santa cruz county regional …sccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/2020-01-16- rtc...santa cruz...
TRANSCRIPT
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission
AGENDA
Thursday, January 16, 2020 9:00 a.m.
NOTE
See the last page for details about access for people with disabilities, translation services, and meeting broadcasts.
En Español
Para información sobre servicios de traducción al español, diríjase a la última página.
AGENDAS ONLINE To receive email notification when the RTC meeting agenda packet is posted on our website,
please call (831) 460-3200 or visit sccrtc.org/about/esubscriptions/ COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP
Caltrans (ex-officio) Tim Gubbins City of Capitola Jacques Bertrand City of Santa Cruz Sandy Brown City of Scotts Valley Randy Johnson City of Watsonville Trina Coffman-Gomez County of Santa Cruz Greg Caput County of Santa Cruz Ryan Coonerty County of Santa Cruz Zach Friend County of Santa Cruz John Leopold County of Santa Cruz Bruce McPherson Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Ed Bottorff Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Aurelio Gonzalez Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Mike Rotkin
The majority of the Commission constitutes a quorum for the transaction of business.
NOTE SPECIAL DATE & LOCATION THIS MONTH City of Santa Cruz Council Chambers
809 Center Street, Room 10 Santa Cruz, CA
RTC Agenda January 16, 2020 2
1. Roll call 2. Oral communications
Any member of the public may address the Commission on any item within the jurisdiction of the Commission that is not already on the agenda. The Commission will listen to all communication, but in compliance with State law, and may not take action on items that are not on the agenda.
Speakers are requested to sign the sign-in sheet and state their name clearly so that their names can be accurately recorded in the minutes of the meeting.
3. Additions or deletions to consent and regular agendas
CONSENT AGENDA All items appearing on the consent agenda are considered to be minor or non-controversial and will be acted upon in one motion if no member of the RTC or public wishes an item be removed and discussed on the regular agenda. Members of the Commission may raise questions, seek clarification or add directions to consent agenda items without removing the item from the consent agenda as long as no other Commissioner objects to the change.
MINUTES
4. Accept draft minutes of the November 4, 2019 Bicycle Advisory Committee 5. Approve draft minutes of the December 5, 2019 Regional Transportation Commission
meeting 6. Accept draft minutes of the December 9, 2019 Bicycle Advisory Committee
POLICY ITEMS
No consent items
PROJECTS and PLANNING ITEMS
7. Approve Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans for Highway 9/SLV Complete Streets Project Initiation Document (Resolution)
8. Approve Highway 9/SLV Complete Streets: HSIP Grant Crosswalk Improvements
Project Update and Funding Agreements (Resolution)
9. Approve Amendment to Administration Coordination and License (ACL) Agreement with St. Paul and Pacific Railroad
BUDGET AND EXPENDITURES ITEMS
No consent items
ADMINISTRATION ITEMS
No consent items
RTC Agenda January 16, 2020 3
INFORMATION/OTHER ITEMS
10. Accept monthly meeting schedule 11. Accept correspondence log
12. Accept letters from RTC committees and staff to other agencies - none
13. Accept miscellaneous written comments from the public on RTC projects and
transportation issues - none
14. Accept information items - none
REGULAR AGENDA
15. Commissioner reports – oral reports
16. Director’s Report – oral report (Guy Preston, Executive Director) 17. Caltrans report
a. Santa Cruz County project updates b. Letter regarding implementation of complete streets improvement along
Hwy9/SLV 18. 10:00 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan (Guy Preston, Executive Director)
a. Staff report b. Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) – available online at:
www.sccrtc.org/measured c. Comments from the Public d. Replacement Pages to the SIP
19. City of Santa Cruz Public Works Department – oral report 20. Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis Communications and Stakeholder Involvement
Plan (Shannon Munz, Communications Specialist, and Ginger Dykaar, Sr. Transportation
Planner)
a. Staff report b. Draft Outreach Plan
21. Next meetings
The next RTC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. at the Watsonville City Council Chambers, 275 Main Street, Room 400, Watsonville, CA.
RTC Agenda January 16, 2020 4
The next Transportation Policy Workshop meet is scheduled for Thursday, February 20, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. at the RTC Offices, 1523 Pacific Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA.
HOW TO REACH US Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission 1523 Pacific Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 phone: (831) 460-3200 / fax: (831) 460-3215 COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Written comments for items on this agenda that are received at the RTC office in Santa Cruz by noon on the day before this meeting will be distributed to Commissioners at the meeting.
HOW TO STAY INFORMED ABOUT RTC MEETINGS, AGENDAS & NEWS Broadcasts: Many of the meetings are broadcast live. Meetings are cablecast by Community Television of Santa Cruz. Community TV’s channels and schedule can be found online (www.communitytv.org) or by calling (831) 425-8848. Agenda packets: Complete agenda packets are available at the RTC office, on the RTC website (www.sccrtc.org), and at all Santa Cruz County public libraries. For information regarding library locations and hours, please check online at www.santacruzpl.org or www.cityofwatsonville.org/public-library On-line viewing: The SCCRTC encourages the reduction of paper waste and therefore makes meeting materials available online. Agendas are typically posted 5 days prior to each meeting. To receive email notification when complete agenda packet materials are posted to our website please visit sccrtc.org/about/esubscriptions/ Newsletters: To sign up for E-News updates on specific SCCRTC projects, go to sccrtc.org/about/esubscriptions/ HOW TO REQUEST ACCOMMODATIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission does not discriminate on the basis of disability and no person shall, by reason of a disability, be denied the benefits of its services, programs, or activities. This meeting location is an accessible facility. If you wish to attend this meeting and require special assistance in order to participate, please contact RTC staff at 460-3200 (CRS 800/735-2929) at least three working days in advance of this meeting to make arrangements. People with disabilities may request a copy of the agenda in an alternative format. As a courtesy to those person affected, please attend the meeting smoke and scent-free. SERVICIOS DE TRADUCCIÓN/ TRANSLATION SERVICES Si gusta estar presente o participar en esta junta de la Comisión Regional de Transporte del Condado de Santa Cruz y necesita información o servicios de traducción al español por favor llame por lo menos con tres días laborables de anticipo al (831) 460-3200 para hacer los arreglos necesarios. (Spanish language translation is available on an as needed basis.) Please make advance arrangements (at least three days in advance) by calling (831) 460-3200.
RTC Agenda January 16, 2020 5
TITLE VI NOTICE TO BENEFICIARIES The RTC operates its programs and services without regard to race, color and national origin in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Any person believing to have been aggrieved by the RTC under Title VI may file a complaint with RTC by contacting the RTC at (831) 460-3212 or 1523 Pacific Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 or online at www.sccrtc.org. A complaint may also be filed directly with the Federal Transit Administration to the Office of Civil Rights, Attention: Title VI Program Coordinator, East Building, 5th Floor-TCR, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, Washington, DC 20590. AVISO A BENEFICIARIOS SOBRE EL TITULO VI La RTC conduce sus programas y otorga sus servicios sin considerar raza, color u origen nacional de acuerdo al Titulo VI del Acta Sobre los Derechos Civiles. Cualquier persona que cree haber sido ofendida por la RTC bajo el Titulo VI puede entregar queja con la RTC comunicándose al (831) 460-3212 o 1523 Pacific Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 o en línea al www.sccrtc.org. También se puede quejar directamente con la Administración Federal de Transporte en la Oficina de Derechos Civiles, Atención: Coordinador del Programa Titulo VI, East Building, 5th Floor-TCR, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20590.
1
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission’s
BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MINUTES – Special Meeting
Monday, November 4, 2019 6:00 pm to 8:30 pm
1. Call to Order: Chair, Amelia Conlen called the meeting to order at 6:05 pm.
2. Introductions
Members Present:Amelia Conlen, Bike-to-Work, ChairGrace Voss, District 1Sally Arnold, District 3 (Alt.)Anna Kammer, District 4Rick Hyman, District 5Theresia Rogerson, District 5 (Alt.)Richard Masoner, City of Scotts ValleyMurray Fontes, City of WatsonvilleLeo Jed, CTSC
Unexcused Absences: Matt Farrell, City of Santa Cruz
Excused Absences: Janneke Strause, District 1 (Alt.) Shea Johnson, District 2 Casey Beyer, District 2 (Alt.) Peter Scott, District 3 Michael Moore, City of Capitola Bruce Sawhill, City of Santa Cruz (Alt.) Drew Rogers, City of Watsonville (Alt.) Jim Langley, CTSC (Alt.) Kira Ticus, Bike-to-Work (Alt.)
Vacancies: District 4 – Alternate City of Capitola – Alternate City of Scotts Valley – Alternate
Staff: Tommy Travers, Transportation Planner Rachel Moriconi, Senior Transportation Planner Sarah Christensen, Senior Transportation Engineer
Guests: Terri Persons, Caltrans District 5 Ingrid McRoberts, Caltrans District 5 Anais Schenk, County of Santa Cruz Gina Cole, Bike Santa Cruz County Kathy Jaqqi, member of public
RTC Office 1523 Pacific Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
4-1
2
3. Announcements – Staff announced that the next Regional Transportation Commissionmeeting will be November 7 and the next Interagency Technical Advisory Committeemeeting will be November 21.
4. Oral communications – Anna Kammer complimented the Countywide Bicycle SignageProject, and other members noted the decimals used on said project’s signs are toosmall. Richard Masoner announced there was good turnout to the October publicmeeting for the development of the Scotts Valley Active Transportation Plan and thatbicyclists may request a key for a gate across the Conference Drive publicly-ownedright-of-way by contacting the private Mt. Hermon Conference Center, purpose beingto be able to travel on the right-of-way between Scotts Valley and Felton and avoidMt. Hermon Road. Theresia Rogerson announced that the South County Bike/PedWork Group will meet on November 5 and that the current issue of Growing Up inSanta Cruz has an article about a girls mountain bicycling program called LittleBellas. Grace Voss announced that Open Streets Santa Cruz on October 13 had anestimated 12,000 attendees and that the Santa Cruz County Cycling Club will haveits Holiday Party on December 8 in Felton. Gina Cole announced that Bike Santa CruzCounty will have its annual dinner on December 8 in Santa Cruz.
5. Additions or deletions to consent and regular agendas – None
CONSENT AGENDA
Members requested two meetings in 2020 be held south of Santa Cruz. Members pointed out considering the hazard report about the poor condition of some of the Watsonville slough trails, the Committee should consider bikeway maintenance needs when reviewing local jurisdiction proposals to spend large sums of money on road maintenance. Members also discussed the possibility of scheduling the October 2020 meeting on the third Monday of the month rather than the first. A motion (Hyman/Masoner) was made to approve the consent agenda. The motion passed unanimously with members Arnold, Kammer, Hyman, Masoner, Fontes, Conlen, and Jed voting in favor.
6. Approved draft minutes of the June 10, 2019 Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting
7. Approved draft minutes of the October 7, 2019 Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting
8. Accepted summary of hazard reports
9. Accepted informational items: Correspondence between Committee and CaltransDistrict 5 regarding District 5 Active Transportation Plan development
10. Accepted informational items: Correspondence from Committee to Watsonvilleregarding Downtown Complete Streets Plan
11. Accept proposed 2020 schedule of Bicycle Advisory Committee meetings
4-2
3
REGULAR AGENDA
12. Caltrans District 5 Active Transportation Plan update and discussion – Ingrid McRoberts and Terri Persons, Caltrans staff, updated the Committee on the development of the plan to address bicycle and pedestrian facilities on, parallel to, and crossing the state highway system in the 5-county District 5. The plan is taking a corridor approach to address connectivity as well as gaps and barriers of existing active transportation networks. The project team is working with the consulting firm Toole Design to incorporate into a GIS the data from all the local jurisdictions and AMBAG as well as public input thus far collected. They are in the Network Analysis phase of the plan development. A Draft Plan is expected in February 2020, and a final Plan is expected by the end of April 2020. Caltrans staff believes that the public at Watsonville Open Streets were the most engaged of all the public events they have attended on the Central Coast. They stated that staff is working with a Partner Team that includes four representatives in Santa Cruz County as well as with Caltrans’ Complete Streets Advisory Committee. They listed all of the multiple local bicycle or active transportation master plans in Santa Cruz County that are being incorporated into the District 5 plan. They emphasized that the plan will focus on bringing attention to needs, such as gaps and barriers for bicyclists and pedestrians, rather than proposing specific projects. Their GIS, when ready, will be shared with the Partner Team and local jurisdictions before the Draft Plan is finished. They announced that the District has a new bicycle and pedestrian coordinator, Audrey Ogden. They announced that while the governor recently vetoed Complete Streets legislation, he referenced his recent executive order, 19-19, which directs the state transportation agency, which includes Caltrans, to address climate change needs including funding transit, walking, biking, and other active modes. They announced that the new Caltrans director has a planning background and is an advocate for active transportation. They stated that the Plan development is prioritizing communication and partnership, and that staff is working closely with many local jurisdictions for input on the Plan. Discussion included: consideration of the Santa Cruz County system of bicycle wayfinding signage in the Plan, as future improvements to gaps and barriers may result in new preferred routes; after the Plan is complete, Caltrans may undertake its own bicycle projects rather than only projects that are primarily vehicle-serving, and in addition may recommend prioritizing maintenance of existing bicycle facilities; in spite of the veto of Complete Streets legislation, Caltrans continues to have design guidelines for pedestrian and bicycle facilities; under SB1 legislation, Caltrans considers bicycle needs in corridors where limited-access highways may prevent bicycle use on the state highway specifically. In addition, members asked if the GIS will allow querying and summarizing for specific counties and cities, and requested a new update of the District-wide bicycle map. Members asked Caltrans staff to consider summarizing in a Plan appendix all of the physical areas of responsibility for maintenance along the state highway system, and to use the development of the Plan as an opportunity to revise or clarify any outdated or inconsistent maintenance agreements.
13. Review and recommend programming of regional transportation funds – Rachel
Moriconi, RTC Sr. Transportation Planner, introduced the staff recommendation for programming of upcoming state and federal transportation funds that are directed through the Regional Transportation Commission, in its role as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency for Santa Cruz County, to the local jurisdictions within the county. While the RTC has recently decided to allocate nearly all of the
4-3
4
Regional Surface Transportation Program Exchange (RSTPX) funds (estimated at over $10 million) to the local jurisdictions roughly by population, approval of particular projects and funding levels for particular projects is nevertheless subject to RTC approval. Before the Committee was the projects as requested by the local jurisdictions. Regional funds for regional projects—from the State Transportation Improvement Program, Highway Infrastructure Program, and SB1 Local Partnership Program—are all being recommended to be spent almost entirely on Highway 1 as per RTC direction. She asked for input on the projects from the Committee. Committee members asked clarifying questions regarding details of some of the projects, including the “bus-on-shoulder” element of the Highway 1 Auxiliary Lanes projects. Members discussed the need for increased bicycle storage on buses that use Highway 1, which could be achieved by adding storage racks on board, possibly in newly purchased buses, or by Santa Cruz METRO updating its policy for Highway 1 buses similar to that for routes 17, 40, 41, and 42. Members also discussed a desire for Watsonville to use funding to rehabilitate the Slough Trail system, as well as generally for agencies to use funding for bicycle projects. Members stated an understanding that since RSTPX funds are being allocated roughly proportionately to the local jurisdictions this cycle, rather than through a competitive process, it would be difficult for the committee to recommend alternate projects, but jurisdictions could consider them in future years. Murray Fontes noted that given the short turnaround for programming the funds, the City of Watsonville was focusing the funds on existing projects in its Capital Improvement Program (CIP). A motion was made (Fontes/Kammer) to recommend that the RTC approve the projects to receive regional shares of state and federal funding, as summarized in the staff report, while also requesting that the responsible agencies:
• Add “sharrows” and “3 Feet to Pass” to any pavement project on streets that do not already include space for bicyclists
• Pursue increased bicycle storage capacity on buses that will operate on Highway 1 auxiliary lanes and shoulders
The motion passed with Voss, Kammer, Masoner, Fontes, and Conlen voting in favor, Jed voting against, and Hyman and Arnold abstaining.
14. Chanticleer Ave Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project update and discussion –
Sarah Christensen, RTC Sr. Transportation Engineer, updated the Committee as a follow-up to the June Committee meeting at which the 65% engineering designs were shared with the Committee. She stated that the project is in the final design phase with expected construction beginning in the fall of 2020, and that staff is seeking additional SB1 grant funding for the project, including possibly for new coaches for the “bus-on-shoulder” element of the project. She focused on the treatments at the south end of the bridge to slow bicyclists exiting the bridge and the crossings and access between northbound Chanticleer and the bridge as well as access between the bridge and the intersection of Soquel Avenue and 17th Avenue. Members brought forth several ideas including
• Mini-“bike circle” treatment should either be completely level with ground, or center should be a small raised feature allowing more than 5 feet on either side, not blocking vision, and not a rounded curb encouraging stunts
• Can a bike box be installed even if the Soquel Ave/Chanticleer intersection does not become signalized
• Can a bicycle be ridden legally in a crosswalk, and is that safe regardless • Consider eliminating the northbound bike lane on Chanticleer (unless a bike
box is added), so that it is more clear that bicyclists should merge into the left turn pocket in order to reach either the Soquel Ave center merge lane
4-4
5
or the pedestrian/bike bridge, and less-experienced bicyclists may cross the entire crosswalk from the right side as a pedestrian
• Add a bicycle crossing or left-turn pocket of Chanticleer Ave farther south of the intersection, along with a two-way path from there to reach the bridge; this was already a recommendation of the Committee in the past to RTC staff
• Consider a “crossbike” (multimodal crossing) across Chanticleer at Soquel, although it may cause confusion
• Consider a signal to assist bicyclists going westbound on Soquel turning left to access the bridge and to better control vehicle movements, or a roundabout if possible
• Consider adding wayfinding signage at both the south and north ends of the crossing project
• Consider adding additional visual warnings for drivers, such as a wide green marked crossing area (crossbike) where bicycles may move in both directions across Chanticleer
• Consider a gate to force bicyclists to dismount • Consider acquiring adjacent right-of-way, or using part of the Soquel Ave
right-of-way, to add a two-way path between this intersection and the Soquel/17th intersection.
A motion (Jed/Arnold) was made for an ad-hoc committee made up of members Hyman, Masoner, Conlen, and Jed to meet with project managers and County Public Works staff to discuss the above concerns further. The motion passed unanimously with members Arnold, Kammer, Hyman, Masoner, Fontes, Conlen, and Jed voting in favor.
15. Watsonville Safe Routes to Schools Plan update and discussion – Amelia Conlen, Chair, updated the Committee on the progress of the Plan, which seeks to identify the barriers to walking and biking to 15 schools in Watsonville and recommend improvements to address them. Public meetings and “walking audits” have been held, and resulting draft recommendations have been shared with each school and parent groups for refinement. She shared visuals and the full list of infrastructure recommendations for every school, most commonly:
• Curb extensions • Corridor and connector improvements for traffic calming and improved
crossings • Rapid-flashing beacon crosswalks, offset crosswalks, speed humps
The Plan also includes non-infrastructure recommendations including education, encouragement, and enforcement. Some of these include the Street Smarts safety campaign, education on how sharrows and roundabouts work, more crossing guards, and a recommendation for the school district to adopt a policy supporting active transportation. The draft Plan will be presented to the city and the school board in November, and the final Plan is expected in early 2020. Committee members discussed consideration of vehicle traffic diverters near some schools as a traffic-calming measure and lowering speed limits less than 25 MPH. Members also discussed bicycle circulation on campuses, improved access to Pajaro Valley High School, and the need for dedicated parent volunteers to lead “rolling school buses.”
16. Updates related to Committee functions (oral updates) – Murray Fontes reported that
green bike lane improvements are nearly complete, that the Watsonville city council approved unanimously the Downtown Complete Streets Plan, and that the first portion of rail trail Segment 18 is out to bid for construction. Rick Hyman reported
4-5
6
that the city of Santa Cruz should mark the outside of bike lanes adjacent to parking with either a solid line or parking stalls, particularly on Ocean Street due to private buses and large trucks parking in the bike lane. Committee members also discussed reporting to the city of Santa Cruz the confusing nature of construction detours for the Beach Street bike path where it enters Boardwalk property at 3rd Street.
17. Adjourn – 8:40 pm
NEXT MEETING: The next Bicycle Committee meeting is scheduled for December 9, 2019 from 6:00pm to 8:30pm at the RTC Office, 1523 Pacific Ave, Santa Cruz, Calif. Minutes respectfully prepared and submitted by: Tommy Travers, Transportation Planner
4-6
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission
DRAFT MINUTES
Thursday, December 5, 2019 9:00 a.m.
1. Roll call
The meeting was called to order at 9:02 am
Members present:Aileen Loe (ex-officio) Andy Schiffrin (alt) Jacques Bertrand Zach Friend Sandy Brown Virginia Johnson(alt) Donna Lind (alt) Ed Bottorff Trina Coffman-Gomez Aurelio Gonzalez Greg Caput Patrick Mulhearn (alt) Tony Gregorio (alt) John Leopold
Staff present: Luis Mendez Guy Preston Amy Naranjo Grace Blakeslee Ginger Dykaar Sarah Christensen Brianna Goodman Krista Corwin Yesenia Parra Cory Caletti Rachel Moriconi
2. Oral communications
Received Public Comment from:
Rick Longinotti, Michael Saint, and Carey Pico
3. Additions or deletions to consent and regular agendas: Replacement pages foritems 5, 13, 22, 24, and handouts for items 8 and 25.
County Board of Supervisors Council Chambers 701 Ocean Street, 5th Floor
Santa Cruz, CA
5-1
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Friend recused himself from items 7 and 12 due to a financial interest because his primary residence is within 500 feet of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line.
Received public comments from: Carey Pico, Aptos Sally Arnold, Board Chair of Friends of the Rail and Trail Barry Scott, Aptos Keith Otto Mark Mesiti-Miller
Chair pulled item 12 from the consent agenda and moved it to the regular agenda as item 25a.
Commissioners discussed item 10, requested a presentation from Community Bridges with more information about their public transit electric vehicle, and a quarterly cost-ridership compare/contrast between ParaCruz and LiftLine and traffic impact of auxiliary lanes with metering lights.
Commissioner Alternate Schiffrin moved and Commissioner Coffman-Gomez seconded to approve the consent agenda as amended. The motion passed with Commissioner Friend recusing himself from item 7 and 12 and Commissioners Bertrand, Brown, Bottorff, Gonzalez, Coffman-Gomez, Caput and Commissioner Alternates Schiffrin, Johnson, and Lind voting “Aye.”
4. Accepted draft minutes of the November 5, 2019 Elderly & DisabledTransportation Advisory Committee (E&DTAC) meeting
5. Approved draft minutes of the November 7, 2019 Regional TransportationCommission meeting
6. Accepted draft minutes of the November 21, 2019 Interagency TechnicalAdvisory Committee (ITAC) meeting
POLICY ITEMS
No consent items
PROJECTS and PLANNING ITEMS
7. Approved Engineering Services Contract for Phase I Bridge Repairs along theSanta Cruz Brach Rail Corridor (Resolution 78-19)
BUDGET AND EXPENDITURES ITEMS
8. Accepted status report on Transportation Development Act (TDA) revenues
9. Accepted status report on Measure D revenues and distribution
5-2
10. Approved Amended Fiscal Year (FY) 2019-20 Transportation Development Act(TDA)/State Transit Assistance (STA) claim for Community Bridges Lift Line(Resolution 79-19)
11. Approved Amended Fiscal Year (FY) 2019-20 Transportation Development Act(TDA)/State Transit Assistance (STA) claim for Santa Cruz Metropolitan TransitDistrict (Resolution 80-19)
ADMINISTRATION ITEMS
12. Approve consent for railroad crossing agreement at Aptos Creek Road-Movedto regular agenda as item 25a
INFORMATION/OTHER ITEMS
13. Accepted monthly meeting schedule
14. Accepted correspondence log
15. Accepted letters from RTC committees and staff to other agencies - none
16. Accepted information items – none
REGULAR AGENDA
17. Commissioner reports –none
18. Director’s Report
Executive Director Guy Preston reported on staff attendance at the Self-HelpCounties Coalition’s Focus on the Future Conference in San Diego; Measure D-Strategic Implementation Plan; an update on RTC recruitments and noted thepromotion of current RTC staff Tommy Travers to permanent TransportationPlanner I. Updates for other vacancies will come to the board at its Januarymeeting.
Commissioner Leopold arrived.
Executive Director Preston also reported on the 2019 San Lorenzo ValleyEnvironmental Town Hall event, noting public excitement for the Highway 9SLV-Complete Streets program; cooperative agreement with Caltrans to fundcrosswalk enhancements in Felton near Highway 9 in the amount of $50,000;groundbreaking ceremony to celebrate Segment 7, Phase 1 hosted by EcologyAction and Friends of the Rail and Trail on January 25, 2020; public input isrequested to inform the 2045 Regional Transportation Plan (RTIP); RTC Officeclosure to foot traffic from December 23 through January 2.
Received public comments from:Brian Peoples, Executive Director of Trail Now
5-3
19. Caltrans report
Aileen Loe, Ex-Officio reported on Caltrans’ recent unveiling of the draftCalifornia Freight Mobility Plan to support the increasing need to move freightaround the state and to do so safely, effectively, and sustainably; investmentof funds in the Highway 46 corridor to expand segments from a 2-lanehighway to a 4-lane divided expressway and upgrades to Antelope Grade.
