july 28, 2015 - agenda - technical advisory committee · revised tac appeals protocol guidelines...
TRANSCRIPT
Tuesday, July 28, 2015 9:00 AM
Agenda
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
William Mulholland Conference Room
1. Call to Order/Roll Call Action (Fanny Pan, Brian Lam)
2. Call for Projects Protocol and Guidelines Information (Fanny Pan) Attachment 1: TAC Appeals Protocol and
Call Appeal Guidelines 3. 2015 Call for Projects Appeals Action (Rena Lum)
Attachment 2: TAC Appeals Schedule
Attachment 3: TAC Appeals Fact Sheets
Attachment 4: 2015 Call for Projects Evaluation Criteria
4. Other Business 5. Adjournment
TAC Minutes and Agendas can be accessed at: http://www.metro.net/about/tac/ Please call Brian Lam at (213) 922-3077 or e-mail [email protected] with questions regarding the agenda or meeting. TAC will not meet in August. The next will be held on September 2, 2015 at 9:30 AM in the William Mulholland Conference Room on the 15th floor.
Revised TAC Appeals Protocol Guidelines 06-24-2015
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE TAC Roles and Responsibilities: TAC is an Advisory Committee and serves as the appeal body for Metro Grant Programs including the Call for Projects, Transit Oriented Development (TOD), FTA Section 5310, to name a few. TAC’s primary role and responsibility is to provide an objective, technical, and countywide perspective in the appeals process. TAC’s role is also to objectively listen to project sponsors’ appeal for funding. Based on the merits of the appeal, it is TAC’s role to recommend whether the project is justified to receive funding from the Board approved TAC Appeal Reserve fund. Projects are not to be reevaluated or rescored. Metro staff can concur, reject or recommend alternatives to the TAC recommendations. To ensure TAC’s countywide role, these protocols shall govern:
The Alternate TAC member shall only participate in the meeting when the primary TAC member is not present.
Ex-officio members are not allowed to vote.
For projects for which their respective agency has submitted an application(s) or appeal(s), TAC members and/or Alternates are prohibited from providing oral testimony.
TAC members and/or Alternates should not participate in TAC discussion concerning project(s) their agency sponsored so as not to be perceived as taking an advocacy role.
Motion seconds should be made from an agency/jurisdiction/League of Cities/TAC Subcommittee representative other than the agency/jurisdiction/League of Cities/TAC Subcommittee representative that originated the motion.
Any discussion involving the public will be allowed when acknowledged and determined appropriate by the TAC Chairperson.
TAC discussion and motion development is intended for TAC members’ participation only.
Revised TAC Appeals Protocol Guidelines 01-13-2015
Guidelines on Call for Projects Funding Appeals
Projects recommended for funding (above the line) by Metro staff will remain above the funding line unless the Metro Board directs otherwise.
As a first priority, TAC should first consider funding those qualifying projects for which funding is not available. This consideration should be made with or without an appeal. The second priority should be those projects below the qualifying line of 70. In this priority, only projects that have an appeal before TAC can be considered for funding.
All appealing project sponsors are required to complete and transmit an Appeal Fact Sheet to Metro 72 hours prior to the TAC Appeal meeting, so that Metro staff can distribute to TAC members prior to the meeting. The Appeal Fact Sheet will be based on information contained in the submitted application including a brief project description, reason for appeal, Metro staff recommended score along with the funding line score for that modal category, etc.
A Metro representative for each modal category will be in attendance to answer TAC questions on the evaluation of appealed project. Please note that Metro staff cannot change the staff recommended score.
Downscoping or a request for less funding is not valid grounds for an appeal since these factors were considered during the application process.
TAC can only consider the Metro Call for Projects evaluation criteria as the basis for evaluating appealed projects. Information presented as part of the appeal can only elaborate on or clarify information already presented in the submitted application. New information which should have been submitted in the application cannot be introduced. Updated technical information (e.g., revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition) will be allowed as long as the same project limits and scope of work are maintained. No handouts will be allowed.
Questions from TAC members may be asked about an appealed project after the agency presents the project (3-minute presentation followed by 2 minute Q&A). However, TAC discussion of which projects merit funding will be held after ALL appeals are concluded.
Because the reserve money may be federal funding, project sponsors must take into account that this type of money requires significant project sponsor processing time.
TAC must be cognizant of the limited funding available in the reserve and modal deobligation amount, if applicable. TAC can only recommend funding up to those amounts.
Ap
pt.
