB’s SB 375 program, including the initial target setting process, is available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/sb375.htm. Special Accommodations: If you require special accommodation, please contact Ms. Annemarie Flores, Air Pollution Specialist at (916) 324-6749 or [email protected] as soon as possible, but no later than 10 business days before the scheduled meeting. TTY/TDD/Speech to Speech users may dial 711 for the California Relay Service. Notices for Future Meetings and Materials: If you would like to receive notices of future meetings and the availability of materials, please sign up for our list serve at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/listserv/listserv_ind.php?listname=sb375.


mailto:[email protected]

https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/sb375.htm

[email protected]

https://www.arb.ca.gov/listserv/listserv_ind.php?listname=sb375

DATE: July 6, 2017

TO: Energy & Environment Committee (EEC)

FROM: Rye Baerg, Senior Regional Planner, 213-236-1866, [email protected]

SUBJECT: ARB Technical Advisory Regarding Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S APPROVAL: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and File - No Action Required EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The California Air Resources Board (ARB) released a Technical Advisory related to Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways in April of 2017. The advisory updates previous guidance issued in 2005 and provides guidance to planners tasked with developing local policies aimed at reducing exposure to traffic emissions and when weighing multiple options to reduce emissions and/or exposure at a specific site. The advisory was developed in response to new research that shows the benefits of infill development on public health, climate, financial, and other outcomes. SCAG incorporated ARB’s 2005 guidance into the development of the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS and will consider ARB’s 2017 guidance as work begins on public health analysis and policies for the 2020 RTP/SCS. ARB staff Maggie Witt will provide a presentation on the Technical Advisory and implications for regional and local land-use planning. STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports SCAG’s Strategic Plan, Goal 1 (Improve Regional Decision Making by Providing Leadership and Consensus Building on Key Plans and Policies), Objective a (Create and facilitate a collaborative and cooperative environment to produce forward thinking regional plans). BACKGROUND: In 2005, ARB released the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (Handbook). The Handbook focused on the siting of sensitive land uses (new residences, schools, day care centers, playgrounds, and medical facilities) near high volume roadways and other polluting land uses such as refineries. Of key importance was the recommendation that such uses be sited a minimum distance from specific land uses, for example – “Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day.” Since the Handbook’s release, the guidance has been used by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and other agencies in their planning activities.

AGENDA ITEM NO. 11


Unfortunately, due to the large number of high volume roadways in many urban areas, locating sensitive receptors outside of the recommended buffer is not always possible and many communities already have sensitive receptors within these areas. In April of 2017, ARB released a Technical Advisory titled Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways (Advisory). The Advisory provides updated guidance to the 2005 Handbook based on new scientific research related to the benefits of “infill” development. The Advisory is designed to provide public health, air quality and urban planning policy-makers with options for reducing exposure to traffic pollution for those who live or work near busy roads. The Advisory addresses new research that has demonstrated the public health, climate, financial, and other benefits of compact, infill development along transportation corridors. Infill as a development strategy is important because it supports the implementation of Senate Bill 375 through the reduction of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Strategies that infill supports include facilitating more trips being accomplished by active transportation (biking and walking), providing a density of development that helps support transit operations, and shortening or reduces car trips which results in the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Importantly, compact and infill development can also improve people’s quality of life by facilitating community connectivity. The Advisory demonstrates that planners, developers, and local governments can pursue infill development while simultaneously reducing exposure to traffic-related pollution by implementing the strategies identified. Strategies included fall into three categories:

1. Strategies that reduce traffic emissions 2. Strategies that reduce the concentration of traffic pollution 3. Strategies that remove pollution from indoor air

The strategies were chosen based on peer-reviewed scientific literature and ARB-sponsored research projects. Examples include the use of traffic roundabouts instead of stoplights to reduce stop and go driving, sound walls and vegetation that help dispel pollution, and air filters in buildings that remove pollutants from indoor air. The Technical Advisory is not intended as guidance for any specific project, nor does it create any presumption regarding the feasibility of mitigation measures for purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Instead, it is meant as guidance for planners weighing options for reducing exposure to traffic emissions. For more information and for Fact Sheets in English and Spanish, please visit: https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/landuse.htm


FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. PowerPoint Presentation: “Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume

Roadways: Technical Advisory” 2. [English] Fact Sheet https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/rd_technical_analysis_fact_sheet.pdf 3. [Spanish] Fact Sheet https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/rd_technical_analysis_fact_sheet_sp.pdf


StrategiestoReduceAirPollutionExposureNearHigh‐Volume

Roadways:TechnicalAdvisory

MaggieWittCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard,ResearchDivision

July6,2017SCAGEnergyandEnvironmentCommittee

2

Whatisthe“TechnicalAdvisory”?