Commission thanked Caltrans for work on Hwy 129 - Riverside Dr. Caltransclarified that project 19 pedestrian crossing is on schedule for construction thiswinter; project 18 Highway 152, now a bridge-widening, is still fully fundedthrough SHOPP; project 18 is halfway through the environmental review phaseand is on schedule for construction in spring of 2022.
Received Public Comment From:Michael Saint, Campaign for Sustainable Transportation
Aileen Loe noted that she is still researching funding options for the purchaseof electric wheelchair-accessible vans by Community Bridges; reported onsolar high-powered fast chargers available for the first time at Camp Roberts.
20. Resolution for Appreciation of retiring RTC staff member, Cory Caletti.
RTC Chair Bottorff presented the resolution to Ms. Caletti. Ms. Caletti thankedthe Commission for their commitment to sustainable transportation and fortheir support of staff members and expressed appreciation for the privilege toserve the Santa Cruz County community. She also thanked her partner JohnCaletti for his support of her career.
Commissioner Leopold moved and Commissioner Alternate Schiffrin to approvethe resolution. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioners Bertrand,Brown, Leopold, Bottorff, Friend, Gonzalez, Coffman-Gomez, Caput, andCommissioner Alternates Schiffrin, Johnson, and Lind voting “Aye.”
21. Election of 2020 RTC Chair and Vice Chair
Chair Bottorff reported that the nominating committee nominatesCommissioner Bruce McPherson as the Chair and Commissioner AurelioGonzalez as the Vice-Chair for calendar year 2020. Commissioner Leopoldmotioned and Commissioner Alternate Schiffrin seconded to approveCommissioner McPherson as Chair and Commissioner Gonzalez as Vice-Chairfor 2020. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioners Bertrand,Brown, Leopold, Bottorff, Friend, Gonzalez, Coffman-Gomez, Caput, andCommissioner Alternates Schiffrin, Johnson, and Lind voting “Aye.”
Commissioner Friend left the meeting and was replaced at the dais byCommissioner Alternate Mulhearn.
22. 10:00 am PUBLIC HEARING Adoption of the 2020 Regional TransportationImprovement Program (RTIP)
5-4
Senior Transportation Planner Rachel Moriconi presented the staff report. The 2020 RTIP includes proposals from local jurisdictions to fund 17 different projects: $200,000 to replace ParaCruz vans; roadway rehabilitation; additional funding for improvements to the Highway 1 & 9 intersection; sidewalk improvements in Scotts Valley, green bike lanes and trails in Watsonville, improvements to the Highway 152 and Holohan Road intersection, Aptos Village projects; pedestrian crosswalk in Davenport; bike signage and sharrows; $6.5 million in STIP and HIP for Highway 1 & 41st Avenue auxiliary lane projects.
Public Hearing opened at 10:07.
Received Comments from:
Paulene Seales, Santa Cruz Climate Action Network. Rick Longinotti, Campaign for Sustainable Transportation. Carey Pico Jessica Evans, City of Santa Cruz Noel Bock, resident of Davenport and Chairperson of the Davenport North Coast Association Bob Morgan, Live Oak resident Michael Saint David Date, resident of La Selva Beach Brian Peoples, Executive Director of Trail Now Sally Arnold, Friends of the Rail and Trail Dana Bagshaw, resident of Santa Cruz Keith Otto Gina Cole, Executive Director of Bike Santa Cruz County Benjamin Ketcham, resident of Live Oak Mark Mesiti-Miller, civil engineer Robert Esposito, resident of Aptos C.J., resident of Santa CruzKristin Rogas, General Manager of Whale City Bakery in DavenportBarry Scott, resident of AptosNina, resident of Live Oak
Public comments closed at 10:51am.
Rachel Moriconi responded to a question noting that $600,000 has been recommended for Segment 18 of the trail network which includes plans to integrate with Watsonville’s planned trail network, linking downtown Watsonville to Ohlone Parkway residences.
Murray Fontes, City of Watsonville Public Works Principle Engineer, clarified that due to permitting issues, the City of Watsonville will complete the trail project segmentally. Although the initial segment may not appear to add capacity, completion of additional segments is expected to create transportation opportunities for pedestrians and bikes.
5-5
Chris Schneider, Assistant Director of Public Works of the City of Santa Cruz, provided clarification regarding timeline and funding for the Frederick Street and Soquel Avenue intersection widening and bike lane (Soquel only) projects. There is significant public interest in this project; however, complications have arisen and the funding is now insufficient to complete the projects on the original timeline. Chris reported that the projects may be completed separately with grant funding available in the future.
Commissioners expressed concerns about the lack of timeline and budget for the Frederick Street and Soquel Avenue intersection project. Mr. Schneider explained that the utility poles are low on PG&E’s priorities and their inaction is causing the delay. The Commission urged the City to take a more aggressive stance with PG&E to get their commitment to move the project forward.
The Commission thanked the public for testimony on the Davenport crossing and emphasized that the willingness of Caltrans to collaborate with Commission staff and federal agencies will be key.
Executive Director Guy Preston explained that the new requirements to reduce vehicle miles traveled under the Governor’s Executive Order N-19-19 are still under review by many agencies; Aileen Loe, Ex-Officio from Caltrans, assured the Commission that state guidelines are forthcoming, and that at this point the 2020 RTIP seemed low-risk given the RTC’s commitment to alternative modes of transportation.
Commissioners discussed: importance of supporting the various cities’ jurisdictional priorities; insufficient funds for rural roads rehabilitation; planned improvements to pedestrian crossing at Soquel Drive and Thurber Lane and along Soquel Drive. Commissioners expressed support for moving Highway 1 & 9 dollars to the Soquel & Frederick intersection; appreciation for reworking RSTPX funding for current grant cycle, enabling construction of a Corralitos project. Commissioners emphasized public support of Measure D and the power of compromise to move the will of the voters forward; expressed reluctance to move Highway 1 & 9 interchange improvements forward out of concern for induced demand and emissions; noted the current interchange is already quite safe for bicyclists and pedestrians with the protected underpass and likely the project will have no impact on bicyclist/pedestrian safety; thanked staff for a professional package; noted shoulder on San Rafael Bridge has been replaced by a new bike lane with a physical barrier; everybody should take credit for the success of Measure D.
Executive Director Guy Preston expanded upon RTC funding strategy, noting that the majority of projects will be implemented by local jurisdictions, and elaborating upon other sources of funding such as SB1, the Solutions to Congested Corridor Program, and local partnerships that could provide a match for Measure D. He also noted that the auxiliary lanes included in the 2020 RTIP will enable innovative transportation projects like bus-on-shoulder, which stretch Measure D dollars and improve public safety by providing access for emergency vehicles.
5-6
Commissioner Alternate Schiffrin moved and Commissioner Bertrand seconded to approve the staff recommendations to:
1. Consider staff, Bicycle Committee, Elderly and Disabled TransportationAdvisory Committee (E&DTAC), and Interagency Technical AdvisoryCommittee (ITAC) recommendations for programming anticipatedregional shares of state and federal funds;
2. Hold a public hearing to receive comments on proposed projects andconsider any written comments received; and
3. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 1):a. Approving projects to receive the region’s anticipated formula shares
of regional, state and federal funds (Attachment 2);b. Approving amendments to previously programmed projects, asrequested by project sponsors, to reflect current project scopes, costsand schedules (Attachment 3);
c. Amending the RTC Budget and Work Program, as applicable; andd. Requesting that the California Transportation Commission (CTC) andAssociation of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) incorporateproject funding and amendments into the 2020 State TransportationImprovement Program (STIP), the Senate Bill 1 Local PartnershipProgram, and/or the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program(MTIP), as applicable.
The motion carried unanimously with Commissioners Bertrand, Brown, Leopold, Bottorff, Gonzalez, Coffman-Gomez, Caput, and Commissioner Alternates Schiffrin, Johnson, Mulhearn, and Lind voting “Aye.”
23. MyCruz511 (RideAmigos) Countywide Outreach and Marketing Contracts
Transportation Planner Amy Naranjo presented the staff report and deliveredthe presentation on GoSantaCruz.
Commissioners discussed: impact metrics of the programs; cost-effectivenessand value of TDM programs; incentives for referrals to the program;anticipation of increase in bus ridership; thanked staff for their work.
Received public comments from:Brian Peoples, Executive Director of Trail NowPiet Canin, Ecology ActionTawn Kennedy, Ecology ActionJessica Evans, City of Santa CruzDavid Date, La Selva Beach
Commissioner Alternate Schiffrin motioned and Commissioner Leopold seconded to approve the staff recommendation to approve distribution of $100,000 Measure D Highway Transportation Demand Management (TDM) funds for sole-source contracts with Ecology Action ($70,000) for countywide employer outreach and Miller Maxfield ($30,000) for countywide marketing services and materials.
5-7
Motion carried unanimously with Commissioners Bertrand, Brown, Leopold, Bottorff, Gonzalez, Coffman-Gomez, Caput, and Commissioner Alternates Schiffrin, Johnson, Mulhearn, and Lind voting “Aye.”
24. On-Call Capital Project Management Services Contract Award
Senior Transportation Engineer Sarah Christensen presented the staff reportnoting that CSG stood out for their diverse team of professionals, who areexpert in the various modes of transportation that RTC staff will be planningunder Measure D. Scope of work includes Capital projects including thehighway projects, rail infrastructure preservation, and the MBSST. Fiscal needis calculated to be $400,000 per year over the three-year term.
Received public comments from:Brian Peoples, Executive Director of Trail NowSally Arnold, Friends of the Rail and TrailBarry Scott, Aptos
Commissioner Leopold moved and Commissioner Coffman-Gomez secondedthe staff recommendation to: Adopt a resolution (82-19) authorizing theExecutive Director to enter into an agreement with CSG Consultants, Inc. forCapital Project Management Services to support staff with delivery of MeasureD capital projects and other capital projects in Santa Cruz County, and amendthe FY 19/20 budget and work program accordingly.
Motion passed unanimously with Commissioners Bertrand, Brown, Leopold,Bottorff, Gonzalez, Coffman-Gomez, Caput, and Commissioner AlternatesSchiffrin, Johnson, Mulhearn, and Lind voting “Aye.”
25. Track Improvement for Rail Vehicle Demonstration.
Commissioner Caput departed the meeting and Commissioner AlternateGregorio stepped in.
Deputy Director Luis Mendez presented the staff report. Noting that IndustrialRailways Company submitted the lowest quote for the work, including disposalof railway ties, at $60,000. The work is expected to be finished in time for therail demonstration in February 2020.
Commissioners discussed: inviting Monterey Bay Community Power to thedemonstration; following up with TAMC as to why they declined to go aheadwith their demonstration; TIG/m is covering the full cost of the operation asidefrom the track repair work; alternatives analysis; media component topromote public interest; potential to utilize Metro as a shuttle service to thedemo; background on selection process of the segment to be repaired.
Mark Johannessen, TIG/m, reported that TIG/m will engage Bill Maxfield onthe public outreach campaign; vehicle is a passenger commute vehicle, with a
5-8
capacity of 100 to 200 to scale up as need arises; vehicle is battery-electric with a hydrogen fuel cell top-off generator and water is the only emission; once the demo is in place, TIG/m plans to invite potential funders to the groundbreaking day (California Energy Commission Representatives, TAMC representatives, Monterey Bay Power, local representatives, and California Fuel Cell Partnership; the logistics and approvals process for the demo with Watsonville hosting the first; collection of data, adaptability of the unit’s noise impact, and invited questions by email: [email protected]. Demonstration will be free to the public.
Commissioners directed staff to work with consultants to devise metrics for Alternatives Analysis and to collect more specific details (location of stops, schedule) for review at the January meeting.
Received public comment from: Brian Peoples, Executive Director of Trail Now Keith Otto Tina, Aptos Jessica Evans, City of Santa Cruz Sally Arnold, Friends of the Rail and Trail Johanna Lighthill, Aptos Gina Cole, Bike Santa Cruz County Mark Mesiti-Miller Barry Scott, Aptos Michael Saint, Aptos David Date, La Selva Beach Robert, Aptos David Van Brink, City of Santa Cruz
RTC staff provided clarification in response to public comment that trespassing on the rail corridor and any unauthorized physical alteration to the structures is dangerous and illegal. Law enforcement has been contacted regarding the issue.
Commissioner Alternate Schiffrin moved and Commissioner Bertrand seconded to approve the staff recommendation to:
1. Enter into a prevailing wage no bid contract with Industrial RailwaysCompany (IRC) to upgrade the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line track betweenCapitola and Santa Cruz to Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Class Istandards for a contract value not to exceed $60,000 and a term ending onDecember 31, 2020;
2. Enter into a temporary license agreement with TIG/m for demonstration ofits passenger rail trolley vehicle between Capitola and Santa Cruz and inWatsonville;
3. To create a report for the January meeting with more details addressing theitems discussed.
5-9
The motion carried unanimously, with Commissioners Bertrand, Brown, Leopold, Bottorff, Gonzalez, Coffman-Gomez, and Commissioner Alternates Schiffrin, Johnson, Mulhearn, Gregorio and Lind voting “Aye.”
25a. Approve consent for railroad crossing agreement at Aptos Creek Road moved from the consent agenda
Commissioner Leopold departed the meeting
Deputy Director Luis Mendez explained that the private crossing is being turned over to a public crossing as part of the Aptos Village plan. As the RTC is the current owner of the rail line, agreements for crossings between Santa Cruz Co and the railroad operators requires RTC concurrence, even though the RTC is not a party to the agreements.
Commissioners discussed ways of ensuring that the RTC would not be held responsible for costs associated with hazardous materials clean-up in the same way they inadvertently assumed part of those costs with the Trout Gulch project. RTC staff communicated that such costs have already been included as part of the project costs by the Santa Cruz County Public Works Department.
Commissioner Alternate Schiffrin moved and Commissioner Brown seconded staff recommendation to: grant its concurrence for the attached (Attachment 1) new public railroad crossing agreement at Aptos Creek Road in the Countyof Santa Cruz with an update to the agreement noting that the RTC will not beresponsible for any costs associated with hazardous materials clean-up.
Motion carried unanimously with Commissioners Bertrand, Brown, Bottorff, Gonzalez, Coffman-Gomez, and Commissioner Alternates Schiffrin, Johnson, Lind, Mulhearn and Gregorio voting “Aye.”
26. Review of items for discussion during closed session.
Adjourned to closed session at 1:05
CLOSED SESSION
27. Review Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Pursuant to GovernmentCode Section 54957) Position: Executive Director
28. Conference with Labor Negotiator (Pursuant to Government Code Section54957) Position: Executive Director
Agency Designated Representative: Ed Bottorff
29. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION, initiationof litigation pursuant to Government Code 54956.9 (d)(4): One Case
5-10
OPEN SESSION
The meeting reconvened to open session at 1:20 p.m.
30. Report on closed session
Chair Bottorff reported that the Executive Director, Guy Preston was given his1-year evaluation reflecting a satisfactory rating.
Commissioner Alternate Schiffrin moved and Commissioner Gonzalez seconded to approve a 2.5% step increase in compensation for Executive Director, Guy Preston pursuant to Employment Agreement Section 3.3.
Motion passed unanimously with commissioners Coffman-Gomez, Gonzalez, Bottorff, Brown, Bertrand and Commissioner Alternates Schiffrin, Johnson, Mulhearn and Lind voting “Aye.”
31. Next meetings- Meeting adjourned at 1:23
The next RTC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, January 16, 2019 at 9:00 a.m.at the City of Santa Cruz Council Chambers, 809 Center Street, Santa Cruz, CA.
The next Transportation Policy Workshop meeting is scheduled for Thursday,February 20, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. at the RTC Offices, 1523 Pacific Ave, SantaCruz, CA.
Respectfully Submitted
Yesenia Parra Administrative Services Officer
Attendees Brian Peoples Executive Director of Trail Now Keith Otto Tina, Aptos Jessica Evans City of Santa Cruz Sally Arnold Friends of the Rail and Trail Johanna Lighthill Aptos resident Gina Cole Bike Santa Cruz County Mark Mesiti-Miller Barry Scott Aptos resident Michael Saint Aptos resident David Date La Selva Beach Robert, Aptos David Van Brink City of Santa Cruz Piet Canin Ecology Action
5-11
Tawn Kennedy Ecology Action Heather Adamson AMBAG John McKeon Davenport Kirk Ance Community Bridges/Lift Line Dan Henderson UCSC Teresa Buika UCSC Noel G Bock DNCA Rachel Spencer Davenport
5-12
1
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission’s
BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
DRAFT MINUTES
Monday, December 9, 2019 6:00 pm to 8:30 pm
1. Call to Order: Chair, Amelia Conlen called the meeting to order at 6:00 pm.
2. Introductions
Members Present:Amelia Conlen, Bike-to-Work, ChairGrace Voss, District 1Peter Scott, District 3Sally Arnold, District 3 (Alt.)Anna Kammer, District 4Rick Hyman, District 5Michael Moore, City of CapitolaMatt Farrell, City of Santa CruzMurray Fontes, City of WatsonvilleDrew Rogers, City of Watsonville (Alt.)Leo Jed, CTSC
Unexcused Absences:
Excused Absences: Janneke Strause, District 1 (Alt.) Shea Johnson, District 2 Casey Beyer, District 2 (Alt.) Theresia Rogerson, District 5 (Alt.) Bruce Sawhill, City of Santa Cruz (Alt.) Richard Masoner, City of Scotts Valley Jim Langley, CTSC (Alt.) Matt Miller, Bike-to-Work (Alt.)
Vacancies: District 4 – Alternate City of Capitola – Alternate City of Scotts Valley – Alternate
Staff: Tommy Travers, Transportation Planner Grace Blakeslee, Senior Transportation Engineer Ginger Dykaar, Senior Transportation Engineer Luis Mendez, Deputy Director Rachel Moriconi, Senior Transportation Planner
Guests: Russell Chen, County of Santa Cruz Tim Nguyen, County of Santa Cruz Piet Canin, Bike-to-Work/Ecology Action Gina Cole, Bike Santa Cruz County
RTC Office 1523 Pacific Ave
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
6-1
2
3. Announcements – Staff announced that
4. Oral communications – Sally Arnold announced that the Friends of the Rail & Trail willhold an event January 25 at 1pm at Santa Cruz Mountain Brewery to celebrate thegroundbreaking of the Rail Trail Segment 7.
5. Additions or deletions to consent and regular agendas – None
CONSENT AGENDA
Members requested, in light of recent hazard reports regarding construction zones, that staff remind other jurisdictions of state requirements for bicycle detour signage. A motion (Hyman/Jed) was made to approve the consent agenda. The motion passed unanimously with members Conlen, Voss, Scott, Kammer, Hyman, Moore, Farrell, Fontes, and Jed voting in favor.
6. Approved draft minutes of the November 4, 2019 Bicycle Advisory Committeemeeting
7. Accepted summary of hazard reports
8. Accept informational item: Bicycle Advisory Committee Roster including Matt Miller asnew Alternate for Bike to Work seat
REGULAR AGENDA
9. Aptos Village Project Phase 2B roadway improvements update and review – TimNguyen & Russell Chen, County of Santa Cruz staff, described the project which willinclude a new traffic signal at Soquel Dr and Aptos Creek Rd, a new railroad crossingsignal at Aptos Creek Rd, curb, gutter, and sidewalks in portions, storm drainsystem, overlay and striping, new video detection at Spreckels Dr, and traffic signalsynchronization capability between State Park Drive and Trout Gulch Rd. Theydiscussed new bike lanes in the area of the Aptos Creek Rd intersection and therailroad crossing, green pavement treatments, and the need to remove parking closeto the intersection and the railroad crossing. Committee members raised concernsabout the removal of the existing bike lane on the north side of Soquel Dr betweenAptos Creek Rd and Aptos Creek. Discussion touched upon loss of several parkingspaces on Soquel Dr and in the 8017 Soquel Dr parking lot, pedestrians’ ability toutilize said parking lot for travel, bicyclists’ ability to use the proposed sidewalk,future need to widen the Soquel Dr bridge over Aptos Creek in order to allow forcontinuous bike lanes, and the improved safety of the railroad crossing.
A motion (Hyman/Voss) was made to request that the County use the existingCounty right-of-way to construct the proposed new sidewalk, rather than removingthe existing bike lane. A friendly amendment (Fontes) was offered and acceptedstating that if it is too costly or time-constrained to more fully address the privateparking lot at 8017 Soquel Dr, which appears to encroach into the roadway right-of-way according to the County’s engineering plans, the preference should be to deferconstruction of the sidewalk until that can be addressed. Further, if the County is
6-2
3
able to address the parking lot encroachment in time for planned construction in spring 2020, the Committee requests new plans be brought to the Committee. The amended motion passed with members Conlen, Voss, Scott, Kammer, Hyman, Moore, Fontes, and Jed voting in favor and Farrell voting against.
10. Rail Trail North Coast project update and review – Grace Blakeslee, RTC Sr.Transportation Planner, provided a general overview of the project and an update tothe Committee on the timeline for the project, particularly progress since thecertification of the EIR in early 2019. The next engineering plans will be the 75%plans expected in spring 2020. One of the changes to the plans is for the trail to be12 feet paved with two 2-foot unpaved shoulders rather than 16 feet paved with one4-foot unpaved shoulder. The RTC is pursuing grant funding for the second(northern) phase of the project. A public meeting is planned for the spring,particularly to update the public on a proposed pedestrian crossing of Highway 1 inDavenport. Staff clarified that there is planned to be a nighttime closure of the trail,specifics yet to be determined, and that there will be no lighting in the project.Committee members asked that project signage be consistent with MBSST signagepolicies, and requested that staff return to the Committee for design review inFebruary 2020.
11. Competitive Regional Surface Transportation Program Exchange (RSTPX) fundsreview and recommend – Rachel Moriconi, RTC Sr. Transportation Planner, presentedthe staff recommendation for the competitive portion of RSTPX funds, and describeddetails of the four applications that were received. In response to committee memberquestions, Gina Cole, Bike Santa Cruz County noted that the two proposed temporaryseparated bike lane projects are expected to be located on 17th Ave in Live Oak andPennsylvania Dr in Watsonville. Piet Canin reported that Ecology Action willundertake outreach in Spanish for the Bike Challenge.
A motion (Kammer/Voss) was made to recommend that the RTC approve the projectfunding for Bike Santa Cruz County and Ecology Action projects as recommended inthe staff report. The motion passed unanimously with members Conlen, Voss, Scott,Kammer, Hyman, Moore, Farrell, Fontes, and Jed voting in favor.
12. Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) 2045 Goals, Policies, and Targets input anddiscussion – Ginger Dykaar, RTC Sr. Transportation Planner, introduced the RTPprocess and presented the draft goals, policies, and targets for the Committee todiscuss and provide their input. The RTP is required for certain funding sources andwill be incorporated into the Monterey Bay region’s Metropolitan TransportationPlan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. The RTP will identify transportation needsfor the next 20-plus years for the county, and the next version will be finalized in2022. This version of the RTP will be similar in design to the previous RTP 2040,continuing a focus on measuring targets rather than forecasting to the future, and itwill incorporate some new requirements including policies on climate resilience,goods movement, dedicated transit facilities, and transit-oriented development. ThePolicies Element guides further development of the plan over the next few years.Committee members sought clarification on bikeway miles currently in the county,which are 27 miles of bike paths and 198 miles of each direction of bike lanes, whilethe amount of buffered or separated bike lanes is not currently tallied butuncommon. Members requested revision of Target 1Ai and Target 2A and revision orfootnoting of Target 1Dii for clarity. Committee members requested aggressivetargets for the year 2045 as follows:
6-3
4
• 85% or 100% of arterials and collectors should have bike facilities to HighwayDesign Manual minimum standard
• Finish the planned rail trail• Increase the total length of bikeway miles by 36% by 2030 and 50% by 2045• Reduce serious traffic injuries, in addition to traffic deaths, to zero by 2050
Members requested that staff communicate with an ad-hoc committee of Rick Hyman and Grace Voss on revisions to the goals, policies, and targets.
13. Regional Transportation Commission 2020 State and Federal Legislative Programsreview and provide input - Rachel Moriconi, RTC Sr. Transportation Planner,introduced the preliminary draft of the RTC’s legislative platform. She brieflydiscussed a few of the positions including increased funding overall, safety policies,local control, and transit funding. She requested that Committee members send hertheir input individually by January 6, 2020. Committee members requested shereturn in 2020 to provide a general overview of funding sources for transportation.
14. Rail Trail Segment 18 update – Murray Fontes, City of Watsonville staff, presentedthe first phase of the Segment 18 project. Committee members asked about thefence between the trail and the tracks, which will be 42 inches high, and requestedspace at the ground for animals to pass. He clarified that there will be no lighting andthat the trail will be closed after dusk. The second phase of the project, completingthe trail between Walker Street and Lee Road, will come two years after the firstphase.
A motion (Hyman, Farrell) was made to approve the designs for phase 1 of theSegment 18 trail. The motion passed unanimously with members Conlen, Voss,Scott, Kammer, Hyman, Moore, Farrell, Fontes, and Jed voting in favor.