Tim
eS
po
nso
rP
roje
ct
#P
roje
ct
Tit
leM
od
eS
co
re
Lo
c.in
Rain
bo
w
Rep
ort
Am
ou
nt
Req
ueste
d
9:0
5C
ity
of
Lo
sA
ng
ele
sF
95
29
Lo
sA
ng
ele
sR
ive
rB
icycle
Pa
thG
ap
Clo
su
reP
roje
ct
BI
78
48
$3
,17
7,7
50
9:1
0C
ity
of
Lo
sA
ng
ele
sF
91
32
Six
thS
tre
et
Via
du
ct
Re
pla
ce
me
nt
-O
ffsite
Inte
rse
ctio
nR
ST
I6
31
3$
6,2
58
,00
0
9:1
5M
on
tere
yP
ark
F9
50
2M
on
tere
yP
ass
Ro
ad
Co
mp
lete
Str
ee
tsB
ike
Pro
ject
BI
81
47
$1
,99
3,6
27
9:2
0M
on
tere
yP
ark
F9
63
1M
on
tere
yP
ass
Ro
ad
Co
mp
lete
Str
ee
tsP
ed
Pro
ject
PI
63
68
$1
,35
5,5
66
9:2
5C
ity
of
Be
llG
ard
en
sF
91
11
Flo
ren
ce
Ave
nu
eIm
pro
ve
me
nt
at
Ira
Ave
nu
e&
Ja
bo
ne
ria
Ro
ad
RS
TI
72
7$
99
2,0
72
9:3
0C
ity
of
Lo
sA
ng
ele
sF
96
22
Six
thS
tre
et
Via
du
ct
Re
pla
ce
me
nt
-P
ed
estr
ian
Imp
rove
me
nts
PI
56
70
$3
,12
9,0
00
9:3
5
9:4
0C
ity
of
Pa
sa
de
na
F9
61
2S
ierr
aM
ad
reV
illa
Ave
nu
eG
old
Lin
eS
tatio
nP
ed
estr
ian
Acce
ss
Imp
rove
me
nts
PI
68
65
$7
82
,64
6
9:4
5C
ity
of
Lo
sA
ng
ele
sF
94
39
We
ste
rnA
ve
Bu
sS
top
Imp
rove
me
nts
-F
wy
10
toW
ilsh
ire
Blv
d.
TC
73
81
$1
,49
6,2
72
9:5
0C
ity
of
Lo
sA
ng
ele
sF
94
40
Ve
rmo
nt
Ave
nu
eB
us
Sto
pIm
pro
ve
me
nts
-M
LK
toW
ilsh
ire
Blv
d.
TC
73
81
$1
,93
6,3
52
9:5
5C
ity
of
To
rra
nce
F9
11
2H
aw
tho
rne
Blv
d.,
Co
rrid
or
Imp
rove
me
nt
Pro
ject
RS
TI
70
11
$3
,21
1,3
15
10
:00
City
of
Lo
ng
Be
ach
F9
12
9G
rea
t7
thS
tre
et
Co
nn
ectivity
RS
TI
71
9$
4,4
16
,00
0
10
:05
City
of
Lo
ng
Be
ach
F9
53
2A
the
rto
nB
rid
ge
&C
am
pu
sC
on
ne
ctio
ns
BI
79
47
$1
,87
6,8
00
10
:10
Co
un
tyo
fL
os
An
ge
les
F9
50
9V
alin
da
Co
mm
un
ity
Pu
en
teC
ree
kB
ike
Pa
thB
I7
74
8$
3,1
11
,65
5
10
:15
Co
un
tyo
fL
os
An
ge
les
F9
51
2E
ato
nW
ash
Bik
eP
ath
BI
75
49
$3
,22
1,8
68
10
:20
Sa
nta
Mo
nic
aB
lue
Bu
sF
94
34
Bu
sR
ep
lace
me
nt
-C
ity
of
Sa
nta
Mo
nic
aT
C7
28
2$
5,7
37
,37
1
10
:25
10
:30
City
of
Co
mm
erc
eF
94
10
Co
mm
erc
eM
etr
olin
kS
tatio
nT
ran
sit
En
ha
nce
me
nt
Pro
ject
TC
62
85
$1
,95
9,4
71
TA
CR
EC
OM
ME
ND
AT
ION
S1
.00
-2
.30
p.m
.
bre
ak
10
.35
-1
0.5
0a
.m.
TA
CD
ISC
US
SIO
NS
10
.50
a.m
.-
12
.00
p.m
.
lun
ch
12
.00
-1
2.1
5p
.m.
2015
CA
LL
FO
RP
RO
JE
CT
SA
PP
LIC
AN
TS
IGN
-UP
SH
EE
T
Tu
es
da
y,
Ju
ly2
8,
20
15
9:0
0a
.m.
-4
:00
p.m
.W
illi
am
Mu
lho
lla
nd
Co
nfe
ren
ce
Ro
om
(15
thfl
oo
r)
TA
CD
ISC
US
SIO
NS
(Co
nti
nu
ed
,if
ne
ed
ed
)1
2.1
5-
12
.45
p.m
.
bre
ak
12
.45
-1
.00
p.m
.
