# FINAL 2007 AQMP

APPENDIX IV-C

Regional Transportation Strategy and

Control Measures

June 2007

# Mission Statement

Leadership, vision and progress that promote economic growth,

personal well being and livable communities for all Southern

California.

The Association will accomplish this mission by:

• Developing long-range regional plans and strategies that provide

for efficient movement of people, goods and information; enhance

economic growth and international trade; and improve the

environment and quality of life.

• Providing quality information services and analysis for the

Region.

• Using an inclusive decision-making process that resolves

conflicts and encourages trust.

• Creating an educational and work environment that cultivates

creativity, initiative and opportunity.

# Regional Council Members

President:

Yvonne B. Burke, Los Angeles

First Vice President:

Gary Ovitt, San Bernardino County

Second Vice President:

Richard Dixon, Lake Forest

Immediate Past President:

Toni Young, Port Hueneme

Imperial County:

• Victor Carrillo, Imperial County

• John Edney, El Centro

Los Angeles County:

• Yvonne B. Burke, Los Angeles

County

• Zev Yaroslavsky, Los Angeles

County

• Jim Aldinger, Manhattan

Beach

• Harry Baldwin, San Gabriel

• Paul Bowlen, Cerritos

• Todd Campbell, Burbank

• Tony Cardenas, Los Angeles

• Stan Carroll, La Habra Heights

• Margaret Clark, Rosemead

• Gene Daniels, Paramount

• Mike Dispenza, Palmdale

• Judy Dunlap, Inglewood

• Rae Gabelich, Long Beach

• David Gafin, Downey • Wendy Greuel, Los

Angeles

• Frank Gurule, Cudahy

• James Gurule, Cudahy

• Janice Hahn, Los Angeles

• Isadore Hall, Compton

• Keith W. Hanks, Azusa

• Jose Huizar, Los Angeles

• Tom LaBonge, Los

Angeles

• Paula Lantz, Pomona

• Paul Nowatka, Torrance

• Pam O'Connor, Santa

Monica

• Alex Padilla, Los Angeles

• Bernard Parks, Los

Angeles • Jan Perry, Los Angeles

• Ed Reyes, Los Angeles

• Bill Rosendahl, Los Angeles

• Greig Smith, Los Angeles

• Tom Sykes, Walnut

• Paul Talbot, Alhambra

• Mike Ten, South Pasadena

• Tonia Reyes Uranga, Long

Beach

• Antonio Villaraigosa, Los

Angeles

• Dennis Washburn, Calabasas

• Jack Weiss, Los Angeles

• Herb J. Wesson, Jr., Los

Angeles

• Dennis P. Zine, Los Angeles

• Eric Garcetti, Los Angeles

Orange County:

• Chris Norby, Orange County

• Christine Barnes, La Palma

• John Beauman, Brea

• Lou Bone, Tustin

• Art Brown, Buena Park

• Richard Chavez , Anaheim • Debbie Cook , Huntington Beach

• Richard Dixon, Lake Forest

• Paul Glaab, Laguna Niguel

• Marilynn Poe, Los Alamitos

• Leslie Daigle, Newport Beach

Riverside County:

• Jeff Stone, Riverside County

• Thomas Buckley, Lake

Elsinore • Bonnie Flickinger, Moreno Valley

• Ron Loveridge, Riverside

• Greg Pettis, Cathedral City

• Ron Roberts, Temecula

San Bernardino County:

• Gary Ovitt, San Bernardino

County

• Lawrence Dale, Barstow

• Paul Eaton, Montclair • Lee Ann Garcia, Grand Terrace

• Tim Jasper, Town of Apple Valley

• Larry McCallon, Highland

• Debra Robertson, Rialto

• Alan Wapner, Ontario

Ventura County:

• Judy Mikels, Ventura County

• Glen Becerra, Simi Valley

• Carl Morehouse, San Buenaventura

• Toni Young, Port Hueneme

Orange County Transportation Authority:

• Lou Correa , C ounty of Orange

Riverside County Transportation Commission:

• Robin Lowe, Hemet

Ventura County Transportation Commission:

• Keith Millhouse, Moorpark

# SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

SCAG MANAGEMENT

Mark Pisano, Executive Director

Jim Gosnell, Deputy Executive Director

Hasan Ikhrata, Director, Planning and Policy

Sylvia Patsaouras, Acting Director, Government and Public Affairs

Keith Killough, Director, Information Services

Wayne Moore, Chief Financial Officer

Deng Bang Lee, Manager, Transportation Modeling

Jacob Lieb, Acting Manager, Environmental Planning

Lynn Harris, Manager, Community Development

Rich Macias, Manager, Transportation Planning & Programs

Joanna Africa, Acting Director, Legal Services

PROJECT STAFF

Main Authors

Jonathan Nadler, Program Manager, Environmental Planning

Sheryll Del Rosario, Associate Regional Planner, Environmental Planning

Jessica Kirchner, Associate Regional Planner, Environmental Planning

Other Contributors

Naresh Amatya, Program Manager, Transportation Planning & Programs

Mark Butala, Program Manager, Community Development

Hsi-hwa Hu, Senior Regional Planner, Community Development

Guoxiong Huang, Senior Modeling Analyst

Philip Law, Senior Regional Planner Specialist, Transportation Planning & Programs