15. Watsonville Downtown Complete Streets Plan update – Murray Fontes, City ofWatsonville staff, provided an update on the Downtown Complete Streets Plan, whichincludes Main Street (SR 152), Union Street, Brennan Street, and Rodriguez Street.As the scope of the project did not allow for right-of-way acquisition, alternatives toimprove active transportation required trade-offs such as removing a travel lane oron-street parking. After extensive public input, recommendations include, amongother improvements, a loss of travel lanes on Main Street, before the construction ofwhich the city council has requested a study of the impact. Initial project short-termpriorities include improved marked crosswalks. Committee members expressedappreciation for the work of the project team to achieve city council acceptance ofcomplete streets improvements on Main Street. They also discussed the pros andcons of the city considering parking-buffered bike lanes, which may protect bicyclistsfrom drivers coming from behind, but may introduce more conflict at driveways andintersections. Relatedly, members expressed an impression that a paint-buffered bikelane may have little use on Main Street, but a grade-separated cycle track adjacentto the sidewalk could attract more users.
16. Bike lane demarcation adjacent to parking in City of Santa Cruz – Rick Hyman,Committee member, discussed that he was under the impression that the City ofSanta Cruz has expressed that they will mark the outside edge of all bike lanes whenadjacent to parking so that parking is more likely not to encroach into bike lanes.
6-4
5
A motion (Fontes, Farrell) was made for a member of the Committee to present the matter to the RTC’s Interagency Technical Advisory Committee for their consideration.
17. Update on Chanticleer Ave bike/ped crossing design review – Amelia Conlen,Committee chair, updated the Committee on the ad-hoc committee’s meeting withRTC, design firm, and County staff for detailed discussion as a follow-up to theNovember Committee agenda item on the topic. She reported that the design firmand County staff appeared open to a marked “crossbike” as well as a possible two-way cycle track as discussed at the November meeting, if there is existing right-of-way to accommodate it.
18. Updates related to Committee functions – Amelia Conlen stated that an ad-hoccommittee will meet with Capitola staff on December 18 to follow up on design inputprovided at the April Committee meeting.
19. Adjourn – 8:25 pm
NEXT MEETING: The next Bicycle Committee meeting is scheduled for February 10, 2020 from 6:00pm to 8:30pm at the RTC Office, 1523 Pacific Ave, Santa Cruz, Calif.
Minutes respectfully prepared and submitted by: Tommy Travers, Transportation Planner
6-5
AGENDA: January 16, 2020
TO: Regional Transportation Commission
FROM: Brianna Goodman, Transportation Planner
RE: Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans for the Highway 9/SLV Complete
Streets Project Initiation Document
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission adopt a resolution (Attachment 1) to authorize the Executive Director to negotiate, enter into, and/or
amend a cooperative agreement with Caltrans to fund their completion of a Highway 9/San Lorenzo Valley (SLV) Complete Streets Project Initiation Document
(PID) in the amount not to exceed $150,000.
BACKGROUND
The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) worked with the
San Lorenzo Valley community, the County, Caltrans and other stakeholders to prepare the Highway 9 San Lorenzo Valley Complete Streets Corridor Plan, which identifies and prioritizes projects in the corridor, focusing on the section of Highway
9 that connects the towns of Felton, Ben Lomond, Brookdale and Boulder Creek, including parallel and connecting streets, roadways and paths. The plan was
accepted by the Commission on June 27, 2019.
Also, in June 2019, the RTC FY 2019-20 budget programmed $250,000 of Measure
D-SLV/Highway 9 Corridor funding for preliminary scope and engineeringdocuments for near term projects. The purpose of the funding was to initiate
projects, create programming documents, and to prepare grant applications forpriority projects identified in the SLV Complete Streets Plan.
In 2019 Caltrans began developing a State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) Project Initiation Document (PID) for Highway 9 that would
provide conceptual design and cost estimates for pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements between the SLV Schools Campus and the Graham Hill Road intersection in Felton. This PID is scheduled to be complete in 2020 and is funded
by the SHOPP safety program.
DISCUSSION
Staff from the RTC, the County of Santa Cruz, and Caltrans have discussed the next
steps for implementation of other improvements identified in the Highway 9 San Lorenzo Valley Complete Streets Corridor Plan that are not already included in the
PID that Caltrans is already preparing for the segment between the SLV Schools
7-1
Hwy 9 Complete Streets PID Cooperative Agreement Page 2
Campus and Graham Hill Road. Caltrans has agreed to prepare a separate PID (independent of the pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements between the SLV
Schools Campus and the Graham Hill Road intersection in Felton). The proposed PID would identify improvements in the Highway 9 / SLV Complete Streets
Corridor Plan that Caltrans would support on Highway 9. Caltrans has requested $150,000 of funding from the RTC to cover their staff and administrative costs. A draft funding Cooperative Agreement was prepared by Caltrans (Attachment 2)
defining responsibilities for the PID. This PID will provide conceptual design and cost estimates for the range of priorities identified along Highway 9 from Henry
Cowell State Park in Felton to north of Boulder Creek. The project initiation phase is the first formal Caltrans project phase in developing a
solution for a specific transportation problem, and occurs prior to the environmental phase of a project. The project initiation phase follows the system and regional
planning process, which in this case was the Hwy 9/SLV Complete Streets Corridor Plan. The outcome of the project initiation process is a PID that establishes a well-defined purpose-and-need statement, and a proposed project scope tied to a
reliable cost estimate and schedule for subsequent phases of environmental, final design, and construction.
A PID is required for any major project on the State Highway System, and is a
requirement to receive future funding allocations from the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for projects. With a completed PID for the Highway 9 corridor, complete streets projects can be implemented and funded in the future. Caltrans
has indicated that they may also be able to identify other minor improvements that can be implemented faster, as part of their evaluation of improvements to include
in the PID. RTC staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission adopt
a resolution (Attachment 1) authorizing the Executive Director to negotiate, enter into, and amend cooperative agreements with Caltrans in
the amount not to exceed $150,000 in Measure D SLV/Highway 9 Corridor funds.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no new fiscal impacts as a result of this proposed cooperative agreement. The Measure D five-year plan programmed a total of $250,000 of SLV/Highway 9 Corridor funds for initiation of projects along the Highway 9 Corridor in FY19/20.
The FY19/20 budget includes $100,000 for contribution to other agencies, in this case Caltrans. The $100,000 budgeted in FY 19/20 is sufficient because the work to
prepare the PID will occur over both FY19/20 and FY 20/21. Staff will propose to include the remaining $50,000 required to fund the PID in the upcoming FY 20/21 budget.
SUMMARY
7-2
Hwy 9 Complete Streets PID Cooperative Agreement Page 3
The Highway 9 Complete Streets PID document is the next necessary step in implementing the improvements identified by the community in the Highway 9/SLV
Complete Streets Corridor Plan. Staff recommends that the RTC authorize the Executive Director to negotiate, enter into, and amend Cooperative Agreements
with Caltrans in the amount not to exceed $150,000 of Measure D funds for the preparation of a Highway 9/SLV Complete Streets PID.
Attachments: 1. Resolution
2. Draft Cooperative Agreement
7-3
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. _____
Adopted by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission on the date of January 16, 2020 on the motion of Commissioner
duly seconded by Commissioner
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO NEGOTIATE, ENTER INTO, AND AMEND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS WITH CALTRANS FOR THE
PREPARATION OF A COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT FOR
THE HIGHWAY 9/SLV CORRIDOR IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $150,000
WHEREAS, to address immense transportation needs and severe transportation funding shortfalls, Santa Cruz County voters approved Measure D in November 2016 by over a 2/3 majority;
WHEREAS, the RTC is the agency responsible for delivering and distributing
funds for regional and other projects in the voter-approved Measure D Expenditure Plan including Highway Corridors, Active Transportation (Coastal Rail Trail), Rail Corridor, San Lorenzo Valley Highway 9 Corridor Improvements, and the Highway 17
Wildlife Crossing;
WHEREAS, the RTC worked with the community to prepare a complete streets corridor plan for Highway 9 and connecting county roads through San Lorenzo Valley
(SLV) that identifies, prioritizes, and will facilitate implementation of some of the most critical and cost effective transportation projects in the corridor;
WHEREAS, on the state highway system, a Project Initiation Document (PID) is necessary for project implementation, to develop a project scope tied to a reliable
cost estimate and schedule; WHEREAS, a PID is required for any major project on the State Highway
System, and is a requirement to receive future funding allocations from the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for projects;
WHEREAS, Caltrans has agreed to prepare a PID for complete streets elements
to provide conceptual design and cost estimates for the range of priorities identified
along Highway 9 from Henry Cowell State Park in Felton to north of Boulder Creek;
WHEREAS, in June of 2019 the RTC programmed a total of $250,000 of the Measure D-SLV/Highway 9 Corridor funding for preliminary scope and engineering documents for near term projects with the purpose of initiating projects, creating
programming documents, and for preparing grant applications for priority projects identified in the SLV Complete Streets Plan; and
WHEREAS, use of Measure D funds for a project initiation document (PID) is
consistent with the Measure D Ordinance and Expenditure Plan and Highway 9/SLV
Corridor Plan;
7-5
ATTACHMENT 1
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION THAT:
1. The Executive Director is hereby authorized to negotiate, enter into, and
amend Cooperative Agreements with Caltrans to fund the preparation of theComplete Streets Project Initiation Document for the Highway 9/SLV Corridor
in the amount not to exceed $150,000 in Measure D SLV/Highway 9 Corridorfunds.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS
NOES: COMMISSIONERS
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS
_________________________ Bruce McPherson, Chair
ATTEST:
_________________________ Guy Preston, Secretary
Distribution: RTC Fiscal, RTC Programming, and Caltrans
7-6
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
EA 1M550 05-SCR-9-4.0/20.8
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) i
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT COVER SHEET
Work Description
DEVELOPING A PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT TO CONSTRUCT OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS AND COMPLETE STREETS ELEMENTS FROM HENRY COWELL REDWOOD STATE PARK (SCR 4.29) TO POOL DRIVE (SCR 15.42)
Contact Information
CALTRANS
Doug Hessing, Project Manager 50 Higuera St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Office Phone: 805-549-3386 Email: [email protected]
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Brianna Goodman, Transportation Planner 1523 Pacific Avenue Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Office Phone: (831) 460-3200 Email: [email protected]
ATTACHMENT 2
7-7
Cover Sheet AGREEMENT 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) ii
Table of Contents
RECITALS ........................................................................................................................................... 1
RESPONSIBILITIES ........................................................................................................................... 2
Sponsorship ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Implementing Agency ...................................................................................................................... 3
Funding ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Project Initiation Document (PID) ................................................................................................... 4
Additional Provisions ....................................................................................................................... 4
Standards ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Qualifications .............................................................................................................................. 4
Protected Resources .................................................................................................................... 5
Disclosures .................................................................................................................................. 5
Hazardous Materials .................................................................................................................... 5
Claims .......................................................................................................................................... 6
Accounting and Audits ................................................................................................................ 6
Penalties, Judgements and Settlements ....................................................................................... 7
GENERAL CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................. 8
Venue ............................................................................................................................................... 8
Exemptions ....................................................................................................................................... 8
Indemnification ................................................................................................................................ 8
Non-parties ....................................................................................................................................... 9
Ambiguity and Performance ............................................................................................................ 9
Defaults ............................................................................................................................................ 9
Dispute Resolution ........................................................................................................................... 9
Prevailing Wage ............................................................................................................................. 10
SIGNATURES .................................................................................................................................... 11
FUNDING SUMMARY No. 01 ........................................................................................................... 1
FUNDING TABLE .......................................................................................................................... 1
SPENDING SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 1
Funding ............................................................................................................................................ 2
7- 8
Cover Sheet AGREEMENT 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) iii
Invoicing and Payment ..................................................................................................................... 2
Project Initiation Document (PID) .............................................................................................. 2
7- 9
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
EA 1M550 05-SCR-9-4.0/20.8
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 1 of 11
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT, effective on _______________________________, is between the State of California, acting through its Department of Transportation, referred to as CALTRANS, and:
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission, a public corporation/entity, referred to hereinafter as SCCRTC.
An individual signatory agency in this AGREEMENT is referred to as a PARTY. Collectively, the signatory agencies in this AGREEMENT are referred to as PARTIES.
RECITALS
1. PARTIES are authorized to enter into a cooperative agreement for improvements to the StateHighway System per California Streets and Highways Code, Sections 114 and 130 andCalifornia Government Code, Section 65086.5.
2. For the purpose of this AGREEMENT, developing a Project Initiation Document to construct
operational improvements and complete streets elements from Henry Cowell Redwood StatePark (SCR 4.29) to Pool Drive (SCR 15.42) will be referred to hereinafter as PROJECT.SCCRTC desires that a Project Initiation Document (PID) be developed for the PROJECT.
3. All obligations and responsibilities assigned in this AGREEMENT to complete the followingPROJECT COMPONENT will be referred to hereinafter as WORK:
PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT (PID)
Each PROJECT COMPONENT is defined in the CALTRANS Workplan Standards Guide as a distinct group of activities/products in the project planning and development process.
7- 11
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 2 of 11
4. The term AGREEMENT, as used herein, includes this document and any attachments,exhibits, and amendments.
This AGREEMENT is separate from and does not modify or replace any other cooperativeagreement or memorandum of understanding between the PARTIES regarding the PROJECT.
PARTIES intend this AGREEMENT to be their final expression that supersedes any oralunderstanding or writings pertaining to the WORK. The requirements of this AGREEMENTwill preside over any conflicting requirements in any documents that are made an express partof this AGREEMENT.
If any provisions in this AGREEMENT are found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be, orare in fact, illegal, inoperative, or unenforceable, those provisions do not render any or all otherAGREEMENT provisions invalid, inoperative, or unenforceable, and those provisions will beautomatically severed from this AGREEMENT.
Except as otherwise provided in the AGREEMENT, PARTIES will execute a writtenamendment if there are any changes to the terms of this AGREEMENT.
AGREEMENT will terminate 180 days after PID is signed by PARTIES or as mutually agreedby PARTIES in writing. However, all indemnification articles will remain in effect untilterminated or modified in writing by mutual agreement.
5. No PROJECT deliverables have been completed prior to this AGREEMENT.
6. In this AGREEMENT capitalized words represent defined terms, initialisms, or acronyms.
7. PARTIES hereby set forth the terms, covenants, and conditions of this AGREEMENT.
RESPONSIBILITIES
Sponsorship
8. A SPONSOR is responsible for establishing the scope of the PROJECT and securing thefinancial resources to fund the WORK. A SPONSOR is responsible for securing additionalfunds when necessary or implementing PROJECT changes to ensure the WORK can becompleted with the funds obligated in this AGREEMENT.
PROJECT changes, as described in the CALTRANS Project Development Procedures Manual,will be approved by CALTRANS as the owner/operator of the State Highway System.
9. SCCRTC is the SPONSOR for the WORK in this AGREEMENT.
7- 12
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 3 of 11
Implementing Agency
10. The IMPLEMENTING AGENCY is the PARTY responsible for managing the scope, cost,schedule, and quality of the work activities and products of a PROJECT COMPONENT.
CALTRANS is the Project Initiation Document (PID) IMPLEMENTING AGENCY.
The PID identifies the PROJECT need and purpose, stakeholder input, projectalternatives, anticipated right-of-way requirements, preliminary environmental analysis,initial cost estimates, and potential funding sources.
11. Any PARTY responsible for completing WORK will make its personnel and consultants thatprepare WORK available to help resolve WORK-related problems and changes for the entireduration of the PROJECT including PROJECT work that may occur under separateagreements.
Funding
12. SCCRTC is the only PARTY obligating funds in this AGREEMENT and will fund the cost ofthe WORK in accordance with this AGREEMENT.
If, in the future, CALTRANS is allocated state funds and Personnel Years (PYs) for PIDreview or development of this PROJECT, PARTIES will agree to amend this AGREEMENTto change the reimbursement arrangement for PID review.
13. Funding sources, PARTIES committing funds, funding amounts, and invoicing/paymentdetails are documented in the Funding Summary section of this AGREEMENT.
PARTIES will amend this AGREEMENT by updating and replacing the Funding Summary, inits entirety, each time the funding details change. Funding Summary replacements will beexecuted by a legally authorized representative of the respective PARTIES. The most currentfully executed Funding Summary supersedes any previous Funding Summary created for thisAGREEMENT.
14. PARTIES will not be reimbursed for costs beyond the funds obligated in this AGREEMENT.
If an IMPLEMENTING AGENCY anticipates that funding for the WORK will be insufficientto complete the WORK, the IMPLEMENTING AGENCY will promptly notify theSPONSOR.
15. Unless otherwise documented in the Funding Summary, overall liability for project costswithin a PROJECT COMPONENT will be in proportion to the amount contributed to thatPROJECT COMPONENT by each fund type.
7-13
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 4 of 11
16. Unless otherwise documented in the Funding Summary, any savings recognized within aPROJECT COMPONENT will be credited or reimbursed, when allowed by policy or law, inproportion to the amount contributed to that PROJECT COMPONENT by each fund type.
17. WORK costs, except those that are specifically excluded in this AGREEMENT, are to be paidfrom the funds obligated in the Funding Summary. Costs that are specifically excluded fromthe funds obligated in this AGREEMENT are to be paid by the PARTY incurring the costsfrom funds that are independent of this AGREEMENT.
Project Initiation Document (PID)
18. As the PID IMPLEMENTING AGENCY, CALTRANS is responsible for all PID WORKexcept those activities and responsibilities that are assigned to another PARTY in thisAGREEMENT and those activities that may be specifically excluded.
Additional Provisions
Standards
19. PARTIES will perform all WORK in accordance with federal and California laws, regulations,and standards; Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) standards; and CALTRANSstandards. CALTRANS standards include, but are not limited to, the guidance provided in the:
CADD Users Manual
CALTRANS policies and directives
Plans Preparation Manual
Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM)
Workplan Standards Guide
Qualifications
20. Each PARTY will ensure that personnel participating in WORK are appropriately qualified orlicensed to perform the tasks assigned to them.
21. The IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for a PROJECT COMPONENT will coordinate, prepare,obtain, implement, renew, and amend any encroachment permits needed to complete theWORK.
7- 14
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 5 of 11
Protected Resources
22. If any PARTY discovers unanticipated cultural, archaeological, paleontological, or otherprotected resources during WORK, all WORK in that area will stop and that PARTY willnotify all PARTIES within 24 hours of discovery. WORK may only resume after a qualifiedprofessional has evaluated the nature and significance of the discovery and CALTRANSapproves a plan for its removal or protection.
Disclosures
23. PARTIES will hold all administrative drafts and administrative final reports, studies, materials,and documentation relied upon, produced, created, or utilized for the WORK in confidence tothe extent permitted by law and where applicable, the provisions of California GovernmentCode, Section 6254.5(e) will protect the confidentiality of such documents in the event thatsaid documents are shared between PARTIES.
PARTIES will not distribute, release, or share said documents with anyone other thanemployees, agents, and consultants who require access to complete the WORK without thewritten consent of the PARTY authorized to release them, unless required or authorized to doso by law.
24. If a PARTY receives a public records request pertaining to the WORK, that PARTY willnotify PARTIES within five (5) working days of receipt and make PARTIES aware of anydisclosed public records.
Hazardous Materials
25. If any hazardous materials, pursuant to Health and Safety Code 25260(d), are found within thePROJECT limits, the discovering PARTY will notify all other PARTIES within twenty-four(24) hours of discovery.
26. PARTIES agree to consider alternatives to PROJECT scope and/or alignment, to the extentpracticable, in an effort to avoid any known hazardous materials within the proposedPROJECT limits.
27. If hazardous materials are discovered within PROJECT limits, but outside of State HighwaySystem right-of-way, it is the responsibility of SCCRTC in concert with the local agencyhaving land use jurisdiction over the property, and the property owner, to remedy beforeCALTRANS will acquire or accept title to such property.
7- 15
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 6 of 11
Claims
28. Any PARTY that is responsible for completing WORK may accept, reject, compromise, settle,or litigate claims arising from the WORK without concurrence from the other PARTY.
29. PARTIES will confer on any claim that may affect the WORK or PARTIES’ liability orresponsibility under this AGREEMENT in order to retain resolution possibilities for potentialfuture claims. No PARTY will prejudice the rights of another PARTY until after PARTIESconfer on the claim.
30. If the WORK expends state or federal funds, each PARTY will comply with the FederalUniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for FederalAwards of 2 CFR, Part 200. PARTIES will ensure that any for-profit consultant hired toparticipate in the WORK will comply with the requirements in 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31.When state or federal funds are expended on the WORK these principles and requirementsapply to all funding types included in this AGREEMENT.
Accounting and Audits
31. PARTIES will maintain, and will ensure that any consultant hired by PARTIES to participatein WORK will maintain, a financial management system that conforms to Generally AcceptedAccounting Principles (GAAP), and that can properly accumulate and segregate incurredPROJECT costs and billings.
32. PARTIES will maintain and make available to each other all WORK-related documents,including financial data, during the term of this AGREEMENT.
PARTIES will retain all WORK-related records for three (3) years after the final voucher.
PARTIES will require that any consultants hired to participate in the WORK will comply withthis Article.
7-16
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 7 of 11
33. PARTIES have the right to audit each other in accordance with generally acceptedgovernmental audit standards.
CALTRANS, the State Auditor, FHWA (if the PROJECT utilizes federal funds), and SCCRTCwill have access to all WORK -related records of each PARTY, and any consultant hired by aPARTY to participate in WORK, for audit, examination, excerpt, or transcription.
The examination of any records will take place in the offices and locations where said recordsare generated and/or stored and will be accomplished during reasonable hours of operation.The auditing PARTY will be permitted to make copies of any WORK-related records neededfor the audit.
The audited PARTY will review the draft audit, findings, and recommendations, and providewritten comments within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt.
Upon completion of the final audit, PARTIES have forty-five (45) calendar days to refund orinvoice as necessary in order to satisfy the obligation of the audit.
Any audit dispute not resolved by PARTIES is subject to mediation. Mediation will follow theprocess described in the General Conditions section of this AGREEMENT.
34. If the WORK expends state or federal funds, each PARTY will undergo an annual audit inaccordance with the Single Audit Act in the Federal Uniform Administrative Requirements,Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards as defined in 2 CFR, Part 200.
35. When a PARTY reimburses a consultant for WORK with state or federal funds, theprocurement of the consultant and the consultant overhead costs will be in accordance with theLocal Assistance Procedures Manual, Chapter 10.
Penalties, Judgements and Settlements
36. The cost of awards, judgements, or settlements generated by the WORK are to be paid fromthe funds obligated in this AGREEMENT.
37. Any PARTY whose action or lack of action causes the levy of fines, interest, or penalties willindemnify and hold all other PARTIES harmless per the terms of this AGREEMENT.
7- 17
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 8 of 11
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Venue
38. PARTIES understand that this AGREEMENT is in accordance with and governed by theConstitution and laws of the State of California. This AGREEMENT will be enforceable in theState of California. Any PARTY initiating legal action arising from this AGREEMENT willfile and maintain that legal action in the Superior Court of the county in which theCALTRANS district office that is signatory to this AGREEMENT resides, or in the SuperiorCourt of the county in which the PROJECT is physically located.
Exemptions
39. All CALTRANS’ obligations under this AGREEMENT are subject to the appropriation ofresources by the Legislature, the State Budget Act authority, programming and allocation offunds by the California Transportation Commission (CTC).
Indemnification
40. Neither CALTRANS nor any of their officers and employees, are responsible for any injury,damage, or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by SCCRTC,its contractors, sub-contractors, and/or its agents under or in connection with any work,authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon SCCRTC under this AGREEMENT. It is understoodand agreed that SCCRTC, to the extent permitted by law, will defend, indemnify, and saveharmless CALTRANS and all of their officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actionsof every name, kind, and description brought forth under, but not limited to, tortious,contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories and assertions of liability occurring byreason of anything done or omitted to be done by SCCRTC, its contractors, sub-contractors,and/or its agents under this AGREEMENT.
41. Neither SCCRTC nor any of their officers and employees, are responsible for any injury,damage, or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done byCALTRANS, its contractors, sub-contractors, and/or its agents under or in connection with anywork, authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon CALTRANS under this AGREEMENT. It isunderstood and agreed that CALTRANS, to the extent permitted by law, will defend,indemnify, and save harmless SCCRTC and all of their officers and employees from all claims,suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, but not limited to,tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories and assertions of liabilityoccurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CALTRANS, its contractors,sub-contractors, and/or its agents under this AGREEMENT.
7-18
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 9 of 11
Non-parties
42. PARTIES do not intend this AGREEMENT to create a third party beneficiary or define duties,obligations, or rights for entities not signatory to this AGREEMENT. PARTIES do not intendthis AGREEMENT to affect their legal liability by imposing any standard of care for fulfillingthe WORK different from the standards imposed by law.
43. PARTIES will not assign or attempt to assign obligations to entities not signatory to thisAGREEMENT without an amendment to this AGREEMENT.
Ambiguity and Performance
44. SCCRTC will not interpret any ambiguity contained in this AGREEMENT againstCALTRANS. SCCRTC waives the provisions of California Civil Code, Section 1654.
A waiver of a PARTY’s performance under this AGREEMENT will not constitute acontinuous waiver of any other provision.
45. A delay or omission to exercise a right or power due to a default does not negate the use of thatright or power in the future when deemed necessary.
Defaults
46. If any PARTY defaults in its performance of the WORK, a non-defaulting PARTY will requestin writing that the default be remedied within thirty (30) calendar days. If the defaultingPARTY fails to do so, the non-defaulting PARTY may initiate dispute resolution.
