Countywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee MEETING … · 2019-07-17 · COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE...

411 King Street, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Countywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee

MEETING AGENDA July 23, 2019 – 1:30 p.m.

Sonoma County Transportation Authority Large Conference Room

411 King Street Santa Rosa, California 95404

ITEM

1. Introductions

2. Approval of Meeting Notes: April 23, 2019 - DISCUSSION / ACTION*

3. Public Comment

4. SB-1 Local Partnership Formulaic Program, 20/21 Call for Projects Results - DISCUSSION/ACTION*

5. Moving Forward 2050 (CTP) and Measure M Reauthorization joint call for projects – Discussion*

6. Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Project Updates – Discussion* 6.1. Bicycle and Pedestrian Webmap Review - Discussion

7. TDA3 / TFCA FY19 Q4 Report – Information**

8. Roundtable Updates – Discussion

9. Bike Share Updates - Discussion

10. Other Business / Comments / Announcements – Discussion

11. Adjourn – ACTION

*Materials attached **Materials to be handed out

The next SCTA/RCPA meeting will be held September 9, 2019 The next CBPAC meeting will be held September 24, 2019

Copies of the full Agenda Packet are available at www.scta.ca.gov.

ACCOMMODATION FOR PERSONS LIVING WITH A DISABILITY: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact SCTA/RCPA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation. SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Sonoma County Transportation Authority office at 411 King Street, during normal business hours.

Pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices should be turned off during the committee meeting to avoid electrical interference with the sound recording system. TO REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS: Please consider bicycling, carpooling or taking transit to this meeting. For more information check www.511.org, www.GoSonoma.org.

1

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

http://www.scta.ca.gov/

http://www.511.org/

http://www.gosonoma.org/

COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES

Meeting Notes of April 23, 2019

ITEM

1. Introductions

Meeting called to order at 1:33 by Chair Jon Paul Harries.

Committee Members: Jon Paul Harries, Chair, City of Cotati; Nancy Adams, Vice Chair, City of Santa Rosa; Bobby Boinski, City of Healdsburg; Gina Benedetti-Petnic, City of Petaluma; Eydie Tacata, City of Rohnert Park; Dana Morrison, City of Sebastopol; Wendy Atkins, City of Sonoma; Mona Ibrahim, Town of Windsor; Elizabeth Tyree, Sonoma County Regional Parks; Joe Morgan, Citizen representative, County of Sonoma.

Guests: Brittany Lobo, Sonoma County DHS; Eris Weaver, Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition.

Staff: Dana Turrey; Drew Nichols; Chris Barney.

2. Approval of Meeting Notes: January 22, 2019 -DISCUSSION / ACTION*

Approved as submitted.

3. Public Comment

N/A

4. Roundtable updates – Discussion

City of Cotati:

Jon Paul Harries announced the West School Street project will be going out to bid.

City of Healdsburg:

Bobby Boinski reported on the Northern Healdsburg Avenue Complete Streets Study. The study aims to understand the wishes and need for the residents and business owners for a road diet/complete streets.

City of Petaluma:

Gina Benedetti-Petnic announced the City of Petaluma will be sponsoring energizer stations for Bike to Work Day.

City of Rohnert Park:

N/A

City of Santa Rosa:

Nancy Adams announced the Santa Rosa City Council adopted the Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan in March and the installation of bicycle lanes throughout the city with TFCA funding.

City of Sebastopol:

Dana Morrison spoke on striping work by Caltrans, ADA curb/ramp upgrades, and a Traffic Corridor Safety study for Highway 116.

City of Sonoma:

Wendy Atkins announced a bicycle rodeo and workshop will be held in the City of Sonoma.

Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition:

Eris Weaver spoke on upcoming bicycle events in Rohnert Park, Sebastopol, and Sonoma (city).

Ms. Weaver also commented on the haiku bookmark contest for elementary-aged students.

Regarding Safe Routes to School, staff are currently enrolling schools for the next school year (FY 19/20 program). W-Trans has been contracted to work on a ranking system/study to determine what schools get which services.

Lastly, there will be a Safe Routes to School Alliance meeting held in May.

2

Sonoma County Regional Parks:

Elizabeth Tyree announced scheduled meetings for the Russian River bicycle and pedestrian trail in the lower Russian River. These meetings have been rescheduled to May 7th and May 11th.

An online survey with a map tool is available for interested persons to provide comments.

Ms. Tyree expressed interest to see the feedback from the community on this topic.

Sonoma County, Department of Health Services:

Brittany Lobo announced the upcoming completion of the ATP grant for high schools and the application submitted for technical assistance.

Town of Windsor:

Mona Ibrahim announced the TFCA application was submitted for a Class 1 trail on Foss Creek.

5. TDA 3

5.1. FY20 Proposed Program of Projects

Dana Turrey announced and described each of the four applications that have been received. Applications submitted include:

- Cloverdale: S. Cloverdale Blvd./Santana Pedestrian and Green Bike Land Improvements;

- Petaluma: Path maintenance – Lynch Creek Trail and Prince Park Path;

- Santa Rosa: Santa Rosa Ave. Bike and Pedestrian Enhancements; and

- Sebastopol: ADA Curb Ramp upgrades at 18 locations along SR 116.

Dana Morrison moved to consider recommendation approval of the projects

submitted to the SCTA Board of Directors, Eydie Tacata seconded.

The motion was approved unanimously.

5.2. Planning and Prioritization

Dana Turrey provided a handout projecting TDA Article 3 funding for six years and outlined the funding and eligible projects.

6. TDA 3/TFCA, FY19 Q3 Report

Dana Turrey reminded the committee this item is a regular quarterly report noting the status of TDA3 and TFCA projects not fully expended.

Nancy Adams added the EV chargers invoice is ready for review.

7. SCTA/RCPA Data Dashboard Mock-up for Review

Chris Barney introduced the idea of a data dashboard to the committee. SCTA produces data and maps and this idea aims to make these sources more accessible.

In the plight to make this access easier, SCTA has introduced the idea for a data dashboard that would include content that works well and looks nice, along with including relevant, strong data.

A handout was distributed which illustrated the types of topics that can be included in this concept by category.

Partial funding for this would come from the Vision Zero grant that was jointly applied for by SCTA and County of Sonoma Department of Health Services.

Mr. Barney requested that committee assist with prioritization of any data, maps, or charts that would be made available.

Jon Paul Harries asked if the data dashboard will be open to the public, or just to staff.

3

Mr. Barney responded that staff continues to looking at both options, but will be looking to have most of the information available to the public.

Eris Weaver asked what would be something that staff would not want the public to see.

Mr. Barney responded that early, preliminary data and conceptual ideas that are not ready for public consumption would be something not available for the public on the data dashboard.

8. Caltrans District 4 Pedestrian Plan

Dana Turrey included, in the agenda packet, the flier of the Caltrans District 4 Pedestrian plan.

Some may recall a few years ago, Caltrans HQ developed and active transportation plan that was mostly a vision and policy document for bicycle and pedestrian safety.

Following the statewide policy document, Caltrans District 4 developed a Bicycle Plan that identified and prioritized bicycle projects within the state highway system.

The Pedestrian Plan just kicked off, with the first meeting the previous Friday. Topics discussed include a preliminary overview of the plan.

Information from the Plan will be brought to the committee as they develop.

Ms. Turrey also referenced and described Street Story, a platform for community engagement developed by UC Berkeley.

9. ATP Update

9.1. Cycle 4, Regional Recommendations

Dana Turrey announced that very few awards were awarded in the Bay Area for the statewide program.

9.2. SB 152 (Beall) Active Transportation Program Reform Act

This item was included for the committee’s interest. The bill proposes to shift more funding to the regional ATP program.

Eris Weaver commented on the bicycle community’s impression on the legislation thus far.

10. Bike Share Updates

Dana Turrey briefly updated the committee on the regional bicycle share program.

The proposals for the RFP were due at the end of March; eight proposals were received.

SCTA and TAM are doing a preliminary review of the proposals, making sure the evaluation criteria is explained clearly so the review panel can differentiate the answers.

Updates will be presented to the committee as they develop.

11. Articles of Interest

11.1. Bike to Work Day is May 9, 2019

Included for the committee’s interest.

Eris Weaver commented that 19 energizer stations will be available this year.

Ms. Weaver also announced the team bike challenge and bicyclist of the month.

12. Other Business/Comments/Announcements

N/A

13. Adjourn

The committee adjourned at 2:43 p.m.

4

411 King Street, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report

To:

From:

Item:

Date:

Sonoma County Transportation Authority – Countywide Bicycle Pedestrian

Advisory Committee (CBPAC)

Seana L. S. Gause, Senior – Programming and Projects

SB-1 Local Partnership Formulaic Program, 20/21 Call for Projects – Results

July 23, 2019

Issue:

What are the results of the recent call for projects? Shall this Committee support the recommendation of the Technical Advisory Committee?

Background:

On March 29, 2019 a call for projects was issued by SCTA for the Road Repair and Accountability Act (aka SB-1)

in the Local Partnership (Formulaic) Program (LPP(f)). The call is attached to this staff report for reference.

The fund source is available for transportation projects to those government entities that have successfully

passed a tax measure or fee specifically for transportation. As the taxing authority of Measure M, Sonoma

County’s ¼ cent transportation sales tax measure, SCTA has discretion over the LPP(f) fund source.

The SCTA received two projects in response to the call, one from Sonoma County Transit for a new electric

bus purchase and installation of two in-route charging stations for two additional electric buses. The project

would serve three different areas in the county: Cloverdale, Healdsburg and Sonoma/Sonoma Springs. The

second project proposed is in Petaluma along the McDowell Boulevard Corridor and would provide signal

coordination, reconstruction and striping of a section between E. Washington and Caulfield, construction of

38 curb ramps, sidewalk gap closures and widening of an existing sidewalk to create connectivity for a class I

bike path. The first project (Sonoma County Transit) is proposed for the funding year in the call for projects

(FY20/21). The second project (Petaluma McDowell Blvd Corridor) was submitted to indicate interest in the

following funding year of FY21/22, but not to compete with the Sonoma County Transit proposal. Both

applications are attached to this staff report for reference.

The California Transportation Commission is in the process of updating the guidelines for the LPP(f), and as

part of that process, it is newly anticipated that the funding cycles will change from the existing single year, to

two year cycles. This is expected to take effect in October when the final guidelines are adopted by the

Commission, and prior to any submittal the SCTA would make for the program. The call that the SCTA issued

prior to being made aware of this change was for a single year (FY20/21).

SCTA staff proposes the CBPAC consider supporting the recommendation of the June 27, 2019 Technical

Advisory Committee (TAC): Program the two projects received for the anticipated two-year funding cycle

(20/21 and 21/22). Each project would receive approximately $551K in programming. SCTA would issue a

call for projects that covered the subsequent two years when the next cycle is available for programming,

and for each subsequent cycle thereafter.