• Aguideintendedtoprovideplannersandotherstakeholderswith:

– Optionsforstrategiesthatcanbeselectedbasedonsite/project‐specificcontext

– Scientificbasisand otherconsiderations(tradeoffs,appropriatecontext,etc.)

• Technicalsupplementtothe2005LandUseHandbook

TheTechnicalAdvisoryandanaccompanyingfactsheetcanbedownloadedat:https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/landuse.htm


REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 1

WhyisitNeeded?1. Supplement/updateARB’sLandUse

Handbook– LandUseHandbookrecommendation:“Avoidsitingnewsensitivelanduseswithin500feetofafreeways,urbanroadswith100,000vehicles/day,orruralroadswith50,000vehicles/day.”1

– But,whattodofor:

• Existingdevelopmentw/in500’?

• Developmentwhere500’separationisimpractical?

• Communitieswherethebusyroadwaynetworkisdense?

2. Identifywaysforreducingexposureinexistingandfutureinfillareas

3

1 http://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf

4

WhyisitNeeded?(Cont.)3. Toprovideneartermoptionsasnear‐roadwayair

qualityimprovesovertime– Stateregulations,policies,plansarecleaninguptheair,butsomearephased‐in,sofullbenefitsmaytaketime

– Non‐tailpipeemissions(e.g.,tireandbrakewear)maycontinuetobeanissue

0

10

20

30

40

50

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

PM2.5(tons/day)

Year

Tire+BrakeWear

Tailpipe

PM2.5EmissionsfromOn‐RoadVehicles

Source:EMFAC2014


HowdidCARBIdentifyStrategies?

• Comprehensiveliteraturereview:2013‐2016

• Criteriaforinclusion:1. Consistentfindingsfrommultiplestudies

supportthestrategyasameansforreducingpollutionconcentrations,oremissionsrates,orimprovingairflowtodispersepollutants.

2. Significantevidenceofeffectivepollutantconcentrationorexposurereductions.

3. Diversityinthestudymethodssupportsconsistentfindings(suchthatstrategiesdonotexclusivelyrelyononemethodofinvestigation).

5

StakeholderReviewState

AgenciesAcademic Federal Gov’t International Regional

Agencies

Germany

NetherlandsNat’lInstituteforPublicHealth&Environm’t

Region9+Officeof

Research&Developm’t

6

AIR DISTRICTS


TechnicalAdvisoryStrategies7

Strategies thatreducetrafficemissions

1. Speedreductionmechanisms,includingroundabouts

2. Trafficsignalmanagement3. Speedlimitreductionsonhigh‐speed

roadways(>55mph)

Strategiesthatincreasedispersionoftrafficpollution

4. Designthatpromotesventilationalongstreetcorridors

5. Solidbarriers,suchassoundwalls6. Vegetationforpollutantdispersion

Strategiesthatremoveairpollution

7. Indoorhighefficiencyfiltration(inbuildings)

StrategiesthatReduceTrafficEmissions8

1. Speedreductionmechanisms,includingroundabouts

• Reducestop‐and‐godrivingandhardaccelerationsandtherebyreduceemissionratesby20%ormore

• Roundabouts(inplaceofstop‐controlledintersections)– Reducelocalizedpollutantconcentrations,dependingoncontextandsite‐specificconditions


StrategiesthatReduceTrafficEmissions

2. Trafficsignalmanagement

• Reducestop‐and‐godrivingandvehicleidling

• Mayreducelocalizedpollutantconcentrationsbyupto50percent

9

StrategiesthatReduceTrafficEmissions

3. Speedlimitreductionsonhigh‐speedroadways

• Per‐mileemissionratesandfuelconsumptionareminimizedintheoptimalaveragespeedrangeof~35to55milesperhour

10


StrategiesthatIncreaseDispersionofTrafficPollution

4. Designthatpromotesventilationalongstreetcorridors

10

• Betterdispersionandairqualityinstreetcorridorscharacterizedby:– Buildingswithvaryingshapes,heights,etc.

