PLAN

PERFORMANCE PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 

ADOPTED | APRIL 2016

APPENDIX

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
INTRODUCTION 1

2016 RTP/SCS OUTCOMES AND PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 7

PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR ON-GOING 

REGIONAL MONITORING 22

CONCLUSION 30

NOTES 37

ADOPTED | APRIL 2016

APPENDIX

PLAN PERFORMANCE I PERFORMANCE MEASURES
PERFORMANCE MEASURES

INTRODUCTION

The investments identified in the 2016 RTP/SCS are expected to result in significant benefits 

to our region, not only for mobility and accessibility but also in the areas of air quality, 

economic activity and job creation, sustainability, and environmental justice. The Plan, 

when fully implemented, is expected to achieve several performance outcomes that reflect 

these benefits. The outcomes and the performance measures that will be used to gauge our 

progress toward achieving each outcome are detailed in this Appendix. SCAG encourages, 

but does not require, agencies to be consistent with the Plan performance measures to the 

extent practical in their sub-regional and project-level planning studies.

SCAG has a history of using performance measurement in developing the RTP, beginning 

with the 1998 RTP. For the 2004 RTP, SCAG developed a set of measurable goals and 

outcomes that were based upon the principle of sustainability, which is not limited only 

to the environment and the transportation-land use connection, but also has important 

implications for how the region meets its critical system preservation needs. The 2016 

RTP/SCS builds upon the sustainability goals established in previous RTP cycles, 

reflecting the ever-evolving needs and concerns of our region. The 2016 RTP/SCS goals 

are listed in TABLE 1.

SCAG is committed to building on past successes by refining and enhancing performance 

measures to meet the region’s priorities. In the spring of 2015, SCAG’s three Policy 

Committees reviewed the updated draft proposed set of 2016 RTP/SCS performance 

measures in a joint meeting. With this input, SCAG developed revised performance goals, 

outcomes and supporting performance measures. The primary performance goals of the 

2016 RTP/SCS are focused on outcomes that strengthen the land use-transportation 

connection and the physical health of our region’s residents. In the fall of 2015, the goals and 

outcomes recommended by the Policy Committees for the 2016 RTP/SCS were presented 

to the Regional Council. The 2016 RTP/SCS incorporates these goals and outcomes. The set 

of performance measures to be used to evaluate the 2016 RTP/SCS is shown in TABLE 2.

SCAG’s Policy Committees also reviewed the 2016 RTP/SCS guiding policies that help 

to focus future investments on the best-performing projects and strategies that seek to 

preserve, maintain, and optimize the performance of the existing system policies (see 

Chapter 4 of the 2016 RTP/SCS main document for a detailed discussion of these system 

policies). The first of those policies states that “transportation investments shall be based on 

SCAG’s adopted Regional Performance Measures.”

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

SCAG has also developed a separate set of performance measures to assess the progress 

of our regional Environmental Justice program. TABLE 3 presents the environmental 

justice outcomes and performance measures to evaluate regional performance on matters 

of social equity and disproportionate impacts. The full results of the analysis conducted 

in support of the 2016 RTP/SCS Environmental Justice program are included in the 

Environmental Justice Appendix.

In support of the 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG has developed a toolbox of potential mitigation 

measures to address impacts to environmental justice communities. The toolbox presents 

optional mitigation recommendations that may be effective in addressing project-specific 

environmental justice impacts after a comprehensive review of impacts and consultation 

with all stakeholders. The list of strategies included in the Environmental Justice Toolbox can 

be found in the Environmental Justice Appendix.

Table 1 2016 RTP/SCS Goals

2016 RTP/SCS Goals

Align the plan investments and policies with improving regional economic development and 

competitiveness.

Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in the region.

Ensure travel safety and reliability for all people and goods in the region.

Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system.

Maximize the productivity of our transportation system.

Protect the environment and health of our residents by improving air quality and encouraging active 

transportation (non-motorized transportation, such as bicycling and walking).

Actively encourage and create incentives for energy efficiency, where possible.

Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and non-motorized transportation.

Maximize the security of the regional transportation system through improved system monitoring, 

rapid recovery planning, and coordination with other security agencies.*

*SCAG does not yet have an agreed-upon security performance measure. Therefore, it is not included in the table.
 2 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Table 2 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures

Outcome Performance Measure Definition Outcome Required Supports RTP Goals Data Source(s) LOCATION EFFICIENCY

Share of growth in High Quality Transit 

Areas (HQTAs)

Share of the region’s household and 

employment growth occurring in HQTAs

Improvement (increase) over No 

Project Baseline SCAG Integrated Growth Forecast

Land consumption Greenfield land consumed and refill land 

consumed

Improvement (decrease) over No 

Project Baseline Scenario Planning Model

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita* Daily vehicle miles driven per person 

(automobiles and light trucks) 

Improvement (decrease) over No 

Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

Transit mode share* The share of total trips that use transit for 

work and non-work trips 

Improvement (increase) over No 

Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

Average distance for work and non-work 

trips

The average distance traveled for work and 

non-work trips 

Improvement (decrease) over No 

Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

Percent of trips less than 3 miles The share of work and non-work trips which 

are less than 3 miles in length

Improvement (increase) over No 

Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

Work trip length distribution The statistical distribution of work trip 

length in the region

Improvement (decrease in trip 

length) over No Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

Person delay per capita Daily minutes of delay experienced per 

capita 

Improvement (decrease) over No 

Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

Person hours of delay by facility type 

(mixed flow, HOV, arterials)

Excess travel time resulting from the 

difference between a reference speed and 

actual speed

Improvement (decrease) over No 

Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

Truck delay by facility type (highways, 

arterials)

Excess travel time for heavy duty trucks 

resulting from the difference between a 

reference speed and actual speed

Improvement (decrease) over No 

Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

Travel time distribution for transit, SOV, 

and HOV modes for work and non-work 

trips

Travel time distribution for transit, SOV, and 

HOV modes

Improvement (decrease in travel 

time) over No Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

*New performance measure for the 2016 RTP/SCS
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 3

TABLE 2 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures Continued

Outcome Performance Measure Definition Outcome Required Supports RTP Goals Data Source(s) SAFETY AND HEALTH

Collision rates by severity and by mode

Collision rate involving fatalities and serious 

injuries per 100 million vehicle miles by 

mode; and number of fatalities and serious 

injuries by mode (all, bicycle/pedestrian)

Improvement (decrease) over No 

Project Baseline 

Statewide Integrated Traffic 

Records System (SWITRS), 

Travel Demand Model Mode Split 

Outputs

Criteria pollutants emissions CO, NOX, PM2.5, PM10, NO2

, and ROG Meet Federal Transportation 

Conformity requirements

No change - requirements 

continue to be met

Travel Demand Model/ARB 

EMFAC Model

Air pollution-related health measures* Pollution-related respiratory disease 

incidence and cost

Improvement (decrease) over No 

Project Baseline Scenario Planning Model

Physical activity-related health 

measures*

Physical activity/weight related health 

issues and costs

Improvement over No Project 

Baseline Scenario Planning Model

Mode share of walking and biking* Mode share of walking and biking for work 

and non-work trips 

Improvement (increase) over No 

Project Baseline Travel Demand Model

ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY

Criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas 

emissions

CO, NOX, PM2.5, PM10, NO2

, and ROG 

emissions; and per capita greenhouse gas 

emissions (CO2)

Meet Federal Transportation 

Conformity requirements and 

State SB 375 per capita GHG 

reduction targets

No change - requirements 

continue to be met

Travel Demand Model/ ARB 

EMFAC Model

ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

Additional jobs supported by improving 

competitiveness

Number of jobs added to the economy as a 

result of improved transportation conditions 

which make the region more economically 

competitive

Improvement (increase) over No 

Project Baseline Regional Economic Model (REMI)

Additional jobs supported by 

transportation investment

Total number of jobs supported in the 

economy as a result of transportation 

expenditures.

Improvement (increase) over No 

Project Baseline Regional Economic Model (REMI)

INVESTMENT 

EFFECTIVENESS

Benefit/Cost Ratio

Ratio of monetized user and societal 

benefits to transportation system 

investment costs

Greater than 1.0 California Benefit/Cost Model

*New performance measure for the 2016 RTP/SCS
 4 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Outcome Performance Measure Definition Outcome Required Supports RTP Goals Data Source(s) TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY

Cost per capita to preserve regional 

multimodal transportation system to 

current state of good repair

Annual cost per capita required to preserve 

the regional multimodal transportation 

system to current conditions

Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year

Estimated using SHOPP Plan and 

recent California Transportation 

Commission 10-Year Needs 

Assessment

State Highway System pavement 

condition*

Share of distressed State Highway System 

lane miles

Improvement (decrease) over No 

Project Baseline

Pavement Management System 

(Caltrans)

Local roads pavement condition* Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating for 

local roads 

Improvement (increase) over No 

Project Baseline Local Arterial Survey Database

ENVIRONMENTAL 

JUSTICE

See Table 3: Performance Measures: Environmental Justice

Meet Federal Environmental 

Justice requirements. 

No unaddressed 

disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income 

or minority communities 

TABLE 2 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures Continued

Acronyms:

ARB: California Air Resources Board

EMFAC Emissions Factors model (ARB)

GHG: Greenhouse Gas Emissions

HOV: High-Occupancy Vehicle

SHOPP: State Highway Operation & Protection Program

SOV: Single-Occupancy Vehicle

*New performance measure for the 2016 RTP/SCS
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 5

Table 3 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures: Environmental Justice

Performance Measure Definition Performance Target Data Source(s)

2016 RTP/SCS revenue sources in terms 

of tax burdens*

Proportion of RTP/SCS revenue sources (taxable sales, income, 

and gasoline taxes) for low income and minority populations

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities 

U.S. Census, BLS Consumer Expenditure 

Survey, BOE Taxable Sales, SCAG 

Integrated Growth Forecast

Share of transportation system usage*

Comparison of transportation system usage by mode for low 

income and minority households in relation to each group's 

population share in the greater region 

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities

NHTS, SCAG Integrated Growth Forecast

2016 RTP/SCS investments*

Allocation of RTP/SCS investments by mode (bus, HOV lanes, 

commuter/high speed rail, highways/arterials, and light/heavy 

rail transit)

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities

RTP/SCS Finance Strategy, Integrated 

Growth Forecast, Regional Travel Demand 

Model

Distribution of travel time savings and travel 

distance reductions*

Evaluate comparative benefits received as a result of the Plan by 

demographic group in terms of travel time and distance savings 

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities

NHTS, SCAG Integrated Growth Forecast, 

Regional Travel Demand Model

Geographic distribution of transportation 

investments

Examination of the spatial distribution of transit, roadway, and 

active transportation infrastructure investments in various 

communities throughout the region

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities

2016 RTP/SCS, U.S. Census, SCAG 

Integrated Growth Forecast

Jobs-housing imbalance*

Comparison of median earnings for intra-county vs inter-county 

commuters for each county in the SCAG region; analysis of 

relative housing affordability and jobs throughout the region

Establish baseline conditions to evaluate future 

performance (not a performance measure for the 

Plan)

U.S. Census PUMS data

Accessibility to employment and services*

Percentage of employment and shopping destinations within 

a one and two mile travel buffer from each neighborhood; also 

share of employment and shopping destinations that can be 

reached within 30 minutes by auto or 45 minutes by bus or all 

transit modes during the evening peak period

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities

InfoUSA, Regional Travel Demand Model, 

U.S. Census, SCAG Integrated Growth 

Forecast, NHTS

Accessibility to parks and natual lands*

Share of population within a one and two mile travel buffer from 

a regional park; also, share of park acreage that can be reached 

within 30 minutes by auto or 45 minutes by bus or all transit 

modes during the evening peak period

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities

SCAG parcel level land use data, California 

Protected Areas Database (CPAD), 

Regional Travel Demand Model, Integrated 

Growth Forecast, NHTS

Gentrification and displacement* Examination of historical and projected demographic and 

housing trends for areas surrounding rail transit stations

Establish baseline conditions to evaluate future 

performance (not a performance measure for the 

Plan)

High Quality Transit Areas (HQTA), U.S. 