5

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

Policy Impacts:

None, it is within policy for the Advisory Committees to make programming recommendations to the Board. SCTA staff is presenting the TAC recommendation to the remaining Advisory Committee meetings in July and

August prior to Board consideration in September.

Fiscal Impacts:

Two years of formulaic programming represents about $1.102M total.

Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the Advisory Committee consider supporting the TAC recommendation.

6


March 29, 2019 To: Stakeholders RE: Road Repair and Accountability Act (SB-1), Local Partnership Formulaic Program (LPP) Call for Projects The Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) intends to program Sonoma County’s formulaic share of funds from the SB-1 Local Partnership Program 2020 cycle (Approximately $551,000 available in 20/21). The funds require a minimum 1:1 match of funding (federal, local or state other than funds allocated by the California Transportation Commission). SCTA staff has been made aware of an eligible Sonoma County Transit project (EV buses and Charging Stations) that will be proposed to the SCTA Board for consideration. Should any eligible project sponsors wish to submit a project for consideration in addition to the above mentioned project, the required information should be submitted to SCTA staff for review. The required information, as stated in the Local Partnership Program guidelines is as follows: Each project application should be limited to 25 pages (excluding the Project Programming Request form) and must include:

A. A cover letter, with signature of the Chief Executive Officer or other officer authorized by the taxing authority’s governing board, authorizing and approving the application [SCTA will provide this upon approval of the project by the SCTA Board]. Where the project is to be implemented by an agency other than the taxing authority, documentation of the agreement between the taxing authority and the implementing agency must be submitted with the application and include the signature of the Chief Executive Officer or other authorized office of the implementing agency.

B. A confirmation that any capacity-increasing project or a major street or highway lane realignment project was considered for reversible lanes pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 100.15.

C. An explanation of the project and its proposed benefits, including the following: i. Project title, which should be a brief, non-technical description of the project type, scope,

and location, and a map (or maps) of the project location denoting the project site. ii. The amount of Local Partnership Program funds requested.

iii. The amount and source of matching funds. Each nomination must list each federal, state, local and private funding source by project component and fiscal year.

iv. Project background and a purpose and need statement. v. A concise description of the project scope and anticipated benefits (outcomes and

outputs) proposed for funding. vi. A description of the project’s current status, including the current phase of delivery, and

the schedule for the completion of the project. vii. A project cost estimate which includes the amount and source of all funds committed to

the project and the basis for concluding that the funding is expected to be available. If uncommitted funding is identified, the requirements as outlined in Section 16 must be included. Cost estimates should be escalated to the year of proposed implementation

7

and be approved by the Chief Executive Officer or other authorized officer of the implementing agency.

viii. Each taxing authority should provide documentation that the expected benefits of the proposed project justify its costs, recognizing that some costs and benefits can be difficult to quantify. Each application should include analysis utilizing the appropriate module or modules of Caltrans’ Life-Cycle Benefit-Cost Analysis Model 6.0. This model can be found at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/eab/LCBC_Analysis_Model.html If anther model is more applicable the application should describe why and also provide the analysis based on the alternate model.

ix. A description of how the project is consistent with transportation, land use and housing planning goals within the region. For projects within a region with a currently adopted California Air Resources Board approved Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), the eligible taxing authority will discuss how the project is 0ocnsistent with the SCS. This will include a quantitative and/or qualitative assessment of how the project will facilitate implementation of the SCS and support achieving the region’s greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.

x. A description of the greenhouse gas impacts and the community impacts of the project and how those impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level. This should include a quantification of the effects of the project on diesel particulate (PM 10 and PM 2.5), nitrogen oxides, greenhouse gases and other pollutant emissions using the Caltrans’ Life-cycle Benefit-Cost Analysis Model 6.0. (Cal B/C), the SB 1 Intermodal Tool, or the SB 1 Other Projects Tool. Report emissions saved in both tons and dollars. The SB 1 Intermodal Tool and the SB 1 Other Projects Tool are currently under development. These tools will be projected by December 15th by Caltrans at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/eab/LCBC_Analysis_Model.html

D. Each application must include a Project Programming Request Form. Each Project Programming Request Form must list federal, state, local, and private funding categories by project component and fiscal year. An excel template of this form may be found at http://dot.ca.gov/hq/transprog/ocip/htm Caltrans is working to develop a web-based PPR form. The Commission will notify potential applicants through its website and through the RTPA Group when the web-based form is available.

Please submit the required information to SCTA staff for consideration by close of business (COB) May 31, 2019. All project information and submittals should be sent to Seana L. S. Gause, Senior – Programming and Projects, either by email at [email protected] or by U.S. Post at 411 King Street, Santa Rosa, CA 95404. Questions and comments can be directed to Seana Gause at (707) 565-5372.

8

Request for SB-1 Local Partnership Program Funding

Project Title: Zero-Emission Bus & En-Route Charging Stations

With the goal of transitioning Sonoma County Transit’s heavy-duty fleet to zero-emission buses, this project requests $551,000 in SB-1 Local Partnership Program cycle 2020 funding to assist with the purchase of one 35-foot electric-powered bus and two en-route electric charging stations. The zero-emission bus will be deployed on Sonoma County Transit’s (SCT) local route operated within the City of Sonoma and the Sonoma-Springs area. The two electric charging stations will be installed at locations within the cities of Healdsburg and Cloverdale, respectively, to provide en-route electric charging for the electric-powered buses to be deployed on those local routes. Maps of the local routes in the cities of Sonoma, Healdsburg and Cloverdale are attached. The anticipated locations of the en-route charging stations to be installed in Healdsburg and Cloverdale are also included on the attached maps.

Costs & Requested Funding: The total cost for a 35-foot zero-emission bus is estimated to be $855,000. After a discount of $135,000 from the Hybrid and Zero-Emission Bus Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP) through the California Air Resources Board, the cost is reduced to $720,000. Sonoma County Transit is requesting $360,000 from the SB-1 Local Partnership Program to assist with this bus purchase. Local matching funding of $360,000 will be provided from the Low-Carbon Transit Operation Program (LCTOP) through Caltrans, the Transportation Fund for Clean Air through the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and Transportation Development Act funding allocated to SCT through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

The total cost for installation of the two en-route electric charging stations in the cities of Healdsburg and Cloverdale is estimated to be $400,000. For this component of the project, SCT is requesting $191,000 from the SB-1 Local Partnership Program. The local match of $209,000 will be provided from LCTOP funding through Caltrans and local TDA funding allocated to SCT through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Please see the ‘Funding Info’ tab on the Project Programming Request form, which lists each funding source by project component and fiscal year.

Background & Project Need: The County of Sonoma is located approximately 50 miles north of San Francisco along the Highway 101 corridor and has a population of just over 500,000. A division of the Sonoma County Transportation and Public Works Department, Sonoma County Transit is publicly- financed and governed by the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. SCT provides countywide fixed-route transit and paratransit services in the rural unincorporated areas of Sonoma County connecting all nine incorporated cities within Sonoma County. SCT also serves as the local transit provider for the cities of Cloverdale, Healdsburg, Windsor, Sebastopol, Rohnert Park, Cotati and Sonoma.

Due to major growth in terms of development and population over the past 39 years, Sonoma County Transit’s fixed-route services have expanded to a total of 29 local and intercity routes. SCT provided a total of 916,541 passenger trips during Fiscal Year 2018 and currently provides approximately 100,000 annual vehicle revenue hours, operating 7-days per week and 358 days per year. SCT also provides American’s with Disabilities (ADA) paratransit service within its countywide service area. A systemwide service map and summary of SCT’s routes and ADA paratransit services can be found on its website www.sctransit.com.

9

http://www.sctransit.com/

Sonoma County Transit's fixed-route fleet currently consists of fifty-one (51) active revenue vehicles. The fixed-route fleet includes thirty-eight (38) 40-foot compressed natural gas (CNG)-fueled buses, six (6) 30-foot CNG-fueled buses, one (1) 30-foot battery-electric bus, and six (6) small gasoline-fueled cut-away mini-buses. SCT’s paratransit fleet currently consists of twenty-nine (29) gasoline-fueled paratransit vehicles including a mix of cut-away vehicles, mini-vans and sedans. These fixed-route and paratransit revenue vehicles as well as thirteen (13) support vehicle are operated out of SCT’s administration and maintenance facility located in Santa Rosa.

All vehicle maintenance and fueling operations are also performed at Sonoma County Transit’s maintenance facility in Santa Rosa, which includes five maintenance bays and fueling/charging facilities for its compressed natural gas, gasoline and electric-powered fleets. Utilizing other secured local funding, it is anticipated that the construction of an expanded electric bus charging facility will be completed at SCT’s maintenance and fueling facility by the summer of 2020. The new electric bus charging stations will have the capacity to charge ten electric-powered buses at a time or twenty buses overnight.

This project will enable Sonoma County Transit to reach a significant milestone in transitioning its heavy-duty fixed-route bus fleet from CNG-fueled to zero-emission in accordance with the Innovative Clean Transit requirements set forth by the California Air Resources Board. Ultimately, this funding request will assist SCT toward replacing approximately 15 percent of its heavy-duty fixed-route fleet with zero-emission buses by 2021. The combination of SCT’s first electric-powered bus already in-service, four additional electric-powered buses either currently being manufactured by BYD Motors or with funding secured, and the additional zero-emission bus included in this funding request will enable SCT to operate all its local routes located in incorporated cities with zero-emission buses.

In anticipation of expanded use of zero-emission buses on its local routes, Sonoma County Transit has begun working with various local jurisdictions to establish en-route electric charging stations. Due to the current range limitations of electric-powered buses, en-route electric charging stations will be necessary on local routes that are operated relatively long distances from SCT’s electric charging facility in Santa Rosa. Funding has already been secured and designs are currently underway for en-route electric charging stations to be installed in the cities of Windsor and Sonoma. This project will provide additional funding for en-route electric charging stations that are needed on local routes operated within the cities of Cloverdale and Healdsburg.

Project Benefits: Over the past four years, Sonoma County Transit has introduced several innovative programs that have resulted in reaching new markets of transit users. Since 2015, all veterans and college students can ride anywhere on SCT free of charge. In July 2018, SCT introduced the ‘Fare-Free’ program, which now includes local routes operated in the cities of Sebastopol, Windsor, Healdsburg, Sonoma and the Lower Russian River communities of Guerneville and Monte Rio. Under this program, participating local jurisdictions have agreed to reimburse SCT the uncollected fares for all rides taken on their respective local routes. Since the Fare-Free program began, the total collective ridership on SCT’s local routes has increased by approximately 50%.

