HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-08-07; SANDAG Draft 2025 Regional Plan Comment Letter (Districts - All); Gomez, PazTo the members of the:
CITY COUNCIL
Date~Fi\2.s-CA ✓ cc✓
CM ✓A(M ✓ocM (3) _.JC --
August 7, 2025
Council Memorandum
{cityof
Carlsbad
Memo ID# 2025046
To: Honorable Mayor Blackburn and Members of the City Council
From: Paz Gomez, Deputy City Manager, Public Works
Via: Sheila Cobian, Assistant City Manager
Re: SANDAG Draft 2025 Regional Plan Co ment Letter (Districts-All)
This memorandum provides information on staff's recent comment letter (Attachment A) on
the San Diego Association of Governments (SAN DAG) Draft 2025 Regional Plan.
Background
The Regional Plan is a long range (25-year) planning document that guides future
transportation investments based on regional goals and projected funding. Federal and state
regulations require SAN DAG to update the Regional Plan every four years. The plan addresses
transportation, housing, land use and climate change goals. The most recent Regional Plan was
adopted in 2021. As part ofthe latest update cycle, SAN DAG officially published the
Draft 2025 Regional Plan for public review and comment from May 26, 2025, to July 18, 2025.
In response to the public review period, staff submitted a formal comment letter to SAN DAG
dated July 18, 2025 (Attachment A). Because the Draft 2025 Regional Plan outlines regional
transportation priorities, the city has a vested interest in ensuring the plan reflects local input,
supports effective project implementation, and aligns with Carlsbad's transportation and
sustainability goals.
Discussion
The following key comments summarize staffs comments on the Draft 2025 Regional Plan. For
more details, please refer to the attached comment letter.
• The city urges prioritization of improving the Interstate Highway 5 (1-5)/State Route 78
(SR-78) interchange to relieve congestion and improve safety on local streets.
• The city requests greater transparency and access to detailed land use and
transportation modeling data to ensure alignment with local plans.
• Carlsbad emphasizes the need to address unresolved issues from the North County
Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan (CMCP), particularly on project priorities and
transit recommendations.
• Carlsbad requests more clarity on how transportation funding will be distributed
regionally to ensure equitable investment in the North County.
Public Works Branch
Transportation Department
1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 442-339-2746 t
Council Memo-SAN DAG Draft 2025 Regional Plan Comment Letter (Districts -All)
August 7, 2025
Page 2
• Proposed rapid bus routes do not align with Carlsbad land use context and bus ridership
trends observed in the city. The city recommends increased investment In flexible
mobility options that better match local needs.
• The Regional Plan should fund retrofits at freeway interchanges to improve safety for
pedestrians and cyclists and allow flexibility in bikeway design standards.
• The Regional Plan should better reflect regional climate planning efforts, use updated
emissions models and incorporate new wildlife risk data.
Next Steps
SAN DAG anticipates releasing the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Draft 2025
Regional Plan in late summer 2025, followed by a 45-day public comment period. The SAN DAG
Board of Directors is expected to consider the Final 2025 Regional Plan and Final EIR for
adoption and certification, respectively, in December 2025.
City staff will continue to review all plan-related materials and provide recommended changes
during key milestones. Staff will also actively participate in the SAN DAG working groups to help
develop a fiscally responsible, safety-focused, sustainable and context-sensitive plan, reflective
of local and regional collaboration.
Attachment: A. Carlsbad comment letter to SAN DAG dated July 18, 2025
cc: Geoff Patnoe, City Manager
Cindie McMahon, City Attorney
Gary Barberio, Deputy City Manager, Community Services
Laura Rocha, Deputy City Manager, Administrative Services
Christie Calderwood, Police Chief
Michael Calderwood, Fire Chief
Nick Ordille, Acting Fire Chief
Reid Shipley, Acting Police Chief
Tim Lyons, Assistant City Attorney
Dalton Sorich, Assistant City Attorney
Tom Frank, Transportation Director/City Engineer
Jason Haber, Intergovernmental Affairs Director
Zach Korach, Finance Director
Jeff Murphy, Community Development Director
Amy Ventetuolo, Communication & Engagement Director
James Wood, Environmental Sustainability Director
Mike Strong, Assistant Director of Community Development
Darcy Davidson, Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Jason Arnotti, Lieutenant
Eric Lardy, City Planner
Nathan Schmidt, Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager
Robert Efird 111, Principal Planner
Transportation & Community Development Departments
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 442-339-2600 t
July 18, 2025
SANDAG Draft 2025 Regional Plan
Attn: Sara Toma Ischep
San Diego Association of Governments
1011 Union Street, Suite 400
San Diego CA 92101
Via: regionalplan@sandag.org
RE: CITY OF CARLSBAD COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2025 REGIONAL PLAN
Dear Ms. Ischep:
The City of Carlsbad appreciates the opportunity to comment on the draft 2025 Regional Plan (Plan),
which plays a key role in guiding the next phase of regional growth and transportation investment
across San Diego County. A well-executed plan that carefully considers local agency feedback can help
improve transportation choices, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and enhance quality of life for all
residents. As a local agency responsible for delivering key components of the transportation network,
such as pedestrian, bike, and local transit connections, the city emphasizes the importance of
transparency and public input throughout the planning process, especially when considering
environmental, cumulative, and off-site impacts tied to implementation.
Carlsbad staff reviewed the draft 2025 Regional Plan with a focus on how it aligns with our local policies,
priorities, and community feedback. We appreciate the conversations we’ve had with SANDAG staff
during development of the Plan and the regional model. We also want to thank SANDAG for presenting
the Plan to our Traffic Safety and Mobility Commission on June 2, 2025. Comments from that meeting,
including public feedback, are included as Attachment 1.
Additionally, we’ve re-submitted comments from our March 2023 review of the North County
Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan (Attachment 2), since many of those concerns were not
addressed in the final document. These comments remain directly relevant to the Draft Regional Plan, as
the NC-CMCP serves as a foundational document for shaping transportation priorities and
recommendations in North County. Since the Regional Plan builds on the NC-CMCP, it’s important that
unresolved issues such as local project priorities, transit recommendations, and corridor-specific
concerns are revisited and considered.
We’ve outlined our key comments below, organized into land use and growth, air quality, and
transportation.