Census, NHTS

Emissions impact analysis*

Comparison of Plan and Baseline scenarios; identification of 

areas that are lower performing as a result of the Plan, along with 

a breakdown of demographics for those areas

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities 

ARB EMFAC Model

Air quality impacts along freeways 

and highly traveled corridors*

Comparison of Plan and Baseline scenarios and demographic 

analysis of communities in close proximity to freeways and 

highly traveled corridors

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities 

ARB EMFAC Model, SCAG Integrated 

Growth Forecast

*Performance measures used in the Environmental Justice analysis for the 2012 RTP/SCS
 6 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

*Performance measures used in the Environmental Justice analysis for the 2012 RTP/SCS

TABLE 3 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures: Environmental Justice Continued

Performance Measure Definition Performance Target Data Source(s)

Aviation noise impacts*

Comparison of Plan and Baseline scenarios; breakdown of 

population by race and ethnicity for low performing airport noise 

impacted areas 

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities 

Projected noise impacts from aircraft 

operations for 2040 (PEIR), SCAG 

Integrated Growth Forecast

Roadway noise impacts*

Comparison of Plan and Baseline scenarios, identification of 

areas that are low performing as a result of the Plan; breakdown 

of population for these impacted areas by race/ethnicity and 

income

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities 

Regional Travel Demand Model, SCAG 

Integrated Growth Forecast

Active transportation hazards Breakdown of population by demographic group for areas that 

experience the highest rates of bicycle and pedestrian collisions

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities 

SCAG Integrated Growth Forecast, 

Statewide Integrated Traffic Records 

System (SWITRS)

Rail-related impacts* Breakdown of population by demographic group for areas in 

close proximity to rail corridors and planned grade separations

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities

Rail network geodata, rail traffic data, 

grade separation geodata, U.S. Census, 

SCAG Integrated Growth Forecast

Public health impacts Historical emissions and health data summarized for areas that 

have high concentrations of minority and low income population

Establish baseline conditions to evaluate future 

performance (not a performance measure for the 

Plan)

ARB historical emissions data, 

CalEnviroScreen, SCAG Integrated Growth 

Forecast

Climate vulnerability

Breakdown of population by demographic group for areas 

potentially impacted by substandard housing, sea level rise, and 

wildfire risk

Establish baseline conditions to evaluate future 

performance (not a performance measure for the 

Plan)

SCAG Integrated Growth Forecast, 

CalFIRE, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration Coastal 

Services Center

Proposed Mileage-Based User Fee (MBUF) 

impacts*

Examination of potential impacts from implementation of a 

mileage-based user fee on low income households in the region

No unaddressed disproportionately high and 

adverse effects for low income or minority 

communities

U.S. Census, BLS Consumer Expenditure 

Survey, BOE Taxable Sales, SCAG 

Integrated Growth Forecast

Acronyms:

ARB: California Air Resources Board

BLS: Bureau of Labor Statistics

BOE: Board of Equalization

CalFIRE: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection

HOV: High-Occupancy Vehicle

NHTS: National Household Travel Survey

PUMS: Public Use Microdata Sample

VMT: Vehicle Miles Traveled
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 7

The 2016 RTP/SCS recognizes that two general types of performance measures are 

appropriate for monitoring progress toward achieving our regional goals. One type of 

measure relies on readily available data that can be forecast into the future, and can 

therefore be used for evaluating 2016 RTP/SCS alternatives. A second type of measure 

is more valuable for on-going system monitoring. This type of measure typically cannot 

be readily forecast, but allows the region to monitor how well goals are being met over a 

period of time. Within this group are additional measures that will be evaluated for future 

integration into SCAG’s performance monitoring efforts as reliable data becomes available. 

TABLE 4 shows the performance measures that will be used for on-going monitoring of our 

regional transportation system. Each measure will be discussed, with results presented 

where data is available.

Note that some regionally important measures are discussed in other areas of the 2016 

RTP/SCS. For example, infrastructure investment measures, including the percentage of 

total funding to be invested in transit and active transportation, are addressed as part of the 

investment allocation descriptions in the Transportation Finance Appendix.

In the discussion of performance measures and outcomes, three scenarios are referenced: 

Base Year, Baseline, and Plan.

z Base Year represents existing conditions as of 2012–that is, our region as it 

was in 2012: our transportation system, land use patterns, and socio-economic 

characteristics (e.g. households and employment). The year 2012 was selected as 

the Base Year for this analysis because it is the year of the previous RTP/SCS.

z Baseline assumes a continuation of the development trends of recent decades, 

with local General Plans not reflecting the intensified growth distribution policies 

promoted in the Plan. This scenario represents a future in 2040 in which only 

the following have been implemented: projects currently under construction or 

undergoing right of way acquisition; those programs and projects programmed and 

committed to in the 2015 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); 

and projects that have already received environmental clearance. 

z Plan represents future conditions in 2040 in which investments and strategies 

detailed in the 2016 RTP/SCS are fully realized.

The specific projects associated with the 2016 RTP/SCS are identified in the 

Project List Appendix.

The following sections describe each of the performance outcomes in detail along with their 

associated performance measures. The first section discusses the performance outcomes 

and measures used to evaluate alternatives and to forecast the performance of the system 

as a result of implementing the 2016 RTP/SCS. The second section discusses the outcomes 

and measures to be used for on-going system monitoring.

2016 RTP/SCS OUTCOMES AND PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES

LOCATION EFFICIENCY

As an outcome for evaluating the 2016 RTP/SCS, Location Efficiency reflects the degree to 

which improved coordination of land use and transportation planning impacts the movement 

of people and goods in the SCAG region. This outcome has several associated performance 

measures that will be used for monitoring the degree to which the region is advancing toward 

our Location Efficiency goals:

z Share of Growth in High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs)

z Land Consumption

z Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Per Capita

z Transit Mode Share

z Average Distance for Work and Non-Work Trips

z Percent of Trips Less than Three Miles

z Work Trip Length Distribution

In addition to these seven metrics, measures of mobility and accessibilty also serve to further 

reinforce the importance of the Location Efficiency outcome. Measures supporting the 

Mobility and Accessibility outcome are described in the next section of this Appendix.

The following is a summary of the performance measures that support the 

Location Efficiency outcome.

SHARE OF GROWTH IN HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT AREAS (HQTAS)

Between 2012 and 2040, growth in both households and employment in the HQTAs is 

projected to increase from the Baseline scenario to the Plan scenario. Specifically, the share 

of growth in households in HQTAs increases from 36 percent under the Baseline to 46 

percent under the Plan. During the same period, the share of regional employment growth 

in the HQTAs increases from 44 percent under the Baseline to 55 percent under the Plan. 

EXHIBIT 1 shows Plan 2040 HQTA locations.

LAND CONSUMPTION

The land consumption metric quantifies the amount of agricultural land that has changed 

from rural to more intensive development patterns to accommodate new growth. Greenfield 

land consumption refers to development that occurs on land that has not previously been 

developed for, or otherwise impacted by, urbanized use, including agricultural land, forests, 
 8 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Outcome Performance Measure Definition Performance Target Data Source(s) LOCATION EFFICIENCY

Share of growth in High 

Quality Transit Areas (HQTA)

Share of the region's growth in households and employment in High Quality 

Transit Areas 

Improvement (increase) over 

Base Year

American Community Survey, SCAG 

GIS database

Land consumption Number of square miles of agricultural or otherwise previously undeveloped land 

converted to more urban uses

Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year

California Farmland Mapping and 

Monitoring Program

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 

per capita Average daily vehicle miles traveled per person (autos and light trucks) Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year

Highway Performance Monitoring 

System

Transit mode share* Share of transit for work and non-work trips Improvement (increase) over 

Base Year

American Community Survey, 

California Household Travel Survey

Transit trips per capita* Average annual number of transit trips taken per person Improvement (increase) over 

Base Year National Transit Database

Annual household 

transportation cost

Annual household spending on transportation including costs of vehicle 

ownership, operation and maintenance, and public transportation

Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year Center for Neighborhood Technology

Percent of income spent on 

housing and transportation The share of household income spent on both housing and transportation Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

American Community Survey

MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

Highway non-recurrent delay 

for mixed flow and HOV lanes

Delay caused by accidents, incidents, weather, planned lane closures, special 

events, or other atypical traffic patterns

Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year

Caltrans Performance Measurement 

System (PeMS)

Mode share for work trips* Share of work trips using various travel modes

Improvement (decrease in Single 

Occupied Vehicle mode share) 

over Base Year

American Community Survey

Travel time to work* Average travel time to work Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year American Community Survey

Table 4 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures for On-Going Monitoring

*New performance measure for on-going monitoring
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 9

TABLE 4 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures for On-Going Monitoring Continued

Outcome Performance Measure Definition Performance Target Data Source(s) RELIABILITY

Variability of travel time for 

automobiles Day-to-day change in travel times experienced by auto travelers Improvement (decrease in 

variability) over Base Year

Caltrans Performance Measurement 

System (PeMS)

Variability of travel time for 

trucks Day-to-day change in travel times experienced by trucks Improvement (decrease in 

variability) over Base Year

Caltrans Performance Measurement 

System (PeMS)

PRODUCTIVITY

Lost lane miles for highways 

and percent seat miles utilized 

for transit

Percent utilization of regional transportation system during peak demand 

conditions

Improvement (decrease in 

highway lost lane miles and 

increase in transit seat miles 

utilized) over Base Year

Caltrans Performance Measurement 

System (PeMS), National Transit 

Database

SAFETY AND HEALTH

Collision rates by severity and 

by mode

Collision rates involving fatalities and serious injuries per 100 million vehicle 

miles by mode; and number of fatalities and serious injuries by mode (all, bicycle/ 

pedestrian)

Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year 

Caltrans Performance Measurement 

System (PeMS), Traffic Accident 

Surveillance and Analysis System 

(TASAS)

Mode share of walking and 

biking Mode share of walking and biking for work and non-work trips Improvement (increase) over 

Base Year

American Community Survey, 

California Household Travel Survey

Daily amount of walking and 

biking related to work and nonwork trips*

Percent of population who had walk or bike trips during the day; and average 

number of minutes of walking and biking for those who had walk or bike trips

Improvement (increase) over 

Base Year California Household Travel Survey 

Asthma incidence Share of population in the region who were ever diagnosed with asthma Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year California Health Interview Survey

Asthma exacerbation Share of population in the region already diagnosed with asthma who had 

asthma-related emergency room visits in the last 12 months

Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year California Health Interview Survey

Percent of households living 

<500 feet from high volume 

roadways

Share of total regional households that live within 500 feet of a high volume 

roadway, defined as having traffic volumes of over 100,000 vehicles per day in 

urban areas, and 50,000 vehicles per day in rural areas

Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year SCAG GIS database

*New performance measure for on-going monitoring
 10 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Outcome Performance Measure Definition Performance Target Data Source(s) SAFETY AND HEALTH

Premature deaths due to PM2.5

The number of premature deaths due to long-term exposure to particulate matter 

(estimated from monitored or modeled PM2.5 concentrations)

Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year California Air Resources Board

Percent of residents within 1/2 

mile walk to parks and open 

space*

Share of regional population that lives within walkable distance to a park Improvement (increase) over 

Base Year SCAG GIS database

Number of acres of parks per 

1,000 residents* Number of acres of parks for every 1,000 residents Improvement (increase) over 

Base Year SCAG GIS database

ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY

Ambient air quality conditions Existing condition of air quality in the various air basins Improvement over Base Year California Air Resources Board

TRANSPORTATION 

SYSTEM 

SUSTAINABILITY

State Highway System 

pavement condition* Share of distressed lane miles of the State Highway System Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year

Pavement Management System 

(Caltrans)

Local roads pavement 

condition* Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating for local roads Improvement (increase) over 

Base Year Local Arterial Survey Database

RESOURCE 

EFFICIENCY

Energy consumption* Energy (electricity, natural gas) consumption per capita Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year

California Energy Commission, 

Caltrans

Water consumption* Urban water consumption per capita Improvement (decrease) over 

Base Year Metropolitan Water District

TABLE 4 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures for On-Going Monitoring Continued

*New performance measure for on-going monitoring
Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arca dia Azusa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La M ira da

Los Angeles Monrovia

Mo nterey

Park

Norwa lk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Colton

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastva le

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert H ot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaum ont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

Desert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La 

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Huntingto n

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

San

Clemente

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yorba Linda 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

High Quality Transit Areas (2040 Plan)

(Source: SCAG)

8

10

10

° 0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Exhibit 1 HQTA Map: Plan 2040

Note: High Quality Transit Areas refer to transportation corridors within 1⁄2 mile of a major transit route that feature peak commute period service frequencies of 15 minutes or less
 12 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

will help us to identify how well the transit strategies and improvements proposed in the 

2016 RTP/SCS are working toward providing better and more diverse commuting options for 

the traveling public. Ideally, with the provision of better transit service, more commuters will 

choose that option over driving alone in their automobiles, further reducing VMT and regional 

greenhouse gas emissions. The transit mode share for all trips is projected to increase in 

2040 from 2.2 percent under the Baseline to 3.1 percent under the Plan. However, for work 

trips, the transit mode share is expected increase from 5.6 percent under the Baseline to 8.2 

percent under the Plan. TABLE 5 shows transit mode shares by county for both work trips 

and all trips as projected for 2040 under the Plan.