As
of:
7/2
3/2
015
3:4
8P
M
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 78 Bicycle Improvements F9529 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Los Angeles River Bicycle Path Gap Closure Project
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration
First/Last Mile Improvements
Project Need and Benefit
Local Match
Cost Effectiveness
Land Use & Sustainability
Total
21 25
Points
Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (without Prior Year)
$3,750,000
$3,000,000
$750,000
Escalated $
$3,972,165
$3,177,750
$794,415
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses
Total Funding Requested
Local Match Submitted
Design and construction of LA River Bicycle Path from Vanalden Avenue to Reseda Boulevard.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
29
0
8
16
78
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes
No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
X
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
REVISED BY METRO STAFF Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 78 Bicycle Improvements F9529 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Los Angeles River Bicycle Path Gap Closure Project
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
This project constructs an extension to the West Valley Los Angeles River Bicycle Path. Currently, the Headwaters section of the LA River bike path (Owensmouth to Mason) is in design. In the adjacent section, construction is complete between Mason and Vanalden. The potion under consideration here, Vanalden to Reseda, will extend the Path eastward and connect to the heavily used Reseda bike lanes, and to the north, the parking protected bicycle lanes on Reseda Blvd. This valuable connection will build out the low-stress bikeway network in the West Valley, and provide access to schools, parks, homes, and businesses for people of all ages and abilities, and who may not otherwise use a bicycle for travel on streets. For all of these reasons, the project should have been ranked higher in the following categories: project need and benefit to system, land use and sustainability principles, regional significance and intermodal integration.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
A draft environmental document is expected to be completed in January 2018. The final environmental document is expected to be completed a year from then, in January 2019. As has been the case for all previous LA River bikeway construction projects, the City of LA has worked in close coordination with the owners of the ROW: The Los Angeles County Flood Control District and the Army Corps of Engineers. As has taken place in the past, a public-access easement will be granted and the parties will collaborate to ensure that the engineering and design does not impede required operations and access along the River. Maintenance vehicles and other special vehicle access requirements will continue to be met. This project alignment is the same as previous projects and will follow the same procedures. ROW Acquisition is expected to being immediately after design engineering, in January 2020. ROW Certification is expected to be completed within a month’s time in February 2020. There are no special issues/requirements associated with this project. Project completion and opening the facility to the public is expected in January 2023.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 63 Regional Surface Transportation Improvements F9132 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Sixth Street Viaduct Replacement - Offsite Intersections
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
21 30
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (without Prior Year) $7,500,000 $6,000,000 $1,500,000
Escalated $$7,789,500$6,258,000$1,531,500
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
The $422 million Sixth Street Viaduct Replacement Project proposes to improve 33 offsite intersections as part of the required Viaduct Detour route.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
19
5
1
13
63
30
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
X
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
REVISED BY METRO STAFF Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 63 Regional Surface Transportation Improvements F9132 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Sixth Street Viaduct Replacement - Offsite Intersections
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes. The City of Los Angeles has extensive experience with federal funding guidelines and is fully aware of the work involvedthat comes with it.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
The city is appealing for funding this project in conjunction with F9622 and asking for F9207 to be De-Funded. The reason for this is that both F9132 and F9622 meet the city’s goals for multimodal transportation in Downtown and Boyle Heights. Both projects combined will connect the 6th Street Viaduct to the Regional Connector through a variety of safety improvements. Intersections were identified by DOT and BOE as needing upgrades in order facilitate a safe environment for pedestrians and vehicles throughout the project area.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match? Yes, the city is fully committed to the local match. When Council authorized applying for the projects, it authorized full matching funding for any projects that were funded through the 2015 Call for Projects.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware? No ROW needs to be acquired for this project.
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 81 Bicycle Improvements F9502 CITY OF MONTEREY PARK Monterey Pass Road Complete Streets Bike Project
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
21 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (without Prior Year) $3,731,144 $1,865,572 $1,865,572
Escalated $$3,987,254$1,993,627$1,993,626
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Monterey Pass Road Complete Streets Bike Project is a 1.6 mile corridor providing multimodal transportation alternatives increasing ped, bike & transit use for the first last mile.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
28
5
8
15
81
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
X
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 81 Bicycle Improvements F9502 CITY OF MONTEREY PARK Monterey Pass Road Complete Streets Bike Project
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes, the project sponsor, City of Monterey Park, has extensive experience in federal funding requirements and will be able to handle all requirements.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
The project received a score of 81, which is above the 70 score threshold for funded projects. The project is in line with Metro’s goals of providing alternative modes of transportation to reduce vehicle travel. Monterey Pass Road is in close proximity to a high number of businesses, schools and other commercial establishments. No pedestrian or bicycle facilities exist along Monterey Pass Road and the demand for these amenities is evident and growing. The project would provide multimodal transportation alternatives that would create first/last mile connections.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes, the project sponsor, City of Monterey Park, is fully committed to the escalated local match if the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