General Feedback
•For digital versions of the Plan, please provide PDF bookmarks
•Please provide a list of Figures and Tables
ATTACHMENT A {city of
Carlsbad
City of Carlsbad Comments on the Draft 2025 Regional Plan
July 18, 2025
Page 2
Housing and Growth
• Chapter 2: The city acknowledges the Plan statement in Chapter 2 that the “Series 15 Forecast is
in alignment with each jurisdiction’s adopted General Plan.” However, the existing growth
projection maps in the Plan and its appendices are not granular enough for Carlsbad to confirm
that the modeled growth areas align with the land use restrictions and growth potential input
provided by the city.
• Appendix F: Please provide a summary of land use inputs provided by member agencies to the
land use model and the action taken in response to each.
• Appendix F: Throughout the review process, member agency staff were told that detailed
modeling/Plan information would be made available for review, comment, and verification. This
occurred during the land use model baseline stage in Summer 2023 using the land use web app
tool provided by SANDAG; however, information regarding modeling outputs was only provided
at the jurisdiction level thereafter. More localized/granular detail is needed for jurisdictions to
verify modeling assumptions and outputs. In particular:
o At the December 18, 2023 and February 26, 2024 Series 15 Taskforce meetings and
again at the April 18, 2024 Sustainable Communities Working Group meeting SANDAG
staff indicated they would provide jurisdictions with detailed housing/population and
jobs information (including data tables at the MGRA scale) to review. Those materials
were not provided and do not appear to be part of the Plan materials made available for
public review. Carlsbad staff remain interested in receiving this information in order to
validate the underlying data and assumptions in the Plan.
• Appendix F: On page F.8, the report states that “During the process of developing the SCS Land
Use Pattern, it became clear that adjustments were needed for the cities of Coronado and
Solana Beach, where initial housing build-out estimates were below the cities' proposed or
adopted Housing Elements. For both cities, the build-out estimate for each city’s adopted
Housing Element was used to accommodate their 6th Cycle RHNA allocations.” What were these
adjustments and how did the post-adjustment land use model parameters remain consistent
with these cities’ General Plans?
• Appendix F: The city seeks clarity on the Plan’s underlying assumptions made for future growth
projections. What exactly are the “detailed assumptions” made in the Cohort Component
Model (CCM) in Appendix F related to fertility, mortality and migration? What evidence was
used to reach these conclusions (other than communications with economists and
demographers through Peer Review Panels (PRPs))? The city does not have adequate
information to fully comment on the accuracy of these assumptions.
• Appendix F: The text states, “Vacancy rates are assumed to stabilize at healthy levels, with 5%
for renters and 2% for homeowners.” Were these rates applied consistently across the county
through the plan’s forecast horizon or is this a summary statement generalizing the vacancy rate
data that is available on SANDAG’s Open Date Portal
(https://adlsdasadsprodpublicwest.z22.web.core.windows.net/datasurfer/sandag_forecast_15_
jurisdiction_carlsbad.pdf), which provides data by city and dwelling unit type (single family,
multiple family, and mobile home) through time (2022 – 2050)? If it is referring to the same
data, how did the plan categorize the dwelling unit types in terms of renters and homeowners?
o Appendix F did not provide a link or citation between the above referenced percentages
and the Regional Growth Forecast/Open Data Portal webpage, so staff were only aware
of this additional source of information from prior experience. Staff recommend that
the Plan include supporting details as requested above or at least provide directions to
City of Carlsbad Comments on the Draft 2025 Regional Plan
July 18, 2025
Page 3
the location of the requested information in supplemental documents and/or data
sources.
Air Quality
• Chapter 2: The Environment section does not include any information on SANDAG’s regional
climate planning efforts. SANDAG’s role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the region
directly correlates to the implementation of local agencies’ Climate Action Plans, particularly
with measures and actions related to on-road transportation, as is highlighted in Chapter 4.
Please include reference to this work.
• Appendix G: Please provide more discussion as to why EMFAC2017 was used to develop the on-
road transportation emissions projections in the regional inventory. As written, it is difficult to
understand why the best available data of a more current model year (e.g., EMFAC2021,
EMFAC2025) was not utilized, especially when the off-model calculators use EMFAC2021.
• Please include a graphic version of the 2022 greenhouse gas inventory. For example, the 2022
information included in Table G.3 could also be presented as a pie chart. This would make it
easier to read.
Fire:
• Appendix D: Includes a brief discussion on risks due to wildfire. With the recent release of the
state’s new Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps, it would seem appropriate for the appendix to
acknowledge the maps in its analysis and the expansion of areas prone to wildfire risk.
Additionally, would the new maps impact any Plan objectives?
• The paragraph on page R.4 describing the County Consolidated Fire Code could be clarified. Not
all jurisdictions within San Diego County adopt the County’s Consolidated Fire Code. However,
all jurisdictions across California are required to adhere to the California Fire Code (CFC) and the
California Building Code (CBC). Additionally, beginning January 1, 2026, the new California
Wildland-Urban Interface Code (CWUIC) will also be in effect statewide. This new code should
be acknowledged as part of the regulatory framework guiding fire-safe planning and
infrastructure design moving forward.
Transportation
• Chapters 2 & 3: Data Transparency and Modeling Assumptions: The plan indicates that the
activity-based model (ABM-3) demonstrates compliance with greenhouse gas (GHG) targets set
by CARB under SB 375, achieving a 19.3% reduction by 2035 (Chapter 2, pg. 17; Chapter 3, pg.
30). However, the specific modeling outputs and assumptions used in ABM-3 are not included or
summarized in the plan or appendices. Without access to these underlying data, local
jurisdictions cannot adequately evaluate how the model’s outputs support project prioritization,
travel mode shifts, or VMT reductions.
• Lack of Transparency in Public Input Integration: While Chapter 2 (pg. 20) and Appendix J
describe the outreach efforts conducted during plan development, the plan does not clearly
document how comments from cities like Carlsbad were considered or incorporated. There is no
visible response matrix or tracking of public input that allows jurisdictions to evaluate whether
their concerns meaningfully shaped the plan recommendations.
• We also anticipate providing follow-up comments related to fire planning and resilience at a
later date.