AVERAGE DISTANCE FOR WORK AND NON-WORK TRIPS

The average distance for work trips in 2040 is projected to increase slightly from 15.1 miles 

under the Baseline, to 15.5 miles under the Plan. The average distance traveled for non-work 

trips in 2040 is expected to remain relatively constant at about 7.8 miles under both the 

Baseline and the Plan.

PERCENT OF TRIPS LESS THAN THREE MILES

The vast majority of trips in Southern California today are made by people driving alone. As 

trip lengths become shorter, particularly to within a few miles, people are more likely to use 

transit, bike, walk, or choose other alternatives to driving alone. By 2040 the share of work 

trips less than three miles is projected to remain about the same, changing slightly from 20.4 

percent under the Baseline to 20.3 percent under the Plan, while the share of non-work trips 

less than three miles is expected to remain constant with just under 42 percent of non-work 

deserts, and other undeveloped sites. As discussed above, the Plan directs more growth 

into the HQTAs than the Baseline. The vast majority of HQTAs are within existing urbanized 

areas. Accordingly, the Plan consumes 23 percent fewer square miles of greenfield land 

than the Baseline (118 square miles compared with 154 square miles).

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) PER CAPITA

Vehicle Miles Traveled (for automobiles and light trucks) per capita has become an 

increasingly significant metric since the passage of SB 375, which includes a requirement 

to achieve, if feasible, state-determined reduction targets for regional greenhouse gas 

emissions from automobiles and light trucks. Automobiles and light trucks are a major 

contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, producing more than 60 percent of transportation 

sector emissions.1

 Therefore, VMT reduction is a critical component in a comprehensive 

regional strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. By monitoring progress in 

reducing per capita VMT through implementation of the various transportation investments 

and land use strategies outlined in this Plan, we will be better able to accurately gauge our 

momentum toward achieving our goals for reducing regional greenhouse gas emissions. 

Daily per capita VMT is projected to decrease in 2040 by 7.4 percent, from 22.1 miles under 

the Baseline, to 20.5 miles under the Plan. FIGURE 1 shows weekday per capita VMT for 

each of the six counties in the SCAG region.

TRANSIT MODE SHARE

Transit mode share is another new metric for the 2016 RTP/SCS. It measures the share of 

transit trips made throughout the region for work and non-work purposes. This new measure 

24.8

21.5

23.8 23.3

26.6

22.4 22.8

26.3

20.2

22.8 23.7

27.1

21.9 22.1

25.1

18.4

21.4 21.7

25.9

20.2 20.5

Imperial Los

Angeles

Orange Riverside San

Bernardino

Ventura SCAG

Region

2012 Base Year 2040 Baseline 2040 Plan

Figure 1 VMT Per Capita By County Table 5 Transit Mode Share by County (Plan 2040)

County Work Trips All Trips

 Imperial 0.6% 0.3%

 Los Angeles 12.0% 4.7%

 Orange 3.8% 1.7%

 Riverside 1.1% 0.5%

 San Bernardino 2.1% 0.7%

 Ventura 1.6% 0.7%

 SCAG Region 8.2% 3.1%
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 13

trips under both the Baseline and the Plan to be within three miles as shown in FIGURE 2. 

The share of all trips less than three miles in length would increase slightly from 38 percent 

to about 39 percent. Changes in land use and investments in active transportation contribute 

toward achieving these results.

WORK TRIP LENGTH DISTRIBUTION

The share of trips less than ten miles remains about 48 percent in 2040 under both the 

Baseline and the Plan. Likewise, while the share of trips under 25 miles would be just over 

80 percent for both the Baseline and the Plan. TABLE 6 shows the distribution of work trip 

lengths in accordance with Plan 2040 projections.

MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

The Mobility and Accessibility outcome is defined as the ability to reach desired destinations 

with relative ease and within a reasonable time using reasonably available transportation 

options. In previous RTPs, mobility and accessibility were treated as separate outcomes. 

However, beginning with the 2012 RTP/SCS, they were combined into a single outcome 

with multiple performance measures. This section discusses the mobility and accessibility 

performance measures for the 2016 RTP/SCS, and provides results based on outputs from 

the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (RTDM).

19.4% 20.4% 20.3%

41.3% 40.7% 41.9%

2012 Base Year 2040 Baseline 2040 Plan

Work Trips Non-Work Trips

Figure 2 Percentage of Trips Less than 3 Miles

Distance (miles) Number of Trips Share of Total

0 to <5 3,040,408 26.07%

5 to <10 2,527,411 21.67%

10 to <15 1,707,955 14.64%

15 to <20 1,194,262 10.24%

20 to <25 884,536 7.58%

25 to <30 594,768 5.10%

30 to <35 410,535 3.52%

35 to <40 299,059 2.56%

40 to <45 223,309 1.91%

45 to <50 176,629 1.51%

50 to <55 140,998 1.21%

55 to <60 107,635 0.92%

60 to <65 87,251 0.75%

65 to <70 66,575 0.57%

70 to <75 49,017 0.42%

75 to <80 37,931 0.33%

80 to <85 29,439 0.25%

85 to <90 22,641 0.19%

90 to <95 15,762 0.14%

95 to <100 10,548 0.09%

100+ 36,079 0.31%

Total Trips 11,662,749 100.0%

Table 6 Work Trip Length Distribution (Plan 2040)
 14 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

3, total person-hours of delay on our regional transportation system is expected to increase 

by more than 50 percent from the 2012 Base Year to the 2040 Baseline. However, under 

the Plan, delay on our highways would improve over Baseline conditions by more than 33 

percent, while delay on HOV facilities would be reduced more dramatically, by 83 percent. 

Delay on our regional arterial roadways would also improve between the Baseline and the 

Plan by about 41 percent. Overall, person delay on our regional transportation system in 

2040 under the Plan would represent an improvement over the Baseline by nearly 39 

percent. In fact, conditions in 2040 under the Plan would represent an improvement over 

what was experienced in 2012 by 6 percent.

PERSON DELAY PER CAPITA

FIGURE 4 shows person delay per capita for each of the six counties in the region, and for 

the SCAG region as a whole. Normalizing delay by the number of people living in an area 

provides insight as to how well the region is mitigating traffic congestion in light of increasing 

population growth. Delay per capita is expected to grow considerably, particularly in 

the Inland Empire counties of Riverside and San Bernardino, under Baseline conditions. 

However, implementation of the Plan is projected to reduce regional per capita delay 

substantially, to below 2012 levels. Daily per capita delay in the region is expected to 

improve from 15 minutes under Baseline to just over 9 minutes under the Plan. Not only 

does this represent a 39 percent improvement over the Baseline, but also a 22 percent 

improvement over the 2012 Base Year.

MOBILITY

The mobility performance measure relies on the commonly used measure of delay. Delay 

is defined as the difference between actual travel time and the travel time at a pre-defined 

reference or optimal speed for each modal alternative. It is measured in vehicle-hours 

of delay (VHD), which can then be used to derive person-hours of delay. The mobility 

measures used to evaluate alternatives for this outcome include:

z Person Delay by Facility Type (Mixed Flow, High Occupancy Vehicle 

(HOV) Lanes, Arterials)

z Person Delay per Capita

z Truck Delay by Facility Type (Highway, Arterial)

One additional measure for delay that is available for on-going monitoring, but which cannot 

be readily forecast, is non-recurrent delay, which is the delay that is caused by accidents, 

weather, special events or other atypical incidents. Non-recurrent delay, and its impact on 

total congestion in the region, is discussed in greater detail in the Performance Measures for 

On-going Regional Monitoring section of this Appendix.

PERSON DELAY BY FACILITY TYPE (HIGHWAY/EXPRESSWAY, HOV, 

ARTERIAL)

Since the 2012 RTP/SCS, this measure has been expanded to differentiate between singleoccupancy vehicle (SOV) and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) delay. As shown in FIGURE 

Highway/

Expressway

HOV Arterial Total Delay

2,114

137

1,362

3,613

3,035

252

2,255

5,542

2,023

43

1,327

3,393

2012 Base Year 2040 Baseline 2040 Plan

Figure 3 Daily Person-Hours of Delay by Facility Type (in Thousands)

0.7

14.7

11.9

5.9

7.6 7.0

11.8

2.7

16.4

13.2

12.3

17.1

11.5

15.0

2.0

11.5

7.9

5.6

7.4

5.7

9.2

Imperial Los

Angeles

Orange Riverside San

Bernardino

Ventura SCAG

Region

2012 Base Year 2040 Baseline 2040 Plan

Figure 4 Daily Per Capita Person Delay By County (Minutes)
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 15

monitoring program and is described in greater detail in the Performance Measures for Ongoing Regional Monitoring section of this Appendix.

HIGHWAY SPEED MAPS

EXHIBITS 2-4 (at end of this Appendix) depict the region’s highway speed conditions during 

the afternoon peak period (3:00 PM to 7:00 PM) based upon the SCAG RTDM results for 

Base Year 2012, Baseline 2040, and Plan 2040. Additional speed maps are provided in the 

Highways and Arterials Appendix.

ACCESSIBILITY

The accessibility measure is used to evaluate how well the transportation system performs 

in providing people access to opportunities. Opportunities may include jobs, education, 

medical care, recreation, shopping, or any other activity that may help enhance a person’s 

quality of life. For the 2016 RTP/SCS, accessibility is simply defined as the distribution of 

trips by mode by travel time.

As with the 2012 RTP/SCS, accessibility is measured by taking afternoon or PM peak period 

travel demand model results for the base and forecast years and identifying the percentage 

of commute or home-based work trips that are completed within 45 minutes. Peak periods 

are those times during the weekday when commuting travel on regional roadways reach 

their highest levels. Typically peak periods occur twice daily, first during the morning 

commute when people are traveling to their workplaces, and again in the late afternoon 

TRUCK DELAY BY FACILITY TYPE (HIGHWAY, ARTERIAL)

This measure estimates the average daily truck delay by facility type for highways and 

arterials (FIGURE 5). The 2016 RTP/SCS includes significant investment in a regional freight 

corridor and other improvements to facilitate goods movement. The Plan is estimated to 

reduce heavy-duty truck delay by more than 37 percent over Baseline on the highway 

system, and by nearly 56 percent on the arterial system. However, truck delay under the 

Plan will still be above Base Year levels, due largely to the projected growth of trade and 

associated truck traffic.

HIGHWAY NON-RECURRENT DELAY

As indicated previously, this measure identifies the share of congestion that is considered 

to be atypical. Non-recurrent delay may be addressed by strategic operational investments 

such as traveler information systems, incident management strategies, and ramp metering. 

Regionally, about 48 percent of freeway congestion is estimated to be non-recurrent, but 

this estimate varies widely by county.

More suburban or rural areas with less overall congestion have a higher percentage of all 

congestion represented by non-recurring events. San Bernardino County, for example, 

was estimated to have the majority (78 percent) of its congestion caused by non-recurrent 

events in 2011 (the year of the most recent available data). In contrast, the more urbanized 

Los Angeles County had just over 44 percent of its total congestion represented by nonrecurring incidents. Non-recurrent delay is a performance measure for our on-going regional 

102 

17 

120 

274 

48 

322 

172 

21 

193 

Highway/Expressway Arterial Total Delay

2012 Base Year 2040 Baseline 2040 Plan

Figure 5 Daily Heavy-Duty Truck Hours of Delay (in Thousands)

24%

73%

82%

22%

72%

82%

26%

79%

89%

Transit High-Occupancy Vehicle

(HOV)

Single-Occupancy

Vehicle (SOV)

2012 Base Year 2040 Baseline 2040 Plan

Figure 6 Percentage of PM Peak Period Home-Based Work Trips within 45 Minutes
 16 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

air pollutants, which is highly correlated to public health concerns, such as asthma. 

The criteria pollutant measure supports both the Safety and Health outcome and the 

Environmental Quality outcome.