Dispute Resolution
47. PARTIES will first attempt to resolve AGREEMENT disputes at the PROJECT team level asdescribed in the Quality Management Plan. If they cannot resolve the dispute themselves, theCALTRANS District Director and the Executive Officer of SCCRTC will attempt to negotiatea resolution. If PARTIES do not reach a resolution, PARTIES’ legal counsel will initiatemediation. PARTIES agree to participate in mediation in good faith and will share equally inits costs.
Neither the dispute nor the mediation process relieves PARTIES from full and timelyperformance of the WORK in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT. However, ifany PARTY stops fulfilling its obligations, any other PARTY may seek equitable relief toensure that the WORK continues.
7-19
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 10 of 11
Except for equitable relief, no PARTY may file a civil complaint until after mediation, or forty-five (45) calendar days after filing the written mediation request, whichever occurs first.
PARTIES will file any civil complaints in the Superior Court of the county in which the CALTRANS District Office signatory to this AGREEMENT resides or in the Superior Court of the county in which the PROJECT is physically located.
48. PARTIES maintain the ability to pursue alternative or additional dispute remedies if apreviously selected remedy does not achieve resolution.
Prevailing Wage
49. When WORK falls within the Labor Code § 1720(a)(1) definition of "public works" in that it isconstruction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair; or maintenance work under LaborCode § 1771, PARTIES will conform to the provisions of Labor Code §§ 1720-1815, and allapplicable provisions of California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Division 1, Chapter 8,Subchapter 3, Articles 1-7. PARTIES will include prevailing wage requirements in contractsfor public work and require contractors to include the same prevailing wage requirements in allsubcontracts.
Work performed by a PARTY’s own employees is exempt from the Labor Code's PrevailingWage requirements.
If WORK is paid for, in whole or part, with federal funds and is of the type of work subject tofederal prevailing wage requirements, PARTIES will conform to the provisions of the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts, 40 U.S.C. §§ 3141-3148.
When applicable, PARTIES will include federal prevailing wage requirements in contracts forpublic works. WORK performed by a PARTY’s employees is exempt from federal prevailingwage requirements.
7-20
Agreement 05-0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019)
11 of 11
SIGNATURES
PARTIES are empowered by California Streets and Highways Code to enter into this AGREEMENT and have delegated to the undersigned the authority to execute this AGREEMENT on behalf of the respective agencies and covenants to have followed all the necessary legal requirements to validly execute this AGREEMENT.
Signatories may execute this AGREEMENT through individual signature pages provided that each signature is an original. This AGREEMENT is not fully executed until all original signatures are attached.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Timothy M. Gubbins District Director
VERIFICATION OF FUNDS AND AUTHORITY:
Julia Bolger Resource Manager
CERTIFIED AS TO FINANCIAL TERMS AND POLICIES:
_ Gina Schumacher HQ Accounting Supervisor
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Guy Preston Executive Director
Attest:
Sarah Christensen Engineer
Approved as to form and procedure:
Steven Mattas RTC Legal Counsel
7-21
AGREEMENT 05 - 0352 Project No. 0520000015
EA 1M550 05-SCR-9-4.0/20.8
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 1 of 2
FUNDING SUMMARY NO. 01
FUNDING TABLE v. 1
PID Source Party Fund Type Totals
LOCAL SCCRTC Measure $150,000
Totals
SPENDING SUMMARY v 2
PID
Fund Type CALTRANS SCCRTC Totals
Measure 150,000 0 $150,000
Totals 150,000 0 $150,000
7-23
FUNDING SUMMARY No. 01 AGREEMENT 05 - 0352 Project No. 0520000015
Project Development Agreement 2017-02-17 (Created November 20, 2019) 2 of 2
Funding
1. Per the State Budget Act of 2012, Chapter 603, amending item 2660-001-0042 of Section2.00, the cost of any engineering support performed by CALTRANS towards any localgovernment agency-sponsored PID project will only include direct costs. Indirect oroverhead costs will not be applied during the development of the PID document.
Invoicing and Payment
2. PARTIES will invoice for funds where the SPENDING SUMMARY shows that onePARTY provides funds for use by another PARTY. PARTIES will pay invoices withinforty-five (45) calendar days of receipt of invoice when not paying with Electronic FundsTransfer (EFT). When paying with EFT, SCCRTC will pay invoices within five (5)calendar days of receipt of invoice.
3. If SCCRTC has received EFT certification from CALTRANS then SCCRTC will use theEFT mechanism and follow all EFT procedures to pay all invoices issued fromCALTRANS.
4. When a PARTY is reimbursed for actual cost, invoices will be submitted each month forthe prior month's expenditures. After all PROJECT COMPONENT WORK is complete,PARTIES will submit a final accounting of all PROJECT COMPONENT costs. Based onthe final accounting, PARTIES will invoice or refund as necessary to satisfy the financialcommitments of this AGREEMENT.
Project Initiation Document (PID)
5. CALTRANS will invoice SCCRTC for a $10,000 initial deposit after execution of thisAGREEMENT and forty-five (45) working days prior to the commencement of PIDexpenditures. This deposit represents two (2) months’ estimated costs.
Thereafter, CALTRANS will invoice and SCCRTC will reimburse for actual costs incurredand paid.
7-24
AGENDA: January 16, 2020
TO: Regional Transportation Commission (RTC)
FROM: Brianna Goodman, Transportation Planner
RE: Highway 9/SLV Complete Streets: HSIP Grant Crosswalk Improvements
Project Update and Funding Agreements
RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) approve the
attached resolution (Attachment 1) to:
1. Authorize the Executive Director to negotiate, enter into, and amend Cooperative
Agreements with Caltrans identifying Caltrans as the implementing agency for enhancements to existing Highway 9 pedestrian crosswalks in the amount not to
exceed $250,000.
2. Amend the FY 19/20 budget accordingly.
BACKGROUND The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) worked with the San Lorenzo Valley (SLV) community, the County, Caltrans and other stakeholders to prepare
the Hwy 9/San Lorenzo Valley Complete Streets Corridor Plan, which identifies and prioritizes projects in the State Route 9 (SR9) corridor, focusing on the section of Highway
9 that connects the towns of Felton, Ben Lomond, Brookdale and Boulder Creek, including parallel and connecting streets, roadways and paths. The plan was accepted by the RTC on June 27, 2019. During outreach for the Corridor Plan, improving safety for pedestrians
and cyclists, particularly while crossing Highway 9, emerged as a top community priority and is defined in Corridor Priority E: Pedestrian Crossing Safety, Lighting, and other
Visibility Improvements. RTC applied for and was awarded a $250,000 federal Highway Safety Improvement
Program (HSIP) grant for pedestrian safety and visibility improvements at five locations along Highway 9 in December 2018.
DISCUSSION
Although RTC received a grant for this work, Caltrans is the owner and operator of the State Highway System, including Highway 9. Since being awarded the grant, RTC has
worked with Caltrans and the County on how best to implement the proposed work from the HSIP grant. Caltrans has been extremely cooperative in how to expedite delivery and has agreed to implement the crosswalk safety improvements by integrating a variation of
the scope of work into an existing Crosswalk Enhancement Minor A State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) Crosswalks and Pedestrian Safety
Enhancements project (EA 05-1G760). Staff is working with Caltrans to refine locations and safety features to enhance the existing pedestrian crossings by adding pedestrian
8-1
Highway 9 HSIP Grant Crosswalk Improvements Project Update and Funding Agreements Page 2
activated solar powered Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), pavement markings, and signing.
The original HSIP grant application included enhancements to existing pedestrian crossings at five locations:
1. Forest Street in Boulder Creek
2. Redwood Drive in Felton3. Midblock between Graham Hill Road and Kirby Street in Felton4. Clear Creek Road in Brookdale
5. Pool Drive in Boulder Creek
Caltrans installed pedestrian crossing improvements at Forest Street in Boulder Creek in 2019 as part of a Caltrans Minor B SHOPP project, therefore the crossing improvements at this location do not need to be funded with the HSIP grant funds.
Caltrans requires additional engineering analysis in order to warrant constructing a new
pedestrian crossing at Pool Drive in Boulder Creek. Therefore, in order to maintain the project schedule set by the funding requirements, it is proposed to eliminate the Pool Drive crossing from the HSIP funding and replace it with improvements at other locations.
Staff will pursue Pool Street as part of a future project and will continue to work with Caltrans District 5 to determine the scope of the analysis needed to warrant the new
crossing at Pool Drive as well as other locations as identified in the Complete Streets Corridor Plan.
To replace Forest Street and Pool Drive locations, staff has identified two existing pedestrian crossing locations where enhancements would be acceptable to Caltrans
District 5 and the HSIP 1. SLV Elementary School in Felton2. Lazy Woods Road ( SLV Middle School entrance)
The safety enhancements at all five existing crosswalks now in the project scope will be as
follows: • Updated high-visibility ladder crosswalk striping• Updated high-visibility pedestrian crossing R1-5 signage
• Advanced yield lines (“shark’s teeth)• Pedestrian activated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) flashers mounted
on pedestrian crossing signposts
The final five proposed locations for the Highway 9 HSIP grant and the locations of
existing improved RRFB crosswalks are shown in Attachment 2.
Staff obtained Chair Bottorff’s approval to enter into a Cooperative Agreement for $50,000 in HSIP funds (Attachment 3) for Caltrans to implement improvements at the Midblock
between Graham Hill/Kirby location in Felton. The Cooperative Agreement was administratively amended (Attachment 4) to change the funds from local to federal, which was needed in order for Caltrans to access the HSIP funds directly. It is now proposed to
amend the cooperative agreement to add the improvements for the other 4 proposed crossings to the Minor A SHOPP project. Staff recommends that the RTC authorize
the Executive Director to negotiate, enter into, and amend Cooperative Agreements with Caltrans as necessary to implement the HSIP grant funded
8- 2
Highway 9 HSIP Grant Crosswalk Improvements Project Update and Funding Agreements Page 3
SR9/SLV crosswalk safety improvements , up to the amount not to exceed $250,000 in HSIP funds.
FISCAL IMPACT
It is proposed to fund the proposed crosswalk improvements with a federal HSIP grant awarded to the RTC in 2018. There is currently $250,000 of HSIP grant funds included in the FY 19/20 budget to fund this project. Since the implementing agency for construction
of this project has been changed from the RTC to Caltrans, staff proposes to amend the FY 19/20 budget to remove the $250,000 of HSIP funds from the RTC budget. The
Cooperative Agreement will allow Caltrans to access the HSIP funds directly and no funds will pass through the RTC.
SUMMARY
Caltrans plans to implement HSIP-funded crosswalk safety improvements on State Route
9 in the San Lorenzo Valley. Staff recommends that the RTC authorize the Executive Director to negotiate, enter into, and amend cooperative agreements with Caltrans to implement crosswalk safety improvements in an amount not to exceed $250,000 in HSIP
funds.
ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution2. Project Location Map
3. Cooperative Agreement for Crosswalk Enhancements at Kirby Street4. Cooperative Agreement Amendment 1
\\rtcserv2\shared\hwy 9\hsip crosswalks implementation\sr-hsip-crosswalks-allocation-01-16-20.docx
8-3
RESOLUTION NO. _____ Adopted by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission
on the date of January 16, 2020 on the motion of Commissioner duly seconded by Commissioner
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO NEGOTIATE, ENTER INTO, AND AMEND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS WITH CALTRANS TO IMPLEMENT THE SR9/SLV CROSSWALK SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT NOT
TO EXCEED $250,000 AND AMEND THE FY 19/20 BUDGET ACCORDINGLY
WHEREAS, the RTC worked with the community to prepare a complete streets corridor plan for Highway 9 and connecting county roads through San Lorenzo Valley (SLV) that identifies, prioritizes, and will facilitate implementation of some of the most critical and cost-effective transportation projects in the corridor; and
WHEREAS, improving safety for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Highway 9 at existing crosswalks was identified as a critical need throughout the SLV corridor; and
WHEREAS, the SCCRTC was awarded a $250,000 Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) crosswalk improvement grant to provide safety upgrades to five crosswalks on Highway 9 in the San Lorenzo Valley;
WHEREAS, the RTC FY 19/20 budget and work program includes $250,000 of revenue from the HSIP program in the Highway 9 Improvements program assuming the RTC as the implementing agency;
WHEREAS, Caltrans has agreed to implement the SR 9/SLV crosswalk safety improvement project; and
WHEREAS, in November of 2019 the FTIP was amended to change the implementing agency for the project to Caltrans;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION THAT:
1. The Executive Director is hereby authorized to negotiate, enter into, andamend Cooperative Agreements with Caltrans as necessary to implement theHSIP grant funded SR9/SLV crosswalk safety improvement project up to theamount not to exceed $250,000.
2. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2019-20 budget is hereby amended to remove $250,000of HSIP grant revenue.
ATTACHMENT 1
8-5
AYES: COMMISSIONERS
NOES: COMMISSIONERS
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS
_________________________ Bruce McPherson, Chair
ATTEST:
_________________________ Guy Preston, Secretary
Distribution: RTC Fiscal, RTC Programming, and Caltrans Local Assistance
8-6
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Felton
Brookdale
Ben Lomond
Boulder Creek
HIGH
WAY 9
Henry CowellState Park Entrance
SLV Schools Campus
HSIP Grant Crosswalk Improvements Project Locations
Clear Creek Rd
Lazy Woods Rd/Middle School
Elementary School
Mid-block betweenGraham Hill/Kirby
Redwood Dr
Main St
Forest St
0 10.5 Mile ±
Crosswalk Locations
!( Completed!( Proposed
Produced 01/2020 | Source: County of Santa Cruz GIS, SCCRTC
Attachment 2
8-7
05-SCR-9-6.39EA: 05-1G760
0515000101 Agreement 05 – 0353 A1
1
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT 05-0353
This Amendment No. 1 (AMENDMENT) to Agreement 05-0353 (AGREEMENT), effective on ________________, is between the State of California, acting through its Department of Transportation, referred to as CALTRANS, and:
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission, a public corporation/entity, referred to hereinafter as SCCRTC.
RECITALS
1. CALTRANS and SCCRTC collectively referred to as PARTIES, entered intoAGREEMENT on __11/26/2019___, defining the terms and conditions for enhancingthe existing pedestrian crossing midway between Kirby Street and Braham Hill Road onRoute 9 in Santa Cruz County at post mile 6.39, referred to as PROJECT.
2. The AGREEMENT established Local Funds in the amount of $50,000 for ConstructionCapital.
3. PARTIES now seek to change from LOCAL FUNDS to FEDERAL/HSIP funds anddirect CALTRANS to draw down these funds.
ATTACHMENT 4
8-17
05-SCR-9-6.39EA: 05-1G760
0515000101 Agreement 05 – 0353 A1
2
IT IS THEREFORE MUTUALLY AGREED:
1. Article 14 in the AGREEMENT is replaced in its entirety to read as follows:
SCCRTC will contribute the funds listed below:
FUNDING TABLE Fund
Source Fund Type
Project Component Amount
FEDERAL HSIP Construction Capital $50,000 Total Funds $50,000
2. Article 15 in the AGREEMENT is replaced in its entirety to read as follows:
CALTRANS will draw from state and federal funds that are provided by SCCRTCwithout invoicing SCCTRC when CALTRANS administers those funds andCALTRANS has been allocated those funds by the CTC and whenever else possible.Otherwise invoicing and payment will occur in accordance as listed in the cooperativeagreement.
3. Article 16 of the AGREEMENT is deleted in its entirety.
4. All other terms and conditions of the AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect.
5. This AMENDMENT is deemed to be included and made a part of the AGREEMENT.
8-18
05-SCR-9-6.39EA: 05-1G760
0515000101 Agreement 05 – 0353 A1
3
SIGNATURES
PARTIES declare that: 1. Each PARTY is an authorized legal entity under California state law.2. Each PARTY has the authority to enter into this AMENDMENT.3. The people signing this AMENDMENT have the authority to do so on behalf of their
public agencies.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By: ______________________________ District Director
VERIFICATION OF FUNDS & AUTHORITY:
By: ______________________________ District Budget Manager
CERTIFIED AS TO FINANCIAL TERMS AND POLICIES:
By: ______________________________ Gina Schumacher
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
By:______________________________ Guy Preston Executive Director
Attest:____________________________ Sarah Christensen Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND PROCEDURE:
By:______________________________ RTC Counsel
8-19
AGENDA: January 16, 2020
TO: Regional Transportation Commission (RTC)
FROM: Luis Pavel Mendez, Deputy Director
RE: Amendment to Administration Coordination and License Agreement with St. Paul and Pacific Railroad
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) approve the attached first amendment (Attachment 1) to the Administration, Coordination and License Agreement with St. Paul and Pacific Railroad extending the time allowed for submission of a plan for proposed transportation service.
BACKGROUND
In 2012, after more than a decade of active negotiations with Union Pacific (UP), extensive due diligence work, and securing funding from the California Transportation Commission (CTC), the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) selected Iowa Pacific Holdings (IPH) to operate on the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line (Branch Line) and completed purchase of the Branch Line from UP. IPH became unable to fulfill all the terms of the administration, coordination and license (ACL) agreement; therefore, in June 2018, the RTC approved a new ACL with a new rail operator (St. Paul and Pacific Railroad a company of Progressive Rail.)
After completion of the Unified Corridor Investment Study, the RTC reaffirmed prior decisions to retain the tracks on the Branch Line and continue development of a bicycle and pedestrian trail adjacent to the tracks. Therefore, consistent with that decision and the ACL between the RTC and St. Paul and Pacific Railroad (SPPR), on March 15, 2019, the RTC issued to a SPPR a license for Transportation Service (recreational passenger rail service) on the Branch Line. This initiated a 12-month period allowed in the ACL for SPPR to prepare and submit a detailed plan for the Transportation Service to the RTC.
The ACL agreement also states that the RTC is to repair damage caused by storms and make other repairs to provide the track on the Brach Line at a Class I level to SPPR so that the track can be used for recreational passenger service. Due to the work and time required to secure necessary permits, the RTC has not yet been able to complete the repairs but anticipates completing the majority of the repairs within one year to allow for the potential implementation of Transportation Service.
9-1
DISCUSSION
Due to the fact that the RTC has not yet been able to complete repairs to the Branch Line as stated in the ACL agreement, SPPR has not been able to produce a detailed plan for the Transportation Service. Therefore, RTC staff worked with legal counsel and SPPR to prepare the attached proposed amendment (Attachment 1) to the ACL. The amendment only lengthens the timeframe allowed for production of the detailed plan for the Transportation Service from 12 months to 24 months. Currently, RTC staff estimates that this will be sufficient time to ensure completion of the majority of the repairs to Branch Line in accordance with the ACL to allow for the potential implementation of Transportation Service. Therefore, staff recommends that the RTC approve the attached first amendment (Attachment 1) to the Administration, Coordination and License Agreement with St. Paul and Pacific Railroad extending the time allowed for submission of a plan for proposed Transportation Service.
FISCAL IMPACT
Taking longer to initiate the Transportation Service will take longer for the RTC to realize any revenue from such service. Potential revenue from the Transportation Service is not included in the current RTC budget.
SUMMARY
Because it has taken longer than initially anticipated for the RTC to secure necessary permits to make repairs to the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line, SPPR cannot yet prepare a detailed plan for Transportation Service (recreational passenger rail service) on the Branch Line. Therefore, staff recommends approval of an amendment to the ACL between the RTC and SPPR extending the time for preparation of the Transportation Service plan from 12 months to 24 months after issuance of the license for such service.
Attachments: 1. Proposed First Amendment to ACL Agreement
S:\RTC\TC2020\TC0120\Consent Agenda\ACL Amend\ACL Amend1 - SR.docx
9-2
Page 1 of 4 First Amendment to Administration, Coordination and License Agreement
FIRST AMENDMENT TO ADMINISTRATION, COORDINATION AND LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
ST. PAUL & PACIFIC RAILROAD AND THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
This First Amendment to the Administration, Coordination and License Agreement (“First Amendment”) is entered into by and between St. Paul & Pacific Railroad, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, a subsidiary of Progressive Rail Incorporated (“Railway”) and the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission, a public agency created under California law (“Commission”) (collectively “Parties”) on this _____ day of _________________, 20___.
RECITALS A. On July 16, 2018 the Parties entered into an Administration, Coordination and LicenseAgreement (“Agreement”) to establish their respective rights and obligations with respectto the Santa Cruz Branch railroad line ("Property") and an easement to conduct common carrierfreight railroad operations on and over the Property ("Freight Easement").
B. On March 15, 2019, the Commission granted Railway a non-exclusive license to use theFreight Easement Property and Railroad Facilities to provide Transportation Service on theFreight Easement Property pursuant to Section 2.4.1 of the Agreement (“License”).
C. Section 2.4.1 of the Agreement requires Railway to present a detailed plan describing theproposed Transportation Service to be provided pursuant to the License within 12 months of theCommission granting the License (“Plan”).
D. The preparation and submission of the Plan has been delayed as a result of Commission’sneed to make required storm damage repairs to the Freight Easement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises of the Parties herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged by the Parties, the Commission and Railway agree as follows:
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and hereby incorporated herein.
2. Defined Terms. All capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaningsascribed to them in the Agreement.
3. Amendment to Section 2.4.1. Section 2.4.1 of the Agreement shall be revised to read asfollows, with additions in underline and deletions in strikethrough:
Railway Transportation Service (Phase II). If upon completion of the Study the Commission
ATTACHMENT 1
9-3
Page 2 of 4 First Amendment to Administration, Coordination and License Agreement
determines that all of the Freight Easement Property should be used for Transportation Service, the Commission immediately will grant Railway a non-exclusive license to use the Freight Easement Property and Railroad Facilities to provide Transportation Service on the Freight Easement Property; provided that prior to the commencement of operations (a) the Commission has approved in writing a detailed plan from Railway describing such Transportation Service, (b) the Transportation Service will not materially conflict with, and will be subject and subordinate to Freight Service, and (c) Railway has obtained any governmental authorizations required under applicable law for such Transportation Service. Within 1224 months of the Commission determining that all of the Freight Easement Property should be used for Transportation Service, Railway will present a detailed plan describing the proposed Transportation Service, including a description of the proposed equipment to be used. The Commission shall have up to one hundred and twenty (120) days to review Railway's proposed plan, and in no case shall the Commission be required to complete its review of Railway's plan prior to the latest date it may grant a license to provide Transportation Service pursuant to Section 8.2.4. Failure to act on the proposed plan within such time period will result in the plan being considered approved by the Commission, provided, however, that any requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act applicable to the Transportation Service have been met. Railway agrees to act in good faith to incorporate the Commission's reasonable requests into its plan. The authorization to provide Transportation Service under this Agreement shall be referred to as "Phase II" of this Agreement.
4. Effect of First Amendment. Except as expressly modified by this First Amendment, theAgreement shall continue in full force and effect according to its terms, and the Parties herebyratify and affirm all their respective rights and obligations under the Agreement. In the event ofany conflict between the First Amendment or the Agreement, the provisions of this FirstAmendment shall govern.
5. Binding Agreement. This First Amendment shall be binding upon and inure to thebenefit of the heirs, administrators, executors, successors in interest, and assigns of each of theparties hereto. Any reference in this First Amendment to a specifically named party shall bedeemed to apply to any successor, administrator, executor, or assign of such party who hasacquired an interest in compliance with the terms of this First Amendment or under law.
6. Counterparts. This First Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, each ofwhich shall be deemed an original, but all of which, when taken together, shall constitute thesame document.
7. California Law. This First Amendment shall be governed by and interpreted inaccordance with the laws of the State of California.
8. Invalidity. Any provision of this First Amendment that is determined by a court ofcompetent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable shall be deemed severed from this FirstAmendment, and the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect as if the invalid orunenforceable provision had not been a part hereof.
9. Headings. The headings used in this First Amendment are for convenience only and shallbe disregarded in interpreting the substantive provisions of this First Amendment.
9-4
Page 3 of 4 First Amendment to Administration, Coordination and License Agreement
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this First Amendment has been entered into by and between Commission and Railway as of the date and year first above written.
[SIGNATURES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE]
9-5
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission THREE MONTH MEETING SCHEDULE
January 2020 Through
March 2020
All meetings are subject to cancellation when there are no action items to be considered by the board or committee
Please visit our website for meeting agendas and locations www.sccrtc.org/meetings/
Meeting Date
Meeting Day Meeting Type Meeting
Time Meeting Place
01/16/20 Thursday Regional Transportation Commission 1:30 pm City of Santa Cruz Council Chambers
01/16/20 Thursday Interagency Technical Advisory Committee 1:30 pm Commission Offices
02/6/20 Thursday Regional Transportation Commission 9:00 am City of Watsonville Council Chambers
2/10/20 Tuesday Bicycle Advisory Committee 6:00 pm Commission Offices
2/11/20 Tuesday Elderly & Disabled TAC 1:30 pm Commission Offices
2/13/20 Thursday Budget and Administration/Personnel 3:00 pm Redwood Room, SC County Building
02/20/20 Thursday Interagency Technical Advisory Committee 1:30 pm Commission Offices
03/05/20 Thursday Regional Transportation Commission 9:00 am County Board of Supervisors Chambers
03/19/20 Thursday Interagency Technical Advisory Committee 1:30 pm Commission Offices
RTC Commission Offices – 1523 Pacific Ave. – Santa Cruz, CA
Board of Supervisors Chambers/Redwood Conference room – 701 Ocean St-5th floor – Santa Cruz, CA
City of Santa Cruz Council Chambers – 809 Center St – Santa Cruz
City of Watsonville Council Chambers – 275 Main St Suit 400– Watsonville, CA
County of Santa Cruz Redwood Room-701 Ocean St-5th floor-Santa Cruz, CA
10-1
1/8
/2020 -
CO
RRESPO
ND
EN
CE L
OG
Date
Lett
er
Rec'd
/S
en
tTyp
eIn
com
ing
/
Ou
tgoin
gR
esp
on
se
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Su
bje
ct
11/2
5/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/5
/19
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Ste
phan
Bia
nchi
Citiz
en
Caltra
ns insta
lled L
it c
rossw
alk
s a
re c
ausin
g m
ore
dam
age t
han g
ood
11/2
6/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/19
S.M
unz
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Johanna
Lig
hth
ill
Citiz
en
If a
nd w
hen w
ill a d
em
onstr
ation t
rain
be c
om
ing a
nd w
hat
is t
he c
ost
and h
ow
will th
e
train
be d
elivere
d.