City of Carlsbad Comments on the Draft 2025 Regional Plan
July 18, 2025
Page 4
Freeways:
• Chapter 2 & Appendix A: Prioritize the I-5/SR-78 Interchange Improvement Project to Address
Regional and Local Congestion: The I-5/SR-78 interchange in Oceanside remains a significant
regional bottleneck, relying on a signalized intersection that causes frequent delays and
backups. This congestion leads to increased cut-through traffic on Carlsbad’s local arterial
streets as drivers seek alternative routes. As a result, streets providing access to Carlsbad
schools experience higher volumes of unnecessary regional traffic, creating avoidable safety
risks for students and families walking or biking. Prioritizing this project would improve traffic
operations along both I-5 and SR-78, while also reducing pressure on local streets and enhancing
safety near schools and in residential areas. We strongly recommend SANDAG elevate this
project’s importance in the Regional Plan and prioritize implementation in collaboration with
Caltrans.
Transit:
• Chapter 1 & 2: One-Size-Fits-All Transit Strategy Ignores North County Context: The plan
envisions significant expansion of regional transit services, including 35 new Rapid bus routes
and major rail upgrades (Chapter 1, pg. 6; Chapter 2, pg. 24). While this may be appropriate in
dense urban areas, it does not reflect the development pattern of Carlsbad and much of North
County, which has been shaped by suburban, auto-oriented land use over the past 60 years. A
more context sensitive approach is needed, one that includes greater investment in flexible
mobility services, roadway safety projects, and key freeway interchanges like I-5/SR-78.
• Chapter 2 pages 22-24 and Appendix A- Rapid Routes in Carlsbad, Request for Clarification and
Concern Over Roadway Impacts: The City of Carlsbad does not support the implementation of
new Rapid bus routes in Carlsbad as outlined in the Regional Plan. While these services may be
suitable in denser urban environments, they may not be appropriate given Carlsbad’s suburban
land use patterns, travel behavior, and existing roadway design. In reviewing the Plan, it is
unclear what local changes would be needed to accommodate these services.
We request clarification on the following:
o What physical changes to the roadway would be required? For example, will the
implementation involve the removal of travel lanes, medians, or on-street parking?
o How would the Rapid routes affect local traffic circulation and the city’s Complete
Streets objectives?
o Are bus-only lanes, flexible-use lanes, or signal pre-emption required to operate these
routes effectively? If so, what analysis has been done to assess the impact on traffic
operations, emergency vehicle access, and public safety?
The Plan briefly references transit priority features such as “bus guideways” and “Smart
Intersection Systems” (Chapter 2, pp. 22–24), but does not provide sufficient detail about
whether these include transit signal pre-emption or bus-only lanes, nor where they would be
located. These types of treatments could significantly impact local control over roadway
operations. The City requests that any such features be clearly identified, justified, and
coordinated with local agencies prior to implementation.
• Microtransit and Flexible Fleets Underemphasized: Flexible Fleets, such as microtransit and
neighborhood electric vehicle services, are briefly mentioned (Chapter 2, pg. 24), and the plan
notes SANDAG’s partnerships on programs like the Carlsbad Connector. However, there is no
clear funding commitment or regional implementation strategy. This is a missed opportunity.
Flexible Fleets can improve equity, reduce per-rider subsidies, and serve areas where fixed-route
City of Carlsbad Comments on the Draft 2025 Regional Plan
July 18, 2025
Page 5
transit is infeasible. Given the growing cost of traditional transit services (e.g., COASTER
subsidies rising from $8 to $53 per rider from 2012–2022 based on NCTD data), we urge
SANDAG to prioritize these alternatives in the funding and implementation framework (Chapter
4, pg. 41).
• Regional Transit Performance and Travel Time Competitiveness: Long travel times and lack of
last-mile connectivity remain barriers to transit use in North County. While the plan references
regional rail upgrades (Chapter 2, pg. 24), it does not provide benchmarks for how service
changes will improve speed, reliability, or competitiveness with other modes that would results
in actual mode shift throughout the region. More analysis is needed to demonstrate that
proposed investments will attract meaningful ridership in lower-density areas.
• Chapter 3 Transit Improvements: The City recommends that future transit investments prioritize
grade separation projects before pursuing additional double tracking. Grade separation
enhances safety, reduces delays, and improves traffic flow at crossings. These benefits should
align with regional goals and OCTA’s Bridges Railroad Grade Separation Program.
Active Transportation
• Chapter 2 and Appendices A and K – Freeway Interchanges and Active Transportation Gaps: The
Draft Plan highlights the importance of expanding the region’s active transportation network,
but it does not directly address one of the most common and critical barriers to walking and
biking throughout the region being freeway interchanges. These locations often lack safe
crossings, have high-speed vehicle movements, and create uncomfortable or disconnected links
in otherwise continuous active transportation routes. In Carlsbad the I-5 freeway is a major
barrier to east – west active transportation connections.
We recommend the Plan includes a specific strategy and dedicated funding for retrofitting
freeway interchanges to improve safety and comfort for people walking and biking.
To better understand the intent of the Plan, we request clarification on the following:
• Does the Plan identify freeway interchanges as active transportation barriers in any of the
performance evaluations or project development criteria?
• Are there any funded projects within Appendix A or Appendix K that include interchange
retrofits or overcrossing enhancements for active modes?
• How does SANDAG intend to prioritize safety improvements at these locations, especially in
areas identified as part of the Regional Bikeway Network?
• Appendix K Active Transportation: The draft Plan requires that all SANDAG-funded regional
bikeways use the facility types recommended in the NACTO Designing for All Ages & Abilities
guide, as referenced in Appendix K, Figure K.4. While NACTO provides a good overview of
bikeway types and design considerations, it is inherently broad and primarily geared toward
dense, urban settings, which may not align with the suburban, mixed-use, and corridor-specific
conditions found throughout North County and Carlsbad.
The NACTO guide itself emphasizes that local context matters, including factors like street
width, traffic volumes, driveway patterns, parking needs, intersection safety, and community
input. For instance, a Class IV separated bikeway may satisfy default selection criteria, but it
could create new safety challenges, such as poor visibility at intersections or driveways,
disruption to parking and curb access, or conflicts with residential and commercial frontages.