There are six common air pollutants that are monitored in accordance with federal air quality 

regulations.3 These ‘criteria’ pollutants include particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), carbon 

monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx

), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and reactive organic gases 

(ROG). These pollutants require careful monitoring because of their known adverse effects 

on human health. While children, older citizens, and persons with existing respiratory 

illnesses are most vulnerable to the effects of air pollutants, the health effects of long term 

exposure are a concern for everyone in the region. Some of the major health concerns of 

exposure to high levels of air pollution include respiratory irritation, reduced lung capacity, 

chest pain, and aggravation of asthma and other respiratory illnesses.4

Airborne particulate matter comes in all sizes, however, particles smaller than ten 

micrometers in diameter (PM10) are considered the most dangerous to human health 

because they are small enough to be absorbed into the lungs. The finer the particle size, the 

more dangerous they are. Particulate matter smaller than 2.5 micrometers is a particularly 

serious concern for people with existing heart or lung disease, as even short term exposure 

to high levels of PM2.5 may aggravate symptoms. High levels of carbon monoxide is also 

considered a health hazard, especially for people with compromised respiratory or coronary 

function, as CO is known to reduce the flow of oxygen through the human body. Long term 

exposure to high levels of nitrogen dioxide, which is produced primarily through the burning 

of fossil fuels, may cause reduced lung function and narrowing of the bronchial airways, 

resulting in chronic bronchitis or aggravation of asthma symptoms.5

The 2016 RTP/SCS would improve physical activity outcomes through improved location 

efficiency, which increases the share of short trips, and through the provision of additional 

investments in active transportation networks including first/last mile improvements, Safe 

Routes to School projects, and regional bikeway infrastructure. It would also increase access 

to natural lands and parks which would further increase opportunities for physical activity. 

New for the 2016 RTP/SCS is an improvement of the Public Health module in the Scenario 

Planning Model which now allows us to measure the Plan’s impact on physical activity. The 

updated module was evaluated by a statewide review panel consisting of representatives of 

state, regional, and local agencies. The Plan is expected to result in 4.3 additional minutes of 

physical activity per capita, which would improve health outcomes related to obesity by 2.7 

percent and hypertension by 3.3 percent.

For a broader discussion of the Scenario Planning Model, please see the SCS Background 

Documentation Appendix. For more detailed information on the connection between 

physical activity and health outcomes, please see the Public Health Appendix.

when people are returning home from work. FIGURE 6 shows these results. In all cases, the 

2040 Plan improves accessibility for home-based work trips over the Baseline.

The 2016 RTP/SCS provides a comprehensive measure of accessibility, including the 

transit, HOV, and SOV modes, for both work and non-work trips. The results of these 

accessibility analyses are shown in TABLE 7 (transit), TABLE 8 (HOV), and TABLE 9 (SOV).

SAFETY AND HEALTH

The Safety and Health performance outcome has been carried over from the 2012 RTP/

SCS. The 2016 RTP/SCS includes new measures to evaluate the Health outcome. Safety 

addresses how well the transportation system performs in minimizing collisions and is 

measured in the number of collisions involving fatalities and serious injuries per million 

vehicle miles traveled by mode.

The safety and health impacts of regional transportation improvements cannot be easily 

forecast, but a reduction in total collisions can be shown in future years, particularly if people 

shift from transportation modes with higher collision risk to modes with lower collision risk. 

The total number of collisions is generally used as the performance measure for safety, and 

it can be partially projected by using mode and facility specific collision rates (highways, 

arterials, and transit). This approach is used for the 2016 RTP/SCS, but it is important to 

note that this methodology does not take into account safety improvements specific to 

each mode. It only reflects changes based on modal or facility shifts. For monitoring, this 

measure can be reported historically by time period (month) and by mode (including for 

active transportation).

The health outcome was first introduced for the 2012 RTP/SCS. Recognizing that the 2016 

RTP/SCS integrates transportation and land use strategies and therefore generates impacts 

beyond those exclusively transportation-related, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes three new 

health-related measures: mode share for walking and biking; rates of physical activity and 

weight-related disease; and incidence of respiratory/pollution-related disease.

The health benefits of an active lifestyle have become increasingly apparent in recent 

years, and there is growing support for improving the walkability and bikability of the 

communities where we live and work. The linkage between obesity and disease has been 

well documented, and providing the appropriate community design and infrastructure 

to support a more active lifestyle may be an important first step toward promoting 

healthy communities.2

The walking and biking mode shares can be used to evaluate the 2016 RTP/SCS 

alternatives, while the disease-focused measures may also be useful for on-going 

monitoring. A health measure carried over from the 2012 RTP/SCS is tons of criteria 
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 17

Trip Type Time Period Model <=5 min <=10 min <=15 min <=30 min <=45 min <=60 min <=90 min >90 min WORK

AM

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 1% 12% 29% 44% 70% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 1% 11% 27% 42% 69% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 1% 13% 30% 47% 73% 100%

Mid-Day

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 1% 11% 30% 46% 72% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 1% 10% 28% 45% 72% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 1% 12% 31% 48% 73% 100%

PM

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 1% 9% 24% 39% 64% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 1% 8% 22% 36% 62% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 0% 9% 26% 41% 68% 100%

Evening

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 1% 11% 30% 46% 72% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 1% 10% 28% 45% 72% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 1% 12% 31% 48% 73% 100%

Night

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 1% 11% 30% 46% 72% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 1% 10% 28% 45% 72% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 1% 12% 31% 48% 73% 100%

OTHER

AM

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 1% 16% 38% 55% 79% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 1% 15% 36% 54% 78% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 1% 16% 38% 56% 81% 100%

Mid-Day

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 1% 15% 37% 57% 81% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 1% 15% 36% 56% 80% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 1% 16% 39% 59% 84% 100%

PM

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 0% 11% 28% 44% 70% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 0% 10% 27% 43% 70% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 0% 11% 29% 47% 74% 100%

Evening

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 1% 15% 35% 54% 80% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 1% 15% 34% 53% 79% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 1% 16% 38% 58% 84% 100%

Night

2012 Base Year 0% 0% 1% 16% 40% 60% 83% 100%

2040 Baseline 0% 0% 1% 16% 38% 59% 82% 100%

2040 Plan 0% 0% 1% 17% 41% 61% 85% 100%

Table 7 Transit Trips: Distribution by Trip Type & Model Run
 18 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Table 8 HOV Trips: Distribution by Trip Type & Model Run

Trip Type Time Period Model <=5 min <=10 min <=15 min <=30 min <=45 min <=60 min <=90 min >90 min WORK

AM

2012 Base Year 12% 23% 33% 58% 74% 83% 93% 100%

2040 Baseline 12% 22% 33% 58% 73% 82% 91% 100%

2040 Plan 12% 24% 35% 61% 77% 86% 95% 100%

Mid-Day

2012 Base Year 10% 21% 34% 66% 83% 91% 97% 100%

2040 Baseline 10% 21% 33% 64% 82% 90% 96% 100%

2040 Plan 10% 22% 35% 68% 84% 92% 98% 100%

PM

2012 Base Year 12% 23% 34% 58% 73% 83% 94% 100%

2040 Baseline 12% 23% 33% 57% 72% 82% 92% 100%

2040 Plan 12% 24% 36% 63% 79% 88% 96% 100%

Evening

2012 Base Year 17% 34% 51% 79% 90% 95% 99% 100%

2040 Baseline 17% 34% 50% 79% 89% 94% 98% 100%

2040 Plan 17% 35% 52% 80% 90% 95% 99% 100%

Night

2012 Base Year 12% 27% 43% 76% 88% 94% 98% 100%

2040 Baseline 12% 27% 43% 75% 87% 93% 98% 100%

2040 Plan 13% 28% 44% 75% 88% 93% 98% 100%

OTHER

AM

2012 Base Year 33% 54% 67% 87% 95% 97% 99% 100%

2040 Baseline 32% 53% 66% 87% 94% 97% 99% 100%

2040 Plan 32% 54% 67% 89% 96% 98% 99% 100%

Mid-Day

2012 Base Year 23% 41% 56% 85% 95% 97% 99% 100%

2040 Baseline 23% 40% 56% 84% 94% 97% 99% 100%

2040 Plan 23% 42% 58% 87% 95% 97% 99% 100%

PM

2012 Base Year 24% 42% 55% 81% 92% 96% 99% 100%

2040 Baseline 24% 41% 55% 80% 91% 96% 99% 100%

2040 Plan 24% 43% 58% 85% 94% 97% 99% 100%

Evening

2012 Base Year 20% 39% 55% 85% 94% 97% 99% 100%

2040 Baseline 21% 39% 56% 86% 94% 97% 99% 100%

2040 Plan 21% 40% 57% 87% 95% 97% 99% 100%

Night

2012 Base Year 21% 41% 58% 87% 95% 97% 99% 100%

2040 Baseline 22% 42% 59% 87% 95% 97% 99% 100%

2040 Plan 22% 42% 60% 88% 95% 97% 99% 100%
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 19

Table 9 SOV Trips: Distribution by Trip Type & Model Run

Trip Type Time Period Model <=5 min <=10 min <=15 min <=30 min <=45 min <=60 min <=90 min >90 min WORK

AM

2012 Base Year 14% 30% 43% 69% 83% 90% 97% 100%

2040 Baseline 15% 31% 44% 70% 84% 91% 96% 100%

2040 Plan 15% 32% 46% 75% 88% 94% 98% 100%

Mid-Day

2012 Base Year 13% 30% 46% 77% 91% 96% 99% 100%

2040 Baseline 13% 30% 46% 77% 90% 95% 99% 100%

2040 Plan 13% 32% 49% 81% 93% 97% 100% 100%

PM

2012 Base Year 14% 29% 42% 68% 82% 90% 97% 100%

2040 Baseline 14% 30% 43% 69% 82% 90% 96% 100%

2040 Plan 15% 31% 46% 76% 89% 95% 99% 100%

Evening

2012 Base Year 18% 39% 57% 86% 95% 98% 100% 100%

2040 Baseline 18% 40% 58% 86% 95% 98% 100% 100%

2040 Plan 19% 41% 60% 88% 96% 98% 100% 100%

Night

2012 Base Year 15% 36% 55% 87% 96% 98% 100% 100%

2040 Baseline 16% 37% 57% 87% 96% 98% 100% 100%

2040 Plan 16% 37% 57% 88% 96% 98% 100% 100%

OTHER

AM

2012 Base Year 36% 61% 76% 93% 98% 99% 100% 100%

2040 Baseline 37% 62% 77% 94% 98% 99% 100% 100%

2040 Plan 38% 65% 80% 96% 99% 100% 100% 100%

Mid-Day

2012 Base Year 34% 59% 76% 96% 99% 100% 100% 100%

2040 Baseline 35% 61% 77% 96% 99% 100% 100% 100%

2040 Plan 37% 64% 80% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100%

PM

2012 Base Year 33% 58% 73% 92% 97% 99% 100% 100%

2040 Baseline 34% 59% 74% 93% 98% 99% 100% 100%

2040 Plan 35% 62% 78% 96% 99% 100% 100% 100%

Evening

2012 Base Year 33% 60% 78% 97% 99% 100% 100% 100%

2040 Baseline 35% 62% 80% 97% 99% 100% 100% 100%

2040 Plan 36% 64% 82% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Night

2012 Base Year 34% 62% 81% 97% 99% 100% 100% 100%

2040 Baseline 35% 64% 82% 98% 99% 100% 100% 100%

2040 Plan 36% 66% 83% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100%
 20 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

The Environmental Quality outcome is measured in terms of criteria pollutant and 

greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions are estimated using the SCAG RTDM results, 

which are input to the California Air Resources Board’s (ARB) Emission Factors (EMFAC) 

model. Pollutant emissions are reported in detail in the Transportation Conformity Analysis 

Appendix.6 The impact of air quality on public health is discussed in the Safety and Health 

outcome section of this Appendix.

Pursuant to SB 375, ARB set per capita greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets from 

passenger vehicles for each of the state’s 18 Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). 

For the SCAG region, the targets set are 8 percent below 2005 per capita emissions levels 

by 2020 and 13 percent below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2035. Although 

ARB has not adjusted SCAG’s regional targets since the 2012 RTP/SCS, ARB is required 

to update regional emissions targets every eight years per state law, therefore SCAG 

anticipates the region’s targets to change. Because the transportation sector is the largest 

contributor to California’s greenhouse gas emissions (more than 36 percent), SCAG 

anticipates updated and more stringent regional greenhouse gas reduction targets may 

be forthcoming. In the meantime, the 2016 RTP/SCS achieves per capita greenhouse gas 

emissions reductions relative to 2005 of 8 percent in 2020, 18 percent in 2035, and 21 

percent in 2040, exceeding the reduction targets the ARB currently requires (TABLE 10).