Since the proposed work is a minor alteration to an existing public facility, this project is Class 1 Categorically Exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). There is no ROW required for this project and there will be no need for the project sponsor to obtain ROW. There are no special issues/requirements regarding the implementation of this project.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 63 Pedestrian Improvements F9631 CITY OF MONTEREY PARK Monterey Pass Road Complete Streets Ped Project
5 5
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
11 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (without Prior Year) $2,536,189 $1,268,095 $1,268,094
Escalated $$2,710,275$1,355,566$1,354,709
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
The Monterey Pass Road Complete Streets Ped Project is a 1.6 mile corridor providing multimodal transportation alternatives improving transit accessibility for the first last mile.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
22
5
5
15
63
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
X
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 63 Pedestrian Improvements F9631 CITY OF MONTEREY PARK Monterey Pass Road Complete Streets Ped Project
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes, the project sponsor, City of Monterey Park, has extensive experience in federal funding requirements and will be able to handle all requirements.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
The project is in line with Metro’s goals of providing alternative modes of transportation to reduce vehicle travel. The project is in close proximity to a high number of businesses, schools and other commercial establishments along Monterey Pass Road. Current conditions along Monterey Pass Road are unsafe and inaccessible for pedestrians. The need for significant improvements along Monterey Pass Road is critical and funding for this project will facilitate access to an equitable, safe and viable transportation option to City residents and commuters.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes, the project sponsor, City of Monterey Park, is fully committed to the escalated local match if the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
Since the proposed work is a minor alteration to an existing public facility, this project is Class 1 Categorically Exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). There is no ROW required for this project and there will be no need for the project sponsor to obtain ROW. There are no special issues/requirements regarding the implementation of this project.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 72 Regional Surface Transportation Improvements F9111 CITY OF BELL GARDENS Florence Avenue Improvements at Ira Avenue & Jaboneria Road
5 3
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
18 30
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (without Prior Year) $1,290,000
$903,000 $387,000
Escalated $$1,417,245
$992,072$425,173
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Intersection improvements on Florence Ave at Jaboneria Rd. and Ira Ave. inclusive of dedicated right-turn lanes; left-turn phasing; signal, pedestrian, and roadway improvements.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
23
3
8
17
72
30
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
X
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 72 Regional Surface Transportation Improvements F9111 CITY OF BELL GARDENS Florence Avenue Improvements at Ira Avenue & Jaboneria Road
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
The City of Bell Gardens is able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements. The City has experience in complying with funding requirements for federal projects. The City was awarded funds for the 2013 Metro Call for Projects and is currently working with the Agency on the release of early funds to commence project. The City has ensured to follow proper guidelines and regulations to effectively meet all funding requirements.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
Florence Avenue has been identified as a Regionally Significant Arterial Corridor in the STP Plan and is earmarked to be improved for better traffic flow in the east/west directional. The project intersections are near school sites where a substantial number of school kids and pedestrians use the intersections to cross. The proposed project will comply with new ADA requirements. Existing signal equipment is outdated and needs to be replaced and there is a critical need for this project. The proposed improvements will ensure that the City significantly enhances current existing conditions and improves safety in the project location.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
The City of Bell Gardens is committed to escalating the local match if project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
We don’t expect any big environmental impact and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) should suffice and it is expected to be completed within 6 months of the project Kick-off. ROW is required, the City does not own the ROW. We expect to obtain the additional right-of-way within 2 years. This time also includes the right-of-way engineering and negotiation. There are no special issues/requirements that we are aware of at this point.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
--Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 56 Pedestrian Improvements F9622 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Sixth Street Viaduct Replacement - Pedestrian Improvement
5 3
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
16 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (without Prior Year) $3,750,000 $3,000,000
$750,000
Escalated $$3,894,750$3,129,000
$765,750
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
The $422 million Sixth Street Viaduct Replacement Project proposes to provide a pedestrian linkage element to the Regional Connector Little Tokyo/Arts District Station.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
21
0
6
10
56
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
X
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 56 Pedestrian Improvements F9622 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Sixth Street Viaduct Replacement - Pedestrian Improvement
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes. The City of Los Angeles has extensive experience with federal funding guidelines and is fully aware of the work involvedthat comes with it.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
The city is appealing for funding this project in conjunction with F9132 and asking for F9207 to be De-Funded. The reason for this is that both F9132 and F9622 meet the city’s goals for multimodal transportation in Downtown and Boyle Heights. Both projects combined will connect the 6th Street Viaduct to the Regional Connector through a variety of safety improvements. Specifically, the addition of sidewalks and pedestrian lighting throughout the Arts District will connect to the existing Metro TIGER grant project and will fulfill some of the ConnectUS project scope.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes, the city is fully committed to the local match. When Council authorized applying for the projects, it authorized full matching funding for any projects that were funded through the 2015 Call for Projects.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