11/2
6/2
019
Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Bri
an
Bru
nelli
Citiz
en
Ple
ase s
pend a
ll $
17 m
illion o
n w
idenin
g H
wy 1
it
is a
sham
e it
has r
em
ain
ed t
his
way f
or
so long.
11/2
6/2
019
Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Kent
Robin
ett
Citiz
en
Ple
ase p
riori
tize H
wy 1
Aux L
anes
11/2
6/2
019
Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Judi
Gru
nstr
aCitiz
en
I am
opposed t
o t
he u
se o
f th
e f
unds t
o d
o t
he w
idenin
g o
f H
wy 1
11/2
6/2
019
Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Jim
Cum
min
g
Citiz
en
Heari
ng f
or
Public I
nput
on P
roposed p
roje
cts
Dec 5
th
11/2
7/2
019
Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Becky
Ste
inbru
ne
rCitiz
en
Consid
era
tion o
f RSTPX F
und A
llocation
11/2
7/2
019
Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Nancy
Maynard
Citiz
en
Local Fundin
g f
or
Roads
11/2
7/2
019
Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Hal
Sta
nger
Citiz
en
How
the R
TC p
lans t
o u
se t
he $
17m
illion D
ollars
11/2
7/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Pis
ano
Mik
eCitiz
en
Item
#25 o
n D
ec 5
th A
genda
11/2
7/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Ric
k
Longin
ott
iCitiz
en
Aux L
anes t
o F
reedom
Blv
d is n
ot
in M
easure
D
11/2
8/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Shoobdoow
ah
Citiz
en
Tra
nsport
ation R
oute
s in B
ould
er
Cre
ek is B
ear
Cre
ek R
oad
11/2
8/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Tin
aAndre
att
aCitiz
en
Ple
ase im
media
tely
appro
ve a
nd p
rovid
e a
lic
ense t
o T
IG/m
to o
pera
te o
n t
he r
ail c
orr
idor
11/2
8/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Jason
Wehm
hoen
er
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve s
taff
recom
mendations o
f tr
ack im
pro
vem
ents
and p
rovid
e a
lic
ense a
to
opera
te t
o T
IG/m
11/2
8/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Paul
Dre
scher
Citiz
en
Appro
ve t
he lic
ense f
or
fuel cell b
att
ery
pow
ere
d e
lectr
ic s
treetc
ar
11/2
8/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Mitchell
Lachm
an
Citiz
en
Ple
ase t
alk
about
road s
hari
ng c
oncept
pra
cticed in a
ll m
ost
industr
ialized c
ountr
ies
11/2
9/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Bru
ce
Saw
hill
Citiz
en
Pote
ntial Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
11/2
9/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Eliece
Hort
on
Citiz
en
Ple
ase s
upport
appro
val of
sta
ff r
ecom
mendation t
o c
om
mence t
rack im
porv
em
ents
11/2
9/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Fra
nk
Rem
de
Citiz
en
Lakevie
w R
oad W
idenin
g a
nd r
esurf
acin
g is p
ath
etic a
nd inexcusable
11/2
9/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Tri
cia
nCom
ings
Citiz
en
So E
xcited t
o learn
that
we a
re g
oin
g t
o h
ave a
dem
onstr
ation o
f a p
assenger
rail t
rolley
vehic
le o
n o
ur
rail lin
e.
11/3
0/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Jeff
Sin
ger
Citiz
en
Tra
in a
dvocate
s w
ant
train
s t
raveling t
hro
ugh o
ur
neig
hborh
oods b
ut
this
would
actu
ally
incre
ase t
raff
ic c
ongestion in o
ur
neig
hborh
oods.
12/0
1/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Mic
hael
Pis
ano
Citiz
en
Every
ones n
eed t
o m
ake a
choic
e b
etw
een t
wo d
iffe
renc p
roducts
12/0
1/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/2
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Benny
Dre
scher
Citiz
en
Ple
ase im
media
tely
appro
ve a
nd p
rovid
e a
lic
ense t
o T
IG/m
to o
pera
te o
n t
he r
ail c
orr
idor
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Melinda
Kehn
Citiz
en
Can y
ou s
end o
ut
a s
urv
ey w
ith t
he lis
t of
pro
posed p
roje
cts
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Jack
Bro
wn
Citiz
en
I am
urg
ing a
no v
ote
on ite
m 2
5 t
o m
ake t
rack im
pro
vem
ents
and issuance o
f a lic
ense f
or
a h
ydro
gen t
rolly.
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Ellen
Mart
inez
Citiz
en
Here
are
my r
ecom
mendations f
or
spendin
g t
he $
17 m
illion f
or
SC T
ransport
ation P
roje
cts
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Susan
Cavalieri
Citiz
en
Tra
nsport
ation P
roje
cts
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Dia
nne
Dry
er
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
From
TO
11-1
1/8
/2020 -
CO
RRESPO
ND
EN
CE L
OG
Date
Lett
er
Rec'd
/S
en
tTyp
eIn
com
ing
/
Ou
tgoin
gR
esp
on
se
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Su
bje
ct
From
TO
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Barr
y
Scott
Coasta
l Rail
Santa
Cru
z
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Robert
Ark
oCitiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Matt
Farr
ell
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Cath
eri
ne
Mari
no
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Molly
Ord
ing
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
David
Van B
rink
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Liz
N
eely
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Teri
Handzel
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Paula
Bra
dle
yCitiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Gra
ce
Voss
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Kere
sha
Durh
am
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
David
Pais
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Cath
eri
ne
Mari
no
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Dan
Dio
nCitiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Haakon
William
sCitiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Janie
Soito
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Paul
Dre
scher
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
2/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Ric
k
Longin
ott
iCitiz
en
Regio
nal Tra
nsport
ation I
mpro
vem
ent
Pla
n
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Care
yPic
oCitiz
en
Engin
eeri
ng S
erv
ices f
or
Phase 1
Bri
dge R
epair
s o
n R
ail C
orr
idor
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Pete
rSta
nger
Citiz
en
Waste
of
$60,0
00 f
or
a H
ydro
gen T
rain
Dem
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Debbie
Bulg
er
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Nin
aD
onna
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
11-2
1/8
/2020 -
CO
RRESPO
ND
EN
CE L
OG
Date
Lett
er
Rec'd
/S
en
tTyp
eIn
com
ing
/
Ou
tgoin
gR
esp
on
se
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Su
bje
ct
From
TO
13/0
4/2
019
Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Mary
Mille
rCitiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Kurt
Roensenbe
rger
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Ste
ve
McG
uir
kCitiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Julie &
Jim
Montg
om
er
yCitiz
en
Ple
ase a
ct
to a
dvance t
ransit s
olu
tions f
or
Santa
Cru
z C
ounty
& T
hank y
ou f
or
appro
vin
g
Item
25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ents
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Will
Cla
rkCitiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Marg
ieW
ay
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Toby
Gra
yCitiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/4
/2019
Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Lin
da
Wilshusen
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Cory
Ray
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Gary
Plo
mp
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Nadene
Thorn
eCitiz
en
Ple
ase d
on't a
ppro
ve ite
m #
25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ents
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/4
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Jeanne
Mulh
ern
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve I
tem
#25 T
rack I
mpro
vem
ent
for
Rail V
ehic
le D
em
o
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/5
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Mic
ah
Posner
Citiz
en
In s
upport
of
of
Rail I
mpro
vem
ents
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/5
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Ste
phan
Bia
nchi
Citiz
en
Kille
r Cro
ssw
alk
s in S
anta
Cru
z
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
incom
ing
12/5
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Kers
tin
Ahlg
ren
Bre
identh
al
Citiz
en
Ple
ase a
ppro
ve t
o a
uth
ori
ze t
he c
ontr
act
to r
epair
tra
cks f
rom
the S
C t
o C
apitola
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/5
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Kri
stin
Cla
rkCitiz
en
I am
in f
avor
of
the r
ail r
epair
s p
lease a
ppro
ve ite
m #
25
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/5
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Bob
Berl
age
Citiz
en
Ple
ase s
upport
and e
ffective p
edestr
ian c
rossw
alk
on S
tate
Hw
y 1
in D
avenport
12/0
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/5
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Danie
lle
Dorr
ian
Citiz
en
I support
the r
epair
ing o
f th
e t
racks f
rom
Santa
Cru
z t
o C
apitola
. M
y f
am
ily,
frie
nds a
nd I
would
benefit
gre
atly f
rom
altern
ative f
orm
s o
f tr
ansit.
12/0
5/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/5
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Carr
Anne
Citiz
en
Inste
ad o
f spendin
g $
60,0
00 o
n a
Bora
dw
alk
to C
apitola
rail r
epair
ple
ase f
ix t
he R
io d
el
Mar
Tra
in o
verp
ass
12/0
5/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/5
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Kri
ste
nSandel
Citiz
en
I str
ongly
oppose t
he w
idenin
g o
f th
e H
wy 1
/Hw
y 9
inte
rsection it
will m
ake t
his
alr
eady
dangero
us inte
rsection m
ore
hazard
ous.
12/0
5/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/5
/2019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Bri
an
People
s
Tra
il N
ow
RTC u
sed t
he incorr
ect
nam
e o
f FO
RT in p
ublic c
om
munic
ations
12/0
5/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
N/A
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Ric
k
Longin
ott
iPle
ase e
xpla
in h
ow
you t
hin
k s
pendin
g f
unds o
n t
he A
ux lanes b
etw
een S
tate
Park
Dr
and
Fre
edom
fits w
ith t
he M
easure
D E
xp P
lan.
11-3
1/8
/2020 -
CO
RRESPO
ND
EN
CE L
OG
Date
Lett
er
Rec'd
/S
en
tTyp
eIn
com
ing
/
Ou
tgoin
gR
esp
on
se
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Su
bje
ct
From
TO
12/5
/19
DEm
ail
Incom
ing
1/7
/20
S.M
unz
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Dana
Juncker
Citiz
en
Hw
y 1
7 A
ccess M
anagem
ent
Pla
n
12/1
7/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
N/A
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Nadene
Thorn
eCitiz
en
Ple
ase g
ive m
e s
om
e info
on t
he t
restles a
nd b
ridges
12/2
0/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/2
019
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Janis
Sta
nger
RTC S
eekin
g P
ublic I
nput
on 2
045 R
egio
nal Tra
nsport
ation P
lan G
oals
12/2
1/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
F.
Pin
iShannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Gra
ce
Voss
Pro
gra
mm
ing F
unds Q
uestion
12/2
3/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
S.
Munz
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Apri
lPeto
nak
SAN
DAG
Bus o
n S
hould
ers
Pro
ject
12/2
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
N/A
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Mic
hah
Mucklo
wCitiz
en
Fundin
g f
or
Sid
ew
alk
s in a
neig
hborh
ood n
eer
BC E
lem
anta
ry
12/3
0/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/8
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Sally
Arn
old
Fri
ends o
f th
e
Rail T
rail
2045 R
TP-
Input
of
Dra
ft G
oals
, Targ
ets
, and P
olicie
s
01/0
3/2
0Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/7
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Robert
Esposito
Citiz
en
I am
in s
upport
of
the p
latf
orm
tra
il.
01/0
6/2
0Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/7
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Mik
e
Ransom
Citiz
en
I am
in s
upport
of
the p
latf
orm
tra
il.
01/0
7/2
0Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/7
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Sin
ger
Jeff
Citiz
en
I am
in s
upport
of
the p
latf
orm
tra
il.
01/0
7/2
0Em
ail
Incom
ing
1/7
/20
D.O
rtega
Shannon
Munz
SCCRTC
Kath
eri
ne
Sm
ith
Citiz
en
I am
in s
upport
of
the p
latf
orm
tra
il.
12/2
0/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Bri
an
Larg
ay
Citiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/2
1/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
David
Min
tzCitiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/2
1/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Marc
iaPom
sCitiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/2
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
David
Osla
nd
Citiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/2
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Jean
Bro
ckle
ban
kCitiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/2
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Caro
lRic
eCitiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/2
4/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Dennis
Nort
on
Citiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
Belo
w is t
he p
ublic input
receiv
ed o
n t
he D
raft
2020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
Com
ments
have b
een inclu
ded a
s a
n a
ttachem
ent
to I
tem
18
11-4
1/8
/2020 -
CO
RRESPO
ND
EN
CE L
OG
Date
Lett
er
Rec'd
/S
en
tTyp
eIn
com
ing
/
Ou
tgoin
gR
esp
on
se
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Fir
st
Last
Org
an
izati
on
Su
bje
ct
From
TO
12/2
7/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Cari
eThom
pson
Land T
rust
of
Santa
Cru
z
County
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/2
9/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
N/A
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Bri
an
People
sTra
il N
ow
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/3
0/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
0/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Becky
Ste
inbru
ne
rCitiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/3
0/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
1/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Glo
ria
Reis
sCitiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/3
0/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
1/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
David
Date
Citiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
12/3
1/1
9Em
ail
Incom
ing
12/3
1/1
9
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Tim
Davis
Citiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
01/0
1/2
0Em
ail
Incom
ing
01/0
3/2
0
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Nancy
Yellin
Citiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
01/0
4/2
0Em
ail
Incom
ing
01/0
6/2
0
F.P
ini
Guy
Pre
sto
nSCCRTC
Duste
nD
ennis
Citiz
en
Dra
ft 2
020 M
easure
D -
Str
ate
gic
Im
ple
menta
tion P
lan
11-5
1 | P
ag
e
PRO
JECT
UPD
ATE
– SAN
TA C
RUZ
COUN
TY
PREP
AR
ED F
OR
TH
E JA
NU
AR
Y 2
, 202
0 SA
NTA
CR
UZ
CO
UN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L TR
AN
SPO
RTA
TIO
N C
OM
MIS
SIO
N M
EETI
NG
PRO
JEC
TS
UN
DE
R C
ON
STR
UC
TIO
N
Proj
ect
Loc
atio
n Po
st M
ile (P
M)
Des
crip
tion
Con
stru
ctio
n T
imel
ine
Con
stru
ctio
n C
ost
Fund
ing
Sour
ce
Proj
ect
Man
ager
(R
esid
ent
Eng
inee
r)
Con
trac
tor
Com
men
ts
1.
Sant
a C
ruz
1 C
APM
and
B
ridg
e R
ails
(1
C85
U)
In a
nd n
ear S
anta
C
ruz
from
Nor
th
Apt
os u
p to
Jc
t. R
oute
9
PM (1
0.2
to 1
7.5)
Pave
men
t R
ehab
ilita
tion,
A
DA
Cur
b R
amps
, G
uard
rail/
Bar
rier
rail/
Brid
ge
June
2, 2
019
– M
ay 2
020
$19
mill
ion
SHO
PP
Luis
Dua
zo
Gra
nite
C
onst
ruct
ion
Com
pany
W
atso
nvill
e,
CA
Con
stru
ctio
n is
und
erw
ay a
nd sc
hedu
led
for
com
plet
ion
in F
all 2
020.
2.
Hig
hway
9
Spri
ng C
reek
R
oad
Sold
ier
Pile
Wal
l
(1K
140)
Nea
r Bou
lder
C
reek
at S
prin
g C
reek
Roa
d
(PM
15)
Con
stru
ct
Sold
ier p
ile
wal
l res
tore
ro
adw
ay a
nd
faci
litie
s, pl
ace
wat
er p
ollu
tion
cont
rol B
MPs
, er
osio
n co
ntro
l
Sum
mer
201
9 $2
.8 m
illio
n SH
OPP
D
oug
Hes
sing
G
ordo
n N
. B
all,
Inc.
A
lam
o, C
A
Con
stru
ctio
n is
sche
dule
d to
be
com
plet
ed b
y W
inte
r 202
0.
3.
Hig
hway
9
Shou
lder
W
iden
ing,
G
uard
rail
Upg
rade
s, an
d C
ente
r R
umbl
e St
rips
(1
C65
0)
Nor
th o
f Bou
lder
C
reek
to so
uth
of
SR 3
5
(PM
22.
1-23
.8)
Shou
lder
w
iden
ing,
gu
ardr
ail
upgr
ades
, and
ce
nter
rum
ble
strip
s
Mar
ch 1
8,
2019
$7
.7 m
illio
n SH
OPP
D
oug
Hes
sing
Gra
nite
C
onst
ruct
ion
Com
pany
W
atso
nvill
e,
CA
Con
stru
ctio
n st
arte
d M
arch
18,
201
9 an
d is
sc
hedu
led
to b
e co
mpl
eted
Dec
embe
r 202
0.
4.
Hig
hway
17
Pasa
tiem
po
Shou
lder
W
iden
ing
(1C
670)
Sout
h of
Pa
satie
mpo
ov
ercr
ossi
ng
(PM
0.2
/0.5
)
Shou
lder
w
iden
ing
and
soil
nail
wal
l
Sprin
g 20
19-
Sum
mer
202
0 $
5.7
mill
ion
SHO
PP
Luis
Dua
zo
Gra
nite
rock
C
ompa
ny
Wat
sonv
ille,
C
A
Ret
aini
ng w
all c
onst
ruct
ion
has b
egun
and
pr
ojec
t is s
ched
uled
to b
e su
bsta
ntia
lly
com
plet
e by
Sum
mer
202
0.
5.
Hig
hway
17
Nor
th R
oute
17
CA
PM
(1F7
60)
Scot
ts V
alle
y fro
m
just
nor
th o
f the
G
rani
te C
reek
R
oad
over
-cr
ossi
ng to
SC
L
(PM
6.0
/12.
5)
Mai
nten
ance
pa
vem
ent
over
lay
Sprin
g 20
19
$19
mill
ion
SHO
PP
SB-1
D
oug
Hes
sing
Gra
nite
C
onst
ruct
ion
Com
pany
, W
atso
nvill
e,
CA
Con
stru
ctio
n is
und
erw
ay a
nd is
sch
edul
ed to
be
com
plet
ed b
y Sp
ring
2020
.
17-1
2 | P
ag
e
PRO
JECT
UPD
ATE
– SAN
TA C
RUZ
COUN
TY
PREP
AR
ED F
OR
TH
E JA
NU
AR
Y 2
, 202
0 SA
NTA
CR
UZ
CO
UN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L TR
AN
SPO
RTA
TIO
N C
OM
MIS
SIO
N M
EETI
NG
PRO
JEC
TS
UN
DE
R C
ON
STR
UC
TIO
N (C
ont’d
.)
Proj
ect
Loc
atio
n Po
st M
ile (P
M)
Des
crip
tion
Con
stru
ctio
n T
imel
ine
Con
stru
ctio
n C
ost
Fund
ing
Sour
ce
Proj
ect
Man
ager
(R
esid
ent
Eng
inee
r)
Con
trac
tor
Com
men
ts
6.
Pede
stri
an
Sign
al
Upg
rade
s (1
G16
0)
Var
ious
Loc
atio
ns:
Hig
hway
s 1, 9
, 17,
12
9, a
nd 1
52
Inst
all
Acc
essi
ble
Pede
stria
n Si
gnal
(APS
)
Janu
ary
2020
–
Sum
mer
202
0 $
1.8
mill
ion
SHO
PP
Mik
e Le
w
Cro
ssto
wn
Elec
trica
l &
Dat
a, In
c
The
proj
ect w
as a
war
ded
to C
ross
tow
n El
ectri
cal &
Dat
a, In
c an
d is
sche
dule
d to
be
gin
early
in 2
020.
PRO
JEC
TS
IN D
EV
EL
OPM
EN
T
Proj
ect
Loc
atio
n Po
st M
ile (P
M)
Des
crip
tion
Con
stru
ctio
n T
imel
ine
Est
imat
ed
Con
stru
ctio
n C
ost
Fund
ing
Sour
ce
Proj
ect
Man
ager
Ph
ase
Com
men
ts
7.
Hig
hway
1
Soqu
el C
reek
Sc
our
Prot
ectio
n
(1H
480)
In C
apito
la a
t So
quel
Cre
ek
Brid
ge
(PM
13.
3)
Brid
ge p
reve
ntat
ive
mai
nten
ance
– P
lace
sc
our p
rote
ctio
n W
inte
r 202
2 $2
.2 m
illio
n SH
OPP
Lu
is
Dua
zo
PA&
ED
8.
TM
S D
etec
tion
Rep
air
(1H
990)
Var
ious
loca
tions
th
roug
hout
D
istri
ct 5
alo
ng
SRs 1
, 17,
68,
156
, 10
1
(PM
Var
ious
)
Rep
lace
faile
d TM
S D
etec
tion
Sum
mer
202
0 $4
51,0
00
SHO
PP
SB-1
B
rand
y R
ider
PS
&E/
RW
Pr
ojec
t is i
n D
esig
n.
9.
Hig
hway
1/
Hig
hway
17
Ram
p Sa
fety
Im
prov
emen
ts
(1H
060)
From
the
fishh
ook
to P
asat
iem
po
over
cros
sing
(PM
16.
7)
Con
stru
ct ra
mp
safe
ty
impr
ovem
ents
M
ay 2
020
$5.8
mill
ion
SHO
PP
Luis
D
uazo
PS
&E/
RW
17-2
3 | P
ag
e
PRO
JECT
UPD
ATE
– SAN
TA C
RUZ
COUN
TY
PREP
AR
ED F
OR
TH
E JA
NU
AR
Y 2
, 202
0 SA
NTA
CR
UZ
CO
UN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L TR
AN
SPO
RTA
TIO
N C
OM
MIS
SIO
N M
EETI
NG
PRO
JEC
TS
IN D
EV
EL
OPM
EN
T (C
ont’d
.)
Proj
ect
Loc
atio
n Po
st M
ile (P
M)
Des
crip
tion
Con
stru
ctio
n T
imel
ine
Est
imat
ed
Con
stru
ctio
n C
ost
Fund
ing
Sour
ce
Proj
ect
Man
ager
Ph
ase
Com
men
ts
10.
Hig
hway
1
Dav
enpo
rt
Cul
vert
R
epla
cem
ent
(0J2
00)
Nea
r Dav
enpo
rt an
d so
uth
of
Wad
dell
Cre
ek
Brid
ge
(PM
31.
9/35
.7)
Rep
lace
cul
verts
Fa
ll 20
21
$3.6
mill
ion
SHO
PP
SB-1
D
oug
Hes
sing
PA
&ED
Pr
ojec
t is i
n pr
elim
inar
y D
esig
n an
d en
viro
nmen
tal p
hase
.
11.
SCr
9 So
uth
Dra
inag
e an
d E
rosi
on
Con
trol
Im
prov
emen
ts
(1F9
20)
Fro
m S
R 1
and
9
to sl
ight
ly n
orth
of
Gle
n A
rbor
Roa
d
(PM
0.0
/8.5
)
Upg
rade
dra
inag
e sy
stem
s and
stab
ilize
sl
opes
Fa
ll 20
20
$2 m
illio
n SH
OPP
D
oug
Hes
sing
PS
&E/
RW
Pr
ojec
t is i
n D
esig
n.
12.
Hig
hway
9 P
M
1.0
and
4.0
Via
duct
(1K
120)
Nea
r SC
r nor
th o
f V
erno
n St
reet
(PM
1/1
)
Con
stru
ct si
de-h
ill
viad
uct r
esto
re
road
way
and
faci
litie
s, pl
ace
Wat
er P
ollu
tion
Con
trol B
MPs
, er
osio
n co
ntro
l
Fall
2022
$9
.9 m
illio
n SH
OPP
D
oug
Hes
sing
PA
&ED
Pr
ojec
t is i
n pr
elim
inar
y D
esig
n an
d En
viro
nmen
tal p
hase
.
13.
SCr
9 U
pper
D
rain
age
and
Ero
sion
C
ontr
ol
Impr
ovem
ents
(1G
950)
In B
ould
er C
reek
fro
m H
olid
ay L
ane
to ju
st so
uth
of
Ben
Lom
ond
to th
e SR
236
/9 Ju
nctio
n
(PM
8.5
/25.
5)
Upg
rade
dra
inag
e an
d er
osio
n co
ntro
l Sp
ring
2023
$5
.4 m
illio
n SH
OPP
D
oug
Hes
sing
PA
&ED
14.
Hig
hway
9
San
Lor
enzo
R
iver
Bri
dge
and
Kin
gs
Cre
ek B
ridg
e R
epla
cem
ent
(1H
470)
Nea
r Bou
lder
C
reek
, at S
an
Lore
nzo
Riv
er
Brid
ge a
nd a
t K
ings
Cre
ek
Brid
ge
(PM
13.