MONITORING REGIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Like all of California’s MPOs, SCAG must prepare its Plan within the context of the 

requirements of SB 375. For the 2012 RTP/SCS, SCAG developed the Local Sustainability 

Planning Tool (LSPT) to analyze the performance of various land use and transportation 

strategies related to greenhouse gas emissions reduction and help local jurisdictions 

to assess impacts from different land use configurations and scenarios.7

 The LSPT is 

a GIS-based sketch planning tool that allows users to create land use scenarios and 

analyze their impacts. SCAG made the LSPT available to each of its member jurisdictions, 

trained hundreds of users, and worked one-on-one with planners to assist in their use of 

the tool. Provided with a variety of preliminary scenarios for their planning areas, local 

planners were able to create, modify, and compare a variety of future scenarios, and their 

Table 10 RTP/SCS Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Per Capita)

Year

% Reduction from 2005 Levels

ARB Target 2016 RTP/SCS % Diff

2020 8% 8% 0%

2035 13% 18% 5%

2040 N/A* 21% N/A

subsequent impacts on vehicle ownership, vehicle miles traveled, mode choice, and 

greenhouse gas emissions.

The California Transportation Commission (CTC) 2010 California Regional Transportation 

Plan Guidelines recommend that on-model or off-model calculations be formulated to 

produce realistic sensitivities to localized land use variations. For the 2016 RTP/SCS, our 

scenario modeling capabilities have been enhanced to provide added functionality in support 

of monitoring the impact of various land use options on regional greenhouse gas emissions. 

For development of the 2016 RTP/SCS, these enhanced modeling capabilities have been 

incorporated into the Scenario Planning Model (SPM), which was based on the LSPT. Using 

the SPM, SCAG is able to evaluate potential strategies, including land use changes and 

active transportation investments, for reducing regional VMT.

Investments in our regional active transportation network are critical components for 

achieving the sustainability and greenhouse gas reduction goals for the SCAG region. 

To better understand the co-benefits associated with investments in our regional active 

transportation network, an enhanced module was developed for the Scenario Planning 

Model as a supplement to SCAG’s RTDM to measure the benefit of active transportation 

infrastructure through varying levels of investment. The enhanced module provides key 

input to the SCAG Scenario Planning Model for evaluating the impact of active transportation 

infrastructure investment in certain strategic areas. As indicated previously, the Scenario 

Plannng Model is now equipped with an improved Public Health module to measure some 

of the public health co-benefits of transportation investments and land use strategies. 

Providing more and better opportunities for physical activity is one of the goals for the 2016 

RTP/SCS, and this enhanced modeling capability provides us a valuable tool for monitoring 

regional performance in regard to achieving that outcome.

ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

The Economic Opportunity outcome is measured in terms of additional jobs created through 

improved regional economic competitiveness as a result of the transportation investments 

provided through the 2016 RTP/SCS. An annual average of more than 188,000 new jobs 

will be generated by the construction and operations expenditures in the 2016 RTP/SCS, 

and an additional 351,000 annual jobs will be created in a broad cross-section of industries 

by the region’s increased competitiveness and improved economic performance as a result 

of the improved transportation system.

The economic benefits of the 2016 RTP/SCS are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 7 of 

the 2016 RTP/SCS (A Plan that Creates Economic Opportunity).

*ARB has set GHG emissions reduction targets for 2020 & 2035, but not for 2040
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 21

measures to support this outcome: state highway system pavement condition and local 

roads pavement condition. These additional performance measures will strengthen the 

Transportation System Sustainability outcome and further support implementation of the 

current federal transportation authorization program which requires a performance-based 

approach for evaluating transportation system investment priorities.

The performance measures presented in this Appendix serve to demonstrate that the 

planned transportation system in 2040 will perform better and more efficiently compared 

with today. The 2016 RTP/SCS is committed to maintaining a sustainable regional 

transportation system by allocating $275.5 billion toward maintaining and operating the 

system in a state of good repair over the period of the Plan. This is an average annual per 

capita investment of about $368 (in 2015 dollars) for each year of the Plan period (roughly 

one dollar per person per day).

Another measure used in the 2016 RTP/SCS to evaluate performance under the 

Transportation System Sustainability outcome is pavement condition. With diminishing 

resources available to finance new roadways or major roadway rehabilitation projects, the 

condition of our pavement has deteriorated over the years and it has become increasingly 

important to maintain the transportation infrastructure we already have. By monitoring 

the condition of our regional roadways and highways, we are better able to allocate our 

resources to facilities that are most in need. Pavement condition is monitored for both the 

state highway system and for our locally maintained arterial roadways. The condition of our 

regional roadways impacts transportation safety for all modes. Smooth road conditions allow 

for better vehicle and bicycle control and reduced hazards. Currently, about 16 percent of the 

state highway system in the SCAG region is considered distressed, meaning it will require 

some level of maintenance or rehabilitation to improve conditions.

FIGURE 7 shows the share of distressed lane miles on our state highway system by county. 

There are three categories used by Caltrans to describe distressed pavement conditions: 

‘Major,’ ‘Minor’, and ‘Poor Ride Quality’. As suggested by its name, ‘Major’ distress is the 

most costly to correct. Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties each have more than 200 

‘Major’ distressed lane miles on the state highway system.9

The measure used by most local agencies to evaluate pavement condition on our local 

roadways is the Pavement Condition Index (PCI). PCI evaluates pavement condition on 

a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the best possible score, and 0 being the worst. Local 

arterials in the SCAG region have an average PCI rating of 69 out of 100, where scores lower 

than 70 typically translate to conditions that are inadequate, and ratings below 50 indicating 

pavement conditions that will require major rehabilitation. This suggests that a substantial 

proportion of our local roadways are in need of pavement improvements to enhance 

multimodal safety and improve the longevity of our existing transportation infrastructure. It 

INVESTMENT EFFECTIVENESS

The Investment Effectiveness outcome is measured in terms of the degree to which the 

Plan’s expenditures generate benefits that transportation users can experience directly. This 

outcome is important because it describes how the Plan’s transportation investments make 

productive use of increasingly scarce funds. The benefit/cost ratio is the measure used to 

evaluate the cost-effectiveness outcome, as it compares the incremental benefits with the 

incremental costs of multimodal transportation investments. The benefits are divided into 

several categories, including:

z Savings resulting from reduced travel delay

z Air quality improvements

z Safety improvements

z Reductions in vehicle operating costs

For these categories, travel demand and air quality models are used to estimate the benefits 

of the Plan compared with the Baseline. Most of these benefits are a function of changes in 

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT). Not all impacts are linear, 

so reductions in congestion can increase or decrease vehicle operating costs and emissions. 

Delay savings are reflected directly in the VHT statistics.

To estimate the benefit/cost ratio, the benefits in each category are converted into 

dollars and added together. These are divided by the total incremental costs of the Plan’s 

transportation improvements to produce a ratio.

The investments in the 2016 RTP/SCS would provide a return of $2.00 for every dollar 

invested, providing a benefit/cost ratio of 2.0 and a 100 percent return on our investment. 

For this analysis, all benefits and costs are expressed in 2012 dollars. Benefits are estimated 

over the RTP/SCS planning period through 2040. The user benefits are estimated using 

California’s Cal-B/C framework and incorporate SCAG’s RTDM outputs. The costs include 

the incremental public expenditures over the entire 2016 RTP/SCS planning period.8

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY

A transportation system is sustainable if it maintains its overall performance over time in 

an equitable manner with minimum damage to the environment and, at the same time, 

does not compromise the ability of future generations to address their transportation needs. 

Sustainability, therefore, pertains to how our decisions today impact future generations. 

One of the measures used to evaluate transportation system sustainability is the total 

inflation-adjusted cost per capita to maintain our overall multimodal transportation system 

performance at current conditions. The 2016 RTP/SCS includes two additional new 
 22 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

is important to note that without the funding provided in the 2016 RTP/SCS for pavement 

preservation, local roadways would deteriorate significantly across the region to an average 

PCI rating below 50. However, with the preservation investments provided in the Plan, the 

regional PCI score is projected to increase to 83. 

FIGURE 8 shows the current pavement condition summary for local roadways in the SCAG 

region by county. In 2013, average county-wide PCI ratings in the SCAG region ranged from 

a low of 57 in Imperial County to a high of 77 in Orange County.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR ON-GOING 

REGIONAL MONITORING 

This section discusses those measures not directly or only partially used for evaluating 

the performance of the 2016 RTP/SCS Plan. These measures will be used for on-going 

monitoring of the Plan until the next RTP/SCS update occurs. The measures used for ongoing monitoring are presented at the beginning of this Appendix in TABLE 4. These on-going 

monitoring measures are not typically forecast, but they allow us to monitor how well our 

regional goals are being met. This group of outcomes include additional measures that will 

be investigated for future integration into SCAG’s performance monitoring efforts as reliable 

data becomes available.

LOCATION EFFICIENCY

This outcome, first introduced in the 2012 RTP/SCS, is used both to evaluate performance 

of the 2016 RTP/SCS and for on-going regional monitoring. Location Efficiency includes 

several associated performance measures that reflect the impact of improved land use and 

transportation coordination in support of the SCS, as required by SB 375. The Location 

Efficiency outcome describes how well regional coordination of transportation and land 

use planning affects the efficient movement of people and goods. The performance 

measures to be used to support this outcome for on-going regional monitoring are 

described in this section.

SHARE OF GROWTH IN HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT AREAS (HQTA)

As an on-going performance monitoring metric, this variable will focus on regional HQTA 

growth trends as compared to the 2012 Base Year. In 2012, 30 percent of the households 

and 38 percent of the employment in the region were located within the HQTAs. A map 

showing Plan 2040 HQTA locations is presented in EXHIBIT 1 of this Appendix.

57 

66 

77 

70 71 70 

Imperial Los Angeles Orange Riverside San

Bernardino

Ventura

Pavement Condition Index (PCI)

Figure 8 Pavement Condition: Local Roadways (2013)

3% 4%

1%

7% 6% 4% 5%

5%

6%

2%

5%

4% 7% 5%

5%

9%

9%

6%

5%

8%

7%

Imperial Los

Angeles

Orange Riverside San

Bernardino

Ventura SCAG

Region

Major Minor Poor Ride

Figure 7 Pavement Condition: State Highway System (2013)
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 23

PERCENT OF INCOME SPENT ON HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION

Households in the SCAG region are estimated to spend an average of 59 percent of their 

incomes on the combination of housing and transportation expenses, including over 37 

percent for housing and about 22 percent for transportation. While 2040 projections are not 

currently available for this variable, it is anticipated that with the decrease in transportation 

costs projected under the Plan for 2040, the average percentage of household income spent 

in the SCAG region for housing and transportation will also decline.10

LOCATION EFFICIENCY MEASURES REQUIRING FURTHER RESEARCH

There are several additional measures that have been suggested by stakeholders for ongoing monitoring of the Location Efficiency outcome. However, these measures require 

further research to determine their potential use for monitoring. They will be included in 

future RTP/SCS updates if additional research warrants their inclusion.

The following measures require further research to determine their potential suitability for 

on-going monitoring:

z Percent of households with walk access to neighborhood services

z Percent of existing and new below-market rental housing units in transit-oriented 

development (TOD) areas

MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

This section discusses the mobility and accessibility performance measures that will be 

used for on-going monitoring of the regional transportation network.

As discussed earlier in this Appendix, the primary measure for monitoring the mobility 

outcome in the 2016 RTP/SCS is delay due to recurring congestion. Another mobility 

measure that will be used for on-going regional monitoring is non-recurrent delay. As 

previously mentioned, recurrent delay is the day-to-day delay that occurs because too 

many vehicles are on the road at the same time. Non-recurrent delay is the delay that is 

caused by accidents, weather, special events, or other atypical incidents. Non-recurrent 

delay can be mitigated or reduced by improving incident management strategies. Other uses 

of intelligent transportation technologies, such as traffic signal coordination and the provision 

of real-time information about unexpected delays, allow travelers to make better informed 

decisions regarding the availability of transportation alternatives, including transit.

Data from the Caltrans Performance Measurement System (PeMS) is used to assess the 

level of non-recurrent delay on regional freeways using the ‘congestion pie’ feature of PeMS. 