No ROW needs to be acquired for this project. As this project is built in conjunction with the 6th Street Viaduct, the existing EIR will be re-certified to include the project scope included in this project.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 68 Pedestrian Improvements F9612 CITY OF PASADENA Sierra Madre Villa Avenue Gold Line Station Pedestrian Access Improvements
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
20 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (without Prior Year) $888,390 $710,712 $177,678
Escalated $$978,308$782,646$195,662
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Sidewalks/Curbs/Ramps/Paving; Mid-Block Crossing; Street Furniture, Trees & Landscaping; Infill Lighting to Enhance Pedestrian Safety on regionally significant Foothill Boulevard.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
22
0
5
17
68
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
X
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 68 Pedestrian Improvements F9612 CITY OF PASADENA Sierra Madre Villa Avenue Gold Line Station Pedestrian Access Improvements
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
The City of Pasadena works closely with Caltrans - District 7 to administer and deliver millions of dollars in federally funded projects annually. Historically, the City of Pasadena has been the recipient of various funding sources, including STP, CMAQ, HSIP, Safe Routes to School, and Emergency Repair funding, and are very familiar with the processes involved in applying for and receiving federal and state funding. Current state and federally funded projects under construction include the $16M La Loma Bridge, $1M I-210 Soundwall project, $1.5M Citywide Resurfacing project, among others. The City of Pasadena has a high employee retention rate and multiple staff throughout the organization who are intimately familiar with the state and federal funding requirements and procedures, so these same staff will be able to seamlessly begin working with Caltrans - District 7 as soon as funds are available to deliver this important project of regional significance.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
Foothill Blvd’s streetscapes create a car dependent environment as currently configured. This corridor is a gateway into Pasadena from the City’s easterly boundary for visitors. The proposed improvements including pedestrian street lights, decorative crosswalks, trees, and other street amenities will encourage people to walk, bike and use public transit. Proposed installation of a midblock pedestrian crossing and curb extensions offer a safe zone and shorter pedestrian street crossing. Recent development adjacent to the SMV Station along with the eastern extension of the Gold Line will create additional pedestrian, bicycle and transit trips in this corridor.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
The City is committed to this project of Citywide and regional importance, and is committed to the escalated local match of $195,662 and will program these funds in the City’s Capital Improvement Program.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
Once the preliminary engineering funding becomes available, the City of Pasadena will submit a Preliminary Environmental Studies form. It is anticipated that there would be no environmental issues, given this project is a minor alteration of existing roadway, with parkway and sidewalk improvements, and would have an insignificant impact on the environment. Therefore it is anticipated that CEQA environmental documentation would entail preparation of an Environmental Exemption for the proposed improvements. The ROW associated with the project is completely located within the jurisdiction and ownership of the City of Pasadena.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 73 Transit Capital F9439 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Western Avenue Bus Stop Improvements - Fwy 10 to Wilshire Boulevard
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
21 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (with Prior Year) $1,700,000 $1,360,000
$340,000
Escalated $$1,870,340$1,496,272
$374,068
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Improvements to 24 bus stops on Western Avenue between Wilshire Boulevard and the 10 Freeway.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
28
0
6
14
73
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
X
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 73 Transit Capital F9439 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Western Avenue Bus Stop Improvements - Fwy 10 to Wilshire Boulevard
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes, the City of Los Angeles is experienced and capable of handling the extensive federal funding requirements.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
This project will provide improvements to bus stops along Western Ave creating an improved transit link between the Exposition LRT and future Purple Line LRT. Although this project was recommended for funding, the overall project was downscoped by approximately 63%. The total positive impact along the project corridor is substantially reduced and the low funding level creates challenges in efficiently delivering the project, especially if federal funds are assigned. The City is appealing to TAC to either fully fund the remaining scope of this project or to allow the City to combine the funds from this project with the funds recommended for project F9440, Vermont Ave Bus Stop Improvements, to increase funding for either the Western Ave or Vermont Ave corridors.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes, the City is committed to the escalated local match requirement if the project is approved by TAC and the Board.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
This project is considered to be categorically exempt under CEQA. If granted federal funds, NEPA documentation will be prepared prior to finalizing plans, specs, and estimates by June 2020. It is anticipated this project will be categorically excluded. No ROW acquisition is required for this project.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
X
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 73 Transit Capital F9440 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Vermont Avenue Bus Stop Improvements - MLK to Wilshire Boulevard
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
21 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (with Prior Year) $2,200,000 $1,760,000
$440,000
Escalated $$2,420,440$1,936,352
$484,088
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Improvements to 18 bus stops on Vermont Avenue between Martin Luther King Boulevard and Wilshire Boulevard.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
28
0
6
14
73
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 73 Transit Capital F9440 CITY OF LOS ANGELES Vermont Avenue Bus Stop Improvements - MLK to Wilshire Boulevard
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes, the City of Los Angeles is experienced and capable of handling the extensive federal funding requirements.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
This project will provide improvements to bus stops along Vermont Ave creating an improved transit link between the Exposition LRT and future Purple Line LRT. Although this project was recommended for funding, the overall project was downscoped by approximately 72%. The total positive impact along the project corridor is substantially reduced and the low funding level creates challenges in efficiently delivering the project, especially if federal funds are assigned. The City is appealing to TAC to either fully fund the remaining scope of this project or to allow the City to combine the funds from this project with the funds recommended for project F9439, Western Ave Bus Stop Improvements, to increase funding for either the Western Ave or Vermont Ave corridors.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes, the City is committed to the escalated local match requirement if the project is approved by TAC and the Board.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