6/15
.5)
Rep
lace
brid
ges
Sum
mer
202
2 $1
2 m
illio
n SH
OPP
SB
-1
Dou
g H
essi
ng
PA&
ED
Proj
ect i
s in
prel
imin
ary
Des
ign
and
Envi
ronm
enta
l pha
se.
17-3
4 | P
ag
e
PRO
JECT
UPD
ATE
– SAN
TA C
RUZ
COUN
TY
PREP
AR
ED F
OR
TH
E JA
NU
AR
Y 2
, 202
0 SA
NTA
CR
UZ
CO
UN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L TR
AN
SPO
RTA
TIO
N C
OM
MIS
SIO
N M
EETI
NG
PRO
JEC
TS
IN D
EV
EL
OPM
EN
T (C
ont’d
.)
Proj
ect
Loc
atio
n Po
st M
ile (P
M)
Des
crip
tion
Con
stru
ctio
n T
imel
ine
Est
imat
ed
Con
stru
ctio
n C
ost
Fund
ing
Sour
ce
Proj
ect
Man
ager
Ph
ase
Com
men
ts
15.
Hig
hway
9
Hai
rpin
T
ieba
ck
(1K
130)
Nea
r Bou
lder
C
reek
abo
ut 1
.1
mile
s sou
th o
f the
SR
236
/9 Ju
nctio
n
(PM
19.
97)
Sold
ier P
ile T
ieba
ck
Ret
aini
ng W
all
Sprin
g 20
21
$2.6
mill
ion
SHO
PP
Dou
g H
essi
ng
PA&
ED
Stor
m D
amag
e R
epai
r
16.
Hig
hway
17
Wild
life
Hab
itat
Cro
ssin
g
(1G
260)
From
Lau
rel R
oad
to ju
st n
orth
of
Laur
el R
oad
(PM
9.4
42-9
.692
)
Con
stru
ct w
ildlif
e un
derc
ross
ing
2020
$5
.6 m
illio
n SH
OPP
A
aron
H
enke
l PS
&E/
RW
Pr
ojec
t is i
n de
sign
and
on
sche
dule
.
17.
Hig
hway
129
/ L
akev
iew
Roa
d In
ters
ectio
n Im
prov
emen
ts
(1G
990)
Nea
r Wat
sonv
ille,
at
Lak
evie
w R
oad
(PM
1.4
)
Con
stru
ct ro
unda
bout
an
d im
prov
e st
reet
lig
htin
g 20
20
$4.5
mill
ion
SHO
PP
Luis
D
uazo
PS
&E/
RW
18.
Hig
hway
152
C
orra
litos
C
reek
AD
A
(05-
1F6
20)
Nea
r Wat
sonv
ille,
Ea
st o
f Bev
erly
D
rive
to H
oloh
an /
Col
lege
Roa
d
(PM
1.9
to R
2.0)
Con
stru
ct A
cces
sibl
e Pa
thw
ay
Sprin
g 20
22
$3.4
mill
ion
SHO
PP
Mik
e Le
w
PA&
ED
Proj
ect i
s cur
rent
ly a
t 50%
com
plet
e fo
r the
PA
&ED
stag
e.
19.
Cro
ssw
alks
an
d Pe
dest
rian
Sa
fety
E
nhan
cem
ents
(1
G76
0)
Var
ious
Loc
atio
ns:
Hig
hway
s 1, 9
, 12
9, a
nd 1
52
(Not
e: P
roje
ct a
lso
incl
udes
six
loca
tions
in
Mon
tere
y C
ount
y,
on R
oute
s 68
and
183)
Inst
all E
lect
rical
/ Si
gns /
Mar
king
s /
Pave
men
t
Fall/
Win
ter
2019
$9
00,0
00
SHO
PP
Ken
D
osta
lek
PS&
E
Proj
ect i
s at 1
00%
PS&
E. T
arge
ting
to
adve
rtise
late
Nov
embe
r and
app
rove
co
nstru
ctio
n co
ntra
ct b
egin
ning
Feb
. 202
0.
SCR
1 @
PM
18.
8 (L
aure
nt S
treet
) SC
R 9
@ P
M 6
.39
(nea
r Kirb
y St
reet
) SC
R 9
@ P
M 9
.51
(Mai
n St
reet
) SC
R 1
29 @
PM
0.2
3 (n
ear S
R1)
SC
R 1
52 @
PM
T3.
161
(Mar
chan
t Stre
et)
Targ
etin
g R
TL in
late
Nov
embe
r and
ap
prov
e co
nstru
ctio
n co
ntra
ct b
egin
ning
of
Feb
2020
17-4
5 | P
ag
e
PRO
JECT
UPD
ATE
– SAN
TA C
RUZ
COUN
TY
PREP
AR
ED F
OR
TH
E JA
NU
AR
Y 2
, 202
0 SA
NTA
CR
UZ
CO
UN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L TR
AN
SPO
RTA
TIO
N C
OM
MIS
SIO
N M
EETI
NG
PRO
JEC
TS
IN D
EV
EL
OPM
EN
T (C
ont’d
.)
Proj
ect
Loc
atio
n Po
st M
ile (P
M)
Des
crip
tion
Con
stru
ctio
n T
imel
ine
Est
imat
ed
Con
stru
ctio
n C
ost
Fund
ing
Sour
ce
Proj
ect
Man
ager
Ph
ase
Com
men
ts
20.
Sant
a C
ruz
1 C
APM
and
B
ridg
e R
ails
(1
C85
U)
In a
nd n
ear S
anta
C
ruz
from
Nor
th
Apt
os u
p to
Jc
t. R
oute
9
PM (1
0.2
to 1
7.5)
Pave
men
t R
ehab
ilita
tion,
AD
A
Cur
b R
amps
, G
uard
rail/
Bar
rier
rail/
Brid
ge
Janu
ary
2019
-J
une
2023
$19
mill
ion
SHO
PP
Luis
D
uazo
PS
&E/
RW
1C85
U c
ombi
nes t
wo
proj
ects
1C8
50 a
nd
1F52
0 fo
r con
stru
ctio
n. T
en A
cces
sibl
e Pe
dest
rian
Sign
al (A
PS) l
ocat
ions
als
o ad
ded
to 1
C85
U. T
hese
APS
loca
tions
are
be
ing
rem
oved
from
1G
160
21.
Hig
hway
236
H
eart
Hill
Wal
l (1
M45
0)
Nea
r Bou
lder
C
reek
(P
M 5
.4)
Inst
all e
ngin
eere
d fil
l an
d re
stor
e ro
adw
ay
2022
/202
3 $1
.8 m
illio
n SH
OPP
D
oug
Hes
sing
PI
D
Proj
ect i
s jus
t kic
king
off
PID
pha
se.
AC
RO
NY
MS
USE
D IN
TH
IS R
EPO
RT:
AD
A
Am
eric
ans w
ith D
isab
ilitie
s Act
C
EQA
Ca
lifor
nia
Envi
ronm
enta
l Qua
lity
Act
C
MA
Q
Cong
estio
n M
itiga
tion
Air
Qua
lity
CM
IA
Corr
idor
Mob
ility
Impr
ovem
ent A
ccou
nt
CTC
Ca
lifor
nia
Tran
spor
tatio
n Co
mm
issi
on
ED
Envi
ronm
enta
l Doc
umen
t EI
R
Envi
ronm
enta
l Im
pact
Rep
ort
PA&
ED
Proj
ect A
ppro
val a
nd E
nviro
nmen
tal D
ocum
ent
PM
Post
Mile
PS
&E
Pl
ans,
Spec
ifica
tions
, and
Est
imat
es
RW
Ri
ght o
f Way
SB
1 Se
nate
Bill
1, t
he R
oad
Repa
ir an
d A
ccou
ntab
ility
Act
of 2
017
SCL
Sa
nta
Clar
a Co
unty
Lin
e SH
OPP
St
ate
Hig
hway
Ope
ratio
n an
d Pr
otec
tion
Prog
ram
SR
St
ate
Rout
e ST
IP
Stat
e Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Impr
ovem
ent P
rogr
am
TMS
Traf
fic M
anag
emen
t Sys
tem
17-5
Santa Cruz – Highway 9 Update on SHOPP Project Coordination
Prepared January 7, 2020 (RAR)
SHOPP Minor A (Project # 05-1G760)
This project provides crosswalk enhancements in Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties. Two locations are in Watsonville: State Route (SR) 129 at Marchant Street and SR 152 at Marchant Street. Additional locations are Santa Cruz at SR 1 at Van Ness Avenue and on SR 9 at Main Street and at Kirby Street. In partnership with SCCRTC utilizing their HSIP funding, Kirby Street was added to the project late in the process and an additional four locations will be added during construction. Those locations are: Redwood Drive, San Lorenzo Valley (SLV) Schools complex entrance, Lazy Woods Road (Middle School Entrance), Clear Creek Road.
Work to include: Update existing crosswalk striping, install white triangular yield markings, signage and rectangular rapid flashing beacons.
A funding Cooperative Agreement was recently executed for the addition of the SR 9 at Kirby Street location. A separate Cooperative Agreement will be executed for the remaining four locations for the additional HSIP funding. Project will be advertised later this month and contract award anticipated in March.
SHOPP Safety Striping (Project # 05-1M330)
This project includes State Routes 9, 1, 17 and San Benito 156. Project will increase stripe width from 4 inches to 6 inches.
The project is currently in the preparation of the Project Initiation Document (PID) which is anticipated to be completed March 2020. Design is anticipated to completed by September 2021 with award of contract by March 2022.
SHOPP Safety Widening (Project # 05-1M400)
This project anticipates enhancing SR 9 from the SLV schools complex to Graham Hill Road to improve pedestrian access. The project is currently in the preparation of the PID which is anticipated to be completed in April 2020. Once the PID is completed it can amended into the SHOPP at the next available CTC meeting to begin the environmental phase.
SHOPP Capital Preventative Maintenance (Project # 05-1K890)
Project is just beginning the PID preparation to be completed in October 2020. This project will be submitted for approval in the 2022 SHOPP.
SHOPP Capital Preventative Maintenance (Project # 05- 1K900)
Project is just beginning the PID preparation to be completed in October 2020. This project will be submitted for approval in the 2022 SHOPP.
17-8
[Typ
e he
re]
0.0
4
.06
.5
9.5
1
1.4
1
3.0
1
5.0
1
8.5
2
0.8
*Pr
opos
edPI
D =
Pro
ject
Initi
atio
n D
ocum
ent
CAP
-M =
Cap
ital P
reve
ntiv
e M
aint
enan
ce (P
avem
ent P
rese
rvat
ion)
.
S
HO
PP =
Sta
te H
ighw
ay O
pera
tions
and
Pro
tect
ion
Prog
ram
2022 S
HO
PP C
T C
AP-M
PID
Pro
ject
# 0
5-1
K890
20
20 S
HO
PP C
T S
afet
y (
Stri
pin
g)
PID
-
Pro
ject
# 0
5-1
M3
30
0.0
2020 S
HO
PP C
T S
afet
y P
ID
Pro
ject
# 0
5-1
M400
6.3
7
.2
San
Lore
nzo V
alle
y C
om
ple
te S
tree
ts (
CS)
PID
* PEN
DIN
G R
TC
CO
-OP
2022 S
HO
PP C
T C
AP-M
PID
Pro
ject
# 0
5-1
K900
18
.9
27
9
NO
T TO
SC
ALE
06/1
9/19
SR 9 Collabo
rativ
e Scop
ing for C
omplete Streets
Mu
ltip
le r
ou
tes
in S
anta
Cru
z C
ou
nty
HW
Y 9
P
ost
Mile
s
7.5
0
.0
17-9
Revised January 2020
Highway 9/San Lorenzo Valley
Caltrans Improvements Supporting Complete Streets
2014 to Present
Year Approx Postmile
Town/Location Improvement
2014 6.35/6.46 Felton Enhanced existing pedestrian warning signs to fluorescent yellow green and added roadside markers at mid-block crosswalk next to Wild Roots Market (BTW, eating area illegal encroachment)
2014 9.51 Main St., Ben Lomond Installed RRFB (Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon) back to back on both side of roadway, enhanced existing pedestrian signing, and relocated signal ahead sign
2014 2.24 At R/R Crossing Replaced existing railroad warning sign with current version of sign
2014 9.5 Ben Lomond Remove large tree, Ace Hardware - impediment 2014 12.9/13 Lomond St., Forest St.,
236/9, Boulder Creek Enhanced crosswalk (ladder) markings and pedestrian warning signs, installed no parking signs
2015 12 Prospect Ave., Irwin Wy., Boulder Creek
Enhanced three existing intersection warning signs to fluorescent yellow green
2015 7.21 Felton/School Complex ADA improvements 2016 Var. Entire route State Route 9/San Lorenzo Valley Complete Streets
Corridor Transportation Plan - $249,000 Caltrans-funded grant.
2016 Var. Entire route Speed Zone Survey – lowered speeds and new signs 2017 13.1 Boulder Creek Install regulatory sign – Sheriff’s substation 2018 12.9 Lomond St., Boulder
Creek Tree trimming enhanced existing warning signs to fluorescent yellow green
2018 Var. Bear Creek Rd., Willowbrook Dr.
Caltrans collected and analyzed pedestrian, bike, and vehicle counts to support evaluation of the two key intersections in the corridor plan.
2018 Var. Entire route Caltrans assisted RTC with application of HSIP grant. $250,000 for five crosswalks.
2019 Var. Redwood Dr., Kirby St., Clear Creek Rd., SLV Elementary, Lazy Woods Rd.
Caltrans incorporated five RRFB’s from SCCRTC’s approved HSIP grant into existing SHOPP project. One additional beacon was previously installed by Caltrans at overlapping location for a total of six.
2019 7 Felton/ Fall Creek & Clearview Place
Installed pedestrian advisory sign to direct pedestrians off highway to local roads.
17-10
---Public Hearing Scheduled for 10:00 a.m.---
AGENDA: January 16, 2020
TO: Regional Transportation Commission (RTC)
FROM: Guy Preston, Executive Director
RE: DRAFT 2020 Measure D – Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP)
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC):
1. Hold a public hearing to receive comments on the draft 2020 Measure DStrategic Implementation Plan (SIP) (available onlinewww.sccrtc.org/measured); and
2. Consider comments received and provide direction to staff for the final 2020Measure D - Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP), scheduled to be adopted atthe February 6, 2020, RTC meeting.
BACKGROUND
On November 8, 2016, the voters of Santa Cruz County approved Measure D (the Ordinance) enacting a retail transaction and use tax dedicated to making transportation improvements in the county. The Ordinance includes an Expenditure Plan and a requirement that the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), in its role as the Measure D Authority, shall allocate, administer, and oversee the expenditure of all Measure Revenues which are not directly allocated by formula annually to other agencies through an Implementation Plan, which it will update at least every 5 years, following a public hearing.
Approximately 53% of the Expenditure Plan is not directly allocated by formula to other entities, which includes the following regional projects and programs:
• Highway Corridors• San Lorenzo Valley (SLV) – Highway 9 Corridor• Highway 17 Wildlife Crossing• Active Transportation – Coastal Rail Trail• Rail Corridor
The Ordinance also requires that each agency receiving Measure Revenues adopt, after a public hearing, a five-year program of projects (Five-Year Plan), including information about each of the projects to be funded with Measure Revenues allocated according to the Expenditure Plan. RTC conducted public hearings and adopted the
18-1
Draft Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) Page 2 first three (3) Five-Year Plans for regional projects and programs on June 1, 2017, June 14, 2018, and June 6, 2019. The Independent Oversight Committee, established by the RTC in accordance with the Ordinance, reviews the annual independent fiscal audits from recipient agencies showing expenditures of the Measure D funds and issues an annual report on its finding regarding compliance with the requirements of the Expenditure Plan and the Ordinance. The first annual report for Fiscal Year (FY)16-17 (partial) and FY17-18 was accepted by the Commission on June 6, 2019. Annual audits and expenditure reports are due from recipient agencies December 31st each year. Staff is currently reviewing the reports on FY19/20 expenditures. DISCUSSION As stated in the Ordinance, the purposes of the Implementation Plan are to define the scope, cost, and delivery schedule of each Regional project or program, detail the revenue projections and possible financing tools needed to deliver the Expenditure Plan within the 30 years promised to the voters, and describe the risks, critical issues and opportunities that the Authority should address to expeditiously deliver the Expenditure Plan. With the adoption of Five-Year Plans for Regional projects and programs, the Commission has laid the foundation of how it plans to commence the delivery of the Expenditure Plan in the shorter term. The Commission has provided additional direction regarding the delivery of priority investments, including how certain discretionary funding should be allocated to regional projects. RTC has contracted with KNN Public Finance to provide information on potential Measure D financing options to accelerate implementation of the Expenditure Plan, and assistance in the preparation of the inaugural Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP). KNN provided a presentation on financing options at the Commission meeting on June 27, 2019. Although Measure D provides significant funding in delivering the Regional investments identified in the Expenditure Plan, it is not intended or necessary to fully fund all investments. Therefore, it is important that Measure D funds be used strategically to help leverage significant additional Federal, State, and local funds to maximize the buying power of Measure D. Leveraging is therefore a central theme of the draft 2020 SIP, as discussed in the SIP’s approach (Chapter 3), policies (Chapter 4), and Fact Sheets (Chapter 6). RTC is in an excellent position to compete for grant funds, especially Senate Bill (SB1) funds, as the Measure D expenditure plan fits well within the guidelines of many of these grant programs. To maximize delivery of all regional programs and projects, the RTC has programmed Measure D to position projects for these grant opportunities by completing the pre-construction phases of projects and providing matching funds for those grants. Although financing options, including issuing revenue bonds, were considered, staff determined that there is enough program-wide pay-go capacity available to meet the commitments made in the previously adopted regional Five-Year Plans. Staff has therefore utilized the Five-Year Plans to develop a 30-year Cash Flow Model, showing only a couple of inter-investment category loans from the Highway Corridor to the
18-2
Draft Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) Page 3
Active Transportation and Highway 17 Wildlife Crossing categories. Loans will be paid back with interest as discussed in Policy 4.4 and shown in Chapter 5 (Cash Flow Model). Some of the Five-Year Plans have been updated based on actions proposed by the Commission and are provided in the Appendix 2 of the draft SIP.
Since the Measure D Cash Flow Model of the SIP only shows Regional Projects programmed in the Five-Year Plans (through FY23/24), there is significant future programming capacity for regional programs and projects over the 30-year life of the measure. Using updated revenue projections, staff estimates that over $407 million will be available for future programming of regional investments. This funding will be allocated as part of the adoption of future regional Five-Year Plans and future updates to the SIP. Depending on the delivery success of the pre-construction phases and the amount of funding available to leverage additional grants, the Commission may consider additional financing options as a tool to further advance delivery in the future.
The draft SIP only includes Fact Sheets (Chapter 6) for program and project investments included in the Measure D regional Five-Year Plans. As additional programming occurs, Fact Sheets will be updated and added as part of subsequent SIP updates. Although the Measure only requires that an Implementation Plan be updated at least every 5-years, staff anticipates updating the 2020 SIP in 2022, which would correspond well with the anticipated delivery schedule of several key projects, as well as the grant cycle of several key SB1 grant programs.
Public Hearing The draft SIP was made public on Friday, December 20, 2019. A public hearing has been scheduled for 10:00 a.m. to receive public input on the draft 2020 SIP. Public notices have been posted and a news release on the hearing was sent to local media and solicited public input on the draft plan through email notices to over 3 thousand individuals and stakeholder groups. Written comments received by 12:00 p.m. by January 7, 2020 are included (Attachment 2) and comments received by 12:00 p.m. on January 15, 2020 will be distributed at this meeting. Any comments received by January 28, 2020 will be included in the February 6th meeting packet. Comments received after January 28th, but by noon on February 5th, will be distributed at the February 6th meeting.
Next Steps Staff will present the draft 2020 SIP to the Interagency Technical Advisory Committee (ITAC) this afternoon. Although not required, staff has invited members of the Independent Oversight Committee to attend both this RTC meeting and the ITAC meeting, so they can also provide input. Feedback from today’s meetings (both the RTC and the ITAC) may be incorporated into a proposed Final 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan, which will be proposed for adoption at the February 6, 2020, RTC meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
The programming shown in the draft 2020 SIP is consistent with the voter-approved Measure D Expenditure Plan and within the projected capacity of the Measure, as
18-3
Draft Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) Page 4
shown in the Cash Flow Model (Chapter 5). Future budgets, including any amendments to the FY19-20 budget determined necessary, will be prepared in accordance with the programming of the Final 2020 SIP.
SUMMARY
The RTC is responsible for allocating, administering, and overseeing the expenditure of all Measure Revenues which are not directly allocated by formula annually to other agencies, consistent with the voter-approved Measure D Expenditure Plan, through an Implementation Plan. After holding a public hearing, staff recommends that the Commission consider public input and provide direction to staff on the final 2020 Measure D - Strategic Implementation Plan to be proposed for adoption at the February 6, 2020 RTC meeting.
Attachments: 1. Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) – available online
at: www.sccrtc.org/measured2. Comments received by 12:00 p.m. on January 7, 20203. Replacement pages to the Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation
Plan
s:\rtc\tc2020\tc0120\regular agenda\measure d sip\measure_d_sip-sr.docx
18-4
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020
From: Dusten Dennis <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 4, 2020 11:57 AM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: Measure D 2020 Strategic Plan- Focus on Infrastructure
Dear SCCRTC:
In reading through the Strategic Plan I see a lot of beneficial projects. I would urge you to focus our revenue on infrastructure improvements like freeway widening, pedestrian bridges, rail trail, and protected bike lanes. Together these facilities will do the most good in transportation for our county. I don't see the funds that go towards programs like Cruz511 and TDM programs being as beneficial. I would like to see a shift in spending towards more infrastructure. If the facilities are built people will use them.
Thank You:
Dusten Dennis
From: Nancy Yellin <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 1, 2020 9:54 AM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: Response to DRAFT SIP 2020 I appreciate the opportunity to express my opinion, yet again, on the Trail and/or Rail decision.
The draft of Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan 2020 (SIP) that was recently made available for public comment is inadequate because:
The plan only identifies 9 out of 20 Segments of the trail that will be built, with no plans to build a continuous trail with Measure D SIP.
Measure D SIP only provides $43M for construction of trail. The difference between MBSST cost estimates and current Measure D SIP cost, the overall trail will not be $126M, but over $325M.
The time frame for completion of the sections will take years and that is too long.
Additionally, I am also opposed to continuing the discussion to keep the rail because:
It will not make an adequate dent in our Highway 1 transportation needs. Many of the commuters come from adjacent counties.
It will require stations with adequate parking and that will be too costly. This rail goes nowhere.
PLEASE consider a Greenway Trail that can be accomplished NOW
Attachment 2
18-5
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020
From: Tim Davis <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2019 9:23 AM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: 2020 Measure D Implementation Plan
To whom it may concern,
I fully support the RTC’s proposed rail trail as as a key part of the Measure D 2020 Implementation Plan. I feel certain that it will offer a great alternative for residents to bike or ride a train to their destination cutting back on Highway One congestion and has been successfully implemented in other areas.
Thanks for listing!
Tim Davis
From: Steel and Feels <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2019 11:09 PM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: SIP Public Comment
I commend staff for their thorough report and demonstration that there is no ability on the part of the Santa Cruz RTC to fund even the most basic sections of the Monterey Bay Scenic Sanctuary Trail (MBSST)
It has frequently been the opinion of this body, that the construction of a trail will take precedent over the rehabilitation of the rail line, but when your "Strategic Implementation Plan" has a $109 million hole from its inception, it is clear that we will get a neither, and the dream of the MBSST is lost.
Santa Cruz needs a continuous trail, TODAY. I urge you to stop pursuing a Rail/Trail plan without first identifying the required funding sources. Consider preparing an honest disclosure of the real world challenges involved in completing this project and seek voter approval of the necessary tax measures to fund the entirety of the project, in a timely manner.
Thank you,
David Date
District 2.
18-6
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020 From: Gloria Reiss <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2019 4:20 PM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: Measure D I do not support spending more money on a trail over the railroad tracks. We have so many beautiful walks and ways to bicycle already. I would support a light rail with added bus lines to reduce traffic on freeway during commutes. Gloria Reiss From: Becky Steinbruner <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2019 2:46 AM To: SIP <[email protected]> Cc: Becky Steinbruner <[email protected]> Subject: Public Comment on Draft 2020 Strategic Plan for Measure D Revenues
Dear RTC, I have read through the Draft 2020 Strategic Plan for Measure D revenue allocation and accounting. I am disturbed that there is virtually no reporting of revenue that has been collected during the Measure's inaugural year. There is a great deal of reporting about projected revenues and growth, but no actual report of what has been collected.
There is a significant amount of space spent on forecasts and projected revenue, but the figures do not match what the AMBAG growth projections report, which note a decline in population and economic vitality: https://ambag.org/sites/default/files/documents/2018_Regional_Growth_Forecast_PDFA.pdf
I also note that there is an inconsistency between the data shown on the RTC report on page 19 and the figure that follows the table 3-3 on page 23. On page 22, table 30-5 projects a -2% revenue total in 2019/2020, and a 0.4% increase to follow in 2020/2021, but there is really no analysis to justify this significant change, other than "an economic correction is overdue".