This module breaks down congestion into recurrent and non-recurrent congestion, with 

LAND CONSUMPTION

Included as a key measure for evaluating performance of 2016 RTP/SCS alternatives, this 

measure will also be used in an on-going regional monitoring capacity, focusing on the 

identification of regional trends in the conversion of agricultural land to urban uses occurring 

since the 2012 Base Year.

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) PER CAPITA

As an on-going monitoring metric, VMT per capita will evaluate regional trends in personal 

travel mileage (for automobiles and light trucks) in comparison to the 2012 Base Year. 

In 2012, daily VMT per capita for the region was 22.8 miles. In 2040, per capita VMT is 

projected to decrease to 22.1 miles under the Baseline, and to 20.5 miles under the Plan. 

Results for this indicator as a performance measure for the 2016 RTP/SCS are discussed in 

more detail in the RTP/SCS Outcomes and Performance Measures section of this Appendix.

TRANSIT MODE SHARE

The transit mode share for work and non-work trips will also be monitored on an on-going 

basis to identify regional trends evolving since 2012. In 2012, the transit mode share in the 

SCAG region for all trips was 2.2 percent. Transit mode share is projected to increase for all 

trips in 2040 from 2.2 percent under the Baseline to 3.1 percent under the Plan. For work 

trips, the share of transit use is higher, accounting for a 4.8 percent mode share in the 2012 

Base Year, 5.6 percent under the 2040 Baseline, and 8.2 percent under the 2040 Plan.

TRANSIT TRIPS PER CAPITA

To be used exclusively as an on-going performance measure, transit trips per capita will 

monitor the average annual number of transit trips taken by people as a means of evaluating 

regional transit system improvements over time. Transit trips per capita in the SCAG region 

was 39 in 2012, but is projected to increase in 2040 from 48 trips under the Baseline to 63 

trips under the Plan.

ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD TRANSPORTATION COST

The average annual household transportation expense for the SCAG region in 2012 was 

$12,079. These expenses included both fuel costs and motor vehicle ownership and 

maintenance costs. Annual transportation costs in the region are projected to increase by 

5.7 percent to $12,766 under the Baseline, however under the Plan, these expenses would 

decrease by more than 13 percent from the Baseline to $11,068. This projected reduction in 

household transportation costs under the Plan would also represent an 8 percent decrease 

from the 2012 Base Year. Since both the Baseline and Plan scenarios use the same 

assumptions regarding future fuel costs and vehicle fuel efficiency, much of the decline 

in transportation expense may be attributed to the multimodal investments and location 

efficient land use strategies promoted in the 2016 RTP/SCS.
 24 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

PRODUCTIVITY AND RELIABILITY

As with the non-recurrent congestion measure, the productivity and reliability outcomes 

cannot be readily forecast and are therefore not used for alternatives analysis in the 2016 

RTP/SCS. They do, however, provide some guidance on how much benefit can be obtained 

by regional investments in operational improvements. Productivity and reliability are critical 

indicators since they reflect improvements in efficiency and non-recurrent congestion, 

respectively. SCAG plans to monitor progress achieved in improving productivity and 

reliability on a regular basis moving forward. As with the non-recurrent congestion analysis, 

the productivity and reliability estimates presented here are based on data from PeMS.

PRODUCTIVITY

The productivity outcome reflects the degree to which the transportation system performs 

during peak demand conditions and is therefore considered a system efficiency measure. 

The productivity measure is defined as the percentage of system utilization during 

peak demand conditions.

For highways, productivity is particularly important because when we need capacity the 

most, we often get the lowest level of production from our transportation system. On some 

recurrent congestion being that day-to-day delay that occurs when there are simply too 

many vehicles on the road at the same time.11

PeMS evaluates non-recurring congestion by categorizing the data into two major 

components: ‘Accidents’ and ‘Miscellaneous’. Accident-related congestion is estimated by 

comparing incident location data provided through the Caltrans Traffic Accident Surveillance 

and Analysis System (TASAS) to congestion levels reported by roadway sensors. If excess 

congestion beyond what is considered normal is reported at a location where TASAS 

reports that an accident occurred, that surplus congestion is classified as accident-related 

congestion. If congestion being reported by a sensor is above normal and there was no 

accident report, then that congestion is classified in the miscellaneous category.

The most recent available PeMS congestion classification data is for the fourth quarter of 

2011. FIGURE 9 shows the percentage of freeway congestion during a typical day (5:00 

AM through 8:00 PM) classified as either recurrent or non-recurrent. The data is reported 

for each county and for the region as a whole. Please note that congestion data was 

not available for Imperial County. In 2011, the estimated regional average percentage of 

congestion that was due to accidents or other incidents was around 48 percent. While San 

Bernardino County has less congestion overall, the county is more susceptible to congestion 

caused by incidents, with PeMS data indicating that up to 78 percent of all congestion in the 

county being non-recurrent. In the more urbanized Los Angeles County, the data reported 

that 44 percent of countywide congestion was non-recurrent, with the remaining 56 percent 

being of the recurrent variety.

Other mobility and accessibility measures to be used for on-going system monitoring 

include mode share for work trips and average travel time to work. In 2012, nearly 77 percent 

of commuters traveled to work alone in a single occupant vehicle, while approximately 

14 percent carpooled, about 5 percent used transit, and just over 4 percent used active 

transportation (bicycling/walking). Under the Plan, the share of commuters traveling to 

work by single occupant vehicle would decline to about 72 percent, with nearly 16 percent 

carpooling, more than 8 percent using transit, and about 5 percent traveling to work using 

active transportation modes.

In 2012, the average travel time to work in the SCAG region was 27.3 minutes. In 2040, 

travel time is projected to increase by 4 percent to 28.4 minutes under the Baseline scenario. 

However, average travel time to work will decrease by 9 percent from the Baseline to 

25.9 minutes under the Plan, which also represents a decrease of more than 5 percent 

from the 2012 Base Year.

N/A

56% 52%

41%

22% 22%

52%

44% 48%

59%

78% 78%

48%

Imperial Los

Angeles

Orange Riverside San

Bernardino

Ventura SCAG

Region

Recurrent Delay Non-Recurrent Delay

Figure 9 Recurrent vs. Non-Recurrent Congestion (2011)
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 25

corridors throughput can decline as much as 50 percent during peak periods, and most 

congested urban corridors typically lose 25 percent of their capacity during rush hour. 

This loss of productivity is illustrated in FIGURE 10, which provides an example of how 

vehicle throughput declines, and system productivity is lost, during peak commute periods, 

especially when average speeds drop below 35 miles per hour.

FIGURE 11 summarizes current estimates for productivity losses on the region’s freeway 

system that occur during the morning and afternoon peak travel periods and the expected 

improvements due to Plan investments. Maximizing the system’s productivity is a critical 

goal of this RTP/SCS, and the overall system management approach aims to recapture lost 

productivity. The total investment of over $9.2 billion to implement advanced operational 

strategies on our freeways and arterials is projected to recapture 20 percent of the lost 

productivity. These projections are based on recent studies indicating that investments in 

ramp metering, arterial signal coordination, traveler information systems, advanced incident 

management strategies, and integrated corridor management initiatives can achieve 

substantial improvements in system productivity.

The Plan improves the productivity of the regional transportation system by committing to 

investments in highway operations as discussed in the main RTP/SCS document. Transit 

productivity will also improve through increased ridership, which maximizes the number 

of seats occupied during peak demand conditions. FIGURE 12 shows the percent of transit 

passenger miles traveled compared to the total number of seat miles provided. Overall, the 

trends in transit productivity have been positive, reflecting increased ridership on the various 

transit systems in our region.

A common industry standard for measuring transit productivity is number of passengers 

per service hour or mile. The decline in productivity shown for some counties in FIGURE 12

is most likely a product of the increase in service hours over the last 20 years. As service 

has increased, it is no longer being used as intensely as it was in the early 1990s. Of course, 

there are valid policy reasons for having fewer passengers per hour or mile. For example, 

an agency could extend transit service later into the evening, seeking to provide later 

return trip options for travelers, or to provide mobility for service sector workers who often 

work late into the evening. Similarly, an agency might determine that the load factors on 

its runs are too high and choose to provide extra service so that travelers would have more 

comfortable, less crowded rides.

Figure 10 Illustrative Highway Productivity Losses

 5

 10

 15

 20

 25

 30

 35

 40

 45

 50

 55

 60

 65

 70

 200

 400

 600

 800

 1,000

 1,200

 1,400

 1,600

1:30 PM

2:00 PM

2:30 PM

3:00 PM

3:30 PM

4:00 PM

4:30 PM

5:00 PM

5:30 PM

6:00 PM

6:30 PM

7:00 PM

7:30 PM

8:00 PM

8:30 PM

9:00 PM

Speed (mph)

Flow Rate (veh/hr/ln)

Flow Rate (veh/hr/ln) Speed (mph)

US-101 NB

Lankershim Blvd

October 14, 2014

235 

356 

188 

285 

AM Peak Period PM Peak Period

2012 Base Year Plan 2040

Figure 11 Highway System Productivity (Lost Lane-Miles)
 26 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

RELIABILITY

Reliability measures the relative predictability of travel time for commuters. Unlike mobility, 

which measures how fast the transportation system is able to move people and goods, 

and accessibility, which addresses how much time people must spend traveling in total, 

reliability focuses on the degree to which mobility and accessibility vary for travelers 

from day to day. This variability is illustrated in FIGURE 13. Highway ‘A’ and Highway ‘B’ 

both have the same average travel time, meaning that they experience the same level of 

mobility. However, when each day’s travel time is taken into account, it is apparent that 

Highway ‘A’ has less travel time variability than Highway ‘B’, and is therefore the more 

reliable alternative.

Reliability measures reflect the impacts of accidents, incidents, weather, and special events 

on reaching destinations in a predictable manner. There are currently no established 

methods to forecast reliability because regional travel demand models are not yet capable 

of evaluating variations in travel times, but can only estimate average travel times and 

delays (however, there is currently extensive research being conducted worldwide on 

reliability forecasting).

One way to measure reliability is to calculate the planning time that a person would need to 

allow to ensure an on time arrival, and a common measure for evaluating planning time is 

the 95th percentile travel time. The 95th percentile travel time represents the time that would 

be required to ensure reaching a destination on time 95 percent of the time. Severe events, 

such as collisions, could occasionally cause longer travel times, but the 95th percentile 

represents a balance between days with such extreme events and more typical travel days. 

The additional travel time needed (the difference between the planning time and the average 

travel time) is known as the ‘buffer time’ and the percentage of additional buffer time is 

referred to as the ‘Buffer Index’.12

TABLE 11 illustrates the concept of reliability using data from PeMS for a person traveling 

northbound on US-101 from Soto Street in downtown Los Angeles to Laurel Canyon 

Boulevard in Studio City and leaving at three different times of the day in 2012. A traveler 

entering US-101 during rush hour at 5:00 PM would typically equire about 29 minutes to 

reach Laurel Canyon Boulevard. However, to ensure reaching their destination on time at 

least 95 percent of travel days, that person would need to allow for an additional 13 minutes 

(or 44 percent more time). Transportation System Management (TSM) investments that 

reduce incident response and clearance times, provide better traveler information during 

non-recurrent events, or provide other system management improvements, can reduce the 

buffer time needed to ensure an on-time arrival.

SAFETY AND HEALTH

For on-going monitoring purposes, the Safety performance measure can be reported 

historically by time period (month) and by mode (including for active transportation). 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60%

1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012

Imperial Los Angeles Orange

Riverside San Bernardino Ventura

Figure 12 Ratio of Transit Passenger Miles/Seat Miles

 Same Mobility (same travel time and delay), but Highway “A” is much more reliable

10

5

15

20 Highway “A” Highway “B”

Travel Time

Delay Delay

Figure 13 Difference between Reliability & Mobility
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 27

FIGURE 14 shows the rate for collisions that have resulted in serious injuries and fatalities 

per million vehicle miles traveled on regional roadways between 2002 and 2012. In 2012, 

the most recent date for which complete data is available, more than 1,300 people were 

killed and nearly 7,000 severely injured on roadways in the SCAG region. This translates 

to a regional fatality rate of 0.83 per 100 million VMT, which is lower than the statewide 

fatality rate of 0.91 per 100 million VMT, and significantly lower than the national rate of 1.09. 

The corresponding rate for collisions involving serious injuries was 4.29 in 2012. However, 

implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS would reduce the rate of collisions involving fatalities 

in 2040 to 0.31 per 100 million VMT, while decreasing the rate of injury collisions to 1.60.