In conjunction with the Fare-Free program, Sonoma County Transit’s deployment of zero-emission buses will help further promote increased ridership on its local routes. SCT’s first electric-powered bus was placed into service in December 2018 on the local ‘Sebastopol Shuttle’ route operated in the City of Sebastopol. Two additional electric-powered buses are currently being manufactured by BYD Motors and will be ready for deployment in summer 2020 on SCT’s local routes operated within the cities of Rohnert Park and Cotati, and on the local Windsor Shuttle route. Funding has been secured for two additional electric-powered buses in Fiscal Year 2021, which will be deployed on the local Healdsburg

10

Shuttle and the local Cloverdale Shuttle routes. The zero-emission bus for which this funding is requested will be deployed on the local Sonoma Shuttle route operated within the City of Sonoma and the Sonoma-Springs area.

The deployment of zero-emission buses on all of Sonoma County Transit’s local routes will help to reduce the energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions that are associated with its current fixed-route bus fleet. Electric-powered buses consume less energy per mile driven than buses that use other common propulsion technologies, such as compressed natural gas (CNG)-fueled engines. The Altoona Bus Research and Testing Center reports that the overall average fuel economy of the electric-powered buses that SCT has purchased from BYD Motors is 27.71 MPG equivalent, which is seven times more efficient than conventional CNG-fueled buses. The Iron-Phosphate batteries that are equipped in BYD Motors’ electric-powered buses are considered ‘life’ batteries that come with a 12-year warranty and no required mid-life battery replacement. It is also anticipated that over the life of an electric-powered bus, maintenance costs will be lower than that of a comparable CNG-fueled bus.

Project Schedule: With the understanding that SB-1 Local Partnership Program funding for this project will not be available until Fiscal Year 2021, during the upcoming fiscal year Sonoma County Transit will be utilizing other state and local funding sources to purchase zero-emission buses and install en-route electric charging stations for local routes in the cities of Windsor and Sonoma. Sonoma County Transit already has one electric-powered bus in-service on the local Sebastopol Shuttle route operated in the City of Sebastopol. Two additional electric-powered buses are anticipated to be delivered during summer 2020 and another two buses by summer 2021. If this funding request is approved for Fiscal Year 2021, then a sixth zero-emission bus would be delivered to Sonoma County Transit by summer/fall 2021.

Funding requested for this project would also support Sonoma County Transit’s installation of two en-route electric charging stations for local routes operated in the cities of Healdsburg and Cloverdale, respectively. During the first half of Fiscal Year 2020, SCT will be working with local jurisdictions on securing locations, including right-of-way if necessary, for the charging stations. After the completing the environmental phase for the project for which Categorical Exemptions are anticipated, design work would then commence at the beginning of 2020. Installation of the charging stations would take place during spring/summer 2021. Utilizing other local funding, en-route electric charging stations are currently being designed for local routes in the cities of Windsor and Sonoma, respectively, with installation anticipated by summer 2020.

Cost/Benefit Analysis: Sonoma County Transit analyzed the expected benefits of this project utilizing

the Quantification Methodology (QM) model developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB)

for the Low-Carbon Transit Operations Program that is administered by Caltrans. The QM model was

developed specifically for LCTOP projects, which are required to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions

and support transit agencies in their efforts to increase mode share. The use of CARB’s QM model was

determined to be more appropriate to quantify the benefits of this transit-focused project.

Based on the deployment of zero-emission electric-powered buses on three local routes providing service in the cities of Sonoma, Healdsburg and Cloverdale over 12 years, the QM model estimates a reduction of 16,726 gallons of fossil fuels and an energy and fuel cost savings of $459,636. Ridership on the three local routes is estimated to increase by 5,520 passenger trips, which will result in an estimated reduction of 22,991 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) according to the model. The QM model also estimates that the total budget for this project would support 7.1 full-time equivalent jobs. The full results of CARB’s model for this project are attached.

11

Regional Planning Goals: Sonoma County Transit’s purchase of zero-emission buses and supporting electric charging infrastructure is consistent with the transportation, land-use and housing goals and strategies included in the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Plan Bay Area 2040. MTC’s Plan Bay Area is the state-mandated long-range transportation, land-use and housing plan for the San Francisco Bay Area. One of the goals in Plan Bay Area is to modernize the region’s transportation system, which includes funding bus replacement projects. The purchase of zero-emission buses and supporting infrastructure als0 supports the goal in Plan Bay Area to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, this project will help advance equity in the region by promoting access to public transportation for low-income and minority populations through SCT’s ‘Fare Free’ local transit services provided with zero-emission buses.

Greenhouse Gas Impacts: Sonoma County Transit analyzed the expected greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions of this project utilizing the Quantification Methodology (QM) model developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for the Low-Carbon Transit Operations Program that is administered by Caltrans. The QM model was developed specifically for LCTOP projects, which are required to reduce GHG emissions and support transit agencies in their efforts to increase mode share. The use of CARB’s QM model was determined to be more appropriate to quantify the GHG emission reductions of this transit-focused project.

Based on the deployment of zero-emission electric-powered buses on three local routes providing service in the cities of Sonoma, Healdsburg and Cloverdale over 12 years, the QM model estimates total GHG emission reductions of 1,931 metric tons of carbon dioxide (MTCO2). The model also estimates this project would result in 11 pounds of PM2.5 emission reductions, 48 pounds of ROG emission reductions and 2,496 pounds of NOx emission reductions. In addition, the model estimates 3,504 MTCO2 in GHG emission reductions per total SB1 Local Partnership Program funding to be provided for this project. The full results of CARB’s model for this project are attached.

Contact Information: Should you have any questions or require additional information regarding this funding request, please contact Bryan Albee or Steven Schmitz at 585-7516.

12

Route 68 – Cloverdale Shuttle

= Potential En-Route Electric Bus Charging Locations.

13

Route 67 – Healdsburg Shuttle

= Potential En-Route Electric Bus Charging Locations.

14

Route 32 – Sonoma Shuttle

15

FY 2018-2019 LCTOPAllocation Request

10 4 23 25 2

*if you have more Districts please provide an attachment

0 0

$551,000Approved LONP: No LONP Approval date:Funding: 99313: $551,000 99314: Total:

Specific Area (Lat-Long of the project in decimal degrees separated by a comma "," (e.g., 34.413775, -119.848624 ). For multiple locations, list each separated by a semicolon ";"

Project Life - For capital projects, state the "Useful Life" of the project. For operation projects state the number of months service will be funded.

Capital: 12 Years Operations:

Start date (anticipated) : 8/1/2019 End date (anticipated) : 12/31/2021

General Area (City/County) :County of Sonoma

Sub-TypePurchase replacement zero-emission vehicle(s) (may include equipment/infrastructure)

Total Years of Rollover: Remaining years of Rollover:

Name: No more than 180 characters.

Electric Bus Purchase & En-Route Charging Stations

Description (Short): No more than 370 characters.

Purchase of one 35-foot electric-powered bus to be deployed on the local route serving the City of Sonoma and the Sonoma Springs area. Installation of two en-route electric charging stations on the local routes serving the cities of Healdsburg and Cloverdale, respectively.

Type: Capital

Phone #: Congressional*:E-mail

Project Summary

Authorized Agent Legislative District NumbersName: Assembly*:Title: Senate*:

E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]

Name: Steven Schmitz Name: Bryan AlbeeTitle: Transit Specialist II Title: Transit Systems Manager

Approved Title VI (Date)*:

Link to Agency's Approved Title VI Plan: *Please provide a copy of your FTA/Caltrans Approval Letter as an attachment to your FY18-19 LCTOP Allocation Request.

Allocation Request Prepared by Contact (if different then "Prepared by")

County: Sonoma Regional Entity: MTCAgency Website: www.sctransit.com

Lead Agency Information

Name: Sonoma County TransitAddress: 355 West Robles AvenueCity, State Zip Code: Santa Rosa, CA 95407

Phone #: 707-585-7516 Phone #: 707-585-7516

Division of Rail and Mass TransportationLow Carbon Transit Operations Program Page 1 of 16

Sheet Name: Allocation RequestRev. 12/18

16


Total FY 18-19 LCTOP Funding $551,000

Supplanting Funds - Describe how the LCTOP funds will not supplant other funding sources.

Fully Funded Project - Provide a description of the status of all the funds to be used to completely fund this project. The budget for this project includes $551,000 in SB-1 Local Partnership Program funding and $569,000 from Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding allocated to Sonoma County Transit, Low-Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) funding through Caltrans, and Transportaton Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) funding through the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

Contact Phone #: 99314Contact E-mails:

Contributing Sponsor: Amount: PUC Funds Type:Contact Person: 99313

Contact E-mails:

Contact Person: 99313Contact Phone #: 99314

Contributing Sponsor: Amount: PUC Funds Type:



Contact E-mails:

Contact Person: 99313Contact Phone #: 99314

Contributing Sponsor: Amount: PUC Funds Type:



Contact E-mail: [email protected]

Contact Person: Bryan Albee $551,000 99313Contact Phone #: 707-585-7516 99314

$0 $1,120,000

Lead Agency: Sonoma County Transit Amount: PUC Funds Type:

Total Project Cost: $0 $1,120,000 $0 $0 $0

$0Other Funds: $569,000 $569,000Other GGR Funds:

$0

Total LCTOP Funds: $0 $551,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $551,000

PUC 99314 Amount: $0

FY 22-23 Total

PUC 99313 Amount: $551,000 $551,000

LCTOP Allocation Year Prior FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22

Funding Information



17


$0

$0

Operations/OtherVeh/Equip Purchase

$0

CON $0

$0

R/W

$0

PS&E

FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 Total

PA&ED

$0 $0 $569,000

Funding Source:

Component Prior FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21

TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $569,000 $0

$569,000

Operations/Other $0

$0

Veh/Equip Purchase $569,000

$0

CONR/W

$0

PS&E $0

FY 23-24 Total

PA&ED

$551,000

Funding Source:

Component Prior FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23

$0

TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $551,000 $0 $0 $0

$551,000

Operations/OtherVeh/Equip Purchase $551,000

FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 Total

PA&ED

$0

CON $0

$0

R/W

$0 $0 $0

Funding Source:

Transportation Development Act (TDA), LCTOP and TFCA

Component Prior FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21

TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0

Operations/Other $0

SB-1 Local Partnership Program

$0

PS&E

$0

Veh/Equip Purchase

$0

CONR/W

$0

PS&E $0

FY 23-24 Total

PA&ED

$0 $1,120,000

Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP)

Component Prior FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23

$0 $0 $0

TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $1,120,000 $0 $0

Operations/Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0

Veh/Equip Purchase $0 $0 $0 $1,120,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,120,000

$0 $0

CON $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0

R/W $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

PS&E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Total

PA&ED $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Funding PlanProposed Total Project Cost

Component Prior FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24



18


$0

$0

Operations/Other

$0

Veh/Equip PurchaseCON

$0

R/W $0

$0

PS&E

FY 22-23 FY 23-24 Total

PA&ED

$0 $0

Funding Source:

Component Prior FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22

$0

TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Operations/Other

$0

Veh/Equip Purchase $0

$0

CON

$0

R/WPS&E

Total

PA&ED $0

Funding Source:


$0

TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0

Operations/Other

$0


$0

R/W $0

$0

PS&E

FY 22-23 FY 23-24 Total

PA&ED

$0 $0

Funding Source:


$0

TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Operations/Other

$0

Veh/Equip Purchase $0

$0

CON

$0

R/WPS&E

Total

PA&ED $0

Funding Source:


$0

TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0

Operations/Other

$0


$0

R/W $0

$0

PS&E

FY 22-23 FY 23-24 Total

PA&ED

Funding PlanFunding Source:




19


Estimated Total Project GHG (mtco2) Reduction:

1930.56This number is calculated based on the values from above and the QM-Tool tab.