Recommendation:
City of Carlsbad Comments on the Draft 2025 Regional Plan
July 18, 2025
Page 6
o The NACTO guide should be used as a reference or consideration only, not as a blanket
requirement. The ultimate selection and design of bikeway facilities should be
determined by local agencies based on site-specific conditions and community input,
including recommendations from recent active transportation or mobility master plans
developed through robust public engagement. This approach will help ensure that
regional investments result in facilities that are both safe and context-sensitive for the
communities they serve.
Transportation Funding and Prioritization
• Funding Allocation and Prioritization: The plan estimates total expenditures of $125.5 billion
(Chapter 4, Table 4.2), yet it lacks detail on how funding is geographically distributed,
particularly among subregions. North County stakeholders are concerned that the proposed
project list and phasing schedules do not reflect equitable prioritization, despite growing
population, congestion, and infrastructure needs. More transparency is needed on how funding
will be allocated and what criteria were used to sequence investments.
If you have any questions related to comments on the transportation network, please contact Tom
Frank, Transportation Director/City Engineer, at Tom.Frank@carlsbadca.gov or, if you need additional
information related to comments on the land use assumptions, please contact Eric Lardy, City Planner,
at Eric.Lardy@carlsbadca.gov.
Sincerely,
TOM FRANK
Transportation Director/City Engineer
Attachments:
1. June 2, 2025, City of Carlsbad Traffic Safety and Mobility Commission meeting minutes (includes
comments provided on the Draft 2025 Regional Plan)
2. March 12, 2023, City of Carlsbad comments on the North County Comprehensive Multimodal
Corridor Plan
cc: Geoff Patnoe, City Manager
Cindie McMahon, City Attorney
Sheila Cobian, Assistant City Manager
Tim Lyons, Assistant City Attorney
Gary Barberio, Deputy City Manager, Community Services
Paz Gomez, Deputy City Manager, Public Works
Mike Strong, Assistant Community Development Director
Eric Lardy, City Planner
Nathan Schmidt, Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager
Jason Geldert, Engineering Manager
Robert Efird, Principal Planner
Scott Donnell, Senior Planner
Katie Hentrich, Senior Program Manager
Alex Patterson, Assistant Planner
TRAFFIC SAFETY & MOBILITY COMMISSION Council Chamber
Ml• nutes 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
June 2, 2025, 4 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER: 4:03p.m.
ROLL CALL: Coelho, Penseyres, Newlands, Kohl, Nicholes, Schuck.
Absent: Proulx.
INVOCATION: None.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chair Coelho led the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of Regular Meeting held on May 5, 2025.
Motion by Commissioner Nicholes, seconded by Commissioner Newlands, to approve the
minutes of the Regular Meeting held on May 5, 2025, as presented. Motion carried, 6/0/l{Proulx
-Absent).
PRESENTATIONS: None.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Bret Schanzenbach spoke about parking tickets for commercial vehicles. He requested that an
item be agendized to address the current parking policies and how they can be expanded to
accommodate commercial vehicles.
Christina McGoldrick thanked the Commission for their work to improve traffic safety throughout
the city.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. EL CAMINO REAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS FROM ARENAL ROAD TO LA COSTA AVENUE,
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NO. 6051: Support staff's recommendation to
the City Council to approve the plans and specifications of the El Camino Real Widening from
Arenal Road to La Costa Avenue Project, Capital Improvement Program Project No. 6051.
(Staff contact: Brandon Miles, Public Works Department)
Associate Engineer Brandon Miles reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the
Office of the City Clerk).
The Commission received the PowerPoint presentation by Associate Engineer Miles.
June 2, 2025 Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Regular Meeting Page 2
Christina McGoldrick expressed her concerns regarding the potential safety impacts to
students traveling to/from Sage Creek High School that may be created during
construction.
In response to Commissioner Kohl's inquiry regarding the removal of the safe route to
school, City Traffic Engineer John Kim confirmed that staff would look into options to
accommodate a bicycle path during construction.
In response to Vice-Chair Penseyres' inquiry regarding whether the "Keep Clear" signs
near the intersection of El Camino Real and Arena! Road will be removed, City Traffic
Engineer Kim confirmed that the "Keep Clear" signs will remain and explained that the
traffic signals for that intersection are connected to the fire trucks exiting from the fire
station.
In response to Vice-Chair Penseyres' concerns regarding the lack of space for a bike lane
during construction, Associate Engineer Miles responded that he anticipates there to be
more space available for bike lanes during construction.
Motion by Commissioner Kohl, seconded by Commissioner Schuck, to approve Consent
Calendar Item No. 1. Motion carried, 6/0/1 (Proulx -Absent}.
2. AVENIDA ENCINAS COASTAL RAIL TRAIL AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS -SEGMENT 3:
Support staff's recommendation to the City Council to approve the plans and specifications
of the Avenida Encinas Coastal Rail Trail and Pedestrian Improvements -Segment 3, Capital
Improvement Program Project No. 6004. (Staff Contact: Brandon Miles, Public Works
Department}
Associate Engineer Brandon Miles reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the
Office of the City Clerk}.
The Commission received the PowerPoint presentation by Associate Engineer Miles.
In response to Vice-Chair Penseyres' inquiry regarding the green painted bike lanes, City
Traffic Engineer Kim responded that staff would take another look at the right-turn from
Avenida Encinas into Embarcadero Lane.
Motion by Vice-Chair Penseyres, seconded by Commissioner Newlands, to approve
Consent Calendar Item No. 2 with the alteration that staff evaluate the feasibility of a
right-turn only lane into the Carlsbad Poinsettia Station. Motion carried, 6/0/1 (Proulx -
Absent}.
PUBLIC HEARING: None.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS:
June 2, 2025 Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Regular Meeting Page 3
3. SANDAG 2025 REGIONAL PLAN UPDATE: Receive a presentation from SANDAG staff on the
2025 Regional Plan Update. (Staff Contact: Nathan Schmidt, Public Works Department)
Recommended Action: Receive the presentation.
SANDAG's Deputy Director of Mobility Planning Jennifer Williamson reviewed a
PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk).
The Commission received a PowerPoint presentation by SANDAG's Deputy Director of
Mobility Planning Williamson.
Christina McGoldrick spoke in support of the North County Highway Project.