FIGURE 15 shows collision rates causing injuries and fatalities involving bicyclists and 

pedestrians per one thousand population for counties in the SCAG region for the years 2004 

through 2012. While the overall trend for all types of collisions involving fatalities or serious 

injuries has been generally sloping downward, it must be noted that roadway safety in our 

region remains a serious concern. Over the last ten years, a total of 1,294 bicyclists have 

been killed and 8,421 severely injured in roadway collisions. During this same time period, 

6,775 pedestrians were killed and 17,504 were severely injured.

The health measure was first introduced as a performance outcome in the 2012 RTP/SCS. 

For on-going monitoring purposes, this measure is reflected in terms of the health effects of 

pollutant emissions, noise, and access to parks and open space. This outcome also includes 

measures for use of bicycling and walking modes for work and non-work trips.

ASTHMA INCIDENCE AND EXACERBATION

Based on the 2014 California Health Interview Survey, 14.6 percent of the State’s 

population has been diagnosed with asthma at some time during their lives. Among 

those who have ever been diagnosed with asthma, over two-thirds (68.2 percent) have 

experienced symptoms in the past 12 months, and 8.8 percent have visited an emergency 

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Imperial Los Angeles

Orange Riverside

Figure 14 Total Injury & Fatality Rates per 100 Million Vehicle Miles: 2002-2012

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Imperial Los Angeles Orange

Riverside San Bernardino Ventura

Figure 15 Bicycle & Pedestrian Injury & Fatality Rates per 1,000 Population: 2004-2012

Table 11 Example of Reliability on a Freeway Corridor*

Departure 

Time

Average 

Travel Time 

(minutes)

Planning Time

(95th 

Percentile) 

(minutes)

Buffer Time 

(minutes)

Buffer Index 

(%)

8:00 AM 16 20 4 28%

Noon 15 18 3 17%

5:00 PM 29 42 13 44%

*US-101 N/B from Soto Street in downtown Los Angeles to Laurel Canyon Blvd in Studio City
 28 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

room or urgent care facility. Thirty-five percent are currently taking daily medication to 

control asthma symptoms.13

PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS LIVING LESS THAN 500 FEET FROM HIGH 

VOLUME ROADWAYS

High volume roads are defined as those with traffic volumes of more than 100,000 vehicles 

per day in urban areas and 50,000 vehicles per day in rural areas. Generally, diesel 

particulate concentrations and the associated cancer risk drop off with distance from the 

pollution source, such as high-volume roadways. Specifically, based on studies conducted 

by the California Air Resources Board (ARB), air pollution levels can be significantly higher 

within 500 feet of high volume roads and then diminish rapidly.14 In 2012, there were a total 

of about 248,000 households in the SCAG region located within 500 feet of high-volume 

roadways. These represented 4.2 percent of total households in the region. In 2040, under 

the Baseline, about 4.1 percent of regional households will be located within the 500 foot 

zone, while this share would increase slightly to 4.2 percent under the Plan.

PREMATURE DEATHS DUE TO PM2.5

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates the number of annual PM2.5 related 

premature deaths in California was 9,200 in 2009.14 The PM2.5 related mortality estimates 

primarily reflect cardiopulmonary and ischemic heart disease causes, which are the 

pathologies most closely associated with PM2.5 exposure, and are also the most frequent 

causes of mortality in the U.S. Because of high PM2.5 concentrations and a large population 

(over 16 million), most of the estimated premature deaths (4,900) occur in the South Coast 

Air Basin in the SCAG region, which includes the non-desert areas of Los Angeles, Riverside, 

and San Bernardino counties, plus the entirety of Orange County. The South Coast Air Basin 

includes nearly 87 percent of the population of the SCAG region.

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MODE SHARE

Supportive of the public health goals of the 2016 RTP/SCS, this measure will allow SCAG 

to monitor the relative share of regional travel that is conducted using active transportation 

modes. It is anticipated that through strategic investments in active transportation 

infrastructure, safety, and supportive land use changes, an increasing share of commuters 

in the region will opt for more healthful, sustainable transportation options for getting to their 

destinations. Bicycle mode share for work trips in the SCAG region is projected to increase 

from 0.5 percent in 2040 under the Baseline to 0.7 percent under the Plan, while the 

pedestrian share of work trips is expected to increase from 4.4 percent under the Baseline, to 

5.6 percent under the Plan.

All of these measures represent improvements over the 2012 Base Year, when 0.4 percent 

of work trips were made by bicycle, and 4.2 percent by walking. The share for active 

transportation modes is generally higher for non-work trips, with a 1.8 percent bicycle mode 

share under the Baseline, and 2.5 percent under the Plan. The non-work pedestrian mode 

share is 12.0 percent under the Baseline, and 15.0 percent under the Plan (FIGURE 16). In 

combination, active transportation modes would account for 15.7 percent of all trips under 

the Plan, in comparison to 12.3 percent under the Baseline.

DAILY AMOUNT OF WALKING AND BIKING

This new measure to be used for on-going regional monitoring, also supportive of the public 

health goal of the 2016 RTP/SCS, will assess the share of our population who include 

walking or biking trips during their day. This measure will also monitor the total number of 

minutes of walking and biking for those who used active transportation modes during their 

daily travels. The average adult in the SCAG region would walk for a total of 12.1 minutes 

each day in 2040 under the Baseline, while under the Plan, the amount of per capita daily 

walking increases by nearly one-third, to 16.0 minutes. The average amount of time an 

adult in the region spends riding a bicycle each day in 2040 under the Baseline would 

be 1.6 minutes, while under the Plan this value increases to 2.0 minutes, an increase of 

more than 25 percent.

PERCENT OF RESIDENTS WITHIN 1⁄2 MILE OF PARKS AND NATURAL LANDS

Another new metric for our on-going regional monitoring program, this measure will evaluate 

the proximity of people to neighborhood parks and natural lands. If there are recreational 

spaces available near enough for people to walk to from their homes, it is more likely they 

4.4%

12.0%

0.5%

1.8%

5.6%

15.0%

0.7%

2.5%

Walk (Work) Walk (Non-Work) Bike (Work) Bike (Non-Work)

Baseline

Figure 16 Mode Share of Walking & Biking
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 29

SHARE OF DISTRESSED LANE MILES ON STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM

Using data provided by Caltrans, this measure will allow SCAG to monitor the general 

condition of our state highway system. Caltrans’ Pavement Management System reports 

distressed pavement condition using three categories: ‘Poor Ride’ indicates low pavement 

quality that only affects the comfort level of the ride, with no apparent underlying weakness 

of the structural integrity of the facility. ‘Minor’ distress refers to a roadway structure 

that requires capital investment in preventative maintenance. ‘Major’ distress refers 

to a roadway facility that requires major rehabilitation to ensure its continued viability 

and operational safety.

According to the most recent data from the Pavement Management System (2013), about 

seven percent of state highway system lane miles in the SCAG region were classified 

as distressed in the ‘Poor Ride’ category, five percent were categorized in the ‘Minor’ 

distressed category, and another five percent were categorized as ‘Major’ distressed. In 

total, approximately 16 percent of state highway system lane miles in the SCAG region had 

pavement conditions that were classified as distressed.

PAVEMENT CONDITION ON LOCAL ROADWAYS

As an on-going performance metric, this measure will allow SCAG to monitor pavement 

condition on our locally maintained arterial roadways. As discussed previously in this 

Appendix, local pavement condition is most frequently evaluated using the Pavement 

Condition Index (PCI) which rates pavement condition on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being 

the best possible score, and 0 being the worst. According to the most recent data collected 

by SCAG from our local jurisdictions (2013), the average PCI rating for local roads in our 

region range from a low of 57 in Imperial County, to a high of 77 in Orange County. These 

conditions may be considered average to below average. But without the incremental 

investments for preservation as provided in the Plan, pavement conditions would 

significantly deteriorate by 2040 to an average PCI rating of below 50, which would require 

substantial expenditures for widespread major roadway rehabilitation and reconstruction 

projects. However, with the infrastructure preservation investments included in the Plan, 

roadways in the SCAG region are projected to achieve an average PCI score of 83 by 2040.

RESOURCE EFFICIENCY

Resource Efficiency is another new outcome for our on-going regional monitoring program 

that will serve to support our regional sustainability goals. The results provided by this 

outcome will provide a better understanding of how well the SCAG region is performing in 

the conservation of our energy and water resources over time. With growing concern over 

climate change and on-going statewide drought conditions, this outcome will help monitor 

our region’s ability to adapt to these climatic challenges.

will get more physical exercise and thereby improve their health and overall quality of life. It 

is estimated that over half (51.7 percent) of the population in the SCAG region lived within 1⁄2 

mile of a local park in 2012.

NUMBER OF ACRES OF PARKS FOR EVERY 1,000 RESIDENTS

Similar to the proximity to park and natural lands metric described above, this measure, 

also new to SCAG’s regional on-going monitoring program, will evaluate the availability of 

local park space to maximize opportunities for residents to engage in physical exercise near 

their homes. Easy accessibility to local parks offers residents the opportunity to obtain the 

benefits of physical exercise, including improved health and a better overall quality of life. 

The amount of local park land available for every 1,000 residents in the SCAG region in 2012 

was estimated to be 3.3 acres.

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

This outcome is measured in terms of ambient air quality. Ambient air quality monitoring is 

performed by the local air districts and the California Air Resources Board. The following are 

links to those agencies’ websites.

z California Air Resources Board: www.arb.ca.gov

z South Coast Air Quality Management District: www.aqmd.gov

z Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District: www.avaqmd.ca.gov

z Imperial County Air Pollution Control District: www.co.imperial.ca.us/AirPollution

z Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District: www.mdaqmd.ca.gov

z Ventura County Air Pollution Control District: www.vcapcd.org

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY

This outcome, like its counterpart in the set of performance measures being used to evaluate 

the 2016 RTP/SCS, seeks to monitor the overall performance of our regional multimodal 

transportation system over time. For purposes of on-going regional monitoring, this 

outcome will be evaluated in terms of how well our existing transportation system is being 

maintained. The two performance measures used to support this outcome include the share 

of distressed lanes miles on our state highway system, and the pavement condition of our 

local arterial roadways.
 30 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

ENERGY CONSUMPTION

Energy consumption is an important performance measure for on-going monitoring in 

the SCAG region because of its impact on greenhouse gas emissions and our regional 

sustainability goals. With the passage of SB 375, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions 

has become a focal point in the development of community sustainability strategies among 

state, regional, and local agencies throughout the State of California. This measure will 

monitor energy consumption (electricity, natural gas, vehicle fuel) in the SCAG region. The 

careful monitoring of this metric over time will help us to distinguish which strategies have 

proven to be the most beneficial toward achievement of our regional sustainability goals.

The cumulative annual energy consumption for buildings in the SCAG region in 2040 

under the Plan is projected to be 748 trillion British Thermal Units (BTU) less than 

what would be consumed under the Baseline, representing a 4 percent decrease in 

cumulative energy usage.

WATER CONSUMPTION

Similar to the energy consumption performance measure described above, the water 

consumption variable will also assist in helping to evaluate which of our sustainability 

strategies have been most effective toward achieving our regional goals. This measure will 

monitor water consumption in the urban areas of the SCAG region. With the continuing 

conditions of severe drought affecting our entire state, paired with escalating concern 

regarding the regional impacts of climate change, it is imperative that we develop effective 

strategies for reducing water consumption in our region.

Cumulative annual water consumption for buildings in the SCAG region in 2040 is projected 

to total nearly 134 million acre feet under the Baseline, however, under the Plan, water 

consumption drops to 133.2 million acre feet, representing a 0.6 percent decrease.

CONCLUSION

As demonstrated throughout this Appendix, the performance of the 2016 RTP/SCS yields 

beneficial results for our region in a wide variety of measurable categories, all of which 

contribute meaningfully toward achieving our regional goals of sustainability, transportation 

equity, improved public health and safety, and enhancement of our overall quality of life in 

Southern California. TABLE 12 provides an overview of some of the key regional co-benefits 

that would be generated through implementation of the Plan. As indicated in the table, the 

transportation system investments and land use strategies outlined in the Plan produce 

very clear and positive results in terms of making progress toward achieving our regional 

sustainability and livability goals.

TABLE 13 provides a summary of the results of the 2016 RTP/SCS performance measures. 