LCTOP Emission Reductions/Total LCTOP Funds Requested

3503.73655This number is calculated based on the values from above and the QM-Tool tab.

Total Project Ridership Increased 5,520 This is calculated based on the values above.Total Project VMTs Reduced

22,991This number is calculated based on the values above.

Trip Length (L) - Length (miles) of average auto trip reduced or average passenger trip length (miles). 8.33

Systemwide average weekeday passeger trip length as reported in the FY 17-18 Natrional Transit Database (NTD).

Project Useful Life 12 This is calculated based on the values above.

Project F Yr. Ridership - Estimated annual ridership contributed by the new service or capital improvement in YrF. 460

Total combined ridership on local routes 32, 67 and 68 of approximately 46,000 in FY 17-18 is anticipated to increase an estimated 1% due to the novelty of the new electric-powered buses.

Adjustment (A) - Adjustment factor to account for transit dependency. Default: 0.5 for local bus service and 0.83 for long distance commute service.

0.50

Using the default for local bus service.

Year F (YrF) - Final year that the service is funded or the final year of the capital improvements useful life. 2033

The end of the useful life of the bus is anticipated to be in late FY 2033.

Project Yr1 Ridership - Estimated annual ridership contributed by the new service or capital improvement in Yr1. 460

Total combine ridership on local routes 32, 67 and 68 of approximately 46,000 in FY 17-18 is anticipated to increase an estimated 1% due to novelty of the new electric-powered buses.

On the local route operated in the City of Sonoma and the Sonoma - Springs area, Sonoma County Transit deploys buses that are fueled by compressed natural gas (CNG). This project will replace one CNG-fueled bus with one zero-emission electric-powered bus. The two en-route electric charging stations to be installed with this project will also allow for the replacement of CNG-buses with zero emission electric-powered buses on local routes providing service with the cities of Healdsburg and Cloverdale. The deployment of the zero-emission electric-powered buses will help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Greenhouse Gas Reductions - Please provide quantitative information requested below and explanation/support for the data provided.

Value ExplanationYear 1 (Yr1) - First year of service, or year that capital improvements will be completed.

2021

The zero-emission electric-powered bus is expected to be deployed into service by late 2021.

Project GHG BenefitsGreenhouse Gas Reductions - Describe qualitatively how this project will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, expanded/enhanced transit service will improve headways thus making transit a more convenient option of transportation thus increasing ridership, reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and reducing GHG.



20


Job Support Benefits (Refer to Read Me for more information)

Travel Cost Savings Benefits

Reduced Operating/Maintenance Costs Promotes Active Transportation

Increase System Reliability Promotes Integration w/ other modes

Other Benefits

Co-Benefits - Describe benefits indicated above and other benefits not listed.

Transit Mode Share (increase mobility): Describe how this project will increase transit mode share (increase mobility).

Co-Benefits - Check all additional Benefits/Outcomes.

Improved Safety Coordination with Educational Institution

Improved Public Health College Grades K-12

Avoided Parking Cost ($/Trip) $0.00 Project will not provide service.

Avoided Toll Cost ($/Trip) $0.00 Project will not provide service.

Reduced Fare Cost ($/Trip) $0.00 Project will not reduce fares.

Transit Facility Parking Cost ($/Trip) $0.00 Project will not provide service.

% of Project Budget Associate with Tertiary Activity

Value Explanation

Standard Fare Cost for Project ($/Trip) $0.00 Project will not provide service.

Secondary Project Activity (select from drop down) Procurement of electric vehicle supporting infrastructure

% of Project Budget Associate with Tertiary Activity 33%

Secondary Project Activity (select from drop down)

Project Benefits

Primary Project Activity (select from drop down) Procurement of Buses

% of Project Budget Associate with Primary Activity 67%



21


####

Identify the Specific Priority Population Benefit:

Identify an important community or household need and evaluate whether the project provides a benefit that meaningfully addresses that need.(For more information please review Read Me) :

Identify Specific Common Needs of Priority Populations (if you select letter D. in question above):

Priority Populations Community Need: Describe, in detail the identified community need(s) and how the project meets the need(s), including the levels of community engagement.

Is the project a transit fare subsidies or network and fare integration technology improvements, including, but not limited to, discounted or free student transit passes

Is the project a purchase of zero-emission transit buses and/or supporting infrastructure?

Identify the Project Census Tract(s) (please use the 10-digit identification code) :

Is the project located within the boundaries of a low-income community census tract?

Is the project located outside of a disadvantaged community, but within 1/2 mile of a disadvantage community and within a low-income census tract?

Is the project a new or expanded transit service that connects with transit service serving a disadvantaged communities?

Priority Populations Benefits

Does your Service Area have a Disadvantaged Community? (as defined by SB 535)Is the project located within the boundaries of a disadvantaged community census tract?



22


Amount funds to benefit Low-Income Households or Resident within 1/2 mile of a DAC: $ 0

Low-Income Community or Low-Income Household within 1/2 a mile of a Disadvantaged Community Benefit - Explain, in your own words, how the project will benefit Low-Income Community(ies) or Low-Income Households within the project area.

Amount funds to benefit a DAC: $ 0Amount funds to benefit Low-Income Households & Residents: $ 0

DAC Benefit - Explain, in your own words, how the project will benefit Disadvantaged Community(ies) within your service area.

Low-Income Community or Low-Income Household Benefit - Explain, in your own words, how the project will benefit Low-Income Community(ies) or Low-Income Households within the project area.



23

Note:

Total Full-time Equivalent Jobs Supported by Project Budget 7.1

California Air Resources Board

Benefits Calculator Tool for theLow Carbon Transit Operations Program

California Climate Investments

Full-time Equivalent Induced Jobs Supported by Project GGRF Funds 1.3

It is not appropriate to directly compare the job estimates from this Job Co-benefit Modeling Tool to the GGRF project dollars. California Climate Investments facilitate greenhouse gas emission reductions and deliver a suite of economic, environmental, and public health co-benefits, including job co-benefits. A different mix of spending on materials, equipment, and labor is expected across various California Climate Investments project types and match funding arrangements. As such, some project types will support more jobs than others.

Total Full-time Equivalent Jobs Supported by Project GGRF Funds 3.5Full-time Equivalent Jobs Directly Supported by Project GGRF Funds 1.2Full-time Equivalent Jobs Indirectly Supported by Project GGRF Funds 1.0

DRAFT December 5, 2018 Page 1 of 1 Jobs Summary24

NOx emission reductions (lbs)

N/A

N/APM2.5 emission reductions (lbs) N/A

ROG emission reductions (lbs)

2,496PM2.5 emission reductions (lbs) 11

48

Fossil fuel energy use reductions (kWh) N/A

Renewable energy generated (kWh) N/AFossil fuel energy use reductions (kWh) N/A

Passenger VMT reductions (miles)

Energy and fuel cost savings ($) $459,636

Travel cost savings ($) N/AEnergy and fuel cost savings ($) N/A

Passenger VMT reductions (miles) N/AFossil fuel use reductions (gallons)

Renewable energy generated (kWh) N/A

ROG emission reductions (lbs)

Diesel PM Emission Reductions (lbs) 0NOx emission reductions (lbs)

Travel cost savings ($)

Diesel PM emission reductions (lbs) 0LCTOP GGRF Funds

Fossil fuel use reductions (gallons)

Renewable energy generated (kWh) N/A

ROG emission reductions (lbs) 48

Fossil fuel energy use reductions (kWh) N/A

NOx emission reductions (lbs) 2,496PM2.5 emission reductions (lbs) 11

Passenger VMT reductions (miles) N/A




Project Name Electric Bus Purchase & En-Route Charging Stations

Co-benefits and Key Variables Summary

16,726

0

16,726

Total California Climate Investments

Travel cost savings ($) N/AEnergy and fuel cost savings ($) $459,636

N/A

Additional California Climate Investments Program(s)

N/AFossil fuel use reductions (gallons)

Diesel PM emission reductions (lbs) N/A

DRAFT December 5, 2018 Page 1 of 1 Co-benefits Summary25

Total GHG Emission Reductions (MTCO2e) 1,931Total GHG Emission Reductions per Total LCTOP GGRF Funds (MTCO2e/$million) 3,504

Total GHG Emission Reductions per Total GGRF Funds (MTCO2e/$million) 3,504

Total LCTOP GHG Emission Reductions (MTCO2e) 1,931

Project InformationProject Name Electric Bus Purchase & En-Route Charging Stations

Total LCTOP GGRF Funds ($) 551,000$ Total GGRF Funds ($) 551,000$

Non-GGRF Leveraged Funds ($) 569,000$ Total Funds ($) 1,120,000$

GHG Summary

FY 2018-19 LCTOP GGRF Funds Requested ($) 551,000$




DRAFT December 5, 2018 Page 1 of 1 GHG Summary26

Required

Project Type

Quantification Method Technology Conversion Automated

Type of Region County Yes

Region Sonoma Yes

Year 1 (Yr1) 2021 Yes

Year F (YrF) 2033 Yes

Quantification Period 12 Calculated

Service Type Local/ Intercity Bus (Short Distances) No

Yr1 Ridership 460 No

YrF Ridership 460 No

Adjustment Factor (A) 0.50 No

Length of Average Trip (L) 8.33 No

Passenger VMT Reductions Not Applicable Calculated

GHG Emission Reductions Not Applicable Calculated

Vehicle Type Transit Bus Yes

Engine Tier No

Hybrid Vehicle No Yes

Fuel/Energy Type Electric Yes

Project Specific Emission Factor Optional

Model Year 2021 Yes

Annual VMT 79,461 Yes

Annual Fuel/Energy (kWh) No

GHG Emissions 445 Calculated

The county where the majority of the service occurs.

The useful life of the rolling stock.

Not applicable for this project type.


The first year of the rolling stock's useful life.

The estimated GHG emissions (MTCO2e) of the vehicle to be acquired.

The vehicle type (e.g., Transit Bus, Streetcar, Ferry, etc.) of the rolling stock to be acquired.

Applicant must be able to demonstrate an approved carbon intensity value under the Low Carbon Fuel Standard; must submit additional documentation.

The final year of the rolling stock's useful life.

SECTION 3: This section is used to estimate the net emission reductions from new service or from the purchase of new zero-emission/hybrid vehicle(s).



SECTION 2: This section is used to estimate the emission and cost reductions from displaced auto vehicle miles traveled (VMT).