– Spacesthatencourageairflow(e.g.,parks,widersidewalks,andbikelanes)

ARBresearchprojects:• Identifyingurbandesignsand

trafficmanagementstrategiesforSouthernCaliforniathatreduceairpollutionexposure

• Effectsofcompletestreetsontravelbehaviorandexposuretovehicularemissions

5. Solidbarriers,suchassoundwalls

12

• Betterverticaldispersionofpollutants– Magnitude/spatialextentofreductiondependsontheheightofthebarrier,widthoftheroad,andmicrometeorology

ARBresearchproject:• Effectivenessofsoundwall‐vegetation

combinationbarriersasnear‐roadwaypollutantmitigationstrategies



6. Vegetationforpollutantdispersion

13

• Vegetationcanalterpollutanttransportanddispersion– May promoteparticleremovalbydiffusionandimpaction

ARBresearchproject:• Effectivenessofsoundwall‐

vegetationcombinationbarriersasnear‐roadwaypollutantmitigationstrategies


StrategiesthatRemoveAirPollution

7. Indoorhighefficiencyfiltration(inbuildings)

14

• Highefficiencyfilters(in‐buildingventilationsystemsandportableairfilters)canremove50‐99%ofairborneparticles

ARBresearchprojects:• Benefitsofhighefficiency

filtrationtochildrenwithasthma

• Reducingin‐homeexposuretoairpollution


KeyOverarchingConsiderations15

• Durabilityofbuiltenvironmentchanges• Holisticandcomprehensiveplanning• Site‐specificconsiderations• Roleofchangingfleetsinnear‐roadairquality• On‐roadwayexposuretotrafficemissions• Translatingresearchintopractice

HowshouldtheTechnicalAdvisorybeUsed?

16

• Intendedaudience:o Publichealth,airquality,and

planningprofessionalsandpolicymakers,&otherkeystakeholders

• Referencewhen:o Developinglocal

policies/planso Weighingoptionsfora

specificsite


OPRGeneralPlanGuidelinesUpdate

• Updateexpectedtobereleasedin2017

• WillincludereferenceandlinkstoARB’sTechnicalAdvisory&strategies

17

NextSteps• OutreachwithOPRfollowingthe

releaseoftheGeneralPlanGuidelines

• Continuedcoordinationwithstakeholdersandpartners– E.g.,workwithCEConbuildingcode

updateregardinghigh‐efficiencyfiltration

• Continuedresearchon:– Exposurehotspots– Additionalmitigationstrategies– Analysisofthereal‐world

effectivenessofcombinationsofstrategies

18


AdditionalARBResources

• AirQuality&LandUse:– https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/landuse.htm

• PublicHealth&theBuiltEnvironment:– https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/vprp/vprp.htm

• SearchabledatabaseofARB‐fundedresearch:

– https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/research.htm

• AdditionalInformationonFiltration:– “AirCleaningDevicesfortheHome:FAQs”:

https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/indoor/acdsumm.pdf– ARB‐fundedresearchonreducingin‐homeexposuretoair

pollution:https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/single‐project.php?row_id=65080

19

ThankYou!

MaggieWittAirResourcesBoard,ResearchDivision

(916)324‐[email protected]

20


California Environmental Protection Agency | AIR RESOURCES BOARD

TECHNICAL ADVISORY

Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure near High-Volume RoadwaysInfill development (the opposite of urban sprawl) provides many environmental and public health benefits. It promotes physical activity, which improves public health, and can reduce the length and number of driving trips that Californians must take to get where they need to go. This reduces health-damaging air pollution and greenhouse gases that cause climate change.

Many infill neighborhoods already exist in California, and more neighborhoods are likely to grow in this way because of local, regional, and statewide efforts to protect the environment and public health. However, Californians living and working in these neighborhoods may also spend more time near high-volume roadways where exposure to traffic pollution, air toxics, and noise can contribute to health problems like the worsening of asthma and other respiratory problems, cardiovascular disease and even premature death. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has developed a Technical Advisory that identifies effective strategies that planners and other land use decision-makers can implement locally and in the near-term to reduce exposure to near-roadway pollution as we pursue infill development while also protecting public health. These strategies complement the state’s many efforts to reduce air pollution from all sources, including cars and trucks.