In response to Commissioner Schuck's inquiry regarding how rapid routes were selected,
SANDAG's Deputy Director of Mobility Planning Williamson responded that various
factors were taken into consideration including SANDAG's travel model, commuter
surveys, streetlight data, and high-performing bus routes.
In response to Commissioner Nicholes' inquiry regarding whether microtransit is the only
method to get to the rapid routes, SANDAG's Deputy Director of Mobility Planning
Williamson responded that the Active Transportation Plan will provide improvements
that will enable enhanced bicycle and pedestrian connections, in addition to the
microtransit, to get to the rapid routes.
In response to Commissioner Kohl's inquiry regarding funding, SANDAG's Deputy
Director of Mobility Planning Williamson explained that Regional Plan is based on a
funding scenario that incorporates various sources, including federal, state, and local
funding, sales tax, and outside revenue.
In response to Commissioner Newlands' comment that he would like SAN DAG to provide
more attention to railway improvements, SANDAG's Deputy Director of Mobility Planning
Williamson confirmed that there are multiple plans and projects to improve the railway.
In response to Vice-Chair Penseyres' inquiry regarding SANDAG's plan to assist in
lowering the train tracks, SANDAG's Deputy Director of Mobility Planning Williamson
explained that SAN DAG is currently working on grade separation criteria to help prioritize
the grade separation requests across the region.
Vice-Chair Penseyres commented that "protected bike lanes" is not an appropriate term
and should be referred to as "separated bikeways" or "cycle tracks."
Vice-Chair Penseyres commented that Class IV bikeways are optional for cyclists to use
and are not considered part of the roadway. As a result, when a collision occurs between
a vehicle and a bicycle within a Class IV bikeway, it is often not included in official crash
reports, since the incident is technically not considered to have occurred in the roadway.
June 2, 2025 Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Regular Meeting Page 4
In response to Chair Coelho's inquiry regarding whether SANDAG has any influence on
city bikeway projects, SANDAG's Deputy Director of Mobility Planning Williamson
responded that SAN DAG can only make recommendations unless it is a regional bikeway
project. She recommended that SANDAG receive these comments in writing on the
Regional Plan.
In response to Chair Coelho's inquiry regarding whether there is an efficiency evaluation
to determine the most effective way to reduce vehicle miles traveled, SANDAG's Deputy
Director of Mobility Planning Williamson responded that public transit is the most
efficient way to reduce vehicle miles traveled.
In response to Chair Coelho's inquiry regarding whether SAN DAG has looked into funding
school buses as a way to reduce vehicle miles traveled, SANDAG's Deputy Director of
Mobility Planning Williamson explained that any funding received from the Federal
Transit Administration prohibits direct school transportation.
In response to Chair Coelho's inquiry regarding transit ridership, SANDAG's Deputy
Director of Mobility Planning Williamson responded that San Diego Metropolitan Transit
System currently has the best recovery in the nation.
In response to Commissioner Kohl's inquiry regarding whether the Coaster ridership has
returned to pre-COVID levels, SANDAG's Deputy Director of Mobility Planning Williamson
responded that it has not.
4. 2025 STREETS RESURFACING PROJECT, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NO.
6001-25: Support staff's recommendation to the City Council to approve the plans for the
2025 Streets Resurfacing Project, Capital Improvement Program Project No. 6001-25, as a
part of the Pavement Management Program. (Staff Contact: Eddie Wills and Hossein Ajideh,
Public Works Department)
Recommended Action: Support staff's recommendation.
Associate Engineer Eddie Wills and Engineering Manager Hossein Ajideh reviewed a
PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk).
The Commission received the PowerPoint presentation by Associate Engineer Wills and
Engineering Manager Ajideh.
In response to Commissioner Schuck's inquiry regarding the first bullet point on Slide 5,
Engineering Manager Ajideh explained that it should list Highway 78 instead of Interstate
5.
In response to Commissioner Kohl's inquiry regarding additional miles of roadway that
will need to be repaired outside of this project's scope and how it will be funded,
Engineering Manager Ajideh explained that the pavement management program is a
June 2, 2025 Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Regular Meeting Page 5
system used to maintain the city's street infrastructure, consisting of 350 center miles, in
a cost-effective manner based on an annual budget. He further explained that slurry seals
last around seven to ten years, dependent on various factors, and overlays last around
20 to 25 years.
In response to Vice-Chair Penseyres' inquiry regarding whether intersections are
included in the slurry seal and restriping, Associate Engineer Wills confirmed that most
of the intersections along Palomar Airport Road and the intersections at the northern
and southern limits of El Camino Real will be overlayed and restriped.
Motion by Vice-Chair Penseyres, seconded by Commissioner Schuck, to support staff's
recommendation to the City Council to approve the plans for the 2025 Streets
Resurfacing Project, Capital Improvement Program Project No. 6001-25, as a part of the
Pavement Management Program. Motion carried, 6/0/1 (Proulx -Absent).
COMMISSION COMMENTARY AND REQUESTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS: In response
to Commissioner Kohl's inquiry regarding whether 3-4 seconds could be added to the green
segment of the traffic signal cycle at the intersection of El Camino Real and Arenal Road, City
Traffic Engineer Kim responded that he would take a look and follow up.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: This section of the Agenda is designated for announcements to advise the
community regarding events that Members of the Commission have been invited to, and may
participate in. No announcements were made.
STAFF COMMENTS: Transportation Planning & Mobility Manager Schmidt spoke about the public
comment received earlier in the meeting regarding parking for commercial vehicles. He
confirmed that the Chamber of Commerce and business owners have been in contact with staff
and are working with the Economic Development Department and Police Department to address
their concerns. An item will be brought to the Commission in the future.
ADJOURNMENT: 5:56 p.m.
Secretary
From:Steve Linke
To:Traffic; Nathan Schmidt
Subject:6/2/2025 Item #3: SANDAG Draft 2025 Regional Plan (protected bike lanes)
Date:Monday, June 2, 2025 2:22:52 AM
Attachments:rc000lADWdyqSjTI.png
Carlsbad traffic commission:
The SANDAG Draft 2025 Regional Plan, Appendix K (Active Transportation), includes the followingstatement: "To support safer streets for all users, the updated Regional Active Transportation Networkin the 2025 Regional Plan will be built for All Ages & Abilities, consistent with the NationalAssociation of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Contextual Guidance for Selecting All Ages &Abilities Bikeways."