SECTION 1: This section is used to determine the quantification method and emission factors to use to estimate emissions.Inputs

The region that best encompasses the geographic location for the proposed project type.

Description

Purchase replacement zero-emission vehicle(s) (may include equipment/infrastructure)

Emission Estimates = Emissions from Baseline Vehicle – Emissions from New Vehicle


Is the vehicle to be acquired a hybrid?

Not applicable for this vehicle type.

The fuel type (e.g. Electric, Diesel, etc.) of the vehicle to be acquired.

The engine model year of the vehicle to be acquired.

The estimated annual VMT of the vehicle to be acquired (e.g., 72,000).


27

Additional GHG Reductions Vehicle Replacement Yes


Engine Tier No

Fuel/Energy Type CNG Yes

Model Year 2009 Yes


Annual Fuel/Energy (cubic feet) No

GHG Reductions 2,376 Calculated

Additional GHG Reductions No

Vehicle Type No

Engine Tier No

Fuel/Energy Type No

Model Year No

Annual Fuel/Energy No

GHG Reductions Not Applicable Calculated

Total Project GHG Reductions 1,931 Calculated

LCTOP Project GHG Reductions 1,931 Calculated

The vehicle type expected to replaced as a result of the project (e.g., Transit Bus).

The portion of GHG emission reductions attributable to funding from LCTOP; GHG emission reductions are prorated according to the level of program funding contributed from LCTOP and other CCI programs, as applicable.

Total GHG emission reductions (MTCO2e) from the project during the useful life.

SECTION 6: This section calculates the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions achieved by the proposed project.

The estimated GHG emission reductions (MTCO2e) from vehicle replacement.




SECTION 4: This section is used to estimate the net emission reductions from vehicle replacement as a result of the proposed project.An existing vehicle will be replaced by the acquisition of a new zero-emission or near zero-emission vehicle.

SECTION 5: This section is used to estimate the net emission reductions from fuel/energy reductions as a result of the proposed project.





The estimated annual VMT of the vehicle to be acquired.

The fuel type of the vehicle expected to replaced as a result of the project (e.g., Diesel).

Engine model year of the vehicle to be replaced.



DRAFT December 5, 2018 Page 2 of 2 QM-Tool28

Required

Project Type

Quantification Method Technology Conversion Automated

Type of Region County Yes

Region Sonoma Yes

Year 1 (Yr1) 2021 Yes

Year F (YrF) 2033 Yes

Quantification Period 12 Calculated

Service Type Local/ Intercity Bus (Short Distances) No

Yr1 Ridership 460 No

YrF Ridership 460 No

Adjustment Factor (A) 0.50 No

Length of Average Trip (L) 8.33 No

Passenger VMT Reductions Not Applicable Calculated

GHG Emission Reductions Not Applicable Calculated


Engine Tier No

Hybrid Vehicle No Yes

Fuel/Energy Type Electric Yes

Project Specific Emission Factor Optional

Model Year 2021 Yes


Annual Fuel/Energy (kWh) No

GHG Emissions 445 Calculated

The county where the majority of the service occurs.

The useful life of the rolling stock.



The first year of the rolling stock's useful life.

The estimated GHG emissions (MTCO2e) of the vehicle to be acquired.

The vehicle type (e.g., Transit Bus, Streetcar, Ferry, etc.) of the rolling stock to be acquired.

Applicant must be able to demonstrate an approved carbon intensity value under the Low Carbon Fuel Standard; must submit additional documentation.

The final year of the rolling stock's useful life.

SECTION 3: This section is used to estimate the net emission reductions from new service or from the purchase of new zero-emission/hybrid vehicle(s).



SECTION 2: This section is used to estimate the emission and cost reductions from displaced auto vehicle miles traveled (VMT).






SECTION 1: This section is used to determine the quantification method and emission factors to use to estimate emissions.Inputs

The region that best encompasses the geographic location for the proposed project type.

Description

Purchase replacement zero-emission vehicle(s) (may include equipment/infrastructure)

Emission Estimates = Emissions from Baseline Vehicle – Emissions from New Vehicle


Is the vehicle to be acquired a hybrid?


The fuel type (e.g. Electric, Diesel, etc.) of the vehicle to be acquired.

The engine model year of the vehicle to be acquired.

The estimated annual VMT of the vehicle to be acquired (e.g., 72,000).


29

Additional GHG Reductions Vehicle Replacement Yes


Engine Tier No

Fuel/Energy Type CNG Yes

Model Year 2009 Yes


Annual Fuel/Energy (cubic feet) No

GHG Reductions 2,376 Calculated

Additional GHG Reductions No

Vehicle Type No

Engine Tier No

Fuel/Energy Type No

Model Year No

Annual Fuel/Energy No

GHG Reductions Not Applicable Calculated

Total Project GHG Reductions 1,931 Calculated

LCTOP Project GHG Reductions 1,931 Calculated

The vehicle type expected to replaced as a result of the project (e.g., Transit Bus).

The portion of GHG emission reductions attributable to funding from LCTOP; GHG emission reductions are prorated according to the level of program funding contributed from LCTOP and other CCI programs, as applicable.

Total GHG emission reductions (MTCO2e) from the project during the useful life.

SECTION 6: This section calculates the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions achieved by the proposed project.

The estimated GHG emission reductions (MTCO2e) from vehicle replacement.




SECTION 4: This section is used to estimate the net emission reductions from vehicle replacement as a result of the proposed project.An existing vehicle will be replaced by the acquisition of a new zero-emission or near zero-emission vehicle.

SECTION 5: This section is used to estimate the net emission reductions from fuel/energy reductions as a result of the proposed project.





The estimated annual VMT of the vehicle to be acquired.

The fuel type of the vehicle expected to replaced as a result of the project (e.g., Diesel).

Engine model year of the vehicle to be replaced.



DRAFT December 5, 2018 Page 2 of 21 QM-Tool30

DTP-0001 (Revised June, 7 2018 v7.09)

Assembly: Senate: Congressional:

Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ● DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONPROJECT PROGRAMMING REQUEST

General Instructions

Amendment (Existing Project) No Date: 6/19/19District EA Project ID PPNO MPO ID Alt Proj. ID / prg.

04County Route/Corridor PM Bk PM Ahd Project Sponsor/Lead Agency

SON Sonoma County TransitMPO ElementMTC Mass Transit

Project Manager/Contact Phone E-mail AddressBryan Albee (707) 585-7516 [email protected]

Project TitleZero-Emission Bus & En-Route Charging Stations

Location (Project Limits), Description ( Scope of Work)Sonoma County Transit requests $551,000 in SB-1 Local Partnership Program cycle 2020 funding to assist with the purchase of one 35-foot zero-emission bus and the installation of two en-route electric charging stations.

Component Implementing AgencyPA&EDPS&ERight of WayConstruction Sonoma County TransitLegislative Districts

2, 4 & 10 2 2 & 5Project BenefitsPlease see attached.

Purpose and NeedPlease see attached.

Category Outputs/Outcomes Unit TotalIntercity Rail/Mass Trans Rail cars/ transit vehicles

Yes No NoYes Yes

Project Milestone Existing Proposed

Bike/Ped Improvements Reversible Lane analysis

Project Study Report ApprovedBegin Environmental (PA&ED) Phase 11/01/19Circulate Draft Environmental Document Document Type CE 11/15/19Draft Project ReportEnd Environmental Phase (PA&ED Milestone) 12/31/19Begin Design (PS&E) Phase 01/01/20End Design Phase (Ready to List for Advertisement Milestone) 06/30/20Begin Right of Way Phase 08/01/19

Begin Closeout Phase 11/01/21

End Right of Way Phase (Right of Way Certification Milestone) 10/31/19Begin Construction Phase (Contract Award Milestone) 07/01/20

ADA ImprovementsInc. Sustainable Communities Strategy Goals

End Closeout Phase (Closeout Report) 12/31/21

ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For information call (916) 654-6410 or TDD (916) 654-3880 or write Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento,

End Construction Phase (Construction Contract Acceptance Milestone) 10/01/21

31

DTP-0001 (Revised June, 7 2018 v7.09) Date: 6/19/19District EA

04Project Title:

Component Prior 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24+ TotalE&P (PA&ED)PS&ER/W SUP (CT)CON SUP (CT)R/WCONTOTAL

E&P (PA&ED)PS&ER/W SUP (CT)CON SUP (CT)R/WCON 1,120,000 1,120,000TOTAL 1,120,000 1,120,000

Fund No. 1:


E&P (PA&ED)PS&ER/W SUP (CT)CON SUP (CT)R/WCON 551,000 551,000TOTAL 551,000 551,000

Fund No. 2:



STATE OF CALIFORNIA ● DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

PROJECT PROGRAMMING REQUEST

County Route Project ID PPNO Alt. IDSON , ,

Zero-Emission Bus & En-Route Charging Stations

Existing Total Project Cost ($1,000s)Implementing Agency

Sonoma County Transit

Sonoma County Transit

Proposed Total Project Cost ($1,000s) Notes$551,000 requested in SB-1 LPP funding and $569,000 provided as matching funding from various sources (see below).

SB-1 Local Partnership Program (LPP) Program CodeExisting Funding ($1,000s)

Funding AgencyCTC

Proposed Funding ($1,000s) Notes$360,000 for zero-emission bus purchase and $191,000 for en-route electric charging stations.

Program CodeExisting Funding ($1,000s)

Low-Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP)

Funding AgencyCaltrans

Proposed Funding ($1,000s) Notes$220,000 for zero-emission bus purchase and $100,000 for en-route electric charging stations.

32

Fund No. 3:



Fund No. 4: rogram Code



Fund No. 5:


E&P (PA&ED)PS&ER/W SUP (CT)CON SUP (CT)R/WCONTOTAL

Existing Funding ($1,000s)

Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) Program CodeExisting Funding ($1,000s)

Funding AgencyBAAQMD

Transportation Development Act (TDA)

Proposed Funding ($1,000s) NotesZero-emission bus purchase.

Funding AgencyMTC

Proposed Funding ($1,000s) Notes

Proposed Funding ($1,000s) Notes

En-route electric charging stations.

Program CodeExisting Funding ($1,000s)

Funding Agency

33

S:\CIP\Grants\SB1 Formulaic\2019\SB-1 LPP Call for Projects.doc

is at McDowell Boulevard at Corona Road and SMART’s proposed multi use path will have aconnection to McDowell at Southpoint Blvd. McDowell Boulevard has also become the home ofLagunitas Brewing, Henhouse Brewing and SonomaCoast Spirits. As the north east side of Petaluma develops and becomes more of a destination, thevehicles, transit, pedestrian and bicycle trips grow.