This project is considered to be categorically exempt under CEQA. If granted federal funds, NEPA documentation will be prepared prior to finalizing plans, specs, and estimates by June 2020. It is anticipated this project will be categorically excluded. No ROW acquisition is required for this project.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
X
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 70 Regional Surface Transportation Improvements F9112 CITY OF TORRANCE Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Improvement Project
5 3
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
19 30
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (with Prior Year) $3,636,000 $2,908,800
$727,200
Escalated $$4,014,144$3,211,315
$802,829
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Install right turn lanes at 4 intersections on Hawthorne Boulevard (SR-107) (LOS D and E) to increase capacity by 1600 vehicles per hour, reduce delays, and enhance bike/ped safety.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
27
0
3
18
70
30
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
REVISED BY METRO STAFF Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 70 Regional Surface Transportation Improvements F9112 CITY OF TORRANCE Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Improvement Project
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes, the City of Torrance has the resources available to address federal funding requirements and processing time.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
Scores for Regional Significance and Cost Effectiveness need reconsideration. Hawthorne Blvd., a principal arterial that carries approximately 70,000 vehicles daily, provides regional access for major developments, retailers, commuters and goods movement to/from the I-405 freeway, including a regional hospital, connection to the Palos Verdes Peninsula, the Del Amo Fashion Center, and the South Bay Galleria. ROW was proactively secured and demonstrates how the project was designed to eliminate the need for ROW acquisition, resulting in reduced costs and optimized schedules.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
No additional ROW is required for this project. Where applicable, ROW has been dedicated to the City to accommodate proposed improvements.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
X
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 71 Regional Surface Transportation Improvements F9129 CITY OF LONG BEACH Great 7th Street - Connectivity
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
23 30
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (with Prior Year) $6,475,730 $4,000,000 $2,475,730
Escalated $$7,149,206$4,416,000$2,733,206
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Implementation of complete street improvements along 6th & 7th streets including street decoupling, crosswalk improvements, bike lanes, and signal upgrades.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
20
4
4
16
71
30
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 71 Regional Surface Transportation Improvements F9129 CITY OF LONG BEACH Great 7th Street - Connectivity
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
The City of Long Beach has experience handling federal funding in many projects across many modal categories. Four such projects will be completed in the next 18 months:
- Bicycle System Gap Closure (2015) - Atherton Street Enhancements (2015) - Daisy/Myrtle Bike Boulevard (2016) - 6th Street Bike Boulevard (2016)
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
7th Street is a Gateway to Los Angeles County and an integral part of the regional network, forming a connection across Long Beach from the 710 in the port of Long Beach, to Orange County where it feeds into four major highways near Cal State Long Beach. These improvements are projected to generate a 90 percent increase in the corridor’s throughput, facilitating continued growth and investment along this critical arterial.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
Environmental clearance is expected within 12 months of award allocation. Additional ROW is not required for this project.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
X
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 79 Bicycle Improvements F9532 CITY OF LONG BEACH Atherton Bridge & Campus Connections
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
19 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (with Prior Year) $3,091,000 $1,700,000 $1,391,000
Escalated $$3,412,464$1,876,800$1,535,664
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Improves LA-Orange County bike/ped access over the San Gabriel River and connects all existing bikeways in east Long Beach, using Cal State Long Beach as a hub.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
28
4
8
16
79
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 79 Bicycle Improvements F9532 CITY OF LONG BEACH Atherton Bridge & Campus Connections
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
The City of Long Beach has experience handling federal funding in many projects across many modal categories. Four such projects will be completed in the next 18 months:
- Bicycle System Gap Closure (2015) - Atherton Street Enhancements (2015) - Daisy/Myrtle Bike Boulevard (2016) - 6th Street Bike Boulevard (2016)
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
This project serves as a vital gateway to Cal-State Long Beach from the regional network of bike paths along the San Gabriel River and Coyote Creek. The bridge will form a connection from the regional bike paths to Long Beach’s bicycle/pedestrian network, Orange County and beyond. This project will fill in key gaps in the bicycle network on the east, south and west of Cal-State Long Beach to improve access for the 36,000 students and the 112,000 employees within 2 miles of the project area.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
Environmental clearance is expected within 12 months of award allocation. Easements are necessary for the bridge and bridge access portions of the project. A letter of support from the Flood Maintenance Division of Los Angeles County Public Works was included in the application. The bridge structure will span the entire San Gabriel River and will not have a hydraulic impact on flood control efforts.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
c:\users\lumr\appdata\local\microsoft\windows\temporary internet files\content.outlook\xcroqlpp\f9509 county valinda community tac appeals fact sheet.docx
X
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 77 Bicycle Improvements F9509 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Valinda Community Puente Creek Bike Path
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
20 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (with Prior Year) $3,574,290 $2,857,434
$716,856
Escalated $$3,892,327$3,111,655
$780,673