The NACTO guidance is then presented in Figure K.4 (appended below), which places an enormousemphasis on "Protected Bicycle Lanes" (PBLs) to the exclusion of most other approaches on streets otherthan local neighborhood streets. PBLs typically include plastic flexible posts and, often, asphalt wheel stopsin the buffer areas with which cyclists can collide.
With the above-cited language and Figure K.4, SANDAG appears to be promoting an inappropriate mandatefor local jurisdictions to follow NACTO's guidance to build extensive PBLSs, which Carlsbad has thus farrejected and instead opted for buffered Class II bike lanes. Local jurisdictions should be able to maketheir own decisions on how to create safe bikeways, so the language and figure should be removed, orat least changed to make it clear that the NACTO guidance is not mandatory.
In announcing its latest 2025 bikeway guidance, NACTO made the following claim: "Protected bike lanesare appropriate for all streets, in all contexts." This type of unsupported, absolutist claim is pure marketingand not consistent with data-driven decision-making or critical thinking. Multiple bike fatalities and seriousinjuries in PBLs in Encinitas and Del Mar over the past few years have almost certainly arisen due to thepresence of PBL infrastructure, so it is a dangerous myth that they are always safer, particularly in areas withhigh concentrations of driveways and/or intersections.
Despite these types of safety marketing claims by organizations such as NACTO and the Federal HighwayAdministration (FHWA), the research behind the safety of PBLs is actually quite weak and inconclusive. Forexample, there is an often-cited FHWA statistic that PBLs reduce bicycle crashes by "up to 53%." However,the 2023 study behind that claim has several fatal flaws, such as:
The safety findings failed when the entire PBL "corridors" were studied. It only worked whenintersection crashes were excluded and only crashes within the street segments between them wereconsidered.Of the three cities modeled, only one (San Francisco, CA) showed a statistically significant crashreduction, while the other two (Cambridge, MA and Seattle, WA) did not. In fact, for Seattle (by farthe largest dataset of the three), the PBLs trended to reduce safety in many cases.Even the San Francisco data is suspect, because the most common bike crashes (solo ones) tend not tobe reported in PBLs in California. So, the alleged safety improvement may be largely or entirelydue to reduced reporting--not reduced crashes.
I conducted an analysis of the PBLs that replaced buffered Class II bike lanes on South Coast Highway inEncinitas in 2020. When crash data was collected from both police reports and emergency vehicle dispatchlogs (57 months of data both before and after), bike crashes were 50% higher after the PBLs wereinstalled--including both a fatality and several serious injuries. In addition, there were around 20 additionalunreported bike crashes in those PBLs, which directly involved the PBL infrastructure. In contrast, for acontrol corridor of equal length on South Coast Highway just to the north, which retained its Class II bikelanes, the crash frequency remained unchanged between the "before" and "after" study periods.
Official-sounding organizations like NACTO and FHWA publish or cite many transportation studies to
•
•
•
support their safety marketing claims. But when many of the underlying studies are actually scrutinized, thecredibility of the claims is severely compromised. Unfortunately, it is easy for local jurisdictions andregional planning organizations to fall into the trap of citing these claims.
Best regards,Steve LinkeCarlsbad, CA
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Figure K.4: NACTO's Contextual Guidance for Selecting Ail Ages & Abilities
Bikeways
,__ __________ R~o_a_dw_a_y_c_o_n_te_~~L __________ ...,AII Ages & Abilities
Bicycle Facility Target Motor
Vellkte Speed' Torget Motor Velil<le Motor Vehtde Lanes Key Operational Considerations Volume (ACT)
At~ofrhefoUowing: high curbside
Any Any -,cHvlty. frequent buses, motor
vehicle congestion. or turning
conflicts::
< 10 mph Le~ relevant Pedestrians share the roadw.,y
No centerllne, or
S:20mph 51,000 -2,000 single lane one•way ..: so motor 'Vthicles ptr hour in t!hr.
S 500 -1.500 peak direction at peak hour
s 1,500 -3,000
Single lane each
s-25 mph > 3.000-6,000 Clirect1on, or slngle
lane-one•Wlt)' low curbside activity, or low
congestion pressure
Greater than 6,000
Multip1e tanes per Any direction
Single lane each
direction
~ 6,000 Low curbside act1vlty, or low
Greater than 26 Multiple lane~ per cooges!lon pressure
mph! direction
Greater than 6,000 Any Any
High'"')peed limited accen ro,dways, High pedestrfan volume
natural corridors, or geographic edge Arty
conditions with Jimited conflicts
Low pedestrfan voltJ.me
Source: NACTO
Sh,n•d Street
Bkycle Boulevard
Conventional or Buffered
Bicycle lane, or Protected
Bl<y<lo L;ona
Butrered or Pro'l•cted
Bicycle Lan•
Prot•cud Blcyd• ... ,..
Pratart•d •1<~•• una, o
R•duc• Speed
Prvtemd li<v<la t.na, o
Reduce to single Lan••
!la<IU<a Spead
Protected Bicycle Lana
Bike Path with Sepiiriltil
W~lkw.1y or Protected
Bicycle Un•
Sharud-Un Path or
Protected elcycl■ l.iJne
March 12, 2023
California Department of Transportation, District XI
Attn. Kareem Scarlett, PE
4050 Taylor St.
San Diego CA, 92110
North County Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan
Dear Mr. Scarlett:
The City of Carlsbad appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the draft North County
Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan (CMCP) and would like to make the following comments:
General Comments:
These corridor studies stem from Senate Bill 1 and will assist SANDAG and the Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) to nominate projects, with preference to be given to projects that
demonstrate collaboration between the regional agencies and Caltrans. The City has provided
comments to SANDAG during the development of the current Regional Plan which were shared with the
North County CMCP Technical Working Group and are still relevant for suggested revisions to the
proposed plans programs and projects of this plan. Please refer to our previous comments to SANDAG
regarding the Regional Plan included in a City Council Memorandum dated Oct 21, 2021 Re: SANDAG
2021 Regional Transportation Plan Draft EIR Comment Letter- referenced at following web address -
https://records.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=5493674&dbid=0&repo=CityofCarlsbad.