Currently McDowell Boulevard is a 40 mph arterial and there has been limited work along thecorridor to improve bicycle and pedestrian connectivity and safety. The roadway has fallen beyondrepair, the City is unable to maintain the existing striping for bike lanes and travel lanes as paintwill only last a year. There are two existing uncontrolled crosswalks along corridor and oneadditional being proposed to connect the breweries along either side of the corridor. The existinguncontrolled crosswalks lack safety treatments that are suitable for the speed and number of travellanes. The bike facilities vary from class I bike path to class II bike lane along the corridor; there iscurrently no consistency or adequate signage along the route. Between Corona Road and OldRedwood Highway some of the sidewalks have been constructed with new developments but thesidewalk gaps prevent users from using the full corridor.

Project Scope: The project includes signal coordination along McDowell Boulevard North fromEast Washington St to Caulfield Lane which includes 13 traffic signals, reconstructing andstriping from Old Redwood Highway to Sunrise Parkway, construction of 38 new curb ramps,sidewalk gap closures from Old Redwood Highway to Corona Road, as well as at the railroadcrossing and widening of an existing sidewalk to create connectivity for class I bike path.

The signal coordination would include developing a traffic signal timing plan for the morning,midday and afternoon peak periods for McDowell Boulevard to reduce traffic congestion andtraffic delays which in turns will reduce the greenhouse gas emissions. With the newdevelopments, breweries, distilleries, proposed SMART station and multi use path will benefitfrom new sidewalks and more well defined bike lanes to encourage more non-motorized travel.

Current Status: Project is in the preliminary scoping phase. Expected Completion Fall 2022

Cost Estimate: See Attachment B- Cost Estimate

Caltrans Life-Cycle Benefit-Cost Analysis Model 6.0: See Attachment C- LCBC Analysis. Bothan active transportation analysis and corridor analysis was completed for this project to properlyportray the benefits and costs associated with each aspect of the project.

Transportation, Land use and Housing Element: McDowell Complete Street project is consistentwith the key aspects of the Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS) by constructing biking andwalking infrastructure to improve active transportation options. The project improves theconnectivity of bicycle and pedestrians infrastructure, improves access to local and regional busroutes, regional connectivity with SMART train and connectivity to the west side of Petaluma via

36


future SMART multi use pathway and the City’s existing Lynch Creek Trail. The improvement ofthe bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. The project will also include signal coordination of 13intersection to achieve speeds that are suitable to the corridor and improve efficiencies tominimize emissions and energy consumption and make optimal use of the street capacity.

Greenhouse Gas Impacts: The SB-1 Emission Calculator and the Arterial Management Projectswork sheet typically used for TFCA projects were utilized to analyze the greenhouse house gasreduction of the project. Both worksheets analyzed the greenhouse gas reduction for the signalcoordination of 13 intersections / 3.71 miles along McDowell Boulevard. Greenhouse gasreduction was quantified for pedestrian and bicycle improvement as part of the cost benefitanalysis of active transportation. See attachment C for greenhouse gas reduction for bicycle andpedestrian improvements and attachment D for the SB-1 Emissions Calculator and

SB-1 Emissions Calculator

Arterial Management

Attachments:

Attachment A: Project Limits MapAttachment B : Cost EstimateAttachment C: Life-Cycle Benefit-Cost Analysis Model 6.0Attachment D: SB-1 Emission Calculator and the Arterial Management

37


Attachment AProject Location Map

38

39

jstutsman

Polygon Line

jstutsman

Text Box

Attachment A- Project Location Map

jstutsman

Text Box

Old Redwood Highway

jstutsman

Text Box

Old Redwood Highway

jstutsman

Text Box

Old Redwood Highway

jstutsman

Text Box

Old Redwood Highway

jstutsman

Text Box

McDowell Boulevard

jstutsman

Text Box

East Washington St

jstutsman

Callout

McDowell Boulevard Complete Streets Project Limits


Attachment BCost Estimate

40

ITEM EST UNIT UNIT ITEMNO. ITEM QTY PRICE, $ TOTAL, $

Signal Coordination- Consultant 1 LS $50,000 $50,0001 Mobilization / Demobilization 1 LS $125,000 $125,0002 Temporary Traffic Control 1 LS $100,000 $100,000

3Storm Water management and Erosioncontrol 1 LS $25,000 $25,000

4 Minor Concrete - Curb and Gutter 304 LF $70.00 $21,280.005 Minor Concrete - Sidewalk curb ramps 2,432 SF $30 $72,960.006 Curb Ramps 38 EA $7,500 $285,000.007 Video Detection Cameras 16 EA $8,000 $128,000.00

8 8" Full Depth Reclamation-foamed Asphalt 45000 SY $6 $270,000.00

9asphalt binder (full depth reclamationfoamed asphalt) 480 Ton $835 $400,800.00

10 Grading Support 45000 SY $2 $99,000.0011 3" HMA Overlay 7843 Ton $120 $941,143.7312 Uncontrolled Xwalk Upgrade 2 EA $100,000 $200,000.0014 Sidewalk - Gap Closure 16,000 SF $23 $368,000.0016 Pothole 150 EA $800 $120,000.0017 Adjust Utilities 120 EA $800 $96,000.0018 Water Service Replacements 1 LS $100,000 $100,000.0019 Striping 1 LS $150,000 $150,000.00

$3,552,184

$1,000$0

$124,326$1,000$1,000

$3,552,184$106,566$183,924

$3,000$3,973,000

$860,000$2,462,000

$551,000$100,000

$3,973,000Water

Total Funds

AdministrationLegal ServicesDesign (3.5%)

Street MaintenanceRMRA

Total usesCIP Overheads

Contingency (5%)Construction Mgmt (3%)

Construction Contracts

SB1 Formulaic

Planning/EnvironmentalLand & Easements

Attachment B - Cost EstimateMcDowell Boulevard Complete Streets Project Engineer's

Estimate

Total Construction

41

Project Title: Pavement Restoration – Future Projects PROJECT PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION

This annual project will reduce the continued degradation of the City’s street system by implementing pavement maintenance measures as much as funding allows. Projects will consist primarily of seal coats and overlays with associated dig-outs of failed areas and crack sealing. The Americans with Disabilities Act improvements to sidewalks and curb ramps will be included either as part of the paving project or as a separate project whenever possible. It is anticipated that there will be one project per year. FINANCIAL OVERVIEW

Expenses and Funds Received BUDGET

USES (dollars in $000) FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24Planning/Environmental - 1 1 1 1 4 Land & Easements - - Design - 53 88 64 60 265 Legal Services - 1 1 1 1 4 Administration - 2 2 2 2 8 Construction Contracts - 1,762 2,933 2,134 2,886 9,715 Construction Mgmt - 88 147 107 150 492 Contingency - 88 147 107 150 492 CIP Overheads - 3 3 3 3 12

TOTAL USES -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,998$ 3,322$ 2,419$ 3,253$ 10,992$

SOURCES (dollars in $000)Street Maintenance - 831 860 890 921 3,502 Road Maint & Rehab Acct (RMRA) - 1,733 1,836 1,918 2,003 7,490

TOTAL FUNDS -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,564$ 2,696$ 2,808$ 2,924$ 10,992$

Actual Life to Date

thru FY 18EstimateFY 18-19

Estimate Life to Date thru FY 19

Adopted Budget

FY 19-20

PROJECTED Total Project Estimate

CIP-65 42

jstutsman

Cloud

jstutsman

Cloud

jstutsman

Callout

McDowell Blvd North


Attachment CLife-Cycle Cost Analysis Model 6.0

43

District: 4EA:

PROJECT: McDowell Complete Streets PPNO:

3 INVESTMENT ANALYSISSUMMARY RESULTS

Total Over AverageLife-Cycle Costs (mil. $) $0.4 ITEMIZED BENEFITS (mil. $) 20 Years AnnualLife-Cycle Benefits (mil. $) $0.7 Journey Quality $0.2 $0.0Net Present Value (mil. $) $0.3 Additional Delay Savings $0.2 $0.0

Additional Safety Benefits $4.6 $0.2Benefit / Cost Ratio: 1.7 Health Benefits -$4.3 -$0.2

Emission Cost Savings -$0.0 -$0.0Rate of Return on Investment: 36.9% TOTAL BENEFITS $0.7 $0.0

Payback Period: 3 years SRTS-SPECIFIC BENEFITS (mil. $) Journey Quality $0.0 $0.0

NON-INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION COST Additional Delay Savings $0.0 $0.0 Per Bike Program Impact Score N/A Additional Safety Benefits $0.0 $0.0 Per Ped Program Impact Score N/A TOTAL SRTS BENEFITS $0.0 $0.0

Tons Value (mil. $)Factors that Differentiate Benefits Total Over Average Total Over Average

and Performance Measures EMISSIONS REDUCTION 20 Years Annual 20 Years Annual CO Emissions Saved -1 0 -$0.0 -$0.0

Safe Route to School Yes CO2 Emissions Saved -296 -15 -$0.0 -$0.0Intersection Improvements on SRTS No NOX Emissions Saved 0 0 -$0.0 -$0.0Programmatic Initiatives No PM10 Emissions Saved 0 0 -$0.0 -$0.0Recreational Benefits 1 PM2.5 Emissions Saved 0 0(enter 1 for Yes, 0 for No) SOX Emissions Saved 0 0 -$0.0 -$0.0

VOC Emissions Saved 0 0 -$0.0 -$0.0

Transportation EconomicsCaltrans DOTP

Cal-B/C AT - 3) ResultsCal-BC62AT

Page 15/22/2019

44


Attachment DSB-1 Emission Calculator and the

Arterial Management

45

District: 4EA:

PROJECT: PPNO:

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

1A PROJECT DATA 1C SYSTEM USAGE BY MODE 1D AVERAGE SPEED/FUEL CONSUMPTION

Vehicle-Miles Traveled (Passenger Vehicles) Average Speed (Passenger Vehicles)Project Location (enter 1 for So. Cal., 2 for No. Cal., or 3 for rural) 2

No Build Build No Build BuildLength of Construction Period (years) 1 Base (Year 1) 37137 37137 Base (Year 1) 26 30

Forecast (Year 20) 40513 4051 Forecast (Year 20) 24 29

Vehicle-Miles Traveled (Trucks) Average Speed (Trucks)

1B HIGHWAY DATA No Build Build No Build BuildBase (Year 1) 3673 3673 Base (Year 1) 26 30Forecast (Year 20) 4007 401 Forecast (Year 20) 24 29

Average Daily Vehicle-Miles Traveled (VMT)No Build Build

Base (Year 1) 40,810 40,810 Service-Miles (Buses) Average Speed (Buses)Forecast (Year 20) 44,520 4,452

No Build Build No Build BuildPercent of VMT No Build Build Base (Year 1) 0 0 Base (Year 1) 26 30

Default User Override Default User Override Forecast (Year 20) 0 0 Forecast (Year 20) 24 29Percent Truck 9% 9%Percent Bus 0% 0%

Ton-Miles (Freight Locomotives) Average Ton-Miles/Gallon (Freight Locomotive)

Trip or Route Length (miles) No Build Build No Build BuildNo Build Build Base (Year 1) Base (Year 1) 468 468

Average Trip Length for Passenger Vehicles 4 4 Forecast (Year 20) Forecast (Year 20) 468 468Average Trip Length for Trucks 4 4Average Route Length for Buses 4 4

Signal Coordination along McDowell Boulevard

McDowell Boulevard Complete Streets

CFIP Emissions - 1) Project InformationSB1EmissionsCalculatorv12r

Page 15/22/2019

46

District: 4EA:

PROJECT: McDowell Boulevard Complete Streets PPNO:

2 INVESTMENT ANALYSISSUMMARY RESULTS

Short Tons Value (mil. $)Total Over Average Total Over Average

EMISSIONS REDUCTION 20 Years Annual 20 Years Annual CO Emissions Saved 195 10 0.0$ 0.0$ CO2 Emissions Saved 72,183 3,609 2.1$ 0.1$ NOX Emissions Saved 57 3 0.7$ 0.0$ PM10 Emissions Saved 1 0 0.1$ 0.0$ PM2.5 Emissions Saved 1 0 SOX Emissions Saved 1 0 0.0$ 0.0$ VOC Emissions Saved 12 1 0.0$ 0.0$

CFIP Emissions - 2) ResultsSB1EmissionsCalculatorv12r

Page 25/22/2019

47

ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT PROJECTSFYE 2014 TFCA Progam Manager Fund WorksheetVersion 1.0, updated 11/26/12

Calculations Tab: Complete areas shaded in yellow.