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Design and construction of 1.86 miles of Class I bike path along Puente Creek within the Valinda Community and 0.37 mile of Enhanced Class III bike route that adjoins the path.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
29
0
8
16
77
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
c:\users\lumr\appdata\local\microsoft\windows\temporary internet files\content.outlook\xcroqlpp\f9509 county valinda community tac appeals fact sheet.docx
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 77 Bicycle Improvements F9509 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Valinda Community Puente Creek Bike Path
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes, if the proposed funding includes federal funds, Los Angeles County has a significant amount of expertise with federal funding requirements.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
The proposed bikeways and pedestrian improvements will greatly improve the opportunities for a healthy and active lifestyle in the Valinda community, which has a very high prevalence of obesity within unincorporated County areas According to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. This project will provide a large benefit to an economically disadvantaged community by improving pedestrian and bicycling access to the local parks and schools, and provide a starting point for the Puente Creek Bike Path that can extend eastward and connect to the San Jose Creek Bike Path.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes, we will provide the additional local match necessary to complete the scope of work in the grant application.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
The environmental clearance will be completed as part the completion of the design portion of this project. This project does not require the additional right-of-way to be completed.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 75 Bicycle Improvements F9512 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Eaton Wash Bike Path
5 4
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
22 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (with Prior Year) $3,712,000 $2,969,600
$742,400
Escalated $$4,025,258$3,221,868
$779,405
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Install 2.15 miles of bike path along the Eaton Wash (Del Mar Boulevard to California Drive, and Duarte Road to Rosemead Boulevard), with on-street bike route connections along Madre Street and Muscatel Avenue.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
27
0
7
15
75
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes
No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 75 Bicycle Improvements F9512 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Eaton Wash Bike Path
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes, if the proposed funding includes federal funds, Los Angeles County has a significant amount of expertise with federal funding requirements.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
This project will greatly compliment the on-road bikeways in the East Pasadena and East San Gabriel communities that was recommended for funding under bikeway mode. The project will improve regional bicycle access by connecting to existing bikeways, and will provide a meaningful alternative to single occupant vehicles for connecting to Metro’s Gold Line. The proposed off-road bikeways are not eligible for Gas Tax funds, therefore we need funding from Metro’s Call or the State’s Active Transportation Program to install these bikeways.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes, we will provide the additional local match necessary to complete the scope of work in the grant application.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
The environmental clearance will be completed as part the completion of the design portion of this project. This project does not require the additional right-of-way to be completed.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 72 Transit Capital F9434 SANTA MONICA BIG BLUE BUS Bus Replacement-City of Santa Monica
5 3Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration
First/Last Mile Improvements
Project Need and Benefit
Local Match
Cost Effectiveness
Land Use & Sustainability
Total
17 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (without Prior Year) $7,113,119 $5,619,364 $1,493,755
Escalated $$7,262,494$5,737,371$1,525,124
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
The City will replace four (4) existing 40-ft LNG buses with four (4) new 40-ft clean fuel buses for the Big Blue Bus fleet.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
26
1
7
18
72
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
X
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet
July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 72 Transit Capital F9434 SANTA MONICA BIG BLUE BUS Bus Replacement-City of Santa Monica
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes. The City of Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus, as a direct recipient has extensive experience with federal funding requirements.
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
Big Blue Bus vehicle replacement is regionally significant in that the vehicles will be placed on BBB’s routes including Pico Blvd and Lincoln Blvd. The Pico and Lincoln Blvd services are considered “consent decree routes” as part of Metro’s ongoing consent decree service implementation plan commitment. In addition, the replacement vehicles will be placed in the new integrated service to accommodate the new Phase II of the Expo Light Rail, which will terminate in Santa Monica by 2016. The new service plan was approved by Council in April 2015.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes. City of Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus is committed to 21% of local match.
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
N/A. Bus Replacement project is categorically exempt.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 62 Transit Capital F9410 CITY OF COMMERCE Commerce Metrolink Station Transit Enhancement Project
5 3
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration First/Last Mile Improvements Project Need and Benefit Local Match Cost Effectiveness Land Use & Sustainability Total
18 25
Points Scored Maximum Possible
Unescalated $ (without Prior Year) $2,680,080 $1,849,255
$830,825
Escalated $$2,839,813$1,959,471
$880,342
Criterion
Evaluation Criteria:
Total Project Expenses Total Funding Requested Local Match Submitted
Commerce Metrolink Station Transit Enhancement Project focuses on Station & access improvements for increased ridership, accessibility, with pedestrian and transit infrastructure.
Project Description Summary:
Project Financial Summary:
19
3
6
13
62
35
5
10
20
100
If full Metro requested funding is not available, would your jurisdiction be amenable to reduced funds?
Yes No
To be completed by Metro from the submitted application
X
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
REVISED BY METRO STAFF Metro Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
2015 Call for Projects Appeal Fact Sheet July 28-29, 2015
Mode: Call for Projects #: Project Sponsor: Project Title:
Funding Line Score: 62 Transit Capital F9410 CITY OF COMMERCE Commerce Metrolink Station Transit Enhancement Project
Due to Rena Lum by Thursday, July 23, 2015
Yes, the project sponsor, City of Commerce, has extensive experience in federal funding requirements and will be able to handle all requirements. Currently, the City is constructing a $35M federally funded project (Washington Bl Reconstruction).