Technical Advisory key findings:

The scientific literature supports seven effective strategies, divided into three categories:

Strategies that reduce

traffic emissions

1. Speed reduction mechanisms including roundabouts

2. Traffic signal management

3. Speed limit reductions on high-speed roadways (>55 mph)

Strategies that reduce

the concentration of

traffic pollution

4. Urban design that promotes air flow and reduces the concentration of pollution along street corridors

5. Solid barriers such as sound walls

6. Vegetation that reduces the concentration of pollution

Strategies that remove

pollution from indoor air7. Indoor high efficiency filtration that removes pollution from the air

Background and motivation for the Technical Advisory:

• Near-roadway pollution has well-documented health impacts.

• In 2005, the CARB wrote the “Land Use Handbook” with recommendations for siting and building new developments to be protective of public health, including siting schools, day care centers, playgrounds, and housing 500 feet or more from freeways, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day.

• Since 2005, research has shown that infill development leads to public health, climate, financial, and other benefits.

• Also, California has many policies and plans to reduce car and truck pollution statewide which are already improving air quality, but will take time before the benefits are achieved.

• New research shows that there are strategies that can be applied locally and in the near-term to reduce air pollution exposure and its health effects while we await the full benefits of statewide programs to reduce air pollution from cars and trucks.


REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 2

How should the Technical Advisory be used?

• The intended audience includes public health, air quality, and planning professionals and policy makers, among other key stakeholders.

• Users can reference the Technical Advisory when developing local policies aimed at reducing exposure to traffic emissions and when weighing multiple options to reduce emissions and/or exposure at a specific site.

• CARB hopes that the Technical Advisory will increase awareness of the need for strategies that will protect public health while we also make strides to reduce the need for driving which has environmental and public health benefits, including reducing regional air pollution.

For more information:

Visit CARB’s webpage on community health and land use at: arb.ca.gov/ch/landuse.htm And CARB’s webpage on public health and the built environment at: arb.ca.gov/research/vprp/vprp.htm

What research is CARB doing in this area?

CARB is currently involved in many projects related to the interactions among air pollution, sustainable community design, and health. For a list of completed and ongoing sustainable communities research projects, visit: arb.ca.gov/research/sustainable/sustainable.htm.

To search for related research projects, visit: arb.ca.gov/research/research.htm.

To obtain this document in an alternative format or language please contact the CARB Helpline at (800) 242-4450 or at [email protected]. TTY/TDD/ Speech to Speech users may dial 711 for the California Relay Service.

PO BOX 2815 SACRAMENTO CA 95812 (800) 242-4450www.arb.ca.gov REVISED 04/24/17


https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/landuse.htm

https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/vprp/vprp.htm

http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/sustainable/sustainable.htm

https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/research.htm

California Environmental Protection Agency | AIR RESOURCES BOARD

ASESORAMIENTO TÉCNICO

Estrategias para reducir la exposición a la contaminación del aire cerca de vías con alto tráfico vehicularLa construcción en terrenos baldíos ofrece una variedad de beneficios ambientales y de salud pública. Promueve las actividades físicas que mejoran la salud pública y puede reducir la cantidad de viajes en auto que los californianos realizan para llegar a sus destinos. Esta práctica reduce la contaminación del aire que afecta a la salud y los gases de efecto invernadero que contribuyen al cambio climático.

En California existen muchos vecindarios con terrenos baldíos y cada vez hay más vecindarios que pueden desarrollarse de esta manera por intermedio de esfuerzos locales, regionales y estatales para proteger al medio ambiente y la salud pública. Aun así, los californianos que viven y trabajan en estos vecindarios podrían estar expuestos a la contaminación generada por el tráfico vehicular y el ruido. Esto puede contribuir a problemas de salud que empeoran los síntomas de problemas respiratorios como el asma, enfermedades cardiovasculares e incluso la muerte prematura. El Consejo de Recursos del Aire de California (CARB, siglas en inglés) redactó el Asesoramiento Técnico (Technical Advisory, en inglés) en el que se identifican las estrategias efectivas para que los urbanistas y los encargados de tomar decisiones sobre el uso de las tierras puedan implementar estrategias a nivel local y a corto plazo para reducir la exposición a la contaminación cerca de las vías de tráfico. Al mismo tiempo, nos enfocamos en la construcción en terrenos baldíos y se protege la salud pública. Estas estrategias son un complemento a los esfuerzos del estado para reducir la contaminación del aire proveniente de todas las fuentes, incluyendo los autos y camiones.