Cost Effectiveness Inputs# Years Effectiveness: 2Total Project Cost: $50,000TFCA Cost 40%: $20,000TFCA Cost 60%: $30,000 TFCA Regional Fund Proj. #: 11-SON-04 (If applicable)Total TFCA Cost: $50,000

Emission Reduction CalculationsA B C D E F G H I J K L

Name of Arterial, DirectionSegmentLength(miles)

Days/Yr. Time PeriodTraffic VolumeDuring Time

Period

Travel Speedw/o Project

Travel Speedw/ Project

PercentSpeed

Increase

ROGEmission

Reductions(lbs/yr)

NOx EmissionReductions

(lbs/yr)

PM EmissionReductions

(lbs/yr)

CO2 EmissionReductions

(lbs/yr)

SAMPLE--San Pablo, Northbound 4.5 250 7AM - 9AM 7,000 21.5 25.0 16.3% 338.24 375.10 71.55 546393N. McDowell Boulevard, Northbound 3.71 250 6:30AM - 10:00AM 3,786 26.0 29.0 11.5% 87.01 98.23 17.79 139223N. McDowell Boulevard, Northbound 3.71 250 11:45AM - 13:00PM 3,786 26.0 30.0 15.4% 116.02 130.71 23.98 185631N. McDowell Boulevard, Northbound 3.71 250 15:00PM - 19:00PM 3,786 31.0 38.0 22.6% 131.88 137.29 28.62 211155N. McDowell Boulevard, Southbound 3.71 250 6:30AM - 10:00AM 3,786 26.0 32.0 23.1% 174.03 196.46 35.58 278446N. McDowell Boulevard, Southbound 3.71 250 11:45AM - 13:00PM 3,786 23.0 30.0 30.4% 259.50 288.89 54.53 417669N. McDowell Boulevard, Southbound 3.71 250 15:00PM - 19:00PM 3,786 22.0 31.0 40.9% 345.35 384.80 73.09 556892

Total Emission Reductions 1113.78 1236.38 233.59 1789016

Cost Effectiveness Results Annual Lifetime1. ROG Emissions 0.56 1.11 Tons2. NOx Emissions 0.62 1.24 Tons3. PM Emissions 0.12 0.23 Tons4. Weighted PM Emissions 2.34 4.67 Tons5. CO2 Emissions Reduced 894.51 1789.02 Tons6. Emission Reductions (ROG, NOx & PM) 1.29 2.58 Tons7. TFCA Project Cost - Cost Effectiveness (ROG, NOx & PM) $19,352 /Ton

$7,121 /Ton8. TFCA Project Cost - Cost Effectiveness (ROG, NOx & Weighted PM). THIS VALUEMUST MEET POLICY REQUIREMENTS.

Existing Vehicles

Clean Fuel Vehicles Clean Fuel Clean Fuel Clean FuelClean Fuel Clean Fuel

Arterial Management FYE 142_McD 5/22/2019 6:51 AM48

DTP-0001 (Revised June, 7 2018 v7.09)

Assembly: Senate: Congressional:

Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ● DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONPROJECT PROGRAMMING REQUEST

General Instructions

Amendment (Existing Project) Y/N Date: 6/4/19District EA Project ID PPNO MPO ID Alt Proj. ID / prg.

04County Route/Corridor PM Bk PM Ahd Project Sponsor/Lead Agency

Son City of PetalumaMPO Element

Capital OutlayProject Manager/Contact Phone E-mail Address

Jeff Stutsman 707-776-3673 [email protected] TitleMcDowell Boulevard Complete Streets

Location (Project Limits), Description ( Scope of Work)The Project Limits are McDowell Boulevard North from Old Redwood Highway to Caulfield Lane. he project is a complete streets projectthat is designed to increase safe access for all users including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorist and transit riders along the corridor. Thescope of the work includes signal coordination along the corridor, pavement rehabilitation, striping, curb ramps, uncontrolled crosswalkimprovements including refuge areas and flashing beacons, and improves pedestrian and bicycle access by closing the gaps andincreasing the connectivity along the route

Component Implementing AgencyPA&EDPS&E City of PetalumaRight of WayConstruction City of PEtalumaLegislative Districts

10 3 2Project BenefitsSee Page #2

Purpose and NeedSee Page #2

Category Outputs/Outcomes Unit TotalLocal streets and roads Operational improvements Miles 3.71Local streets and roads Pedestrian/Bicycle facilities miles constructed Miles 0.5

Yes Yes NoYes Yes

Project Milestone Existing Proposed

Bike/Ped Improvements Reversible Lane analysis

Project Study Report Approved NABegin Environmental (PA&ED) Phase NACirculate Draft Environmental Document Document Type NADraft Project Report NAEnd Environmental Phase (PA&ED Milestone) NABegin Design (PS&E) Phase 01/01/20End Design Phase (Ready to List for Advertisement Milestone) 11/01/21Begin Right of Way Phase 08/01/21

Begin Closeout Phase 09/01/22

End Right of Way Phase (Right of Way Certification Milestone) 02/01/22Begin Construction Phase (Contract Award Milestone) 09/01/22

ADA ImprovementsInc. Sustainable Communities Strategy Goals

End Closeout Phase (Closeout Report) 02/01/23

ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For information call (916)654-6410 or TDD (916) 654-3880 or write Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento,

End Construction Phase (Construction Contract Acceptance Milestone) 09/01/22

49

DTP-0001 (Revised June, 7 2018 v7.09) Date: 6/4/19

ADA Notice



Additional InformationProject Purpose: McDowell Boulevard North is one of the main arterials in town connecting north and southwith an average daily traffic of approximately 11,000 vehicles per day. Petaluma Transit, Sonoma CountyTransit, and Golden Gate Transit utilize the 23 transit stops along this route. Many new developments alongthe corridor are in construction or pending development application such as Brody Ranch, Deer Creek andCorona Station Developments. SMART’s proposed station is at McDowell Boulevard at Corona Road andSMART’s proposed multi use path will have a connection to McDowell at Southpoint Blvd. McDowellBoulevard has also become the home of Lagunitas Brewing, Henhouse Brewing and SonomaCoast Spirits. As the north east side of Petaluma develops and becomes more of a destination, the vehicles,transit, pedestrian and bicycle trips grow.

Currently McDowell Boulevard is a 40 mph arterial and there has been limited work along the corridor toimprove bicycle and pedestrian connectivity and safety. The roadway has fallen beyond repair, the City isunable to maintain the existing striping for bike lanes and travel lanes as paint will only last a year. There aretwo existing uncontrolled crosswalks along corridor and one additional being proposed to connect thebreweries along either side of the corridor. The existing uncontrolled crosswalks lack safety treatments thatare suitable for the speed and number of travel lanes. The bike facilities vary from class I bike path to class IIbike lane along the corridor; there is currently no consistency or adequate signage along the route. BetweenCorona Road and Old Redwood Highway some of the sidewalks have been constructed with newdevelopments but the sidewalk gaps prevent users from using the full corridor.

Project Scope: The project includes signal coordination along McDowell Boulevard North from EastWashington St to Caulfield Lane which includes 13 traffic signals, reconstructing and striping from OldRedwood Highway to Sunrise Parkway, construction of 38 new curb ramps, sidewalk gap closures from OldRedwood Highway to Corona Road, as well as at the railroad crossing and widening of an existing sidewalk tocreate connectivity for class I bike path.

The signal coordination would include developing a traffic signal timing plan for the morning, midday andafternoon peak periods for McDowell Boulevard to reduce traffic congestion and traffic delays which in turnswill reduce the greenhouse gas emissions. With the new developments, breweries, distilleries, proposedSMART station and multi use path will benefit from new sidewalks and more well defined bike lanes toencourage more non-motorized travel

For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For information call (916) 654-6410 orTDD (916) 654-3880 or write Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814.

50

DTP-0001 (Revised June, 7 2018 v7.09) Date: 6/13/19District EA

04Project Title:


E&P (PA&ED) 1 1PS&E 129 129R/W SUP (CT)CON SUP (CT)R/WCON 3,843 3,843TOTAL 130 3,843 3,973

Fund No. 1:


E&P (PA&ED) 1 1PS&E 129 129R/W SUP (CT)CON SUP (CT)R/WCON 3,292 3,292TOTAL 130 3,292 3,422

Fund No. 2:


E&P (PA&ED)PS&ER/W SUP (CT)CON SUP (CT)R/WCON 551 551TOTAL 551 551



County Route Project ID PPNO Alt. IDSon , ,

McDowell Boulevard Complete Streets

Existing Total Project Cost ($1,000s)Implementing Agency

City of Petaluma

City of PEtaluma

City of PEtaluma

Proposed Total Project Cost ($1,000s) Notes

Local Funds (Street Maintenace, RMRA, Water) Program CodeExisting Funding ($1,000s)

Funding AgencyCity of Petaluma

Proposed Funding ($1,000s) NotesLocal Funds

SB-1 Formulaic Program CodeExisting Funding ($1,000s)

Funding AgencyState of California

Proposed Funding ($1,000s) NotesSB-1 Formulaic

51


Staff Report To: SCTA Board of Directors

From: Janet Spilman, Director of Planning

Re: 4.1.2 – Joint call for projects for Moving Forward 2050 and for projects that may be included in a Measure M reauthorization

Date: July 8, 2019 Issue:

Shall the SCTA authorize a call for projects to be included in Moving Forward 2050, the SCTA long range transportation plan, and in a Measure M reauthorization expenditure plan?