Is project sponsor able to handle the extensive federal funding requirements?
The project is in line with Metro’s goals of providing alternative modes of transportation to reduce vehicle travel. The project will provide new and upgrade old amenities to increase ridership & promote public transit. The Station exhibits major signs of dilapidation and damages. Improving the station and connecting pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes to the Commerce Station will close network gaps and address transportation service deficiencies.
Reason for Appeal - New information is not allowed, except technical information (e.g. revised Level of Service, updated transit ridership, updated right-of-way acquisition). (500-character limit)
Yes, the project sponsor, City of Commerce, is fully committed to the escalated local match if the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board. The City matching funds are currently available in the City’s Measure AA (local City funding program).
If the project is successful in Appeals and approved by the Board, is the project sponsor committed to the escalated local match?
Since the proposed work is a minor alteration to an existing public facility, this project is Class 1 Categorically Exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). There is no ROW required for this project, and there will be no need for the project sponsor to obtain ROW. There are no special issues/requirements regarding the implementation of this project. However, a standard BNSF encroachment permit will be obtained (BNSF has already been contacted and has provided a letter of support, which was part of the submitted application). Metrolink has also provided a letter in support of the improvements to the Commerce Metrolink Station, which was included in the submitted application.
When is environmental clearance expected to occur (if applicable)? Is ROW required for this project? If yes, does the project sponsor currently own the ROW? If not, when does the project sponsor expect to obtain the ROW? Are there any special issues/requirements of which we should be aware?
L:\2015 Call\TAC Appeals\TAC_appeals_Fact_Sheets_2015final.rpt
19
Contact Rena Lum at (213) 922-6963, if you are unable to access the files from the Internet. • The Online Application and Instructions for Part I-General Project Information and
Part II-Project Financial Plan, will be available on the web at: http://www.metro.net/callforprojects.
PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS AND SCHEDULE Each project will compete within a modal category and will be evaluated against other projects in that modal category. Each modal category has specific questions with points assigned to each evaluation criteria. EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHTS BY MODE
CRITERIA RSTI
GMI Signal Synch
TDM BIKES PEDS Transit Capital
Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration
30
30 25 25 25 25 25
First/Last Mile Improvements
5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Project Need & Benefit to Transportation System
30
30 35 35 35 35 35
Local Match 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Cost Effectiveness 10
10
10 10 10 10 10
Land Use & Sustainability Policies/Principles
20
20 20 20 20 20 20
Total 100
100 100 100 100 100 100
Metro staff has reviewed the application requirements and evaluation criteria with TAC and the appropriate TAC Subcommittees. The application and evaluation criteria for each modal category have been tailored to enhance the evaluation process. (See Modal Application for additional information about each evaluation criterion and weights.)
20
In general, each project will be evaluated based on the following types of evaluation criteria: 1) Regional Significance & Intermodal Integration:
• The degree to which the project supports the recommendations and goals for each transportation mode as stated in Metro’s adopted LRTP.
• The degree to which the project is part of a regional program to address mobility, reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality.
• The project’s connectivity with and ability to complement nearby transit projects. • The degree to which the project provides access to regional trip generators, regional
activity centers, fixed guideway, and Metrolink, and improves access between jurisdictional boundaries.
• The degree to which the project promotes improvements among modes and transportation services by different agencies.
2) First/Last Mile Improvements:
• The extent to which project facilitates access to transit stations. • The degree to which the project eliminates access and safety barriers to transit
facilities. • The extent to which the project utilizes or is consistent with the Metro Board-adopted
First/Last Mile Strategic Plan Planning Guidelines. 3) Project Need & Benefit to Transportation System:
• The degree to which the project creates mobility benefits for the region, including improved access for the transit-dependent population.
• The project’s contribution to a balanced and integrated transportation system for the movement of people and goods.
• The potential for the project to increase transit use, and to improve the transit system.
• The extent to which the project eliminates or corrects deficiencies in the transportation system, such as existing gaps, bottlenecks, or points of congestion/overcrowding.
• The importance of the project to the effective operation and management of existing transportation facilities and systems.
• The extent to which the project furthers previous actions supporting the project or area services such as completing partially funded project segments.
4) Local Match Requirement:
• Twenty percent (20%) of monetary Local Match (non-Metro funds), except for Transit Capital. For Transit Capital, the 20% Local Match can be cash and/or land.
5) Cost Effectiveness: • The project’s cost effectiveness in relationship to the total project cost. • The applicant’s demonstrated commitment to covering life-cycle operational and
maintenance expenses.
21
6) Land Use and Sustainability Policies/Principles: • The project’s ability to advance the goals and priorities of the adopted Regional
Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). • The jurisdiction/agency demonstrates that the project is complemented by programs
or activities that will implement the RTP/SCS, while also increasing the effectiveness of the project.
• The jurisdiction/agency demonstrates its commitment to coordination activity with the land use planning authority. Evidence may be a SCAG Sustainability Program (formerly Compass Blueprint) project, a Strategic Growth Council Planning Grant, Metro Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Planning Grant, or similar program.