I see no actual report of how the Measure D revenues have been used to leverage other funding sources. There is an exhaustive explanation of SB 1 money and what is eligible, but there is nothing to show the public that the promise of using Measure D money for leverage would help bring augmented funding to the projects promised has actually occurred. I see no discussion or detail of what has actually been done to leverage any funding, only hypothetical terms of "the RTC will target..." and "SB 1 makes eligible..." on pages 23-25.
18-7
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020 It is disturbing to me to see that so much of the Measure D revenue is used for RTC administration and the California Dept. of Tax and Fee Administration...$24.3 million! Please detail staff time expenses, and rates. On page 31, there is discussion about allocating $1.3 million to the 511 transportation service. There is no discussion about how much this service actually gets used by the public. Please include a cost/benefit analysis of the 511 service. On page 32, the report admits the trestle over Soquel Creek in Capitola Village is very challenging, but no Measure D money is going to be spent on the trestle, other than $50,000 for a feasibility study regarding it. This is unacceptable...why not spend the $50,000 on repairing it so it is safe to use for active transportation or some form of public transit? On page 35, the report states no Measure D money will be spent on new rail service, but the RTC will spend $5.75 Million on yet ANOTHER rail feasibility study? The RTC has already studied this to death...spend the taxpayer's money on actually getting something done that will benefit the people who are paying the Measure D taxes. Please include the justification of another feasibility study and what new information the public can expect to see from it that would help accomplish anything at all. On page 35, the report also states $550,000 will be used to repair the railroad tracks damaged in the 2017 storms (in the San Andreas Road area). Why repair the tracks if there is no plan to spend any money on providing a train or public transit mode that uses the tracks? The report explains that Measure D money will only get used to maintain the tracks...but no train or public transit that uses the rails? That is ludicrous. I note that the RTC has allocated $1.58 Million in the inaugural year for track upgrades, signals, and signage. For what purpose, if there is no serious intent to fund a public transportation mode on the rails. Please provide detailed project areas and funding amounts where the public Measure D money has been spent for these types of upgrades...for example, how much got spent in the Aptos Village Project area? Page 41 reports that the RTC is considering future bonds to fund projects. This is unacceptable...voters were promised the Measure D tax would supply plenty of money to accomplish real improvements in public transportation and relief of traffic congestion. More public debt through bonds? Is that the plan to get public transportation on the rail corridor? Is that what is planned after the publicity of the Hydrogen Fuel Cell train in February, 2020... persuade the people to agree to yet more debt burden in order to have public transportation on the rail that the RTC bought nearly a decade ago? No. Where is that Measure D leveraging promised to voters in order to get grant funding from state and federal sources?
Page 44 gives absolutely no concrete report about the Measure D Oversight Committee's real existence and what the group has determined about the use of the Measure D money in the inaugural year of existence. It is as if the description of this group that was included in the Measure D ballot information were pasted into
18-8
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020 this report. There is no list of who is on that Oversight Committee, no report of how they were chosen, and most significantly, that the group met multiple times in the past year. Where is the website link to the agendas for the group? Where is their analysis of Measure D spending and how it conforms with what the voters were promised?
Page 64 provides a Fact Sheet for the Chanticleer Avenue bike/ped crossing over Highway One, but there is not one for the Mar Vista bike/ped crossing, or a discussion of the status of that project. The later is included in the timeline for funding, but the funding is projected to be much less than originally anticipated. Where is the discussion of the promised and much-needed bike/ped crossing for the Pajaro Valley High School students? It is missing entirely.
Finally, the financial tables on pages 55-56 show alot of red but no clear explanation of why. Page 12 details the breakdown of Measure D allocation breakdown, but the percentages do not add up to 100%. I think that the missing 8% is the rail corridor. There is a typographical error on page 16, last sentence in third paragraph: "2020 Strategic Implantation Plan", which I assume should be "Implementation" Plan.
In short, I feel the 2020 Strategic Report is lacking clear and concise information that demonstrates to the public that Measure D revenues are being put to the uses that were promised to the voters. Please include my comments for the public record. Sincerely, Becky Steinbruner From: Brian Peoples <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2019 9:19 AM To: Guy Preston <[email protected]> Cc: Zach Friend <[email protected]>; Patrick Mulhearn <[email protected]>; 'Bruce McPherson ([email protected])' <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Matt Machado <[email protected]>; Shannon Munz <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Fw: 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP)
Good morning Guy,
18-9
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020
I am forwarding you the TrailNow newsletter that was recently sent out to thousands of supporters and community members interested in our communications. Contained within the message is a matrix table that illustrates the current RTC plans for the Rail & Trail. As we have been communicating, we believe it is critical to open the Santa Cruz Coastal Corridor as soon as possible to give our community an alternative to driving and highway congestion.
As you know, we have been working with Lon VanGemert (CEO Progressive Rail) to submit our proposal for a platform-trail along key sections of the corridor (portion of proposal attached). We believe opening these key sections using a "temporary" trail system will help reduce traffic congestion within Santa Cruz County. Studies have shown that the volume of active transportation users will reduce congestion on Highway 1 and provide valuable traffic relief to south county (Watsonville, Aptos).
Our understanding is that you have informed Lon that RTC will be sending them a letter "delaying" required actions by Progressive Rail. We want to communicate to you that we are prepared to submit our proposal as the "Excursion Train" and we are hopeful that platform-trails can be built in 2020.
We are hopeful that RTC supports moving forward with a solution today to use the corridor and look forward to the opportunity.
Best regards,
Brian Peoples Executive Director TrailNow
From: Trail Now <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, December 27, 2019 10:40 PM To: Brian Peoples <[email protected]> Subject: 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP)
18-10
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020
The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) released its Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan for public comment. Trail Now supported Measure D because transportation is a key to a communities’ quality-of-life; poor transportation systems impact everyone’s daily lives. Trail Now supporters contributed the greatest amount of funds to get Measure D approved and we believe it is critical that the funds be effectively invested to help ensure a continuous trail is built within 10-years, as stated by RTC Executive Director Guy Preston. Unfortunately, the Measure D SIP does not achieve this goal and it appears that it will be decades longer, cost millions more and actually have no trail in key segments. The plan only identifies 9 Segments of the trail that will be built, with no plans to build a continuous trail with Measure D SIP. The cost to build a trail adjacent to an old railroad track and over 20 trestles is
18-11
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020
proving to be unaffordable for our community. Based on the difference between MBSST cost estimates and current Measure D SIP cost, the overall trail will not be $126M, but over $325M. Measure D SIP only provides $43M for construction of the trail.. We are asking the RTC to spend our tax dollars more effectively to get a Trail NOW!!!
Opportunity for public to comment at public hearing on January 16, 2020, no sooner than 10:00 a.m. at City of Santa Cruz Council Chambers, 809 Center Street, Room 10, Santa Cruz. Written comments on the 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan are due by Jan 15 / 12 pm and can be submitted via: ◾Mail: 1523 Pacific Ave., Santa Cruz, CA 95060◾Email: [email protected]◾Fax: (831) 460-6178
18-12
“Platform Trail” Proposal Measure D Implementation Plan for Rail & Trail
Segment Area
Original MBSST
(in thousands)
2020 RTC Est
(in thousands)Funded
(in thousands)Need
(in thousands)Year
CompleteCompleted
Activity1 Waddell Beach $ 107
2 Greyhound Rock Beach $ 308
3 Upper Coast Dairies $ 2,250
4 Davenport Landing / End of Railroad Tracks $ 2,685
5 Davenport / Wilder Ranch $ 15,006 $ 22,262 $ 17,168 $ 5,094 2021 Final Design
6 Antonelli Pond $ 3,116
7a New Leaf / Westside $ 1,161 $ 6,700 $ 6,700 $ - 2021 Trail Built
7b Westside / Wharf $ 10,057 $ 13,108 $ 2,769 $ 10,339 2020 EIR
8 Santa Cruz Boardwalk Combined w ith 9 Combined w ith 9 Combined w ith 9 Combined w ith 9
9 Twin Lakes $ 22,228 $ 34,634 $ 8,369 $ 26,265 2022 EIR
10 Live Oak / Jade Street Park Combined w ith 12 Combined w . 12 Combined w ith 12 Combined w ith 12
11 Capitola / Seacliff Combined w ith 12 Combined w . 12 Combined w ith 12 Combined w ith 12
12 Aptos Village $ 29,406 $ 66,331 $ 4,000 $ 62,331 2022 Final Design
13 Rio Del Mar / Hidden Beach $ 3,306
14 Seascape $ 2,079
15 Manresa $ 4,735
16 Ellicott Slough $ 3,613
17 Harkins Slough $ 19,961
18 Watsonville Slough Open Space $ 3,010 $ 9,102 $ 4,051 $ 5,051 2022 Trail Built
19 Walker Street / Watsonville $ 381
20 Pajaro River $ 3,009
Total: $ 126,418 $ 152,137 $ 43,057 $ 109,080
“Platform Trail” Concept “Platform Trail” Concept
18-13
“Platform Trail” Concept Platform Trail Proposed PlanCustom Platform Trail
2.5 miles of trail8-foot wide trail
Key Sections from Manresa to DavenportManresa BeachLa Selva TrestleAptos South Trestle / Rio Del Mar underpassState Park Drive / Aptos North Trestle Capitola TrestleSeabright Ave (Harbor Bridge) / 7th AveBoardwalk Trestle / Murray Bridge underpassAntonelli Pond Trestle North Coast (Farmland)
Railroad Compliance (CPUC, STB, FRA, CTC)
Platform Trail versus Rail & Trail
Segment 7 Rail & Trail
Platform TrailFraction of cost to a Rail & Trail
Reduced tree & brush cutting
Wetlands remain intact
No excavation or culvert work
Support long-term trail plans
Support long-term transit plans
Reduce local traffic congestion
Increase public access
Generate “trail-use” data
Meet all railroad requirements
Meet all CTC requirements
Supported by Progressive Rail
Supported by local farmers
Built TODAY – not decades from now
18-14
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020
From: Carie Thompson <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, December 27, 2019 10:13 AM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: comments page 35 - maintaining the rail corridor Greetings,
I have just reviewed the SCCRTC measure D draft strategic plan. In reference to page 35, which discusses funding for maintenance of the rail, I did not see any funding for ongoing maintenance and cleanup of associated real property.
As a land manager with properties abutting RTC lands I have direct knowledge of the dismal state of the rail corridor. We have a homeless crisis in Santa Cruz, and while we can't expect to solve this problem, we must anticipate associated costs and prepare to address public safety issues on RTC property.
In the past few years the Land Trust of Santa Cruz county (LTSCC) has spent thousands of dollars cleaning up trash dumps and encampments under the rail at Antonelli pond in Santa Cruz and along the rail line bordering Watsonville Slough Farm in Watsonville. Best practices call for proactive enforcement and hasty cleanup.
LTSCC consistently reaches out to RTC staff to report issues on these properties. The response is delayed at best, with no response on most occasions. This is not a criticism of RTC staff. The problem is overwhelming, and as I understand it, RTC has no mechanism in place to handle these problems.
Please add appropriate funding to address the public safety hazards on RTC real property.
Thank you,
Carie Thompson Access Director Land Trust of Santa Cruz County
From: DENNIS HANSON <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2019 6:44 PM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: Roads are atrocious
Our roads and streets need repairs so badly...why are walking and biking trails getting designated so much more monies than our roads and streets that so many of us use. Priorities....where are they?
Ida Hanson
18-15
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020
So tired of the minority getting their wishes met, while the majority who work and drive and live here are constantly being drained of resources and have to drive with all these pot holes and shoddy streets....
Million dollar home or not...leaving Santa Cruz gets more attractive all the time!
From: Hi Carol <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2019 10:15 AM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject:
We need to expand Highway 1 immediately. There are several very important reasons: 1) ease traffic jams. I live in Watsonville and have several doctor appointments in Santa Cruz so I must leave hours before I need to because of the uncertainly of the traffic , but the most important and the most serious reason is because I was in Santa Cruz when the last earthquake happened and I again lived in Watsonville it took me 4 hours to get home unknownly what was going on with my house. I think it is IMPORTANT to understand the need for better road opening in case of emergency. With highway one being ourt ONLY roadway it is not enough.
Carol Rice
From: Jean Brocklebank <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2019 9:19 AM To: SIP <[email protected]> Cc: John Leopold <[email protected]> Subject: Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Dear RTC ~
Are you serious? Releasing the 143 page Plan on December 20 during the holidays and setting a deadline of noon January 15, less than a month later, for comments to be considered by those who cannot attend the January 16 hearing?
How does this possibly serve the public?
The RTC took three years after the passage of Measure D to develop the Plan, but the public is supposed to read, review and comment on the plan in three weeks time ... during the holiday season?! This is just not right.
Jean Brocklebank
18-16
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020
From: Dave Osland <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2019 6:52 AM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: Measure D
Plans to spend the money on traffic improvements must prioritize the aux. lanes as well as adding additional lanes on highway 1 to improve traffic flow and reduce pollution from the now 25-30 minute additional commute times motorists are seeing on highway 1 Thank You, Dave Osland, Aptos
From: Marcia Poms <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2019 1:54 PM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: transportation
Because of vision problems, I am unable to drive. I live in La Selva Beach, which had bus service when I moved here. Bus service needs to be restored. Use smaller vans. Paracruz won’t tramsport after medical procedures (and they rattle and shake too much). Alternatives are needed.
Thank you. Marcia Poms
From: David Mintz <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2019 6:38 AM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Hello
Thanks for all of the hard work and effort to share. Certainly lots and lots to know and complete and extremely complex and complicated.
So, thanks for the ongoing efforts to help the flow of people and materials.
As for the Rail/Trail corridor - build it for pedestrians and bikes NOW. Natural Bridges to Watsonville. People will use it. People will get out of their cars. Children wil be safer. Adults will be safer. I will be able to ride to downtown and not get into my car. It will be until my unborn grandchildren are attending UCSC before anyone will decide to do RAIL and then it will start more planning. Build it for human powered transportation.
Thanks, thanks
David Mintz
18-17
Draft 2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan
Comments received between Dec. 20, 2019 and Jan. 7, 2020
From: Bryan L <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2019 5:25 PM To: SIP <[email protected]> Subject: Comments on 2020 Measure D Plan
Dear RTC,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment you the 2020 Measure D Plan. In general I applaud the RTC's proactive work on Measure D initiatives. To get us to this point, your team has been both visionary and effective, a rare combination.
Specific comments:
Page 27 - Farmer's Land should be Farmer Street Page 28 - Summary of Programming. Programming only $1.3 million for the period through 2024 will likely result in inadequate progress towards implementing safety improvements. This will risk additional pedestrian fatalities. Page 28- Summary of Programming. When supporting the bond measure, San Lorenzo Valley voters envisioned an investment of $10 million in 2016. Delays in making this investment will erode the value of the $10 million through inflation. At the end each year, the amount remaining should be escalated to account for inflation. At present rates of inflation (1.8% average CPI over the last 10 years), by 2024 the adjusted value of the $10 million would be $11.7 million, for example. Page 35. Investment in the rail corridor is inadequate, despite ample financial resources. The RTC will need to adjust its mindset to be that of a landowner, and take care of the corridor until another agency steps in. The corridor is the subject of extensive dumping, vandalism and unmaintained and damaged facilities. Examples include the southern-most crossing over Highway 1. A tree damaged the railing three years ago, and the crushed railing remains dangling over the travel lanes to this day. The trestle at Antonelli Pond is a severe public safety hazard both because the decking - regularly walked by pedestrians - is failing, and because the RTC allows encampments and vandalism underneath it.
Thank you for the opportunity to contribute my review.
Kind regards,
Bryan Largay Felton, CA
18-18
2020 STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
DRAFT
Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission
1523 Pacifi c Avenue Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Phone: (831) 460-3200E-mail: [email protected]
www.sccrtc.org
MEASURE D
- Replacement Pages -
Attachment 3
18-19
122020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan | SCCRTC
Table 2-1: Summary of Transportation Investments
The voter-approved Ordinance and Expenditure Plan serve as the primary guiding documents regarding implementation of Measure D. The RTC is required to allocate, administer and oversee the expenditure of all Measure Revenues which are not directly allocated by formula to other agencies, consistent with the Expenditure Plan, through an implementation plan. Subsequent to voter approval of Measure D, the RTC and other Measure D recipients have adopted a five-year program of projects showing how each recipient plans to spend Measure D revenues in the near term. The 2020 Stra-tegic Implementation Plan serves as RTC’s inaugural plan on how RTC will implement Measure D over the life of the measure.
SUMMARY OF TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS % OF FUNDS
Neighborhood Projects 30%Highway Corridors 25%Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities 20%Active Transportation 17%Rail Corridor 8%
Replacement Page
18-20
Model #5: Highway Corridors
Fiscal Year Prior FY 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 32/33 33/34 34/35 35/36 36/37 37/38 38/39 39/40 40/41 41/42 42/43 43/44 44/45 45/46 46/47 TOTALSBeginning Balance $0 $6,160 $10,915 $13,083 $10,055 $3,742 $1,814 $7,012 $12,850 $18,894 $25,149 $31,620 $38,313 $45,235 $52,391 $59,787 $67,430 $75,326 $83,483 $91,906 $100,603 $109,582 $118,848 $128,411 $138,277 $148,454 $158,951 $169,776 $180,908 $192,247
Interest on Pooled Cash $32 $158 $218 $262 $201 $75 $36 $140 $257 $378 $503 $632 $766 $905 $1,048 $1,196 $1,349 $1,507 $1,670 $1,838 $2,012 $2,192 $2,377 $2,568 $2,766 $2,969 $3,179 $3,396 $3,618 $3,845 $42,092Sales Tax Revenues $6,177 $5,434 $5,234 $5,255 $5,306 $5,365 $5,445 $5,532 $5,620 $5,710 $5,801 $5,894 $5,989 $6,084 $6,182 $6,281 $6,381 $6,483 $6,587 $6,692 $6,799 $6,908 $7,019 $7,131 $7,245 $7,361 $7,479 $7,599 $7,720 $5,883 $188,598
InterProgram Loan (Active Transportation) $0 $0 $0 $0 -$201 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$201Inter Program Loan (Highway 17) $0 $0 $0 $0 -$1,176 -$1,848 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$3,024
Loan Payment (Active Transportation) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $205 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $205
Loan Payment (Highway 17) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $139 $0 $0 $3,639Expenses -$50 -$837 -$3,285 -$8,545 -$10,443 -$5,725 -$450 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$29,334Ending Balance $6,160 $10,915 $13,083 $10,055 $3,742 $1,814 $7,012 $12,850 $18,894 $25,149 $31,620 $38,313 $45,235 $52,391 $59,787 $67,430 $75,326 $83,483 $91,906 $100,603 $109,582 $118,848 $128,411 $138,277 $148,454 $158,951 $169,776 $180,908 $192,247 $201,974
Model #6: Active Transportation
Fiscal Year Prior FY 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 32/33 33/34 34/35 35/36 36/37 37/38 38/39 39/40 40/41 41/42 42/43 43/44 44/45 45/46 46/47 TOTALSBeginning Balance $0 $3,691 $5,997 $4,131 $1,520 $0 $304 $2,872 $6,691 $10,646 $14,742 $18,982 $23,370 $27,909 $32,605 $37,461 $42,481 $47,670 $53,032 $58,571 $64,294 $70,203 $76,305 $82,604 $89,105 $95,814 $102,736 $109,876 $117,241 $124,835
Interest on Pooled Cash $21 $88 $120 $83 $30 $0 $6 $57 $134 $213 $295 $380 $467 $558 $652 $749 $850 $953 $1,061 $1,171 $1,286 $1,404 $1,526 $1,652 $1,782 $1,916 $2,055 $2,198 $2,345 $2,497 $26,549Sales Tax Revenues $4,201 $3,695 $3,559 $3,574 $3,608 $3,648 $3,702 $3,762 $3,822 $3,883 $3,945 $4,008 $4,072 $4,137 $4,204 $4,271 $4,339 $4,409 $4,479 $4,551 $4,624 $4,698 $4,773 $4,849 $4,927 $5,006 $5,086 $5,167 $5,250 $4,000 $128,247InterProgram Loan (Highway Corridor) $0 $0 $0 $0 $201 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $201
Loan Payment (Highway Corridor) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$205 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$205
Expenses -$530 -$1,477 -$5,545 -$6,268 -$5,359 -$3,140 -$1,140 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$23,459Ending Balance $3,691 $5,997 $4,131 $1,520 $0 $304 $2,872 $6,691 $10,646 $14,742 $18,982 $23,370 $27,909 $32,605 $37,461 $42,481 $47,670 $53,032 $58,571 $64,294 $70,203 $76,305 $82,604 $89,105 $95,814 $102,736 $109,876 $117,241 $124,835 $131,332
Model #7: Rail Corridor
Fiscal Year Prior FY 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 32/33 33/34 34/35 35/36 36/37 37/38 38/39 39/40 40/41 41/42 42/43 43/44 44/45 45/46 46/47 TOTALSBeginning Balance $0 $1,344 $1,954 $1,014 $199 $582 $689 $1,522 $3,323 $5,187 $7,118 $9,117 $11,186 $13,326 $15,539 $17,828 $20,195 $22,641 $25,168 $27,779 $30,476 $33,262 $36,138 $39,107 $42,171 $45,332 $48,595 $51,960 $55,431 $59,010
Interest on Pooled Cash $10 $41 $39 $20 $4 $12 $14 $30 $66 $104 $142 $182 $224 $267 $311 $357 $404 $453 $503 $556 $610 $665 $723 $782 $843 $907 $972 $1,039 $1,109 $1,180 $12,567Sales Tax Revenues $1,977 $1,739 $1,675 $1,682 $1,698 $1,717 $1,742 $1,770 $1,798 $1,827 $1,856 $1,886 $1,916 $1,947 $1,978 $2,010 $2,042 $2,075 $2,108 $2,142 $2,176 $2,211 $2,246 $2,282 $2,318 $2,356 $2,393 $2,432 $2,470 $1,882 $60,351InterProgram Loan (Highway Corridor) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Loan Payment (Highway Corridor) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Expenses -$642 -$1,170 -$2,654 -$2,517 -$1,319 -$1,621 -$923 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$10,846Ending Balance $1,344 $1,954 $1,014 $199 $582 $689 $1,522 $3,323 $5,187 $7,118 $9,117 $11,186 $13,326 $15,539 $17,828 $20,195 $22,641 $25,168 $27,779 $30,476 $33,262 $36,138 $39,107 $42,171 $45,332 $48,595 $51,960 $55,431 $59,010 $62,072
Model #8: Total Program Cash Flows
Fiscal Year Prior FY 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 32/33 33/34 34/35 35/36 36/37 37/38 38/39 39/40 40/41 41/42 42/43 43/44 44/45 45/46 46/47 TOTALSBeginning Balance $0 $11,823 $19,961 $19,531 $12,585 $4,811 $3,634 $12,580 $24,392 $36,618 $49,268 $62,354 $75,887 $89,879 $104,343 $119,291 $134,736 $150,691 $167,168 $184,183 $201,749 $219,881 $238,592 $257,899 $277,817 $298,361 $319,548 $341,395 $363,917 $387,133
Interest on Pooled Cash $66 $303 $397 $388 $249 $94 $70 $249 $485 $730 $983 $1,245 $1,515 $1,795 $2,084 $2,383 $2,692 $3,011 $3,341 $3,681 $4,032 $4,395 $4,769 $5,155 $5,554 $5,965 $6,388 $6,825 $7,276 $7,740 $83,863Measure D Sales Tax Revenue $25,429 $22,460 $21,610 $21,700 $21,909 $22,154 $22,481 $22,841 $23,206 $23,578 $23,955 $24,338 $24,728 $25,123 $25,525 $25,934 $26,349 $26,770 $27,199 $27,634 $28,076 $28,525 $28,981 $29,445 $29,916 $30,395 $30,881 $31,375 $31,877 $24,291 $778,686Administrative Expenses -$720 -$723 -$676 -$679 -$685 -$693 -$703 -$714 -$726 -$737 -$749 -$761 -$773 -$786 -$798 -$811 -$824 -$837 -$850 -$864 -$878 -$892 -$906 -$921 -$935 -$950 -$966 -$981 -$997 -$760 -$24,294
Total Sales Tax Revenue for Distribution $24,710 $21,737 $20,934 $21,021 $21,224 $21,461 $21,778 $22,127 $22,481 $22,840 $23,206 $23,577 $23,954 $24,338 $24,727 $25,123 $25,525 $25,933 $26,348 $26,770 $27,198 $27,633 $28,075 $28,524 $28,981 $29,445 $29,916 $30,394 $30,881 $23,531 $754,392
Neighborhood Direct Allocations -$6,788 -$6,021 -$5,780 -$5,806 -$5,867 -$5,938 -$6,033 -$6,138 -$6,244 -$6,352 -$6,462 -$6,573 -$6,686 -$6,801 -$6,918 -$7,037 -$7,157 -$7,280 -$7,404 -$7,531 -$7,659 -$7,790 -$7,923 -$8,057 -$8,194 -$8,333 -$8,475 -$8,618 -$8,764 -$6,559 -$211,192
Transit Direct Allocations -$4,942 -$4,347 -$4,187 -$4,204 -$4,245 -$4,292 -$4,356 -$4,425 -$4,496 -$4,568 -$4,641 -$4,715 -$4,791 -$4,868 -$4,945 -$5,025 -$5,105 -$5,187 -$5,270 -$5,354 -$5,440 -$5,527 -$5,615 -$5,705 -$5,796 -$5,889 -$5,983 -$6,079 -$6,176 -$4,706 -$150,878Highway 17 Wildlife Crossing Program $0 $0 -$15 -$15 -$2,015 -$2,015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$4,060
Highway 9 Program $0 -$50 -$295 -$1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$1,345Highway Corridor Program -$50 -$837 -$3,285 -$8,545 -$10,443 -$5,725 -$450 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$29,334
Active Transportation Program -$530 -$1,477 -$5,545 -$6,268 -$5,359 -$3,140 -$1,140 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$23,459
Rail Program -$642 -$1,170 -$2,654 -$2,517 -$1,319 -$1,621 -$923 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$10,846Ending Balance $11,823 $19,961 $19,531 $12,585 $4,811 $3,634 $12,580 $24,392 $36,618 $49,268 $62,354 $75,887 $89,879 $104,343 $119,291 $134,736 $150,691 $167,168 $184,183 $201,749 $219,881 $238,592 $257,899 $277,817 $298,361 $319,548 $341,395 $363,917 $387,133 $407,139
Replacement Page
2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan | SCCRTC 5618-21
Category: Highway Corridors (25% of Measure D Revenues)
Name/Road/Limits DescriptionPrior Years
SpentFY19/20 FY20/21 FY21/22 FY22/23 FY23/24
Total Measure D
2020 Updates 2019 Updates
$350,000 $0 0 $1,650,000
$4,350,000 $100,000 $0 $5,750,000
$100,000 $1,833,168 $4,300,000 $2,480,000 $400,000 $9,013,168
$50,000 $693,168 $2,510,000 $2,330,000 $400,000 $5,983,168
3
Highway 1: Auxiliary Lanes & Bus on Shoulder from Freedom to State Park, and Reconstruction of two railroad bridges, and widening of the bridge over Aptos Creek/Spreckles Drive (2)
Freeway operational improvement, bus on shoulder improvements, soundwalls and retaining walls, reconstruct 2 railroad bridges and widen bridge over Aptos Creek/Spreckles Drive
$0 $4,300,000 $5,730,000 $824,000 $3,660,000 $0 $14,514,000
Program funds for pre-construction phases. Will seek competitive grants for future phases.