Once again, progress is demonstrated through implementation of the Plan for nearly every 

outcome. An important function for developing these performance measures is to monitor 

how well our region responds over time to the transportation improvements and strategies 

promoted through the Plan. Our objective through the monitoring of these performance 

measures will be to identify areas where we are experiencing success toward achieving our 

regional goals and those areas where additional efforts or new strategies may be needed.
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 31

Benefit Categories Baseline RTP/SCS Savings % Savings

Local Infrastructure and Services Costs: Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs to Support 

New Growth: 2012-20401 $40.7 billion $37.3 billion $3.4 billion 8.4%

Household Costs: Transportation and Home Energy/Water Use, All Households, Annual: 2040 $16,000 $14,000 $2,000 12.3%

Land Consumption: New (greenfield) land consumed to accommodate new growth: 2012-2040 154 sq miles 118 sq miles 36 sq miles 23.4%

Building Energy Use: Residential and Commercial Buildings, Cumulative: 2012-2040 

(measured in British Thermal Units (BTUs)) 20,311 trillion 19,563 trillion 748 trillion 3.7%

Building Energy Costs: Residential and Commercial Buildings, Cumulative: 2012-2040 $762 billion $735 billion $27 billion 3.5%

Building Water Use: Residential and Commercial Buildings, Cumulative: 2012-2040 

(measured in Acre Feet (AF)) 134 million 133.2 million 0.8 million 0.6%

Building Water Costs: Residential and Commercial Buildings, Cumulative: 2012-2040 $186 billion $185 billion $1 billion 0.5%

Household Driving: Annual Passenger Vehicle Miles Traveled: 2040 177.7 billion 150 billion 27.7 billion 15.6%

Table 12 Key Benefits of the Plan

Source: SCAG Scenario Planning Model

Note: 1 Operations and maintenance costs referenced here include costs beyond those for transportation (e.g. sewer and water operations and maintenance costs).
 32 2016–2040 RTP/SCS I APPENDIX

Outcome Performance Measure Category 2040 Baseline Result 2040 Plan Result Trend LOCATION EFFICIENCY

Share of growth in High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs)

Percent of households in HQTA's 36% 46% 11.0%

Percent of jobs in HQTA's 44% 55% 12.0%

Land consumption Greenfield land consumed 154 sq miles 118 sq miles -23.4%

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita Automobiles and light-duty trucks 22.1 miles 20.5 miles -7.4%

Transit mode share

All Trips 2.2% 3.1% 0.9%

Work Trips 5.6% 8.2% 2.6%

Average distance traveled by trip type

Work Trips 15.1 miles 15.5 miles 2.5%

Non-Work Trips 7.8 miles 7.9 miles 0.5%

Percent of trips less than 3 miles

Work Trips 20.4% 20.3% -0.1%

Non-Work Trips 41.7% 41.9% 0.2%

Work trip length distribution

Trip Length: 10 miles or Less 51.6% 50.9% -0.7%

Trip Length: 25 miles or Less 81.8% 81.0% -0.8%

MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

Person delay per capita Automobiles and light-duty trucks 15.0 mins 9.2 mins -38.8%

Person delay by facility type

Highway/Expressway 3,035,105 hrs 2,023,417 hrs -33.3%

HOV 251,547 hrs 42,590 hrs -83.1%

Arterial 2,254,896 hrs 1,327,235 hrs -41.1%

Truck delay by facility type 

Highway 274,456 hrs 171,828 hrs -37.4%

Arterial 47,561 hrs 20,998 hrs -55.9%

Travel time distribution for transit, SOV, and HOV modes for 

work and non-work trips

% of PM peak transit trips <45 minutes 22.2% 25.6% 3.4%

% of PM peak HOV trips <45 minutes 72.3% 78.8% 6.5%

% of PM peak SOV trips <45 minutes 82.5% 88.7% 6.2%

SAFETY AND HEALTH

Collision rates by severity by mode (per 100 million vehicle 

miles)

Serious injuries N/A 1.60 N/A

Fatalities N/A 0.31 N/A

Criteria pollutants emissions (tons per day)

Reactive organic gases (ROG) 49.1 tons 45.0 tons -8.4%

Carbon monoxide (CO) 338.6 tons 307.7 tons -9.1%

Oxides of nitrogen (NOx

) 96.4 tons 88.2 tons -8.5%

Particulate matter (PM10) 32.6 tons 30.8 tons -5.5%

Particulate matter (PM2.5) 13.3 tons 12.6 tons -5.3%

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 94.6 tons 86.8 tons -8.2%

Air pollution-related health measures

Pollution-related health incidences (annual) 270,328 234,363 -13.3%

Pollution-related health costs (annual) $4.48 billion $3.88 billion -13.4%

Table 13 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures Results
PLAN PERFORMANCES I PERFORMANCE MEASURES 33

Outcome Performance Measure Category 2040 Baseline Result 2040 Plan Result Trend SAFETY AND HEALTH

Physical activity-related health measures

Daily per capita walking 12.1 mins 16.0 mins 32.2%

Daily per capita biking 1.6 mins 2.0 mins 25.9%

Daily per capita driving 64.8 mins 61.9 mins -4.5%

Obese population (%)* 26.3% 25.6% -2.7%

High blood pressure (%)* 21.5% 20.8% -3.3%

Heart disease (%)* 4.4% 4.2% -4.5%

Diabetes Type 2 (%)* 6.1% 6.0% -1.6%

Mode share of walking and bicycling by trip type

Walk share (Work) 4.4% 5.6% 1.2%

Bike share (Work) 0.5% 0.7% 0.2%

Walk share (Non-Work) 12.0% 15.0% 3.0%

Bike share (Non-Work) 1.8% 2.5% 0.7%

Walk share (All Trips) 10.7% 13.5% 2.8%

Bike share (All Trips) 1.6% 2.2% 0.6%

ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY

Greenhouse gas emissions Reduction in per capita GHG emissions from 

2005 levels N/A

8% in 2020

18% in 2035

21% in 2040

N/A

ECONOMIC 

OPPORTUNITY

Additional jobs supported by improving competitiveness Annual number of new jobs generated N/A 351,000+ N/A

Additional jobs supported by RTP/SCS transportation 

investments Annual number of new jobs generated N/A 188,000+ N/A

INVESTMENT 

EFFECTIVENESS

Benefit/Cost Ratio Benefit ratio received per $1 investment N/A 2.0 N/A

TRANSPORTATION 

SYSTEM 

SUSTAINABILITY

Cost to preserve multimodal system to current and state of 

good repair Annual per capita cost N/A $368 N/A

State Highway System Pavement Condition Share of distressed lane miles

Please refer to Figures 7 and 8 in this Appendix for 2013 pavement condition 

results Local Roadways Pavement Condition Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating

TABLE 13 2016 RTP/SCS Performance Measures Results Continued

*Results are only for areas experiencing land use and population changes (not the entire SCAG region)
Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arcadia Azu sa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La Mi rada

Los Angeles Mo nrovia

Monterey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Co lt on

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

De sert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La Q

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Hu ntington

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

Sa n

Clem e nte

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yo rba L in da 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

73

241

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Less than 35 36 to 50 Greater than 50

(Source: SCAG)

8

10

10

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Imperial

County

° 0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Speed in Miles per Hour

Exhibit 2 Highway Speed Map: Base Year 2012 PM Peak
Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arcadia Azu sa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La Mirada

Los Angeles Mo nrovia

Monterey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Co lt on

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

De sert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La Q

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Hu ntington

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

Sa n

Clem e nte

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yo rba L in da 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

73

241

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Less than 35 36 to 50 Greater than 50

(Source: SCAG)

8

10

10

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Imperial

County

° 0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Speed in Miles Per Hour

Exhibit 3 Highway Speed Map: Baseline 2040 PM Peak
Kern

San Diego

Camarillo

Moorpark

Ojai

Simi Valley

Thousand

Oaks

Oxnard

Arcadia Azu sa

Burbank

Carson

Downey

El

Monte

Glendale

Glendora

La Mi rada

Los Angeles Mo nrovia

Monterey

Park

Norwalk

Pasadena

Pomona

Torrance

Walnut

West

Covina

Whittier

Calabasas

Long

Beach

Adelanto

Apple Valley

Barstow

Chino

Chino Hills

Co lt on

Fontana

Hesperia

Highland

Loma

Ontario Linda

Rancho

Cucamonga

Redlands

Rialto San

Bernardino Upland

Victorville

Yucaipa

Yucca Valley

Lancaster

Palmdale

Santa Clarita

Eastvale

Lake Elsinore

Hemet 

Indian

Wells

Temecula

Perris

Moreno Valley

Murrieta

Wildomar

Rancho

Mirage

Corona

Jurupa Valley

Desert Hot Springs

San

Jacinto

Beaumont Banning

Calimesa

Palm

De sert

Riverside

Menifee

Norco

La Q

Palm

Springs Anaheim

Brea

Buena

Park

Costa

Mesa

Fullerton

Garden

Grove

Hu ntington

Beach

Irvine

Laguna

Niguel

Mission

Viejo

Newport

Beach

Orange

Sa n

Clem e nte

Santa Ana

Seal

Beach Tustin

Yo rba L in da 91

14

60

126

71

57

60

73

241

101

101

15

215

10

15

10

210

405

5

605

710

5

15

405

110

San Bernardino

County

Riverside

County

Orange

County

Los Angeles

County

Ventura

County

Less than 35 36 to 50 Greater than 50

(Source: SCAG)

8

10

10

San

Bernardino County

Riverside

County

Imperial

County

° 0 5 10 2.5

Miles

Speed in Miles Per Hour

Exhibit 4 Highway Speed Map: Plan 2040 PM Peak
 37

NOTES

1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Transportation Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 1990-2013.

2 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, from http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/. Last accessed August 5, 2015; and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevalence of Overweight, Obesity, and Extreme 

Obesity Among Adults: United States, Trends 1960–1962 through 2007–2008. June 2010.

3 For more information on Federal air quality standards, see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS): http://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/criteria.html

4 For more information on the health impacts of criteria air pollutants, see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Six Common Air Pollutants: http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/

5 For more information on the health impacts of particulate matter, see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Particle Matter (PM) Health, Last Accessed October 7, 2015: http://www3.epa.gov/pm/health.html

6 For more information on Federal transportation conformity requirements, see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Transportation Conformity General Information: http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/

generalinfo.htm

7 California Air Resources Board, Estimate of Premature Deaths Associated with Fine Particle Pollution (PM2.5) in California Using a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Methodology, August 31, 2010: http://www.arb.

ca.gov/research/health/pm-mort/pm-report_2010.pdf

8 California Department of Transportation, California Life-Cycle Benefit/Cost Analysis Model User’s Guide, February 2009: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/eab/benefit_files/CalBC_User_Guide_v8.pdf

9 Caltrans, 2013 State of the Pavement Report; http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/maint/Pavement/Pavement_Program/PDF/2013_SOP_FINAL-Dec_2013-1-24-13.pdf

10 Center for Neighborhood Technology: http://www.cnt.org/

11 Caltrans, Performance Measurement System (PeMS): http://pems.dot.ca.gov/

12 For technical information regarding the Buffer Index, see Federal Highway Administration, Office of Operations: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion_report_04/appendix_C.htm

13 UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, California Health Interview Survey: http://healthpolicy.ucla.edu/chis/Pages/default.aspx

14 California Air Resources Board, Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, April, 2005: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

ADOPTED | APRIL 2016

WWW.SCAGRTPSCS.NET

APPENDIX

PLAN PERFORMANCE I PERFORMANCE MEASURES

please recycle 2347 2016.03.31

REGIONAL OFFICES

Imperial County

1405 North Imperial Avenue, Suite 1 

El Centro, CA 92243 

Phone: (760) 353-7800 

Fax: (760) 353-1877

Orange County

OCTA Building 

600 South Main Street, Suite 1233 

Orange, CA 92868 

Phone: (714) 542-3687 

Fax: (714) 560-5089 

Riverside County

3403 10th Street, Suite 805 

Riverside, CA 92501 

Phone: (951) 784-1513 

Fax: (951) 784-3925

San Bernardino County

Santa Fe Depot 

1170 West 3rd Street, Suite 140 

San Bernardino, CA 92410 

Phone: (909) 806-3556 

Fax: (909) 806-3572

Ventura County

950 County Square Drive, Suite 101 

Ventura, CA 93003 

Phone: (805) 642-2800 

Fax: (805) 642-2260 

MAIN OFFICE

818 West 7th Street, 12th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90017

(213) 236-1800

www.scag.ca.gov