Annie Nam, Program Manager, Transportation Planning & Programs

Teresa Wang, Senior Modeling Analyst

Frank Wen, Program Manager, Community Development

Philbert Wong, Associate Regional Planner

Danny Wu, Program Manager, Transportation Planning & Programs

Ying Zhou, Senior Regional Planner Specialist, Community Development

# Table of Contents

SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ ..... 1

LINKING REGIONAL TRANSPORTAT ION PLANNING TO AIR QUALITY

PLANNING ....................................................................................................................... ...... 2

K EY 

# P LANNING 

# F ACTORS 

# : C HALLENGES AND 

# O BJECTIVES 

# ................................................... 3

IMPLEMENTING A REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY.......................... 4

H ISTORIC 

# T RENDS 

# : C ONTEXT AND 

# C ONDITIONS 

# .................................................................... 5

G ROWTH 

# F ORECASTS 

# : L INKING 

# S OCIO 

# -E CONOMIC 

# P ROFILES TO 

# L AND 

# U SE 

# P ATTERNS 

# ........ 5

S OUTHERN 

# C ALIFORNIA 

# C OMPASS 

# B LUEPRINT 

# : P LANNING FOR 

# I NTEGRATED



# L AND 

# U SE AND 

# T RANSPORTATION 

# ....................................................................................... 6

G OODS 

# M OVEMENT 

# : D EVELOPMENT OF A 

# R EGIONAL 

# S TRATEGY 

# .......................................... 9

TRANSPORTATION CONT ROL MEASURES .............................................................. 36

B ACKGROUND 

# ..................................................................................................................... 36

2007 AQMP TCM S 

# ............................................................................................................. 39

R OLLOVER AND 

# S UBSTITUTION OF 

# TCM P ROJECTS 

# ............................................................. 39

TCM I MPLEMENTATION 

# ...................................................................................................... 42

R ELATION OF 

# C URRENT 

# TCM C OMPONENTS 

# T O 

# P REVIOUS 

# P LANS 

# ..................................... 44

TCM E NFORCEABILITY AND 

# M ONITORING 

# .......................................................................... 45

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS............................................................. 46

REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONT ROL MEASURE ANALYSIS............................. 49

I NTRODUCTION 

# .................................................................................................................... 49

SCAG TCM D EVELOPMENT 

# P ROCESS 

# ................................................................................ 49

A SSEMBLY AND 

# R EVIEW OF 

# C ANDIDATE 

# RACM ................................................................ 52

D ETERMINING 

# RACM M EASURES 

# ....................................................................................... 54

R EASONED 

# J USTIFICATION 

# ................................................................................................... 55

C ONCLUSION 

# ....................................................................................................................... 55

ATTACHMENT A

2007 AQMP T RANSPORTATION 

# C ONTROL 

# M EASURES 

# (TCM S 

# )

ATTACHMENT B

F ISCALLY 

# C ONSTRAINED 

# P ROJECTS FROM THE 

# 2004 RTP

ATTACHMENT C

R EASONABLY 

# A VAILABLE 

# C ONTROL 

# M EASURE 

# (R ACM 

# ) A NALYSIS



# ATTACHMENT D

G OODS 

# M OVEMENT 

# C ONTROL 

# M EASURES

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

1 

# SUMMARY

This Appendix describes the Southern Califor nia Association of Government’s (SCAG)

transportation strategy and transportation control measures (TCMs) to be included as part of the

2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the South

Coast Air Basin. This strategy was developed in consultation with Federal, State and local

transportation and air quality planning agencies and other stakeholders. The four County

Transportation Commissions in the South Coast Air Basin, namely Los Angeles County

Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Rivers ide County Transportation Commission, Orange

County Transportation Authority and the San Bernardino Associated Governments, were

actively involved in the development of the TCM strategy of this Appendix.

Consistent with past practices and in response to the inter-Agency consultation process, the

Regional Transportation Strategy and Transportation Control Measures portion of the 2007

AQMP/SIP consists of the following four related elements.

• Transportation Strategy and Emissions - Total regional emissions from transportation

projects in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) are derived from the 2004 Regional

Transportation Plan (RTP). The long-term planning requirements from on-road mobile

sources are met by the RTP process, while the short-term implementation requirements are

met by the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) process.

• TCM Project Identification - The TCMs included in the 2007 AQMP are a subset of the

RTP/RTIP. The TCMs are derived from TCM projects listed in the first two years of the

2006 RTIP, which include ongoing TCMs from previous RTIPs and are based on the broad

categories (TCM1) adopted in the 1994 AQMP/SI P. Examples of TCM1 categories are

HOV lanes, transit improvements, park and ride facilities and traffic signal improvements.

TCM projects with funds programmed for right-of- way or construction in the first two years

of the prevailing RTIP are considered committed TCMs. In the event of a conformity lapse,

only federally approved TCMs and exempt projects, in the first two years (fiscally

constrained portion) of the most recent RTIP, will be allowed to proceed.