4Highway 1 Bicycle/Pedestrian Overcrossing at Mar Vista Drive (3)
Implementation $48.5k. RTC oversight and assistance to address restricted bike/ped access by building new overcrossing with lighting, traffic calming, and moderate aesthetic treatments
$0 $148,500 $100,000 $100,000 $348,500 No change
$300k for RTC oversight and assistance., previously programmed for CON. Will seek SB1 SCCP, LPP, and/or ATP funds for construction. Additional $48,500 approved 6/27/19.
5Santa Cruz County Regional Conservation Investment Strategy - Grant match
Match to Wildlife Conservation Board grant for early mitigation planning for transportation projects.
$0 $25,500 $25,500 No change Approved by RTC May 2, 2019
6Cruz 511-Traveler Information and Commute Manager
Ongoing system & demand management (TDM), includes Cruz511.org traveler information, carpool and other TDM programs
$200,000 $250,000 $250,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,300,000 No change
Funds added in FY19/20 and FY20/21; may issue "call for projects/RFP" for assistance growing TDM employer participation using new Trip Planner. FY23/24 added.
7 Safe on 17 Ongoing system management program, involves increased CHP enforcement on Highway 17
$25,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $275,000 No change Increased from $25k to $50k per year.
8 Unified Corridor Investment Study Analysis of Highway 1 corridor projects $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200,000 No change No change. Project completed in FY18/19
9 Freeway Service Patrol (4)
Ongoing system management and congestion reducing program. Roving tow trucks removing incidents and obstructions during peak travel periods on Hwy 1 and Hwy 17
$118,813 $122,213 $150,000 $165,000 $181,500 $199,650 $937,176 No changeFunds for FY23/24 added; lower amounts used/budgeted-anticipated FY17/18 - FY19/20 --- SB1 providing additional funds.
Estimated Annual Measure D Expenditures $1,303,813 $7,772,549 $17,440,000 $6,499,000 $4,991,500 $449,650 $29,343,344
Notes:1.
2.
3.
4. Freeway Service Patrol: Through state budget/SB1 more Caltrans funds became available reducing Measure D needed
Updated cost estimates.
Shifted funds for PA/ED to FY19/20 and reduced amount based on cost savings; PS&E phase into FY 20/21. Added funds in 21/22 for right-of-way ($1.8M capital + $180k support). Added funds in 22/23 for DSDC & PM. Will seek SB1 SCCP and LPP
$350,000 $350,000
Additional $4million for construction grant match; added $100k for PM in 22/23.
Hwy 1 Auxiliary Lanes from State Park Drive to Bay/Porter Project: Measure D funding for preliminary design and environmental documentation (FY 18/19 - FY 19/20) assumes PS&E will be advanced in FY 20/21, and right-of-way acquisition occurring in FY 21/22. RTC will target SCCP and LPP Cycle 2 or could decide at future date whether to utilize bond or other financing.
Hwy 1 41st/Soquel Aux Lane and Chanticleer B/P Overcrossing: Previously programmed funds used for preliminary and final engineering design and right-of-way phases over the period FY 17/18-through-FY 19/20. Measure D funds for PS&E and Project Management activities. RTC will target SCCP and LPP Cycle 2 or could decide at future date whether to utilize bond or other financing.
Mar Vista Bicycle/Pedestrian Overcrossing: Previously programmed funds used for project development and construction activities. $300k Measure D funds to supplement project management and public outreach support activities as needed. $48,500 replaces RSTPX previously programmed, that was shifted to Scott Creek. RTC will target SCCP and LPP Cycle 2 or could decide at future date whether to utilize bond or other financing.
Measure D: 5-Year Program of Projects (FY19/20-FY23/24)
Planned Use
Approved 6/6/19. Amended 6/27/19. PROPOSED CHANGES underlined, in orange, and will be taken for board approval on 2/6/20
1
Highway 1: Auxiliary Lanes and Bus on Shoulder from 41st to Soquel; Chanticleer Bike/Pedestrian Overcrossing (1)
Freeway operational improvement, bus on shoulder improvements, rehab roadway and drainage, improve
bicycle/pedestrian access over freeway.$600,000
RTC will seek SB1 Solutions for Congested Corridors (SCCP) funds and Local Partnership Program (LPP) cycle 2 competitive funds to fund construction.
2
Highway 1: Auxiliary Lanes & Bus on Shoulder from State Park to Bay-Porter, and Reconstruction of Capitola Avenue Overcrossing (2)
Freeway operational improvement, bus on shoulder improvements, soundwalls and retaining walls, reconstruct Capitola Ave. overcrossing with sidewalks and bike lanes
$0
\\RTCSERV2\Shared\MeasureD\5YearPlan_RTC\2019\ProposedUpdatesSIP\Hwy-5yearProjList-2020-Feb1/7/2020
Replacement Page
2020 Measure D Strategic Implementation Plan | SCCRTC 119
18-22
AGENDA: January 16, 2020
TO: Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission FROM: Shannon Munz, Communications Specialist, and Ginger Dykaar, Senior
Transportation Planner RE: Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis – Communications and
Stakeholder Involvement Plan
RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) review, provide input and approve the Communications and Stakeholder Involvement Plan (Attachment 1) for the Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis. BACKGROUND An Alternatives Analysis will be performed to evaluate transit investment options that provide an integrated transit network for Santa Cruz County utilizing all or part of the length of the rail right-of-way as a dedicated transit facility. An Alternatives Analysis Ad Hoc Committee, composed of 6 members of the RTC, was formed to represent both RTC and METRO in developing the Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis. To ensure that, to the greatest extent possible, interagency consultation and public participation are an integral part of the Alternatives Analysis process, a Communications and Stakeholder Involvement Plan (CSIP) has been developed by the HDR consultant team with input from RTC and METRO staff and the Alternatives Analysis Ad Hoc Committee to guide the outreach process and lay out the engagement strategy. DISCUSSION In November 2019, RTC in partnership with METRO and the HDR project team began work to identify future options for high-capacity transit along the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line through an Alternatives Analysis. The analysis will evaluate public transit investment options for a future integrated transit network connecting Santa Cruz in the north to Watsonville and future regional transit links at Pajaro Station. Public education, engagement and communications will be a critical component of the overall project planning process and will remain a focal point as the project moves throughout each phase. A Communications and Stakeholder Involvement Plan (Attachment 1), lays out the engagement strategy at each milestone of the project. The CSIP identifies the
20-1
Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis – Involvement Plan
target audiences, outreach objectives, strategies and tactics to be implemented as an integrated part of the Alternatives Analysis project. The CSIP outlines a strategy to build awareness, educate, engage and seek informed input that will help guide the identification of a high-capacity transit service between Santa Cruz and Watsonville/Pajaro Station. The overarching CSIP aims to achieve the following objectives:
• Maintain an open and transparent planning process • Provide regular, consistent, accurate and timely communication • Inform and educate • Build and maintain relationships • Foster understanding and awareness • Address concerns as they arise • Seek informed input
The Communications and Stakeholder Involvement Plan is intended to act as a roadmap for communication and outreach activities throughout the duration of the project. As discussed in the plan, there are three key technical milestones where there will be outreach to stakeholders to ensure awareness, education, and input is sought at the right time in the process. Key Milestones for stakeholder engagement are as follows:
1. Goals/Screening Criteria/Performance Measures & Initial Alternatives Purpose: Important to seek input and obtain buy-in and understanding of screening criteria and performance measures early so that as alternatives are narrowed down, the stakeholders understand why. Gather initial input on transit alternatives to be considered.
2. Screened Alternatives Purpose: Explain screening process and results that lead to narrowed down alternatives. Gather input on short list of transit alternatives to be considered.
3. Performance Analysis Results and Locally Preferred Alternative Purpose: Explain performance measure results on short list of alternatives and seek input on locally preferred alternative.
The CSIP outlines the communication tools and tactics that will be implemented during each of the key milestones of the Alternatives Analysis. RTC staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission review, provide input and approve the Communications and Stakeholder Involvement Plan (Attachment 1) for the Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis.
20-2
Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis – Involvement Plan
FISCAL IMPACT This project is already funded and included in the RTC budget; therefore, the action proposed does not have any fiscal impacts. SUMMARY A Communications and Stakeholder Involvement Plan has been developed to guide the stakeholder engagement and outreach process for the Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis. The CSIP identifies the key milestones, proposed target audiences, outreach objectives, strategies and tactics to be implemented as an integrated part of the Alternatives Analysis project. The CSIP lays out a strategy to build awareness, educate, engage and seek informed input that will help guide the identification of a high-capacity transit service between Santa Cruz and Watsonville/Pajaro Station. Attachments 1. Draft Communications and Stakeholder Involvement Plan
20-3
WATSONVILLE/PAJAROto
SANTA CRUZ
Pa ja r o
TRANSIT CORRIDORALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Attachment 1
DRAFT
TRANSIT CORRIDOR
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
COMMUNICATIONS AND STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT PLAN
20-5
This page is intentionally left blank.
TRANSIT CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS COMMUNICATIONS AND STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT PLAN
20-6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION TO COMMUNICATIONS & STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT PLAN ..................... 4
PROJECT BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. 4 Santa Cruz County Area Map ..................................................................................................................... 5
COMMUNICATIONS APPROACH ............................................................................................. 6
INTERNAL PROJECT TEAM COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOL ....................................................... 7
1. IDENTIFICATION OF TARGET AUDIENCES ................................................................................ 7
2. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT MILESTONES ........................................................................... 9
3. DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT BRAND ..................................................................................... 11
4. CREATION OF TOOLS AND IMPLEMENTATION TACTICS ....................................................... 11 Project Contact Database ........................................................................................................................ 11 Project-Specific Website ......................................................................................................................... 11 Informational Toolkit ............................................................................................................................... 12 Public Open Houses ................................................................................................................................. 12 RTC Public Meetings ............................................................................................................................... 12 Media Relations ....................................................................................................................................... 13 Social Media ............................................................................................................................................ 13
5. SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER INPUT REPORT ....................................................................... 13
20-7
4
INTRODUCTION TO COMMUNICATIONS & STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT BACKGROUND
There are three parallel routes that link the communities along the Santa Cruz County Coast from Davenport through Watsonville:
• Highway 1• Soquel Avenue/Soquel Drive/Freedom Boulevard• The Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line
Highway 1 and Soquel/Freedom are heavily traveled, often congested, and emphasize automobile travel. The 2012 acquisition of the rail right-of-way provides a parallel transportation facility along this corridor that has unused capacity. The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) conducted a Unified Corridor Investment Study (UCS) that was completed in 2019. One of the outcomes of the study is to protect the rail right-of-way for high-capacity public transit use adjacent to a bicycle and pedestrian trail.
In November 2019, RTC in partnership with METRO, began work to identify high-capacity transit options along the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line (SCBRL) through a performance-based planning alternatives analysis process. The analysis will evaluate public transit investment options for a future integrated transit network connecting Santa Cruz in the north to Watsonville and future transit links at Pajaro Station for an alternative mode of travel. The Alternatives Analysis will identify use of all or part of the rail right-of-way, between Pajaro Station and Shaffer Road, as a dedicated transit facility, adjacent to the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) that is being developed. During the analysis, transit alternatives will be compared to define a viable project that will provide the greatest benefit to Santa Cruz County residents, businesses and traveling visitors.
This Communications and Stakeholder Involvement Plan (Plan) identifies the proposed target audiences, outreach objectives, strategies and tactics to be implemented as an integrated part of the Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis in an effort to build awareness, educate, engage and seek informed input that will help guide the identification of a high-capacity transit service between Santa Cruz and Watsonville. The Plan is intended to act as a roadmap for communication and outreach activities through the duration of the project.
20-8
6
COMMUNICATIONS APPROACH
Technology and culture have drastically changed the way people seek information and communicate. Introduction of personal smart devices and generational shifts in focus towards social media results in the need for use of both traditional high-touch means for communication blended with digital engagement to reach all desired audiences within a medium that they prefer. With individual mobile devices in most households (including low income, diverse communities), easy access to information and a desire to “share” everything, the public requires transparency and a voice. That’s why translating information into meaningful dialogue with all members of the public is more critical than ever.
Therefore, it is critical to develop a strategic communications program that is a seamless extension of the technical work and offers the public clear and concise opportunities to participate. The project communication tools and tactics created must address the diversity of stakeholders, and their needs, as well as combine traditional media with newer technologies to ensure a broad reach. Public education, engagement and communications will be a critical component of the overall project planning process and will remain a focal point moving forward throughout each project phase.
The overarching Plan aims to achieve the following objectives:
• Maintain an open and transparent planning process
• Provide regular, consistent, accurate and timely communication
• Inform and educate
• Build and maintain relationships
• Foster understanding and awareness
• Promptly address concerns as they arise
• Seek informed input
20-10
7
INTERNAL PROJECT TEAM COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOL
Internal communications and collaboration will be critical to the project’s success. The project team responsible for developing the Alternatives Analysis consists of RTC, METRO and HDR. Regular coordination, collaboration and ongoing communications will ensure the project team works effectively and stays on schedule. To drive the stakeholder outreach program, representatives from RTC, METRO and HDR will provide review and direction on all project key messaging, outreach activities and materials directed to the stakeholders.
The communications organization chart below identifies the key players that will not only lead development of the outreach program, but will also be responsible for providing the stakeholder and public input received to the larger project team.
The Plan is organized to identify the following components:
1. IDENTIFICATION OF TARGET AUDIENCES
Engagement of diverse audiences during the Alternatives Analysis phase is critical in determining an alternative that will meet the needs and be supported by the communities that the future transit system will serve. To engage audiences effectively we must understand who they are and how best to reach them. For the Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis, a tactical stakeholder engagement approach will allow the project team to proactively keep identified audiences informed, address concerns in a timely manner and minimize surprises while maximizing project awareness and understanding. Identified stakeholders will be proactively engaged via presentations at established and project-specific hosted meetings, regional media, and social media campaigns or other digital engagement.
20-11
8
The targeted groups will be requested to partner with SCCRTC and METRO to share project information to their peers, colleagues and neighbors, while also bringing valuable and informed input from their constituents for consideration from the project team.
AGENCY PARTNERS: Ensures key partner agencies are in the loop, updated and prepared throughout all project stages for potential public inquiries.
• RTC/METRO Alternatives Analysis Ad Hoc Committee
• Partner Agencies – Planning and Public Works Departments
• RTC Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC)
• RTC Elderly and Disabled Transportation Advisory Committee (E&DTAC)
• RTC Interagency Technical Advisory Committee (ITAC)
STAKEHOLDER GROUPS: Allows RTC and METRO to proactively reach into the many facets of a community through targeted focus groups of key representatives.
Community Focus Group 1 – Provides opportunity to proactively connect with non-English speaking and transportation-disadvantaged populations to share information, listen and respond. The project team will connect with key representatives from organizations within the non-English speaking and transportation-disadvantaged communities to ensure these community members receive information on the project and have the opportunity to provide feedback. Representatives may include:
• Spanish Speaking Advocacy
• Faith Based Organizations
• Human Services Organizations
• Low-Income and Minority Organizations
Community Focus Group 2 – Provides opportunity to bring diverse representatives of the community together to discuss the project and seek information while allowing attendees to understand the larger impacts to each unique group. Representatives may include:
• Business Associations / Chamber of Commerce / Major Employers
• Advocacy Groups (Bike/Pedestrian/Youth/Elderly/Disabled/Environmental)
• Educational and Healthcare Institutions
• Neighborhood Groups
GENERAL PUBLIC: RTC and METRO will engage the general public through multiple communication mediums established specifically for the project.
RTC & METRO BOARDS: Allows the project team to seek input from METRO Board and approval from RTC Board at the three key milestones. After receiving input from stakeholders, including the METRO Board, the project team will consider this input and submit a
20-12
9
recommendation to the RTC Board for approval of every key milestone at a regularly scheduled RTC meeting.
2. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT MILESTONES
While regular and ongoing communication will occur throughout the planning effort, there are three key technical milestones shown below that will trigger a proactive reach to each of the identified audiences to ensure we are educating, building awareness and seeking input at the right time in the process. At each technical milestone when it is time to inform and seek valuable input, the project team through the communication program will engage, listen, learn and consider the input received from the identified audiences.
MILESTONE 1: Goals/Screening Criteria/Performance Measures & Initial Alternatives Purpose: Gather initial input on universe of alternatives, draft screening criteria and performance measures. It is critical to obtain buy-in to the alternatives analysis process so that audiences understand how alternatives are narrowed down.
AUDIENCE FORMAT Agency Partners: Ad Hoc Committee RTC Advisory Committees Partner Agencies – Planning and Public Works
• Presentations at scheduled meetings
Stakeholder Groups: Community Focus Group 1 Community Focus Group 2
• Project hosted Community focus groupmeetings
General Public: • Project hosted open houses• Online outreach (social media, email,
website)• Other outlets (newspaper/bus/radio ads,
flyers, fact sheet)RTC & METRO: Commission and Board
• METRO Board meetings to receive input• RTC meetings to obtain approval
20-13
10
MILESTONE 2: Screened Alternatives Purpose: Share alternative screening process results and highlight narrowed down alternatives. Gather input on short list of alternatives to be considered.
AUDIENCE FORMAT Agency Partners: Ad Hoc Committee RTC Advisory Committees Partner Agencies – Planning and Public Works
• Presentations at scheduled meetings
Stakeholder Groups: Community Focus Group 1 Community Focus Group 2
• Online outreach (social media, email,website)
General Public: • Public Hearing at RTC meeting• Online outreach (social media, email,
website)• Other outlets (newspaper/bus/radio ads,
flyers, fact sheets)RTC & METRO: Commission and Board
• METRO Board meetings to receive input• RTC meetings to obtain approval
MILESTONE 3: Preferred Analysis Results & Locally Preferred Alternative Purpose: Highlight analysis process on short list of alternatives, share performance measure results and seek input on locally preferred alternative.
AUDIENCE FORMAT Agency Partners: Ad Hoc Committee RTC Advisory Committees Partner Agencies – Planning and Public Works
• Presentations at scheduled meetings
Stakeholder Groups: Community Focus Group 1 Community Focus Group 2
• Online outreach (email)
General Public: • Project hosted open houses• Online outreach (social media, email,
website)• Other outlets (newspaper/bus/radio ads,
flyers, fact sheets)RTC & METRO: Commission and Board
• METRO Board meetings to receive input• RTC meetings to obtain approval
20-14
11
3. DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT BRAND
In order to maintain a consistent look and feel that will be recognizable and directly tied to Santa Cruz RTC and METRO, a project-specific brand will be developed that may include name, slogan and logo. HDR will work closely with the project team to develop brand options that can be narrowed down to an approved brand. Initial concepts will be provided for review and consideration. Once established, the new project brand will be carried on the project website and throughout all materials. The brand must catch the diverse audience attention in order to garner notice as well as memory and recognition.
4. CREATION OF TOOLS AND IMPLEMENTATION TACTICS
Communication tools and tactics will be designed to capture the broadest audience combining a wide range of traditional mediums such as public workshops, focus group meetings, collateral materials and media relations with digital engagement tools such as a website, social media, email communication, and more. The goal will be to provide convenient and meaningful opportunities for interaction and sharing of information.
Project Contact Database Central to the Plan is identification and maintenance of a database that contains a diverse group of regional and local stakeholders, organizations, project partners and property owners who may be interested, impacted and influential.
The combined contacts will not only receive information about the project, but also will be asked to disseminate valuable and correct information. The project contacts will continue to be communicated with through a variety of tools such as in-person discussions, presentations, distribution of media alerts or electronic information blasts as well as other project related materials. As the word spreads about the project, it is anticipated that the list of stakeholders may continue to expand.
Project-Specific Website As communication technologies continue to improve, flexibility and innovation are critical in engaging hard to reach audiences directly. A user-friendly project webpage will play a vital role in the project’s communication program. The team will prepare materials to post on the RTC website and establish a protocol for review, maintenance and postings. Interested individuals will be able to sign-up to receive project-related electronic notifications to stay informed.
The project-specific website will be housed on RTC’s website (www.sccrtc.org) and a short URL will be established by RTC for easy recognition. Specific information that will be housed on the project website includes:
• Project Overview• Project Schedule & Key Milestones• Project Map
• Project News and Events• Contact Information• Online Comment Form
20-15
Informational Toolkit Collateral materials will be critical tools in educating the public about the project and keeping them updated through each key project milestone. Materials will include approved key messages to ensure a consistent and effective communications is delivered. Materials will be distributed in hard copy and electronically via e-blasts, the project website and social media. In addition, as determined necessary, materials will be translated into Spanish in order to reach the diverse population, and ensure an open, transparent communications process.
Collateral informational materials may include:
• Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)• Project Fact Sheet• E-newsletter• PowerPoint presentations
• Display boards• Comment cards & sign-in sheets• Static maps
Public Open Houses At two key points in the Alternatives Analysis process, RTC and METRO will host informational Public Open Houses to create an opportunity for the public to review information and talk one-on-one with key staff members. The open houses will provide information via collateral material handouts and information stations that will include display boards and staff to address questions. Attendees will have the opportunity to provide input in multiple ways at the open houses as they view information at their own pace.
• Public Open House 1 (Early 2020) – Project kick-off to gather initial input, learn aboutthe planning process, meet the team and provide feedback on goals, universe ofalternatives and screening criteria. A public open house will be held in Watsonville andin Live Oak/Santa Cruz.
• Public Open House 2 (Mid 2020) – As alternatives are narrowed down through thescreening process, the public will be asked again to provide feedback on the analysisthat will identify a locally preferred alternative. A public open house will be held inWatsonville and in Live Oak/Santa Cruz.
RTC Public Meetings RTC holds regular monthly meetings, which are typically the first Thursday of the month. The schedule and location can be found on the RTC website (www.sccrtc.org). At the beginning of every meeting there is time allocated for “Oral Communications” when the public can speak about any topic that is not on the agenda. If there is an item on the agenda related to the Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis then members of the public will also be able to speak about the project at that time.
20-16
Media Relations Even as the world of communications continues to move towards a paperless environment, the print and broadcast media continue to be vitally useful and credible outlets for dissemination of information. Whether local and regional media utilize electronic formats and/or hard copy newspapers, creating the opportunity for a special article or announcement within community and minority papers is an important communications tool.
In order to promote key project elements as well as manage the correct and consistent flow of information to the general public during each Alternatives Analysis phase, the project team will develop and disseminate media releases as needed to communicate project information. All media information will be posted on the website and emailed to key stakeholder groups for further dissemination.
Social Media Social media networks provide another opportunity to effectively push and pull information directly to or from a larger cross-section audience to engage the local communities and decision makers in an open dialogue in real time. A social media strategy will be developed to display project key milestones, updates, and all in-person and online public workshops. Social media will drive the timely reach of various audiences to not only educate about the project, but also promote public involvement opportunities in an interesting, visual way in order to capture attention.
Additionally, RTC and METRO will partner with local and regional agencies and municipalities to leverage resources and maximize outreach. The project team will work closely with RTC and METRO’s Communications staff to develop approved content for distribution through agency established social media channels.
5. SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER INPUT REPORT
A summary of stakeholder input at each of the three key milestones will capture the communications and stakeholder outreach efforts, activities, materials and input received. This information will be provided on the Alternatives Analysis website.
20-17