Background:

SCTA is concluding solicitation for MTC’s Plan Bay Area call for “regionally significant” projects as per Item 4.1.1 on today’s agenda. The next step in the long term planning process is to solicit information from local jurisdictions about all project types that should be included in the SCTA’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) and possibly in a Measure M reauthorization expenditure plan. The projects may also be aggregated by type for inclusion in Plan Bay Area.

The processes are aligned in order to streamline the call for projects and reduce level of effort needed by each jurisdiction.

Call for Projects

Process of updating the CTP project list:

1) Update the existing projects by removing them or updating project information. If a project sponsor chooses an existing project to be considered for Measure M renewal it should be updated to include that information.

2) Submit new projects by completing the application.

As part of the application project sponsors are asked to include their priority projects for consideration in an expenditure plan for the renewal of Measure M. Each jurisdiction may select up to ten (10) projects – across all modes – that should be ranked 1 – 10.

The call for projects will be released on July 8 with projects due September 4.

Over this summer, SCTA will engage the public in discussions about the CTP and transportation needs of their communities. The findings of this outreach will be shared with the TAC in late August.

Staff Recommendation:

Authorize the call for projects for the Moving Forward 2050 and Measure M reauthorization expenditure plan.

52

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

1

CALL FOR PROJECTS July 9, 2019

TO: All interested parties RE: Moving Forward 2050 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Project List

The SCTA is in the process of updating its long range Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) with the help of the County and nine cities. The purpose of the CTP is to serve as the vision for transportation in Sonoma County for the next 30 years as well as provide policy direction and information on specific priority projects. It also helps provide input into the regional planning process that is required for projects to secure State and federal funding. The importance of maintaining an updated planning document is two-fold:

• Provide a list of projects to be included in the next Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) – known as Plan Bay Area 2050.

• Document a prioritized list of projects – necessary to program future funding to projects and for potential future sources of funding, including a possible local sales tax measure

If the SCTA does not meet these two requirements all jurisdictions in the county are at risk of being ineligible for critical transportation dollars. Transportation Project List – all modes

Moving Forward 2040, the CTP adopted in 2016, has over 330 transportation projects identified. This list, attached, needs to be updated to reflect the changed time period, eliminate already built projects and add new projects. Projects that have not been built may require review for changes in description, scope and budget. The existing list of projects includes a variety of project types including maintenance and rehabilitation projects in need of updating. All transportation projects of over $1 million should be submitted for consideration in the CTP. See the CTP website for detailed project information https://scta.ca.gov/planning/comprehensive-transportation-plan/. The CTP will include bike/ped projects by reference to the Countywide Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan. If you have a bike/ped project for the CTP that is not in the Countywide Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan, please discuss with SCTA staff. All new bike/ped projects over $1 million should be submitted in a CTP Application.

53

https://scta.ca.gov/planning/comprehensive-transportation-plan/

https://scta.ca.gov/planning/comprehensive-transportation-plan/

2

SCTA staff will be working through the CBPAC to update the Countywide Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan project list. All bike/ped projects under $1 million will be generalized into appropriate categories with aggregate costs. Please review and update the projects on the current list. Using the attached application form, submit new projects that are a priority in your jurisdiction. Measure M Renewal The CTP call for projects is also an opportunity to identify priority projects for your jurisdiction that you would like to see considered for inclusion in a possible sales tax expenditure plan. You may submit up to ten projects per jurisdiction and across all modes and must rank these projects from 1 to 10 with 1 being the highest priority. Completed application forms and updates to existing projects spreadsheet are due to SCTA by September 4

Attached are the following documents: 1) Call for Projects & Instructions 2) Application 3) List of all projects for your jurisdiction currently in the 2016 CTP.

Thank you very much for your input to this process.

Suzanne Smith Executive Director, SCTA/RCPA

54

3

CTP APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS – NEW PROJECTS ONLY The CTP Application is an interactive PDF. Please use this application to submit new projects for inclusion in the CTP. For maintenance projects, most jurisdictions already have one or more maintenance projects on the existing CTP project list, which should be updated. Jurisdictions that do not already have an existing road maintenance project should consider adding one using the NEW PROJECTS application.

Required fields are in red italics

CONTACT INFO

Project Sponsor Department

Primary Contact

Phone number E-Mail Address

Second Contact

Phone Number E-Mail Address

PROJECT INFO

Maintenance projects will be addressed as part of the updates of existing CTP projects.

• Project name is limited to 65 characters.

• Description – please be thorough but concise.

• Project map – email to [email protected]

• The Project Type field includes a list of options. The options with examples are listed below. Please select one that most closely describes your project.

o Highway Improvements (e.g. highway extension or new lane, interchange modification)

o Roadway Improvements (e.g. local road extension or new lane)

o Intersection Improvements (e.g. intersection channelization; intersection signalization at individual intersections)

o Transit Improvements – Non Capital (e.g. expansions to service; non-capital improvements)

o Transit Capital Projects (e.g. vehicles, bus shelters, transit facilities; ADA compliance)

o Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities (e.g. new and extended bike and pedestrian facilities)

o ITS and New Technologies (e.g. incident management; signal coordination)

o Travel Demand Management (e.g. shared mobility; parking programs; carpool/vanpool, ridesharing activities; information, marketing and outreach; traveler information; education)

55

4

o Multi-model Streetscape Improvements (e.g. bicycle and/or pedestrian facility gap closure; ADA compliance; landscaping; lighting; streetscape improvements; road diet; complete streets)

o Emission Reduction Technologies (e.g. alternative fuel vehicles and facilities)

PROJECT SCHEDULE AND COST

• Year of Construction/Year of Implementation should be as specific as possible if the project is anticipated to be implemented in the next 10 years.

• Estimated Cost of the project should be calculated in year of expenditure, and entered in millions. Every project must have some cost listed.

• Annual costs? Yes/No

• Amount of identified funds

• Sources of identified funds

MEASURE M

Identify projects you would like to be included in the Measure M renewal expenditure plan.

• Measure M renewal – yes/no. You may submit up to ten projects for all modes except transit for inclusion and must rank these projects from 1 to 10 with 1 the highest and 10 the lowest priority. You may submit and rank 5 additional transit only projects.

• Rank the priority of this Measure M project relative to all Measure M projects you plan to submit with #1 being the highest priority and #10 being the lowest priority (#1 - #5 for transit). If you are not submitting a project for Measure M indicate with N/A.

SUBMITTAL

If you are submitting multiple projects, you must fill out a separate application for each project. Once you have entered your contact information in the form, you may click a button to clear the project information only so that you can easily submit more than one application without having to re-enter your contact information each time.

CTP Project applications are due to SCTA by September 4, 2019. Submit your completed application by clicking on "Submit Form" in the upper right corner of the screen.

56

5

CTP EXISTING PROJECT REVIEW INSTRUCTIONS

SCTA will provide you with an excel spreadsheet containing your projects in the 2016 CTP. The cells highlighted in green on the spreadsheet are the most in need of updating. Required fields are in red italics

• Provide contact information for each jurisdiction

• Carry forward project into the updated CTP Project List? – select YES to carry forward the project to the updated CTP. Otherwise SCTA will remove the project.

• Measure M Project yes/no – identify existing projects you would like to be included in the Measure M renewal expenditure plan. You may identify up to ten projects total from your new and existing projects.

• Measure M Priority – rank these projects from 1 to 10 with 1 the highest and 10 the lowest priority.

• Project Type – select the project type that most closely reflects your project. Project types are listed on the spreadsheet and on the NEW PROJECTS section of these instructions.

• Project Year – review and update if necessary.

• Cost – review and update if necessary.

• Amount of identified funds – review and update if necessary.

• Source of identified funds – review and update if necessary.

You may also update other project information as needed; please highlight any cells that you change in addition to those listed above.

SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR EXISTING PROJECTS

• Email the updated spreadsheet with revisions for existing projects to [email protected] by September 4, 2019.

57

mailto:[email protected]

CTP NEW PROJECT APPLICATION

Department:

E-Mail Address:

E-Mail Address:

No Not applicable

Project Type [select one from list below]:

Highway Improvements

Roadway Improvements

Intersection Improvements

Transit Improvements - Non Capital

Transit Capital Projects

If yes, please email to [email protected]

Project Sponsor:

Primary Contact:

Phone Number:

Second Contact:

Phone Number:

PROJECT SCHEDULE AND COST

Year of construction or implementation:

Amount in year of expenditure (in $M):

Annual costs? Yes No

Amount of identified funds (in $M):

Source(s) of identified funds

MEASURE M

Include project in expenditure plan for Measure

If yes, please rank the priority of this Measure Myou plan to submit with #1 being the highest pri

CTP Project applications arSubmit your completed application by clicking

Project Map Available?

Project Location:

Project Description:

Project Name:

PROJECT INFORMATION

CONTACT INFORMATION

Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities

ITS & New Technologies

Travel Demand Management

Multimodal Streetscape Improvements

Emission Reduction Technologies

M renewal?

project relative to all Measure M projects ority and #10 being the lowest priority:

Yes No

e due to SCTA by September 4, 2019. on "Submit Form" in the upper right corner of the screen.58

initiator:[email protected];wfState:distributed;wfType:email;workflowId:8fb8db40bbba144783bc207b59a99db9

411 King Street, Santa Rosa, CA| 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Staff Report To: Countywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee

From: Dana Turréy, Transportation Planner

Item: 6.0 Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Map and Project List Update

Date: July 23, 2019

Issue:

How are bicycle and pedestrian projects updated in the Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (CBPMP) appendices A and B?

Background:

The Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (CBPMP), adopted in 2014, was designed to allow for periodic updates to the project list (Appendix A) and maps (Appendix B). In 2017, SCTA staff consulted the CBPAC to establish an annual process to update the project list. This process includes a reminder to the CBPAC in July, submittal of locally approved project updates in September, followed by an updated project list and maps for review.

Following previous submittals of project updates, SCTA staff updated the existing facilities map with completed projects since the 2014 CBPMP. Staff has since updated the GIS maps with the updated projects submitted to SCTA in 2017 and 2018. Staff is now working toward ensuring consistency between the GIS map files and the project list. Staff is requesting that municipalities review the updated bicycle and pedestrian webmap (https://arcg.is/1qrTLL) and project lists (handout).

The CBPMP will be incorporated by reference in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) update, Moving Forward 2050, and all projects will be included either in a programmatic category or as an individual large project.

Requested Action:

Committee members are requested to:

1) Identify new projects in your jurisdiction that have been approved and indicate the manner in which they were approved by September 4. Any new projects, over $1M, should be submitted through the CTP application described in Agenda Item 5,

2) Review the project list (handout) and submit any changes or corrections to planned projects, and complete any missing information in the project lists,

3) Review the revised webmap (https://arcg.is/1qrTLL) and submit any corrections to planned projects or completed facilities.

59

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

https://arcg.is/1qrTLL

https://arcg.is/1qrTLL

Countywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee MEETING … · 2019-07-17 · COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE...

Documents

Transcript of Countywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee MEETING … · 2019-07-17 · COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE...