2022 regional transportation improvement program

Stanislaus Council of Governments 1111 I Street Suite 308 Modesto, CA 95354

www.stancog.org

2022 Regional Transportation

Improvement Program

Fiscal Years 2022/23 through 2026/27

Member Agencies

City of Ceres

City of Hughson

City of Modesto

City of Newman

City of Oakdale

City of Patterson

City of Riverbank

City of Turlock

City of Waterford

Stanislaus County

Policy Board Chair

Jeramy Young

Policy Board Vice-Chair

Terry Withrow

Executive Director

Rosa De León Park

December 2, 2021

Mr. Mitch Weiss Executive Director California Transportation Commission 1120 N Street MS 52 Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: Submittal of StanCOG's 2022 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)

Dear Mr. Weiss:

Enclosed!are!two!copies!of!Stanislaus!Council!of!Governments!(StanCOG�s)!2022 RTIP. StanCOG, as the Metropolitan Planning Organization and Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) for the Stanislaus Region, is governed by a board of 16 members representing the nine cities and the County of Stanislaus, and one ex-officio representative.

The development of StanCOG�s 2022 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) incorporates input from key stakeholders, partner agencies, and the public.!The!list!of!projects!identified!in!this!RTIP!represents!the!Stanislaus!region�s priority projects, as determined by the Policy Board during the Regional Improvement Program�s (RIP) development.

The projects are consistent with the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (RTP/SCS). To!the!best!of!StanCOG�s!knowledge,!at!this time, the projects identified for funding in the 2022 RTIP are not anticipated to be impacted by implementation of the Safer Affordable Fuel Efficient Vehicles Rule Part One � One National Program which became effective on November 26, 2019.

The 2022 RTIP proposes programming a total of $9.521 million of funding available to the Stanislaus Region. Of that, a total of $1.127 million will be carried over from the 2020 STIP cycle into the 2022 RTIP.

StanCOG also requests $30 million of ITIP funding for the North County Corridor project in FY 23/24. A key element of the funding plan for the project relies on CTC fulfilling their prior commitment of programming ITIP funds as stated in CTC Resolution G-08-08. StanCOG!respectfully!requests! the!Commission�s!support!for North County Corridor.

DRAFT

Mr. Mitch Weiss

CTC Executive Director

Page -2-

Please feel free to contact me or Elisabeth Hahn, Deputy Director of Planning and

Programming, at (209) 525-4600 should you have any questions or need additional information

pertaining to the 2020 StanCOG RTIP.

Sincerely,

Rosa De Leon Park

Executive Director

Attachments:

1. 2022 StanCOG Regional Transportation Improvement Program

2022 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (2020 RTIP)

Cover Letter

Table of Contents

Page Number

A. Overview and Schedule

Section 1. Executive Summary ...................................................................................... 1

Section 2. General Information ...................................................................................... 3

Section 3. Background of Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) ........ 4

Section 4. Completion of Prior RTIP Projects ................................................................ 4

Section 5. RTIP Outreach and Participation ................................................................... 6

B. 2020 STIP Regional Funding Request

Section 6. 2020 STIP Regional Share and Request for Programming ............................. 7

Section 7. Overview of Other Funding Included in Delivery of RTIP Projects ............... 9

Section 8. Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) Funding .............10

Section 9. Multi-Modal Corridors - Projects Planned Within the Corridor.....................10

Section 10. Highways to Boulevards Conversion Pilot Program ..................................10

C. Relationship of RTIP to RTP/SCS/APS and Benefits of RTIP

Section 11. Regional Level Performance Evaluation .....................................................11

Section 12. Regional and Statewide Benefits of RTIP ...................................................14

D. Performance and Effectiveness of RTIP

Section 13. Evaluation of the Cost Effectiveness of RTIP .............................................14

Section 14. Project Specific Evaluation ........................................................................16

E. Detailed Project Information

Section 15. Overview of Projects Programmed with RIP Funding ................................16

F. Appendices

Section 16. Project Programming Request (PPR) Forms

Section 17. Board Resolution or Documentation of 2020 RTIP Approval

Section 18. Detailed Project Programming Summary Table

Section 19. Additional Appendices

This page is left blank.

StanCOG - Regional Transportation Improvement Program - Page 1

A. Overview and Schedule

Section 1. Executive Summary

The 2022 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) for Stanislaus County was prepared by the Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG). Pursuant to the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) guidelines, Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs) must prepare and submit an RTIP to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) every two years. As the RTPA for the Stanislaus region, StanCOG has prepared the 2022 RTIP!to!assist!with!the!programming!and!implementation!of!the!region�s!state!highway and road projects! identified!in!StanCOG�s!adopted!2020 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). This RTIP covers a 5-year programming period, beginning at Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 and ending in FY 2026/27.

The STIP consists of two broad programs: the Regional Improvement Program (RIP), and the Interregional Improvement Program (IIP). The RIP is funded from 75% of new STIP funding and the IIP is funded from 25% of new STIP funding. The 75% in RIP funds are further subdivided by formula into county shares. County shares are available solely for projects nominated by regions in their RTIPs. StanCOG is responsible for recommending projects for RIP funding through its submittal of the RTIP. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is responsible for recommending projects for IIP funding through its submittal of the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP). Under restricted circumstances an RTIP may also recommend a project for funding from the interregional share. The CTC incorporates both programs into the STIP upon adoption.

On August 19, 2021, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) adopted the 2022 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Fund Estimate (FE). According to the adopted Fund Estimate, the Stanislaus region has $8,394,000 in new programming capacity in the 2022 STIP, available in the two outer years of FY 25/26 and 26/27. The 2022 RTIP is a prioritized program of projects designed to ensure that projects contribute to the overall creation of a dynamic transportation system. It identifies key state highway and local road projects in the Stanislaus region with the intent of improving mobility, reducing congestion, and improving air quality as it relates to transportation-related air pollution.

StanCOG�s! 2022 RTIP! is! consistent! with! the! CTC�s! 2022 STIP Guidelines and STIP Fund Estimate (FE), which were adopted on August 19, 2021.

STIP Project Recommendations

This 2022 RTIP proposes programming the total of $9,521,000 million in RIP funding available to the Stanislaus region.

Table 1, identifies the general breakdown of total RIP funds to be programmed in the StanCOG 2020 RTIP.


Table 1: Breakdown of Available STIP Funding

Regional Improvement Program (RIP) Funds Availability Funding Apportionment

Total New Regional County (RIP) Shares $8,394,000

Carryover Regional County (RIP) Shares $1,127,000

Total Regional Shares Programmed $9,521,000

As mentioned previously, $1.127 million is being carried over from the 2020 RTIP as identified in Tables 2A and 2B.

Table 2A: Projects Carried Over from 2020 RTIP

Project Title Program Year Total

Planning, Programming and Monitoring (PPM) FY 22/23 -24/25 ($215,000\yr.)

$645,000

Table 2B: Projects Carried Over from 2020 RTIP with Programming Changes


State Route 132 West Freeway/Expressway � Phase 2

Change from RW in FY 24/25 to CON

Support in FY 25/26

$482,000

Table 3 summarizes the proposed projects to be programmed with new Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funding in the 2022 StanCOG RTIP.

Table 3: Projects Programmed with New RIP Funding


State Route 132 West Freeway/Expressway � Phase 2 FY 25/26 $7,974,000

Planning, Programming and Monitoring (PPM) FY 25/26 � 26/27

($210,000\yr.) $420,000

Total for Projects Programmed with New RIP Funding $8,394,000

Appendices: Section 18 contains StanCOG�s proposed 2022 Regional Transportation Improvement Program to be incorporated into the 2022 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).


Section 2. General Information

· Regional Agency Name

Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG)

· Agency website links for Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)

and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

Regional Agency Website Link: http://www.stancog.org

RTIP document link: http://www.stancog.org/trans-fund.shtm

RTP link: http://www.stancog.org/rtp.shtm

· Regional Agency Executive Director/Chief Executive Officer Contact Information

Name Rosa De León Park

Title Executive Director

Email [email protected]

Telephone (209) 525-4600

· RTIP Manager Staff Contact Information

Name Elisabeth Hahn

Title Deputy Director of Planning and Programming

Address 1111 I Street, Suite 308

City/State Modesto, CA

Zip Code 95354


Telephone (209) 525-4600 Fax (209) 558-7833

· California Transportation Commission (CTC) Staff Contact Information

Name Teresa Favila Title Deputy Director

Address 1120 N Street

City/State Sacramento, CA

Zip Code 95814


Telephone 916-653-2064 Fax 916-653-2134


Section 3. Background of Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)

A. What is the Regional Transportation Improvement Program?

The Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) is a program of highway, local road, transit and active transportation projects that a region plans to fund with State and Federal revenue programmed by the California Transportation Commission in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The RTIP is developed biennially by the regions and is due to the Commission by December 15 of every odd numbered year. The program of projects in the RTIP is a subset of projects in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), a federally mandated master transportation plan which guides a region�s transportation investments over a 20 to 25- year period. The RTP is based on all reasonably anticipated funding, including federal, state and local sources. Updated every 4 to 5 years, the RTP is developed through an extensive public participation process in the region and reflects the unique mobility, sustainability, and air quality needs of each region.

B. Regional Agency�s!Historical and Current Approach to developing the RTIP

StanCOG has endeavored to develop procedures and processes that address regional transportation planning issues. Focusing on growth and other related impacts, StanCOG works with our 10 member agencies, partner agencies, local jurisdictions, citizens, and the State, utilizing state of the art planning tools to address transportation, planning and stewardship issues that impact the region.

Programming recommendations in the 2022 RTIP reflect the larger!goals!of!StanCOG�s!adopted 2020 RTP and Sustainable Communities Strategy of 1) mobility and accessibility, 2) social equity, 3) economic and community vitality, 4) sustainable development pattern, 5) environmental quality, 6) health and safety, 7) system preservation, 8) smart infrastructure, 9) reliability and congestion and 10) project delivery. In addition, Measure L, approved by the voters of Stanislaus County, will provide $38,000,000 annually in funding for local transportation improvement projects. Of that amount, 28% will be used for regional transportation projects. Projects recommended in the 2022 RTIP are consistent with Stanislaus County�s!Measure!L program.

StanCOG coordinates with Caltrans District 10 as well as our local agency partners for identifying projects to be submitted in the RTIP. All of the projects submitted in the RTIP have gone through analysis and public outreach.

Section 4. Completion of Prior RTIP Projects (Required per Section 68)

State Route (SR) 132 West Phase 1

Phase 1 of the State Route 132 Project, which is slated for completion in 2022, will construct a 2-lane expressway with full access control and grade separations at Rosemore Avenue, Carpenter Road, Emerald Avenue, and SR 99 between North Dakota Avenue and east of SR99. Controlled intersections are proposed for existing SR 132/North Dakota Avenue, proposed SR 132/North Dakota Avenue, proposed realigned Kansas Avenue/North Dakota Avenue, and proposed realigned SR 132/Kansas Avenue-Needham Street. In addition, the project would make improvements to the 5th and 6th Street connections to the new SR 132 expressway.


The purpose of the project is to improve regional and interregional circulation, relieve traffic congestion along existing State Route132 (SR-132)/Maze Boulevard, and improve operations by creating a four-lane freeway/expressway on a new alignment connecting SR-132 with the City of Modesto. This would facilitate the movement of goods and freight within the study area and larger region.

The project would be built in two phases. It would begin at the intersection of existing SR-

132/Maze Boulevard and North Dakota Avenue and extend north along North Dakota Avenue for roughly a half mile. South of Kansas Avenue, at the proposed intersection with North Dakota Avenue, the new alignment would extend east to State Route 99 (SR-99) at the proposed Needham Street overcrossing. The project would also make improvements to the 5th Street and 6th Street connections to SR-99 including restriping and the reduction of conflict points between SR-99 and 5th and 6th streets.

SR-132 from SR-99 west to San Francisco serves as a major route for conveying agricultural and manufactured goods within the San Francisco-Central Valley Strategic Interregional Corridor.

Project Name and

Location

Description Summary of

Improvements/Benefits


In Phase 1, a two-lane expressway will be constructed with full access control and grade separations at intersections between North Dakota Avenue to State Route 99.

Phase 1 will add a 2-lane access-controlled (one lane eastbound and one lane westbound) Freeway / Expressway that will improve system connectivity between I-5 and SR 99;

Improve interregional circulation and relieve congestion by creating a new connection with downtown Modesto separating local traffic from interregional traffic;


Improve safety by creating a new median separated roadway; and

Promote a more livable community along portions of SR 132 (Maze Blvd.) that will be relinquished upon the opening of the new facility.

Additional environmental safety enhancements will be realized through the project with the encapsulation of the contaminated soils on existing on State property.

Section 5. RTIP Outreach and Participation

A. RTIP Development and Approval Schedule

Action Date

CTC adopts Fund Estimate and Guidelines August 18, 2021

Caltrans identifies State Highway Needs September 15, 2011

Caltrans submits draft ITIP October 15, 2019

StanCOG Public Review and Comment

Period for Draft 2020 RTIP

October 6, 2021 �

November 4, 2021

CTC ITIP Hearing, North November 2021

CTC ITIP Hearing, South November 2021

StanCOG Public Hearing for Draft 2022 RTIP October 20, 2021

StanCOG adopts 2022 RTIP November 17, 2021

Regions submit RTIP to CTC (postmark by) December 15, 2021

Caltrans submits ITIP to CTC December 15, 2021

CTC STIP Hearing, South January 27, 2022

CTC STIP Hearing, North February 3, 2022

CTC publishes staff recommendations February 28, 2022

CTC Adopts 2022 STIP March 23-24, 2022


B. Public Participation/Project Selection Process

It is StanCOG�s policy to engage public participation in the development of planning and programming activities. The public is provided opportunities to participate in StanCOG Policy Board and Committee meetings. StanCOG provides notice to the public of hearings and makes agendas and minutes readily available to the public. StanCOG solicits key stakeholders, partner agencies and the public for input as to project importance and acceptance. To further refine the project list, input is sought from technical and management staff members representing StanCOG�s 10 member agencies. A public hearing is held to obtain additional feedback from the public regarding the proposed programming contained in the RTIP.

The! last! step! of! analysis! comes! from!StanCOG�s!Policy!Board,!which! evaluates! and!provides direction! on! the! draft! project! list! during! the! RTIP�s! development! phase. The list of projects identified! in! each! RTIP! are! derived! from! Stanislaus! region�s! priority! projects! as! determined through!extensive!public!outreach!during!the!development!of!StanCOG�s!adopted!2018!Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).

C. Consultation with Caltrans District (Required per Section 17)

Caltrans District: 10

Caltrans District 10 is an ex-officio member of the StanCOG policy board. StanCOG works closely with District 10 to develop a RIP and IIP funding strategy to address the transportation needs of the region.

StanCOG participates as a member of various project development teams and steering committees that work towards improving transportation and mobility in the region in collaboration with Caltrans!in!StanCOG�s!member!jurisdictions. Through these and other venues, Caltrans has had the opportunity to provide feedback regarding the potential impact a project may have on the region and are in support of the proposed projects.

B. 2022 STIP Regional Funding Request

Section 6. 2022 STIP Regional Share and Request for Programming

A. 2022 Regional Fund Share Per 2022 STIP Fund Estimate

According to the adopted Fund Estimate, the Stanislaus region has $8,394,000 in new programming capacity in the 2022 STIP available to the Stanislaus region in the 4th and 5th years in Fiscal Years 2025/26 and 2026/27. Additionally, the Stanislaus Region has $1,127,000 of carryover funding from the 2020 RTIP.


Refer to Additional Appendices: Section 18 for the 2022 STIP Fund Estimate for the Stanislaus Region.

B. Summary of Requested Programming

Project Name and Location Project Description Requested RIP Amount


2 Lane expansion � State Route 99 to Dakota Avenue

$8,456,000

Planning, Programming and Monitoring � Stanislaus Council of Governments

Planning, Programming and Monitoring

$1,065,000

TOTAL

$9,521,000

Sec

tio

n 7

. O

ver

vie

w o

f O

ther

Fu

nd

ing

In

clu

ded

Wit

h D

eliv

ery

of

Reg

ion

al

Imp

rov

em

ent

Pro

gra

m (

RIP

) P

roje

cts

The

tab

le b

elo

w i

den

tifi

es t

he

20

22 R

TIP

fu

nd

ing f

or

FY

202

2/2

3 t

hro

ugh F

Y 2

02

6/2

7 i

n t

he

firs

t co

lum

n.

Als

o i

den

tifi

ed a

re f

und

ing

fr

om

oth

er s

ou

rces

as

wel

l as

fro

m p

rev

ious

year

s th

at w

ill

be

use

d t

o d

eliv

er p

roje

cts

in t

he

RT

IP. T

he

last

co

lum

n e

stab

lish

es the

tota

l p

roje

ct c

ost

of

each

pro

po

sed

20

22 R

TIP

pro

ject

.

Pro

ject

Fu

nd

ing

Ov

ervie

w f

or

Reg

ion

al

Imp

rov

emen

t P

roje

cts

Ta

ble

P

rop

ose

d 2

02

0 R

TIP

Tota

l 202

2

RT

IP

Oth

er F

un

din

g

Tota

l

Pro

ject

Cost

Prio

r

RIP

LP

P-

Form

ula

Mea

sure

L

CO

VID

ST

IP

Fu

ture

Fu

nd

s

Sta

te R

ou

te 1

32

W

est

Fre

eway/E

xp

res

sway

- P

has

e 2

$8

,45

6,0

00

$3

,841,0

00

$1,1

96,0

00

$16

,08

6,0

00

$

2,3

98,0

00

$1

29

,44

6,0

00

$1

61

,42

3,0

00

Pla

nn

ing,

Pro

gra

mm

ing a

nd

Mo

nit

ori

ng

$1

,06

5,0

00

$1

,06

5,0

00

To

tals

$

9,5

21,0

00

$3,8

41,0

00

$1,1

96,0

00

$16

,086,0

00

$2

,39

8,0

00

$1

29

,44

6,0

00

$1

62

,48

8,0

00

Note

s:

Fu

ture

Funds

for

the

SR

132 W

est

Fre

eway

/Exp

ress

way

Phas

e 2 p

roje

ct w

ou

ld c

onsi

st o

f fu

ture

ST

IP,

Mea

sure

L,

pote

nti

al

Sta

te/F

eder

al G

rant

awar

ds,

and S

B1 P

rogra

m f

und

s



Section 8. Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) Funding

The purpose of the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) is to improve interregional mobility for people and goods in the State of California. As an interregional program, the ITIP is focused on increasing the throughput for highway and rail corridors of strategic importance outside the urbanized areas of the state. A sound transportation network between and connecting!urbanized!area!ports!and!borders!is!vital!to!the!state�s!economic!vitality.!The!ITIP!is prepared in accordance with Government Code Section 14526, Streets and Highways Code Section 164 and the STIP Guidelines. The ITIP is a five-year program managed by Caltrans and funded with 25% of new STIP revenues in each cycle. Developed in cooperation with regional transportation planning agencies to ensure an integrated transportation program, the ITIP promotes the goal of improving interregional mobility and connectivity across California. COG submitted written comments to Caltrans on the Draft 2020 ITIP. StanCOG requested an allocation of $30 Million in FY 23/24 to program the construction phase of the North County Corridor (NCC) project in the Stanislaus Region. See Additional Appendices Section 19C.

The North County Corridor (NCC) Project (Tully Road to State Route 120) is a high-priority project for Stanislaus County, its communities and the growing cities of Modesto, Oakdale, and Riverbank. NCC would serve as a priority interregional freight corridor and as a lifeline for the movement of people, goods and services, traversing through rural counties.

In May of 2008, CTC passed a resolution supporting up to $91 million of ITIP funds for the NCC as an ITIP eligible project. In May of 2010, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) approved the North County Corridor (NCC) State Route (SR) 108 East Route, making the project eligible for ITIP funding. The adopted corridor provides for approximately 18 miles of freeway/expressway on new alignment from near SR-219 north of the City of Modesto and west of the City of Riverbank to SR-120 approximately six miles east of the City of Oakdale.

Section 9. Projects Planned Within Multi-Modal Corridors

StanCOG participates in a wide range of regional and project level planning activities. In conjunction with other Regional Transportation Planning Agencies, Caltrans and the local jurisdictions, StanCOG participates as a member of various Project Development Teams and Steering Committees that work towards improving transportation and mobility in the region. The following is an analysis of projects programmed in the 2020 RTIP that have an impact on other projects within the same corridor.

State Route 132 West Freeway/Expressway, Phase 2 (Dakota Avenue to State Route 99)

Phase 2 of the project will add 2-lanes to the 2-lane, access-controlled facility to create a four-lane expressway from Needham Street on the east side of State Route 99 (SR99) to Dakota Avenue. The project includes construction of freeway to freeway connectors for eastbound SR132 to southbound SR99 and northbound SR99 to westbound SR132. The project will also include construction of a partial interchange at Carpenter Road. The purpose of the project is to improve regional and interregional circulation, relieve traffic congestion along existing State Route 132


(SR132)/Maze Boulevard, and improve operations by creating a four-lane freeway/expressway on a new alignment connecting SR132 with the City of Modesto. This would facilitate the movement of goods and freight within the study area and larger region.

The highway provides an interregional connection between Interstate 5 near the City of Tracy to the west and SR99 in Modesto to the east. The existing highway is the only east-west highway with access across the Tuolumne, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus rivers from Modesto. As such, SR 132 has increasingly served the San Joaquin Valley and has become a major truck route between Interstate 5 and SR 99. It serves as a major route for conveying agricultural and manufactured goods within the San Francisco-Central Valley Strategic Interregional Corridor

SR132 from SR99 west to San Francisco serves as a major route for conveying agricultural and manufactured goods within the San Francisco-Central Valley Strategic Interregional Corridor.

Section 10. Highways to Boulevards Conversion Pilot Program

In this STIP cycle, regions have the opportunity to repurpose highways to boulevards as part of a Conversion Pilot Program. There are no candidate projects in Stanislaus County.

C. Relationship of RTIP to RTP/SCS/APS and Benefits of RTIP

Section 11. Regional Level Performance Evaluation

The 2022 RTIP furthers the goals of StanCOG�s adopted 2022 RTP/SCS. These goals include:

· Goal 1: Mobility & Accessibility - Improve the ability of people and goods to move between desired locations and provide a variety of modal and mobility options.

· Goal 2: Social Equity � Promote equitable access to opportunities by ensuring all populations share in the benefits of transportation improvements and are provided a range of transportation and housing choices.

· Goal 3: Economic and Community Vitality � Facilitate economic development and opportunities through infrastructure investments that support goods movement within and through the region, including but not limited to the county�s strategic freight corridors.

· Goal 4: Sustainable Development Pattern - Provide a mix of land uses and compact development patterns, and direct development toward existing infrastructure, which will preserve agricultural land, open space, and natural resources.

· Goal 5: Environmental Quality � Support infrastructure investments that facilitate vehicle electrification and the provision of electrification infrastructure in public and private parking facilities and structures.

· Goal 6: Health & Safety - Operate and maintain the transportation system to ensure public safety and security; improve the health of residents by improving air quality and providing more transportation options.

· Goal 7: System Preservation - Maintain the transportation system in a state of good


repair,! and! protect! the! region�s! transportation! investments! by! maximizing! the! use! of existing facilities.

· Goal 8: Smart Infrastructure � Coordinate, monitor, and integrate planning and programming for intelligent transportation systems (ITS), smart infrastructure, demand- responsive transportation, and automated vehicles.

· Goal 9: Reliability & Congestion - Maintain or improve reliability of the transportation network and maintain or reduce congestion.

· Goal 10: Project Delivery � Efficiently use available transportation funding to expedite project delivery of transportation improvements within the region for the benefit of residents of Stanislaus County and the general traveling public.

A. Regional Level Performance Indicators and Measures (per Appendix B of the STIP

Guidelines).

StanCOG�s 2020 RTP/SCS funds over $7 billion in transportation improvements in the Stanislaus Region, of which the 2022 RTIP reflects approximately $9.521 million. The RTIP is one of a number of funding sources which are relied upon to support transportation projects within the region. The performance measures listed in Table B1 below identify relevant data and tools available to the extent that may be reported. With the exception of the change in acreage of agricultural land, the performance measures presented in the above table, remain constant, as the number of projects programmed with new STIP funding is relatively small compared to the universe of projects that are part of the 2018 RTP/SCS. Even so, these three projects identified in this RTIP are anticipated to relieve congestion, improve traffic circulation/reduce congestion for commuters and trucks, improve

safety and operations, enhance access and connectivity, and increase the mobility of people and goods.

Section 12. Regional and Statewide Benefits of RTIP

The regional and statewide benefits of the two projects programmed in the 2020 RTIP will take the form of increased regional and interregional connectivity, improved operational efficiencies, reduced traffic congestion and enhanced safety, mobility and access. Key benefits for the two projects are summarized below:

State Route 132 West Freeway/Expressway, Phase 2

The existing SR132/Maze Boulevard experiences operational inefficiencies due to its proximity and direct access to schools, churches, businesses, and residences along existing SR 132. These uses increase the potential for conflicts between bicyclists, pedestrians, and vehicles. Vehicular crashes, including broadside accidents, head-on collisions, and rear-end collisions due to relatively high traffic volumes and speeds, the large number of conflict points, and lack of turning lanes are observed along the existing SR132W. The existing highway does not have stop signs or stop lights at most of the intersections, resulting in vehicular conflicts.

The new SR132W will also increase capacity, relieve congestion, improve traffic circulation for commuters and trucks, and facilitate operational efficiency of vehicles and goods through this area.


Table B1 Evaluation � Regional Level Performance Indicators and Measures

Goal

Indicator/Measure (per thousand

dollars invested)

Current Level

of Performance

(Baseline)

Projected

Performance

Improvement

(2042)

Congestion Reduction

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita

19.5 19.5

Percent of congested VMT (at or below 35 mph)

21.5% 21.5%

Commute mode share (drive alone daily mode share)

34.6% 34.6%

Infrastructure Condition

Percent of distressed state highway lane- miles

Not N/A

Pavement Condition Index (local streets and roads)

63a 63a

Percent of highway bridges by deck area classified in Poor condition

22.92%b 22.92%b

Percent of transit assets that have surpassed the FTA useful life period

N/A N/A

System Reliability

Highway Buffer Index (the extra time cushion that most travelers add to their average travel time when planning trips to ensure on-time arrival)

N/A

N/A

Accessibility and on-time performance for rail and transit

N/A N/A

Safety Fatalities and serious injuries per capita 0.023 0.023

Fatalities and serious injuries per VMT 4.860 4.860

Economic Vitality

Percent of housing and jobs within 0.5 miles of transit stops with frequent transit service

59.3%

59.3%

Mean commute travel time (to work or school)

27.9 mins 28.0 mins

Farebox recovery ratio N/A N/A

Environmental Sustainability

Change in acres of agricultural land 6,000c 5,379c CO2 emissions reduction per capita 5.9% 5.9%

a Source: 2018 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment, www.savecaliforniastreets.org b Source: Long-Term Bridge Performance, https://infobridge.fhwa.dot.gov/data accessed 09/30/19 c Source: Stanislaus Council of Governments 2018 Regional Transportation Program/Sustainable Communities

Strategies Final Environment Impact Report


D. Performance and Effectiveness of RTIP

Section 13. Evaluation of Cost Effectiveness of RTIP

The cost-effectiveness of the RTIP is based upon the following performance metrics (previously identified in Table B1) and summarized again in Table B2. The investments programmed in the 2020 RTIP projects will take the form of increased regional and interregional connectivity, improved operational efficiencies, reduced traffic congestion and enhanced safety, mobility and access.

With the exception of the change in acreage of agricultural land, the performance measures presented in the above table, remain constant, as the number of projects programmed with new STIP funding is relatively small compared to the universe of projects that are part of the 2018

RTP/SCS. Even so, these three projects identified in this RTIP are anticipated to relieve

congestion, improve traffic circulation/reduce congestion for commuters and trucks, improve safety and operations, enhance access and connectivity, and increase the mobility of people and goods.

Section 14. Project Specific Evaluation

Each RTIP shall include a project specific benefit evaluation for each new project proposed that estimates its benefits to the regional system from changes to the built environment, including, but limited to the items listed in the STIP Guidelines. A project level evaluation shall be submitted for projects for which construction is proposed if:

· The total amount of existing and proposed STIP for right-of-way and/or construction of the project is $15 million or greater, or

· The total project cost is $50 million or greater.

The project level benefit evaluation shall include a Caltrans generated benefit/cost estimate, including life cycle costs for projects proposed in the ITIP. For the RTIP, the regions may choose between the Caltrans estimate and their own estimate (explain why the Caltrans estimate was not used). The project level benefit evaluation must explain how the project is consistent with Executive Order B-30-15 (Climate Change).

Refer to Appendices, Section 16: Projects Programming Request (PPR) Forms for project

level benefit evaluation.

E. Detailed Project Information

Section 15. Overview of Projects Programmed with RIP Funding

State Route 132 West Freeway/Expressway Phase 2 Phase 2 of the project will add 2-lanes to the a 2-lane, access-controlled facility being constructed as part of Phase 1 to create a four-lane expressway from Needham Street on the east side of State Route 99 (SR99) to Dakota Avenue. The project includes construction of freeway to freeway connectors for eastbound SR132 to southbound SR99 and northbound SR99 to westbound SR132. The project will also


a Source: 2018 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment, www.savecaliforniastreets.org b Source: Long-Term Bridge Performance, https://infobridge.fhwa.dot.gov/data accessed 09/30/19 c Source: Stanislaus Council of Governments 2018 Regional Transportation Program/Sustainable Communities

Strategies Final Environment Impact Report

Table B2 Evaluation � Cost-Effectiveness Indicators and Measures

Goal

Indicator/Measure (per thousand

dollars invested)

Current Level

of Performance

(Baseline)

Projected

Performance

Improvement

(2042)

Congestion Reduction

Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita

19.5 19.5

Reduce Percent of congested VMT (at or below 35 mph)

21.5% 21.5%

Commute mode share (drive alone daily mode share)

34.6% 34.6%

Infrastructure Condition

Reduce percent of distressed state highway lane-miles

N/A N/A

Improve Pavement Condition Index (local streets and roads)

63a 63a

Reduce percent of highway bridge deck area in Poor Condition

22.92%b 22.92%b

Reduce percent of transit assets that have surpassed the FTA useful life period

N/A N/A

System

Reliability

Reduce Highway Buffer Index (the time cushion added to the average commute travel times to ensure on-time arrival).

N/A

N/A

Improve accessibility and on-time performance for rail and transit

N/A N/A

Safety

Reduce fatalities and serious injuries per capita

0.023 0.023

Reduce fatalities and serious injuries per VMT

4.860 4.860

Economic Vitality

Increase percent of housing and jobs within 0.5 miles of transit stops with frequent transit service

59.3%

59.3%

Reduce mean commute travel time (to work or school)

27.9 mins 28.0 mins

Increase farebox recovery ratio N/A N/A

Environmental Sustainability

Change in acres of agricultural land 6,000c 5,379c CO2 emissions reduction per capita 5.9% 5.9%


include construction of a partial interchange at Carpenter Road. The purpose of this project is to improve regional and interregional circulation, relieve regional congestion, enhance safety and improve operations. This segment of SR 132 and the existing SR 132/99 interchange experiences congestion due to the limitations of the existing facilities combined with an increase in commuters, trucks, local area vehicles, bikes and pedestrian traffic. Existing SR 132 has an average 21% truck traffic.

The highway provides an interregional connection between Interstate 5 near the City of Tracy to the west and SR99 in Modesto to the east. The existing highway is the only east-west highway with access across

the Tuolumne, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus rivers from Modesto. As such, SR132 has increasingly served the San JoaquinValley and has become a major truckroute between Interstate 5 and SR 99. It serves as a major route for conveyingagricultural and manufactured goods within the San Francisco-Central ValleyStrategicInterregional Corridor

SR 132 from SR 99 west to SanFrancisco serves as a major route for conveying agricultural andmanufactured goods within the San Francisco-Central ValleyStrategicInterregional Corridor.

Project Planning, Programming and Monitoring

According to the STIP Guidelines, a region may program up to 5 percent of its share of RIP fundsfor project planning, programming and monitoring (PPM) by the transportation planning agency.StanCOG�s! 2022 RTIP proposes $1,065,000 of RIP funds programmed for PPM. The PPMprogram ensures that StanCOG continues to fulfill its federally-mandated functions as the MPOfor the Stanislaus County region, including: (1) Oversight and monitoring of projects receivingfederal aid and those identified in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP); (2)Ensuring that all projects and recipients of federal/state funding are in compliance with all stateand! federal! regulations;!and! (3)!Ensuring! that!all!projects!are!consistent!with!StanCOG�s!2020Regional Transportation Plan and 2021 Federal Transportation Improvement Program.


F. Appendices

Section 16. Project Programming Request Forms

Section 17. Board Resolution or Documentation of 2022 RTIP

Section 18. Detailed Project Programming Summary Table

Section 19. Additional Appendices

19A. 2022 Regional Fund Share from 2020 STIP Fund Estimate

19B. StanCOG�s Written Comments to the Draft 2020 Interregional Transportation

Improvement Program (ITIP)

19C. 2008 STIP CTC Resolution G-08-08

Appendices

Section 16

Project Programming Request Forms

Appendix 16A

State Route 132 West Freeway/Expressway

Phase 2

STATE OF CALIFORNIA � DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

PROJECT PROGRAMMING REQUEST (PPR) PRG-0010 (REV 08/2020)

PPR ID

(Existing Project) YES NO Date

LPP-C LPP-F TCEPSCCP STIP Other

District EA Project ID PPNO Nominating Agency

Co-Nominating Agency

MPO Element

Project Manager/Contact Phone Email Address

Project Title

County Route PM Back PM Ahead

Location (Project Limits), Description (Scope of Work)

Component Implementing Agency

PA&ED

PS&E

Right of Way

Construction

Assembly: Senate: Congressional:

Project Milestone Existing Proposed

Project Study Report Approved

Begin Environmental (PA&ED) Phase

Circulate Draft Environmental Document Document Type

Draft Project Report

End Environmental Phase (PA&ED Milestone)

Begin Design (PS&E) Phase

End Design Phase (Ready to List for Advertisement Milestone)

Begin Right of Way Phase

End Right of Way Phase (Right of Way Certification Milestone)

Begin Construction Phase (Contract Award Milestone)

End Construction Phase (Construction Contract Acceptance Milestone)

Begin Closeout Phase

End Closeout Phase (Closeout Report)



PPR ID





MPO Element


Project Title




PA&ED

PS&E

Right of Way

Construction


















PPR ID

Date

Purpose and Need

NHS Improvements YES NO Roadway Class YES NO

Inc. Sustainable Communities Strategy Goals YES NO Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions YES NO

Project Outputs

Category Outputs Unit Total



PPR ID

Date

Purpose and Need



Project Outputs




PPR ID

Date

Additional Information



PPR ID

Date

Additional Information



PPR ID

Measure Required For Indicator/Measure Unit Build Future No Build Change



PPR ID

Measure Required For Indicator/Measure Unit Build Future No Build Change



PPR ID

District EA Project ID PPNOCounty Route

Project Title

Existing Total Project Cost ($1,000s)

Component Total Implementing Agency

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

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

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Program Code

Existing Funding ($1,000s)

Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency

NotesProposed Funding ($1,000s)

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL



PPR ID


Project Title



E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL


E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Program Code


Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency

NotesPrPrProposed Funding ($1,000s)

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL



PPR ID

Program Code


Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency


E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Program Code


Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency


E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL



PPR ID

Program Code


Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency

NotesPropopoposososededed Funding ($1,000s)

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Program Code


Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency


E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL



PPR ID

Program Code


Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency


E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL



PPR ID

Program Code


Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency

NotesPropopoposososededed Funding ($1,000s)

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL



PPR ID

Complete this page for amendments only Date

District EA Project ID PPNORouteCounty

SECTION 1 - All Projects

Project Background

Programming Change Requested

Reason for Proposed Change

If proposed change will delay one or more components, clearly explain 1) reason for the delay, 2) cost increase related to the delay, and 3) how cost increase will be funded

Other Significant Information

SECTION 2 - For SB1 Project Only

Project Amendment Request (Please follow the individual SB1 program guidelines for specific criteria)

Approvals

Name (Print or Type) Signature Title Date


Attachments 1) Concurrence from Implementing Agency and/or Regional Transportation Planning Agency 2) Project Location Map



PPR ID

Complete this page for amendments only Date

District EA Project ID PPNORouteCounty


Project Background

Programming Change Requested

Reason for Proposed Change

If proposed change will delay one or more components, clearly explain 1) reason for the delay, 2) cost increase related to the delay, and 3) how cost increase will be funded

Other Significant Information

SECTION 2 - For SB1 Project Only

Project Amendment Request (Please follow the individual SB1 program guidelines for specific criteria)

Approvals

Name (Print or Type) Signature Title Date


Attachments 1) Concurrence from Implementing Agency and/or Regional Transportation Planning Agency 2) Project Location Map

Appendix 16B

Planning, Programming and Monitoring



PPR ID





MPO Element


Project Title




PA&ED

PS&E

Right of Way

Construction


















PPR ID





MPO Element


Project Title




PA&ED

PS&E

Right of Way

Construction


















PPR ID

Date

Purpose and Need



Project Outputs




PPR ID

Date

Purpose and Need



Project Outputs




PPR ID


Project Title



E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL


E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Program Code


Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency


E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL



PPR ID


Project Title



E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL


E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Program Code


Component Total

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Funding Agency

NotesPrProposed Funding ($1,000s)

E&P (PA&ED)

PS&E

R/W SUP (CT)

CON SUP (CT)

R/W

CON

TOTAL

Appendices

Section 17

Board Resolution of 2022 RTIP

STANISLAUS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

RESOLUTION XX-XX

ADOPTING THE 2022 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT

PROGRAM

WHEREAS, the Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG) is a Regional Transportation

Planning Agency (RTPA) and a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Stanislaus

region, pursuant to State and Federal designation; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to State law, every two years StanCOG is required to develop and

submit to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) a Regional Transportation

Improvement Program (RTIP) that identifies projects to be included in the State Transportation

Improvement Program (STIP); and

WHEREAS, StanCOG has prepared the 2022 RTIP in compliance with the CTC's adopted

2020 STIP Guidelines and STIP Fund Estimate; and

WHEREAS, the 2022 RTIP covers a five-year period from Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 through

FY 2026/27; and

WHEREAS, the projects contained in the 2022 RTIP are consistent with StanCOG's adopted

2020 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), 2021 Federal Transportation Improvement Program

(FTIP), and Congestion Management Program (CMP); and

WHEREAS, the 2022 RTIP has been developed in coordination with the technical and

management staff representing StanCOG's member agencies, as well as the StanCOG Policy

Board; and

WHEREAS, a 30-day public comment period was conducted, and a public hearing was held on

October 20, 2021 to encourage all interested parties to review and comment on the draft RTIP

prior to adoption by the StanCOG Policy Board; and

WHEREAS, the 2022 RTIP programs $9.521 million in the 2022 STIP cycle (Fiscal Years

2022/23 through 2026/27).

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the 2022 Regional Transportation

Improvement Program is hereby adopted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Executive Director is authorized to make

administrative changes, as needed, to ensure that the program is implemented in the most efficient

and cost-effective manner possible

THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was introduced at a regular meeting of the Stanislaus

Council of Governments, on the 17th day of November 2021. A motion was made and seconded

to adopt the foregoing Resolution. Motion carried and the Resolution was adopted.

DRAFT

Meeting Date: November 17, 2021

Terry Withrow

Chair

ATTEST:

Rosa De Leon Park

Executive Director

Appendices

Section 18

Detailed Project Programming Summary Table

Det

ail

ed

Pro

ject

Pro

gra

mm

ing

Su

mm

ary

Tab

le

Sta

nis

lau

s 2

02

0 R

TIP

($

�s i

n 1

,00

0)

Co

un

ty

Ag

en

cy

Pro

ject

Pro

ject

To

tals

by

Fis

ca

l Y

ear

Pro

ject

To

tals

by

Co

mp

on

en

t

To

tal

22

/23

23

/24

24

/25

25

/26

26

/27

R/W

C

ON

E

&P

P

S&

E

R/W

Su

p

CO

N S

up

Sta

nis

lau

s

Sta

nC

OG

Sta

te R

ou

te 1

32

Wes

t

Fre

eway

/Exp

ress

way

Phas

e 2

8

,45

6*

8

,45

6

Sta

nC

OG

P

lann

ing, P

rogra

mm

ing, an

d

Mo

nit

ori

ng

21

5

2

15

21

5

21

0

21

0

1

,06

5

To

tal

2

15

21

5

21

5

8,6

66

21

0

9,5

21

*R

epro

gra

m $

48

2,0

00

for

RW

in F

Y 2

4/2

5 t

o C

ON

Sup

port

in F

Y 2

5/2

6 a

nd a

dd t

o $

7,9

74

,00

0 i

n 2

02

2 R

IP s

har

es.

Additional Appendices

Section 19A

2022 Regional Fund Share from 2022 STIP Fund Estimate

2022 STIP FUND ESTIMATE Table 1 - Reconciliation to County and Interregional Shares

($ in millions)

Public Transportation Account (PTA)

2022 FE PTA Target Capacity

Total 2022 STIP FE PTA Capacity

2020 STIP Program 1

Extensions

Advances

Net PTA STIP Program

PTA Capacity for County Shares

Cumulative

2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27

5-Year

Total

6-Year

Total

$10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10

$10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10

$121

$12

$0

$261

$63

$0

$61

$0

$0

$50

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$372

$63

$0

$493

$74

$0

$133 $324 $61 $50 $0 $0 $435 $567

($123) ($324) ($61) ($50) $0 $0 ($435) ($557)

($123) ($447) ($507) ($557) ($557) ($557)

State Highway Account (SHA)

2022 FE SHA Target Capacity

2022 FE TFA Available Capacity 2

Total 2022 STIP FE SHA Capacity

2020 STIP Program 1

Extensions

Advances

Net SHA STIP Program

SHA Capacity for County Shares

Cumulative

Total Capacity

Notes:

General note: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 1 2020 STIP as of June 30, 2021 (2021 Orange Book) 2 TFA capacity represents unallocated, closeout savings available for STIP projects.

2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27

5-Year

Total

6-Year

Total

$695 $725 $310 $310 $335 $360 $2,040 $2,735

$6 $52 $0 $0 $0 $0 $52 $58

$701 $777 $310 $310 $335 $360 $2,092 $2,793

$507

$257

($174)

$434

$37

($41)

$208

$0

$0

$212

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$854

$37

($41)

$1,361

$293

($215)

$590 $429 $208 $212 $0 $0 $849 $1,439

$111 $348 $102 $98 $335 $360 $1,243 $1,354

$111 $459 $560 $659 $994 $1,354

($12) $24 $41 $49 $335 $360 $808 $796

Table 2 - Summary of Targets and Shares ($ in thousands)

County

2022 STIP Programming

Total Target Maximum

Share

through 2026-27

Estimated Share

through 2027-28

Alameda 22,035 31,823

Alpine 0 279

Amador 6,492 7,156

Butte 10,887 12,842

Calaveras 2,297 3,091

Colusa 4,466 4,992

Contra Costa 61,008 67,724

Del Norte 0 0

El Dorado LTC 5,318 6,678

Fresno 22,420 29,825

Glenn 2,306 2,856

Humboldt 4,925 6,898

Imperial 9,280 12,780

Inyo 0 0

Kern 13,879 23,852

Kings 0 0

Lake 2,015 2,874

Lassen 3,286 4,543

Los Angeles 0 57,061

Madera 0 0

Marin 0 0

Mariposa 5,657 6,172

Mendocino 5,290 7,152

Merced 5,968 8,398

Modoc 859 1,531

Mono 5,124 7,155

Monterey 8,973 12,471

Napa 0 0

Nevada 3,183 4,223

Orange 24,595 42,895

Placer TPA 0 0

Plumas 1,719 2,467

Riverside 35,968 51,945

Sacramento 17,167 26,459

San Benito 0 0

San Bernardino 38,942 57,525

San Diego 57,307 78,316

San Francisco 12,750 17,726

San Joaquin 3,709 8,756

San Luis Obispo 8,341 12,046

San Mateo 15,327 20,398

Santa Barbara 7,154 11,318

Santa Clara 32,094 43,716

Santa Cruz 4,522 6,530

Shasta 4,822 6,965

Sierra 5,019 5,375

Siskiyou 2,727 4,205

Solano 0 0

Sonoma 8,654 12,396

Stanislaus 8,394 12,122

Sutter 11,080 11,938

Tahoe RPA 0 0

Tehama 3,215 4,310

Trinity 2,491 3,268

Tulare 1,975 6,587

Tuolumne 1,819 2,676

Ventura 81,671 87,837

Yolo 8,592 10,390

Yuba 12,401 13,060

Statewide Regional 618,123 883,602

Interregional 178,189 272,710

TOTAL 796,312 1,156,312

New Capacity

Statewide SHA Capacity 1,353,697

Statewide PTA Capacity (557,385)

Total STIP Capacity 796,312

Table 3 - Calculation of New Programming Targets and Shares - Total Target ($ in thousands)

County

Net Carryover

2022 STIP

Share through 2026-27

Unprogrammed

Balance

Balance

Advanced

Formula

Distribution

Add Back

Lapses 2019-20

& 2020-21

Net Share

(Total Target)

Net

Advance

Alameda 0 0 22,035 0 22,035 0

Alpine 0 (673) 659 0 0 (14)

Amador 4,997 0 1,495 0 6,492 0

Butte 6,484 0 4,403 0 10,887 0

Calaveras 510 0 1,787 0 2,297 0

Colusa 3,283 0 1,183 0 4,466 0

Contra Costa 31,090 0 15,118 14,800 61,008 0

Del Norte 0 (6,714) 1,099 0 0 (5,615)

El Dorado LTC 2,256 0 3,062 0 5,318 0

Fresno 5,750 0 16,670 0 22,420 0

Glenn 962 0 1,239 105 2,306 0

Humboldt 482 0 4,443 0 4,925 0

Imperial 1,401 0 7,879 0 9,280 0

Inyo 0 (15,443) 6,153 0 0 (9,290)

Kern 0 (8,573) 22,452 0 13,879 0

Kings 0 (9,093) 3,296 0 0 (5,797)

Lake 81 0 1,934 0 2,015 0

Lassen 454 0 2,832 0 3,286 0

Los Angeles 0 (135,991) 133,672 0 0 (2,319)

Madera 0 (6,559) 3,067 0 0 (3,492)

Marin 0 (22,406) 4,131 0 0 (18,275)

Mariposa 4,499 0 1,158 0 5,657 0

Mendocino 1,099 0 4,191 0 5,290 0

Merced 496 0 5,472 0 5,968 0

Modoc 0 (688) 1,512 35 859 0

Mono 118 0 4,571 435 5,124 0

Monterey 0 0 7,873 1,100 8,973 0

Napa 0 (19,683) 2,724 0 0 (16,959)

Nevada 840 0 2,343 0 3,183 0

Orange 0 (16,600) 41,195 0 24,595 0

Placer TPA 0 (21,476) 5,706 0 0 (15,770)

Plumas 34 0 1,685 0 1,719 0

Riverside 0 0 35,968 0 35,968 0

Sacramento 0 (3,752) 20,919 0 17,167 0

San Benito 0 (6,779) 1,451 0 0 (5,328)

San Bernardino 0 (2,890) 41,832 0 38,942 0

San Diego 10,014 0 47,293 0 57,307 0

San Francisco 1,548 0 11,202 0 12,750 0

San Joaquin 0 (7,652) 11,361 0 3,709 0

San Luis Obispo 0 0 8,341 0 8,341 0

San Mateo 3,612 0 11,415 300 15,327 0

Santa Barbara 0 (2,220) 9,374 0 7,154 0

Santa Clara 3,632 0 26,162 2,300 32,094 0

Santa Cruz 0 0 4,522 0 4,522 0

Shasta 0 0 4,822 0 4,822 0

Sierra 4,216 0 803 0 5,019 0

Siskiyou 0 (600) 3,327 0 2,727 0

Solano 0 (29,263) 6,854 0 0 (22,409)

Sonoma 231 0 8,423 0 8,654 0

Stanislaus 0 0 8,394 0 8,394 0

Sutter 9,149 0 1,931 0 11,080 0

Tahoe RPA 0 (1,592) 956 0 0 (636)

Tehama 751 0 2,464 0 3,215 0

Trinity 742 0 1,749 0 2,491 0

Tulare 0 (8,409) 10,384 0 1,975 0

Tuolumne 0 (110) 1,929 0 1,819 0

Ventura 67,789 0 13,882 0 81,671 0

Yolo 4,545 0 4,047 0 8,592 0

Yuba 10,919 0 1,482 0 12,401 0

Statewide Regional 181,984 (327,166) 638,326 19,075 618,123 (105,904)

Interregional 0 (39,222) 212,774 4,637 178,189 0

TOTAL 181,984 (366,388) 851,100 23,712 796,312 (105,904)



Total 796,312

Table 4 - Calculation of Targets and Shares - Maximum ($ in thousands)

County

Net Carryover

2022 STIP

Estimated Share through 2027-28

Unprogrammed

Balance

Balance

Advanced

Formula

Distribution

Add Back

Lapses 2019-20

& 2020-21

Net Share

(Maximum)

Net

Advance

Alameda 0 0 31,823 0 31,823 0

Alpine 0 (673) 952 0 279 0

Amador 4,997 0 2,159 0 7,156 0

Butte 6,484 0 6,358 0 12,842 0

Calaveras 510 0 2,581 0 3,091 0

Colusa 3,283 0 1,709 0 4,992 0

Contra Costa 31,090 0 21,834 14,800 67,724 0

Del Norte 0 (6,714) 1,587 0 0 (5,127)

El Dorado LTC 2,256 0 4,422 0 6,678 0

Fresno 5,750 0 24,075 0 29,825 0

Glenn 962 0 1,789 105 2,856 0

Humboldt 482 0 6,416 0 6,898 0

Imperial 1,401 0 11,379 0 12,780 0

Inyo 0 (15,443) 8,886 0 0 (6,557)

Kern 0 (8,573) 32,425 0 23,852 0

Kings 0 (9,093) 4,760 0 0 (4,333)

Lake 81 0 2,793 0 2,874 0

Lassen 454 0 4,089 0 4,543 0

Los Angeles 0 (135,991) 193,052 0 57,061 0

Madera 0 (6,559) 4,429 0 0 (2,130)

Marin 0 (22,406) 5,966 0 0 (16,440)

Mariposa 4,499 0 1,673 0 6,172 0

Mendocino 1,099 0 6,053 0 7,152 0

Merced 496 0 7,902 0 8,398 0

Modoc 0 (688) 2,184 35 1,531 0

Mono 118 0 6,602 435 7,155 0

Monterey 0 0 11,371 1,100 12,471 0

Napa 0 (19,683) 3,934 0 0 (15,749)

Nevada 840 0 3,383 0 4,223 0

Orange 0 (16,600) 59,495 0 42,895 0

Placer TPA 0 (21,476) 8,240 0 0 (13,236)

Plumas 34 0 2,433 0 2,467 0

Riverside 0 0 51,945 0 51,945 0

Sacramento 0 (3,752) 30,211 0 26,459 0

San Benito 0 (6,779) 2,095 0 0 (4,684)

San Bernardino 0 (2,890) 60,415 0 57,525 0

San Diego 10,014 0 68,302 0 78,316 0

San Francisco 1,548 0 16,178 0 17,726 0

San Joaquin 0 (7,652) 16,408 0 8,756 0

San Luis Obispo 0 0 12,046 0 12,046 0

San Mateo 3,612 0 16,486 300 20,398 0

Santa Barbara 0 (2,220) 13,538 0 11,318 0

Santa Clara 3,632 0 37,784 2,300 43,716 0

Santa Cruz 0 0 6,530 0 6,530 0

Shasta 0 0 6,965 0 6,965 0

Sierra 4,216 0 1,159 0 5,375 0

Siskiyou 0 (600) 4,805 0 4,205 0

Solano 0 (29,263) 9,899 0 0 (19,364)

Sonoma 231 0 12,165 0 12,396 0

Stanislaus 0 0 12,122 0 12,122 0

Sutter 9,149 0 2,789 0 11,938 0

Tahoe RPA 0 (1,592) 1,381 0 0 (211)

Tehama 751 0 3,559 0 4,310 0

Trinity 742 0 2,526 0 3,268 0

Tulare 0 (8,409) 14,996 0 6,587 0

Tuolumne 0 (110) 2,786 0 2,676 0

Ventura 67,789 0 20,048 0 87,837 0

Yolo 4,545 0 5,845 0 10,390 0

Yuba 10,919 0 2,141 0 13,060 0

Statewide Regional 181,984 (327,166) 921,878 19,075 883,602 (87,831)

Interregional 0 (39,222) 307,295 4,637 272,710 0

TOTAL 181,984 (366,388) 1,229,173 23,712 1,156,312 (87,831)



Total 1,156,312

Table 5 - Planning, Programming, and Monitoring (PPM) Limitations ($ in thousands)

County

2020 STIP

FY 2024-25

2022 STIP

2024-25 through

2026-27

Total

2024-25 through

2026-27

5% PPM Limitation

2024-25 through

2026-27

Alameda 11,315 22,035 33,350 1,668

Alpine 337 659 996 50

Amador 765 1,495 2,260 113

Butte 2,264 4,403 6,667 333

Calaveras 915 1,787 2,702 135

Colusa 606 1,183 1,789 89

Contra Costa 7,747 15,118 22,865 1,143

Del Norte 565 1,099 1,664 83

El Dorado LTC 1,568 3,062 4,630 232

Fresno 8,540 16,670 25,210 1,261

Glenn 635 1,239 1,874 94

Humboldt 2,280 4,443 6,723 336

Imperial 4,036 7,879 11,915 596

Inyo 3,152 6,153 9,305 465

Kern 11,506 22,452 33,958 1,698

Kings 1,687 3,296 4,983 249

Lake 990 1,934 2,924 146

Lassen 1,449 2,832 4,281 214

Los Angeles 68,508 133,672 202,180 10,109

Madera 1,570 3,067 4,637 232

Marin 2,119 4,131 6,250 313

Mariposa 593 1,158 1,751 88

Mendocino 2,150 4,191 6,341 317

Merced 2,802 5,472 8,274 414

Modoc 774 1,512 2,286 114

Mono 2,342 4,571 6,913 346

Monterey 4,032 7,873 11,905 595

Napa 1,395 2,724 4,119 206

Nevada 1,199 2,343 3,542 177

Orange 21,115 41,195 62,310 3,116

Placer TPA 2,928 5,706 8,634 432

Plumas 865 1,685 2,550 128

Riverside 18,432 35,968 54,400 2,720

Sacramento 10,720 20,919 31,639 1,582

San Benito 743 1,451 2,194 110

San Bernardino 21,436 41,832 63,268 3,163

San Diego 24,241 47,293 71,534 3,577

San Francisco 5,747 11,202 16,949 847

San Joaquin 5,820 11,361 17,181 859

San Luis Obispo 4,274 8,341 12,615 631

San Mateo 5,848 11,415 17,263 863

Santa Barbara 4,804 9,374 14,178 709

Santa Clara 13,406 26,162 39,568 1,978

Santa Cruz 2,317 4,522 6,839 342

Shasta 2,476 4,822 7,298 365

Sierra 411 803 1,214 61

Siskiyou 1,702 3,327 5,029 251

Solano 3,511 6,854 10,365 518

Sonoma 4,314 8,423 12,737 637

Stanislaus 4,302 8,394 12,696 635

Sutter 989 1,931 2,920 146

Tahoe RPA 490 956 1,446 72

Tehama 1,261 2,464 3,725 186

Trinity 895 1,749 2,644 132

Tulare 5,331 10,384 15,715 786

Tuolumne 987 1,929 2,916 146

Ventura 7,114 13,882 20,996 1,050

Yolo 2,073 4,047 6,120 306

Yuba 759 1,482 2,241 112

Statewide 327,152 638,326 965,478 48,274

Note: Limitation amounts include amounts already programmed.


Section 19B

StanCOG�s Written Comments to the Draft 2020 Interregional

Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP)


Section 19C

2008 STIP CTC Resolution G-08-08

May 29, 2008

CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

Adoption of 2008 State Transportation Improvement Program

Resolution No. G-08-08

1.1 WHEREAS Government Code Section 14529 requires the California Transportation Commission biennially to adopt and submit to the Legislature and Governor a state transportation improvement program (STIP), and

1.2 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14529, the 2008 STIP is a five-year STIP, adding two new program years, 2011-12, and 2012-13, and

1.3 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14525, the Commission adopted the 2008 STIP fund estimate on October 24, 2007, and

1.4 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14530.1, the Commission adopted amendments to the STIP guidelines, to be applicable to the 2008 STIP development process, on October 24, 2007, and

1.5 WHEREAS the 2008 STIP fund estimate provided $1.164 billion in new STIP programming capacity, and

1.6 WHEREAS the $1.164 billion in new capacity includes $144 million that is restricted to projects eligible for funding from federal Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds, and

1.7 WHEREAS the fund estimate included Public Transportation Account funding, which is restricted to rail and transit projects, at a level that is $14 million less than the amount required to fund all rail and transit projects that were programmed in the 2006 STIP, as amended, and

1.8 WHEREAS the statutes define the STIP as a resource management document to assist the state and local entities to plan and implement transportation improvements and to utilize resources in a cost effective manner, and

1.9 WHEREAS the statutes make 75% of all new STIP funds available for the regional improvement program, subdivided by formula into county shares, with projects to be nominated by each regional agency in its regional transportation improvement program (RTIP), and

1.10 WHEREAS the statutes make the remaining 25% of all new STIP funds available for the interregional improvement program, with projects to be nominated by the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in its interregional transportation improvement program (ITIP) or, under limited circumstances, by a regional agency in its RTIP, and

1.11 WHEREAS the Commission has received and reviewed the 2008 RTIPs and the 2008 ITIP submitted on or about February 19, 2008, as well as various amendments and corrections submitted subsequently, and

1.12 WHEREAS the Commission has received requests for changes to the STIP funding of projects also funded from the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) and the Route 99 Bond program, including requests that would increase STIP funding by $93 million, and

2008 STIP Adoption Page 2

CTC Resolution G-08-08

1.13 WHEREAS the Commission has had insufficient time for review of amendments to the project baseline agreements for the CMIA and Route 99 Bond projects, and

1.14 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14529, the Commission held two public hearings, one in Los Angeles on March 12, 2008, and the other in Sacramento on March 18, 2008, for the purpose of reconciling any objections by any county or regional agency to the ITIP or the Department�s objections to any RTIP, and has considered the testimony heard at those hearings along with further written and oral comments, and

1.15 WHEREAS the total amount programmed in each fiscal year may not exceed the amount specified in the adopted fund estimate, and

1.16 WHEREAS the Commission staff recommendations for the 2008 STIP were published and made available to the Commission, the Department, regional transportation agencies, and county transportation commissions on May 9, 2008, and

1.17 WHEREAS the staff recommendations conform to the fund estimate and other requirements of statute for the STIP, and

1.18 WHEREAS the staff recommendations include rail and transit projects at a level that does not exceed the fund estimate capacity for the Public Transportation Account, and

1.19 WHEREAS the Route 210 freeway in San Bernardino County between the Los Angeles County Line and Route 215 (PPNO 193S) was programmed in the STIP for $98 million for right-of-way and was constructed with local funds, and the Commission has not been able to close out the project for STIP share purposes because the Department has not yet reported a final estimate of right-of-way costs for the project,

2.1 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the California Transportation Commission hereby adopts the 2008 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to include the program described in the staff recommendations, including the attachments to this resolution, and

2.2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, except as otherwise noted in the staff recommendations or this resolution, the 2008 STIP includes all projects remaining from the 2006 STIP, as currently amended, for which funding has not yet been allocated, and

2.3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that each of the local road and transit rehabilitation projects included in the staff recommendations or remaining from the prior STIP is included in the 2008 STIP, subject to verification by the Department at the time of allocation by the Commission that the project meets the standard for rehabilitation and does not include ineligible maintenance costs, and

2.4 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that each of the projects identified in the staff recommendations as eligible for Transportation Enhancement (TE) funding is included in the 2008 STIP subject to verification by the Department and the Federal Highway Administration that the project is indeed eligible for TE funding, and

2.5 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission intends that all STIP projects that are eligible or could be made eligible for Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds shall be funded from the state�s Federal TE apportionment, whether or not they are identified in the staff recommendations as TE-eligible and whether or not they are designated for programming from TE funding, and

2.6 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission intends that all STIP rail and transit projects, including grade separations on passenger rail lines, be funded from the Public Transportation Account or, if eligible, from the state�s Federal TE apportionment, and



2.7 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission intends that State Highway Account funds, including federal funds other than federal TE funds, be reserved for the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) and not be used for the STIP during the 2008 STIP period, except for the payment of outstanding GARVEE bond debt service, and

2.8 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, while the Commission is deleting all programming for the Route 120 Oakdale Bypass in the 2008 STIP, as proposed in the ITIP, the Commission supports the Department�s commitment to the development and delivery of the North County Corridor (NCC) project identified by the Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG) as an alternative to the Route 120 Oakdale Bypass, and the Commission acknowledges the Department�s intent to nominate up to $91 million in the 2010 ITIP for programming of an ITIP-eligible project segment, and

2.9 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission recognizes StanCOG�s commitment to the NCC project through the programming of the environmental component of the project in the 2008 STIP, and the Commission expects the Department and StanCOG to identify an appropriate scope, cost, and schedule for programming of a project segment in the 2010 STIP, and

2.10 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission expects the Department, in consultation with the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) to report its final estimate of right-of-way costs for the Route 210 freeway well in advance of the fund estimate for the 2010 STIP, so that any impact of these costs on the San Bernardino county share can be taken into account beginning with the 2010 STIP, and

2.11 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as recommended by staff, the Commission is leaving $93 million in STIP capacity as an unprogrammed reserve pending the review and approval of amendments to the project baseline agreements for CMIA and Route 99 Bond projects and that the Commission intends to act on the STIP requests for those projects at the June 25-26, 2008 meeting, and

2.12 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Commission staff, in consultation with the Department and regional agencies, is authorized to make further technical changes in cost, schedules, and descriptions for projects in the 2008 STIP, consistent with the fund estimate, in order to reflect the most current information (including the lapse of projects at the close of the 2007-08 fiscal year) or to clarify the Commission�s programming commitments, with report of any substantive changes back to the Commission for approval at the June 25-26, 2008 meeting, and

2.13 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission adopts this STIP in accordance with current law and the fund estimate, which is based on current law, and that the capacity of the Commission to allocate funding to STIP projects is dependent on revenues that are appropriated through the annual state budget, and

2.14 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the revenues made available through the state budget

fall short of the amounts assumed in the fund estimate, which is based on current law, then

the Commission may be required to delay or restrict allocations and would adopt interim

allocation plans to do so.



ATTACHMENT A 2008 STIP STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS

ERRATA (All costs listed in $1,000�s)

County Share Summaries:

Alameda. For the Route 238 landscape replacement (#96G), construction is $3,200, not $4,059, and the totals are corrected accordingly. $4,059 is the total for all components.

Mono. For the Route 395 Highpoint curve correction (#241), the first of two lines is -$1,241, not +$1,241, and the totals are corrected accordingly.

Monterey. For the County�s Davis Rd Salinas River Bridge, the construction component amount is $1,600, not -$1,600. The fiscal year amount was listed correctly and totals do not change.

Interregional Share Summary:

Interregional TE. For the Route 395 Independence lighting (#454), the first of two lines is -$263, not -$219. Construction support was incorrectly listed, and the totals are corrected accordingly.



ATTACHMENT B 2008 STIP STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS LATE CHANGES AND CLARIFICATIONS

(All costs listed in $1,000�s)

Alameda. For the Route 880 Mission Blvd interchange reconstruction (#16V), change the implementing agency from Caltrans to ACTIA and change $10,000 construction from 2008-09 to 2009-10.

Contra Costa. The request for $3,339 in increased STIP funding for the I-80 integrated corridor mobility CMIA project (#62E) is withdrawn.

Contra Costa (TE). For Hercules intercity rail station enhancement (#2011F), change $1,097 construction from 2008-09 to 2010-11. For Montalvin Manor pedestrian improvements (#183K), change $365 in 2008-09 to $30 PS&E and $335 construction.

El Dorado (TE). For Placerville El Dorado Trail (#1215), advance the project by one year, with $40 environmental and $45 PS&E in 2010-11 and $95 construction in 2011-12. For El Dorado County, El Dorado Hills SMUD Corridor bike path (#1216), advance the project by one year, with $15 environmental and $29 PS&E in 2010-11 and $251 construction in 2011-12.

Humboldt. For the Route 101 Eureka-Arcata corridor improvement (#72), change $3,262 environmental to $2,613 and $2,718 PS&E to $2,496. This restores both components to the amounts programmed in the prior STIP.

Los Angeles. For the Route 5 Carmenita Road interchange (#2808A), change $44,231 ($35,531 construction and $8,700 construction support) from 2008-09 to 2009-10.

Los Angeles. For the Route 71 Mission Blvd interchange (Caltrans portion) (#2232), change the closeout cost for environmental from $400 to $200.

Los Angeles (TE). For the City of Los Angeles San Fernando Road bike path (#4085), change $8,370 construction from 2012-13 to 2011-12.

Marin. For the Route 101 San Antonio Rd curve correction (#360G), change $2,300 PS&E ($1,900 RIP and $400 IIP) from 2010-11 to 2008-09.

Mono. Delete the Owens River Road project (#2020), which is now programmed in 2008-09 for $2,255 construction. Change PPM (#2003) in each year from 2008-09 through 2010-11 from $400 to $350. Change the County�s Bridgeport local street rehab (#2021) construction from $2,621 in 2010-11 to $1,999 in 2010. Change the County�s Lee Vining streets rehab (#2558) construction from $2,815 to $2,047 in 2010-11. Change the County�s Owens Gorge Road rehab (#2012) construction from $1,791 to $1,619 in 2009-10. Add the County�s June Lake street rehab (#2561), with $37 environmental in 2010-11, $242 PS&E in 2011-12, $60 R/W in 2011-12, and $3,005 construction in 2012-13. Add the County�s Chalfant street rehab (#2563), with $35 environmental in 2010-11, $30 PS&E in 2010-11, and $1,219 construction in 2012-13.

Mono (TE). For Mammoth Lakes, Mammoth Scenic Loop bike lanes (#2565), change $1,000 construction from 2012-13 to 2011-12.

Nevada. For the Route 20 Dorsey Drive interchange (#3976), change PS&E from $1,390 to $655 and change construction in 2009-10 from $9,820 to $10,555.

Orange. For the Fullerton transportation center parking (#2026), change $29,219 construction from 2012-13 to 2010-11. For Tustin rail station parking expansion (#9510), change $16,500 construction from 2010-11 to 2011-12. For Placentia Metrolink station with siding (#9514), change $16,600 construction from 2009-10 to 2012-13.



Sacramento. For the Sacramento Regional Transit South Line extension (#3L05), change $4,307 PS&E from 2010-11 to 2009-10.

Sacramento (TE). For R Street enhancements (#1662), change $4,665 construction from 2011-12 to 2010-11.

San Benito (TE). For San Benito COG, San Juan Highway bike lanes (#9380), change $252 construction from 2012-13 to 2011-12.

San Francisco. For the Golden Gate Bridge median barrier (#2014U), delete $970 environmental in 2009-10, $80 R/W in 2009-10, and $2,900 PS&E in 2010-11, and increase construction in 2011-12 from $3,950 to $8,000.

San Francisco (TE). For Leland Avenue streetscape (#9098A), change $1,735 construction from 2010-11 to 2008-09.

San Joaquin (TE). For Stockton, Airport Way streetscape (#205), change $900 construction from 2012-13 to 2011-12. For San Joaquin Regional Transit District, Airport Way bus rapid transit corridor enhancement (#204), change $124 construction from 2012-13 to 2011-12.

San Luis Obispo. For the County�s Price Canyon Rd widening (#2071), change $3,414 construction from 2008-09 to 2009-10.

San Luis Obispo (TE). For the Arroyo Grande East Branch St streetscape (#2218), change $838 construction from 2011-12 to 2009-10. For the Pismo Beach Promenade IV (#1109), change $400 construction from 2011-12 to 2009-10. For the Atascadero Traffic Way streetscape (#1898A), change $375 construction from 2012-13 to 2011-12. For the Grover Beach Grand Av streetscape (#2219), change $475 construction from 2012-13 to 2011-12. For the County�s Bob Jones bike and pedestrian pathway (#1129), split the project (originally recommended for $1,600 construction in 2009-10) into two phases, with phase 1 construction for $1,000 in 2009-10 and phase 2 construction for $600 in 2012-13. For the County�s Atascadero-Templeton connector (#1843), delete $150 originally recommended for environmental in 2008-09 and change PS&E from $150 in 2009-10 to $200 in 2012-13. For the County�s Morro Bay-Cayucos connector, delete $150 originally recommended for environmental in 2008-09 and change PS&E from $150 in 2009-10 to $200 in 2012-13. For the TE reserve, change $800 in 2012-13 to $450 in 2011-12 and $350 in 2012-13.

San Mateo. For the Route 101 Willow Road interchange reconstruction (#690A), reduce STIP funding for construction in 2011-12 by $2,079, from $18,870 to $16,791, with the difference to come from local funding.

San Mateo. The request for $4,606 in increased STIP funding for the Route 101 auxiliary lanes CMIA project (#658B) is withdrawn.

San Mateo. Add San Mateo C/CAG Smart Corridors ITS (#2140F) for $1,860 PS&E in 2008-09, $140 R/W in 2008-09, and $8,000 construction in 2010-11.

San Mateo (TE). Change the TE reserve (#2140C) in 2008-09 from $1,836 to $1,124, in 2009-10 from $1,313 to $1,587, and in 2010-11 from $1,278 to $1,716.

Santa Barbara. For the Route 101 improvement, Carpenteria Creek to Linden (#482), change $39,589 construction from 2010-11 to 2011-12. For the Route 166 widening, Guadalupe-Santa Maria (#620), change the implementing agency from Caltrans to the Santa Barbara Association of Governments (SBCAG) and change the funding for environmental in 2011-12 from $3,100 to $1,251. For the Route 101 Union Valley Parkway interchange (#4638), change $5,050 construction and $1,800 construction support from 2011-12 to 2010-11. Add the County�s Ortega Hill Road improvement (#1206A) for $2,000 construction in 2010-11; this project was proposed in the RTIP for 2008-09 and was not included in the original staff recommendation.



Santa Barbara (TE). For the City of Santa Barbara�s Loma Alta Hill sidewalk (#1195), change $1542 construction from 2011-12 to 2008-09. For the Lompoc Alan Hancock bike path (#1906), change $905 construction from 2011-12 to 2010-11.

Santa Cruz. For the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission Route 1 HOV environmental study (#73), change $1,375 from 2011-12 to 2008-09.

Shasta. For the Route 5 South Redding widening (#3331), change $1,195 environmental from 2011-12 to 2008-09.

Solano. For the Solano TA local roads north of Route 80/680/12 (#5301K), change $11,412 construction from 2008-09 to 2009-10.

Stanislaus. For the StanCOG North County Corridor environmental study (#228), change $6,200 from 2011-12 to 2008-09.

Trinity. For Brady Rd intersection realignment (#2420), change $35 PS&E from 2008-09 to 2009-10 and change $35 R/W and $400 construction from 2009-10 to 2010-11.

Trinity (TE). For the Lowden Park-Senior Center bike and pedestrian lane (#2487), change $130 environmental from 2010-11 to 2008-09, $40 R/W from 2012-13 to 2009-10, and $770 construction from 2012-13 to 2010-11. This TE project is to be constructed in conjunction with the East Weaverville road project (#2138). For the Horsewater Lake pedestrian bridge (#2399C), change $25 PS&E from 2008-09 to 2009-10 and $60 R/W and $130 construction from 2009-10 to 2010-11.

Tulare. For the Route 216 widening (#106), change the limits to Lovers Lane to McAuliff Street. For the County�s Road 80 expressway, phase 1 (#6L11), change the limits to Avenue 304 to Avenue 328. For the Route 65 project to align and widen Road 204 (#104), change environmental programmed in the prior year from $3,807 to $3,150.

Intercity Rail. For Orange County Fullerton station parking expansion (#2026) change $2,750 construction from 2012-13 to 2010-11.

Intercity Rail. Add Stockton station relocation (#2081), as recommended in the ITIP, for $100 environmental in 2011-12, $650 PS&E in 2012-13, and $2,750 R/W in 2012-13.

Interregional Program (Highways). For the Monterey Route 101 Prunedale improvement (#58G), reduce R/W from $56,073 to $42,401 and increase construction in 2010-11 from $74,664 to $88,336. This compensates for an advance of federal earmark funds.

Interregional Program (TE). For the Aesthetic Enhancements along Route 5 in Los Angeles County (#2808A), change $3,385 ($3,195 construction and $190 construction support) from 2008-09 to 2009-10.

Interregional Program (TE). For the Merced County Route 99 corridor bridge enhancement (#196), change environmental in 2010-11 from $17 to $81, PS&E in 2011-12 from $65 to $100, and construction in 2012-13 from $829 to $900.

Interregional Program (TE). For the Riverside County Route 91 Green River Road landscape enhancements (#72G), change $1,000 construction and $536 construction support in 2008-09 to $1,103 construction and $536 construction support in 2010-11.

Interregional Program (TE). For the Route 46 Whitley 1 enhancements in San Luis Obispo County (#A226C), change $4,500 construction from 2011-12 to 2009-10.

Interregional Program (TE). For the Stanislaus County Route 99 corridor bridge enhancement (#195), change environmental in 2010-11 from $29 to $96, PS&E in 2011-12 from $105 to $474, construction in 2012-13 from $1,387 to $1,075, and construction support in 2012-13 from $236 to $509.



Interregional Program (TE). For the following projects, change construction and construction support from 2010-11 to 2009-10, as originally proposed:

Los Angeles, Route 5, landscape enhancements (#3547), $2,356.

San Bernardino, Route 71, tree planting (#234P), $1,781.

San Joaquin, Route 205, tree planting (#1), $1,764.

Interregional Program (TE). For the following projects, change construction and construction support from 2011-12 to 2010-11, as originally proposed:

Lake, Route 20, Bloody Island interpretive center (#4421), $192.

Placer, Route 89, Alice Richardson water pollution abatement (#5282), $574.

2022 regional transportation improvement program

Documents