Below are specific comments regarding the draft plan:
Mobility Hubs:
•Recommend changing the On-demand shuttle connecting transit center to employment centers
to a “On-demand flexible fleet” to facilitate the option of rideshare programs.
Mobility Boulevards:
•Request inclusion of the Coast Highway / Carlsbad Boulevard as a Mobility Boulevard.
Throughout the Technical Working Group meetings, the City of Carlsbad and Oceanside
requested that Coast Highway and Carlsbad Boulevard be included as a “Mobility Boulevard” in
the North County CMCP. This primary north-south corridor is the most highly utilized corridor in
North County from a multimodal users perspective and most consistent with the definition of a
Mobility Boulevard as an alternative path to the state highway system (I-5), has a high potential
for higher quality investments for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit, and connects the
subregions primary activity centers in Oceanside, Carlsbad and neighboring cities to the south.
•College Boulevard: The recommended active transportation improvements include a Class-IV
protected bikeway to Palomar Airport Road. The City of Carlsbad recommends that this be
revised to a Class-I facility within the city limits. The city is developing a plan for the extension
of College Blvd. between Bobcat Lane and El Camino Real which includes a plan to provide both
Class-II bike lanes and a separate Class-I multi-use path along this new alignment.
•Palomar Airport Road/San Marcos Boulevard: Recommend a Class-I multi-use path be provided
along El Camino Real within the City of Carlsbad instead of the proposed Class-IV protected
ATTACHMENT 2 ( Cityof
Carlsbad
North County CMCP: City of Carlsbad Comments
March 12, 2023
Page 2 of 6
bikeway due to the high vehicle speeds, wide roadways, and potentially limited visibility of
bicyclists at the primary intersections. It is also recommended to provided flexible fleets/on-
demand transit along this corridor as a primary connection from the Poinsettia Coaster Station
to the Business Parks along Palomar Airport Road and eventually Cal State San Marcos.
Recommend upgrading all intersections through interchange to smart intersections with
recommended revisions as explained below. Requesting a proposed multimodal bridge over
NCTD rail road right of way and tracks to facilitate adequate space for vehicle lanes, a Class I
pathway, sidewalks, and class IV or buffered class II for the highspeed bicyclist including electric
bicycles.
• El Camino Real: Recommend a Class-I multi-use path be provided along El Camino Real within
the City of Carlsbad instead of the proposed Class-IV protected bikeway due to the high vehicle
speeds, wide roadways, and potentially limited visibility of bicyclists at the primary
intersections.
Regional Spines:
• In the area serviced by North County Transit District (NCTD), fixed route transit ridership
declined from 2015 to 2021 and has not returned to the pre-pandemic ridership levels as shown
in the below graph included in NCTD’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report For the Fiscal
Years Ended June 30, 2022 and 2021
Interstate 5 (I5) and State Route 78 (SR78) – Recommend prioritizing the NCC improvements
and managed lanes on both I5 and SR 78. The new managed lanes would facilitate next gen
Rapid (BRT) and Flexible Fleet public transit programs which support Senate Bill 1 Chapter
8.5 Congested Corridors, section 2391. The NCC EIR includes an additional Managed Lane to
provide 8 free lanes and 4 managed lanes. To implement the flexible fleet programs with
Source: NCTD Internal Financial lnfonnation
en C 0
::i:
13.0
12.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
North County Transit District
Total Boardings
Transportation & Community Development Departments
1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2710 t
North County CMCP: City of Carlsbad Comments
March 12, 2023
Page 3 of 6
minimum delays on the I5 and SR 78 routes, we recommend revising the projects scopes
included in this plan and subsequently the Regional Plan to include 8 free lanes and 4 managed
lanes on I5, and adding the previously scheduled proposed lanes on SR78 included in the current
Transnet Extension Ordinance. We recommend moving up the projects priorities to be
completed by 2035 which could support the Next Gen Rapid projects and flexible fleet public
rideshare transit programs. Recommended priority projects for this corridor include:
1. Completing the I5 and SR 78 multimodal interchange
2. Completing the Village Trench Project
3. Completing additional managed lanes on I5 and SR78 in the Transnet Extension
Ordinance.
4. To address the community barrier created by I5 and the current auto-centric on and off-
ramp intersections designed in the 1960s, include in the plan all new multimodal
interchanges throughout I5 NCC and North County CMCP with the similar approach used
in the Birmingham Drive interchange in the NCC.
A overview of the current trends in our region and many of the recommendations included in
this letter are explained in our short presentation to SANDAG Independent Taxpayer Oversight
Committee (ITOC) on May 11, 2022 at the following web address -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Cj_qAtqg2M&t=1332s . Please include the related
recommendations in the presentation as recommendations in this letter.
• Recommend using program language consistent with SANDAG including the following flexible
fleet programs.
• Rideshare: Drivers and passengers headed in a similar direction can share the ride in a
vehicle. This includes carpool, vanpool, and pooled ridehailing services such as
uberPOOL and Lyft Shared.
• Microtransit: Multi-passenger shuttles can carry up to 15 passengers and provide rides
within a defined service area. This technology-enabled transit service allows users to
reserve a ride ahead of time or on-demand. Smaller, all-electric shuttles, also known as
neighborhood electric vehicles (NEV), are a form of microtransit that provides a
sustainable and convenient solution for short trips around communities.
• Ridehailing: On-demand ridehailing services allow someone to request a ride in real
time. Services link the passenger with available drivers based on their trip length,
number of passengers, origin, and destination. This includes services such as Uber, Lyft,
and taxis.
Projects and Programs:
• Delete all reference to flexible lanes on Palomar Airport Road and other arterials in Carlsbad
• Revise Carlsbad Mobility Hubs• NEV Areawide Shuttles to • “Rideshare/Rideshailing and
Microtransit”
• Recommend all Rapid (BRTs) be revised to routes on I5 and SR 78 as explained in the first
comment under Regional Spines
• For all identified - • Upgrade signalized intersections to smart intersections, recommend revise
to:
• Upgrade signalized intersections to smart intersections including Intersection Control
Evaluation (ICE).
Transportation & Community Development Departments
1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2710 t
North County CMCP: City of Carlsbad Comments
March 12, 2023
Page 4 of 6
o ICE guidelines shall conform with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (CA MUTCD), Section 4C.01b and 01c regarding intersection
control. An engineering study shall include consideration of a roundabout (yield
control). If a roundabout is determined to provide a viable and practical
solution, it shall be studied in lieu of, or in addition to a traffic control signal.