Los resultados claves del “Technical Advisory”:

El lenguaje científico respalda siete estrategias efectivas que se dividen en tres categorías:

Estrategias que reducen

las emisiones del tráfico

1. Mecanismos de reducción rápida que incluyen las rotondas

2. Mejor uso de las señales de tráfico

3. Reducciones del límite de velocidad en las autopistas (>55 mph)

Estrategias que reducen

la concentración de la

contaminación del tráfico

4. Diseño urbano que promueve el flujo de aire y reduce la concentración de la contaminación en las calles y corredores

5. Uso de barreras sólidas como las paredes que reducen el ruido

6. Vegetación que reduce la concentración de la contaminación

Estrategias que remueven

la contaminación de los

interiores

7. Filtros de alta eficiencia que remueven la contaminación del aire

Antecedentes y motivos para redactar el “Technical Advisory”:

• Existe documentación fiable sobre los impactos a la salud causados por la contaminación en áreas cercanas a las vías de tráfico.

• En 2005, CARB escribió el Manual de Uso de Tierras (Land Use Handbook, en inglés) con recomendaciones para la ubicación de escuelas, centros de cuidado de niños, parques de juego infantiles a 500 pies o más de las autopistas y caminos urbanos con 100,000 vehículos al día o caminos urbanos con 50,000 vehículos al día.

• Desde 2005, las investigaciones indican que la construcción en terrenos baldíos conducen a una mejor salud pública, clima, economía entre otros beneficios.


REY

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 3

• A su vez, California cuenta con muchas políticas y planes a nivel estatal para reducir la contaminación causada por los autos y camiones los cuales ya están mejorando la calidad del aire, pero tomará tiempo para alcanzar todos los beneficios.

• Estudios nuevos demuestran que hay estrategias que pueden ser aplicadas a nivel local y a corto plazo para reducir la exposición a la contaminación y el efecto causado a la salud mientras que esperamos alcanzar todos los beneficios que ofrecen los programas estatales para reducir la contaminación causada por los autos y camiones.

¿Cómo se debe utilizar el “Technical Advisory”?

• La audiencia para este documento incluye el sector de la salud pública, calidad del aire, profesionales de planificación, legisladores y otras partes interesadas.

• Los usuarios pueden utilizar este “Technical Advisory”: como referencia al momento de redactar políticas a nivel local enfocadas en reducir la exposición a las emisiones del tráfico y cuando ponen en la balanza las múltiples opciones para reducir las emisiones y/o la exposición en un lugar específico.

• CARB espera que este “Technical Advisory” aumente la conciencia por la necesidad de estrategias que protegen la salud pública mientras se logra reducir la necesidad de conducir, práctica que aporta beneficios ambientales y de salud pública, incluyendo la reducción de la contaminación del aire a nivel regional.

Para más información

Visite la página web de CARB sobre el uso de tierras y la salud comunitaria: arb.ca.gov/ch/landuse.htm Y la página de CARB sobre la salud pública y el ambiente edificado: arb.ca.gov/research/vprp/vprp.htm

¿Qué tipo de investigación se está realizando en tu área?

En estos momentos CARB está involucrado en diferentes proyectos relacionados a las interacciones entre la contaminación del aire, los diseños de comunidades sustentables y de salud. Para una lista completa de los proyectos comunitarios en curso visita: arb.ca.gov/research/sustainable/sustainable.htm.

Para buscar datos sobre proyectos de investigación visita: arb.ca.gov/research/research.htm.

Para obtener este documento en un formato o idioma alternativo, favor de contactar la línea de ayuda de CARB al (800) 242-4450 o a [email protected]. TTY/TTD/Speech to Speech usuarios pueden marcar el 711 para el servicio de retransmisión de California.

PO BOX 2815 SACRAMENTO CA 95812 (800) 242-4450www.arb.ca.gov REVISED 04/26/17




REGULAR MEETING ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT ......REGULAR MEETING Thursday, July 6, 2017 10:00 a.m. –...

Documents

Transcript of REGULAR MEETING ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT ......REGULAR MEETING Thursday, July 6, 2017 10:00 a.m. –...