Refer to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) website for
more information on the Traffic Operations Policy Directive 13-02, Intersection
Control Evaluation (ICE), and other resources for the evaluation of intersection
traffic control strategies: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/liaisons/ice.html
• Palomar Airport Road/San Marcos Boulevard Corridor Wide Mobility Boulevard Improvements
& Enhancements- Recommend
o Upgrading all intersections through interchange to smart intersections with
recommended ICE analysis and proposed intersection improvements. Recommend
increasing cost estimate $10 million or per an engineer’s estimate of probably cost and
revise cost accordingly.
o Requesting a proposed multimodal bridge over NCTD rail road right of way and tracks to
facilitate adequate space for vehicle lanes, a Class I pathway, sidewalks, and class IV or
buffered class II for the highspeed bicyclist including electric bicycles. Recommend
increasing budget estimate $30 million or complete engineer’s estimate of probably cost
and revise cost accordingly.
Other General Comments:
• Transit Demand Analysis: The expansion of transit throughout the subregion is a key element of
the North County CMCP however the analysis provided in Appendix C does not provide any
information to support the significant expansion of traditional fixed route transit. To
understand how transit can be utilized to improve the ways people travel throughout North
County a full demand analysis and supporting market research data should be provided in the
document. Appendix R, Travel Patterns, should be similarly structured to understand how the
recommended transit services can address the current travel patterns in the subregion.
• Barriers for Active Transportation: Freeways interchanges are among the most significant
barriers for active transportation users in the subregion due to the high-speed design features
and number of conflict points. In the City of Carlsbad, the I-5 freeway divides the city and
disconnects active transportation users between the highly attractive coastal destinations in the
west and the residential and business park areas in the eastern portions of the city. The “Gaps
and Barriers” section of the CMCP fails to highlight these critical gaps at freeway interchanges.
Improvements at the freeway interchanges are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans so the draft
CMCP should provide guidance on how these freeway barriers will be overcome with specific
project recommendations for active transportation improvements at all freeway interchanges in
the city.
• The final North County CMCP should prioritize all remaining and un-finished projects that were
identified during the North Corridor Public Works Plan (NC PWP) and seek ways to streamline
implementation.
Transportation & Community Development Departments
1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2710 t
North County CMCP: City of Carlsbad Comments
March 12, 2023
Page 5 of 6
• The draft North County CMCP inventories and assesses existing and future conditions in each
city. However, despite previously providing information to SANDAG staff, the assumptions used
for "existing" and "planned" land use and transportation in the City of Carlsbad are not
consistent with our adopted land use and transportation plans or policies (e.g., forecasted
housing and roadway capacities). Predicting the effect of transportation plans or projects on
land uses and land use planning is critical to developing context sensitive solutions for
transportation projects. Therefore, utilization of the most recent planning assumptions is not
only necessary but is required as specifically stated therein Government Code Section 65080.
Furthermore, the land use assumptions for “uses, residential densities, and building intensities
within the region” (as required by Government Code Section 65080 (b)(2)(B)(i)) should also be
the same, as that provided to the State Air Resources Board (as required per Government Code
Sections 65080 (b)(2)(H and J) in estimating and analyzing GHG from the RTP and the effect on
growth and whether the effects of that growth would be significant in the context of the
region’s plans, natural setting, and growth patterns.
• The draft North County CMCP identifies new policies, programs, and projects that were not
included in the RTP or the NC PWP. The North County CMCP seems to create a funding
requirement for some future activity that is reasonably foreseeable and/or an irrecoverable
commitment to specific program or construction project. As of this writing, it is unclear what
procedures related to CEQA apply to the adoption of the North County CMCP. If the scope of the
North County CMCP is a “project” as defined by CEQA (and NEPA), then the City of Carlsbad will
need to be consulted as a Responsible Agency per CEQA Guidelines Section 15096. As such, the
Lead Agency (i.e., SANDAG) should consider whether the project is covered by a previous
environmental review. To determine whether a project can tier from a certified program EIR,
the Lead Agency should consider whether the later project (Public Resources Code Section
21068.5) is consistent with the program for which the original EIR was prepared and certified; is
consistent with applicable land use plans and zoning in which the later project would be located;
and would not trigger the need for a subsequent or supplemental EIR. In this instant, there
would need to be an evaluation of impacts to existing Land Use Plans, and the lack of a
reasonable range of alternatives that show what would occur if funding or land use assumptions
for the new projects have not been prepared.
• The draft North County CMCP only lists potential projects; it does not show potential
alignments, right of way needed or coordination with specific agencies. More information needs
to be provided on project implementation phasing (both short-range and long-range
improvements), unfunded projects and various funding mechanisms that can bridge the
unfunded gaps.
• Carlsbad respectfully requests that SANDAG support the city’s service bureau requests as
efficiently as possible. Further delays in completion of the regional travel demand model could
adversely impact our rezone schedule and jeopardize our ability to timely meet our Housing
Element program requirements, thereby potentially placing our HCD housing element
certification at risk. Additionally, the city requests that future decisions to update the 2021
Regional Transportation Plan respect the fact that Carlsbad and other local jurisdictions have
been waiting on the availability of the regional model for local projects for some time and that
further delays could result in additional liability, time, and costs for member agencies.
Transportation & Community Development Departments
1635 Fa raday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2710 t
North County CMCP: City of Carlsbad Comments
March 12, 2023
Page 6 of 6
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Jeff Murphy, Community
Development Director at Jeff.Murphy@carlsbadca.gov for land use related items or Tom Frank,
Transportation Director/City Engineer, at tom.frank@carlsbadca.gov for mobility related items.
Sincerely,
Tom Frank
Transportation Director/City Engineer
c: Paz Gomez, Deputy City Manager, Public Works
Gary Barberio, Deputy City Manager, Community Services
Ron Kemp, Assistant City Attorney
Jeff Murphy, Community Development Director
Eric Lardy, City Planner
Scott Donnell, Senior Planner
Jason Geldert, Engineering Manager
Nathan Schmidt, Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager
Transportation & Community Development Departments
1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2710 t