SAFETEA-LU (Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy

for Users) provides for a formal substitution process that supersedes the process currently

approved and implemented by SCAG. In the event that the criteria outlined in SAFETEA-LU

are met, a formal SIP revision is not necessary for substitution of TCMs. SCAG will continue

to update the TCM list to reflect new, completed and ongoing projects each time SCAG

adopts a new RTIP and/or RTP.

• Timely Implementation – Once a TCM project is listed in an RTIP as a committed project,

the implementation status must be reported on in subsequent RTIPs and RTPs until the

project has been completed. The purpose of this reporting is to track the timely

implementation of TCMs, and to demonstrate that TCMs have been or are being

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

2 

# implemented. Reporting is done through the timely implementation report which is included

in each RTIP. This report assures implementation and compliance and is the primary tool

used by SCAG and the federal agencies for TCM implementation tracking. As part of the

RTIP process, the Transportation Conformity Working Group receives draft timely

implementation reports as appropriate. SCAG maintains a list of completed TCMs on its

website.

• Reasonably Available Control Measure (RACM) Analysis – The Federal Clean Air Act

(CAA) requires that a RACM analysis be included as part of the overall TCM strategy in the

SIP. This analysis ensures that all potential TCMs are evaluated for implementation and that

justification is provided for those measures that are not implemented. In accordance with

EPA procedures, this analysis will consider TCM measures that are suggested during public

comments, relevant measures adopted in other non-attainment areas of the country, and

measures identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).



# LINKING REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING TO AIR QUALITY

PLANNING

The air quality conformity requirements of the Federal CAA establish a need to integrate air

quality planning and regional transportation planning. This integration presents the challenge of

balancing the real need for improved mobility with the equally important goals of cleaner air and

the enhanced social and economic well being of communities. As the Federally-designated

Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the six-county Southern California region,

SCAG is required by law to ensure that transportation activities “conform” to, and are supportive

of, the goals of regional and state air quality plans to attain the National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS). In addition, SCAG is a co-producer, with the South Coast Air Quality

Management District (AQMD), of the AQMP fo r the South Coast Air Basin. SCAG has the

responsibility for the demographic projections and integrated regional land use, housing,

employment, and transportation programs, measures, and strategies, as well as analyzing and

providing emissions data related to its planning responsibilities (California Health and Safety

Code § 40460).

The SCAG Region is the largest metropolitan planning area in the United States, encompassing

38,000 square miles. The Region is divided into 14 subregions and is one of the largest

concentrations of population, employment, income, business, industry and finance in the world.

The six-county SCAG Region is home to more than 18million people, nearly half of the

population of the state of California. The Gr oss Regional Product (GRP) for the Region, over

$700 billion in 2005, shows that Southern California is the 10th largest economy in the world,

while the State, as a whole, constitutes the 5th largest economy in the world. The South Coast

Air Basin (Basin) has the worst air quality of the four air basins contained in the SCAG region.

SCAG is responsible for the creation of the Re gion’s quadrennial long-range (20 year planning

horizon) RTP and its biennial short-term (s ix year planning horizon) RTIP. The 2004 RTP

represents the culmination of more than two y ears of work involving dozens of public agencies,

184 cities, hundreds of local, county, regional and state officials, the business community,

environmental groups, as well as various nonpr ofit organizations, and was founded on a broad-

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

3 

# based public outreach effort. A comprehensive list of Task Forces and Advisory Committees is

included in the 2994 RTP, Appendix J 1



# .

The 2004 RTP was formally adopted by the SCAG Regional Council in April 2004, and

approved by the federal agencies on June 7, 2004. The 2004 RTP, as updated by more current

socioeconomic data and improved heavy-duty truck trip data, provides a basis for the

transportation control strategy portion of the 2007 AQMP. It also provides the framework for

aggregating sub-regional and local efforts to institute measures aimed at mitigating the adverse

air pollution impacts from increased transportation activities. These measures are known as

transportation control measures, and are the focus of this Appendix.

The RTIP is the vehicle used to implement the RTP. The TCMs in the 2007 AQMP are derived

from the first two years of the 2006 RTIP. The RTIP also provides the schedule and framework

for the timely implementation of the Region’s TCM strategies.



# Key Planning Factors: Challenges and Objectives

As the growth forecasts point out, the central challenge facing the Region is the prospect that the

regional population is expected to increase by almost 5.8 million people (32%), from 2003 to

2035, employment by 2.5 million jobs (32%), and the number of households by 2.0 million

(35%). Other demographic factors, such as th e rapid aging of the region’s population profile and

proportional redistribution amongst the region’s et hnic groups, may affect residential location

decisions and affect commute and general transportation choices as well.

Accommodating this anticipated growth in a sustainable way—by taking account of ecological,

economic and social factors, while enhancing quality-of-life indicators for present and future

generations—represents the central challenge facing regional transportation planning in Southern

California. Improvements in transportation mobility, both for people and for goods and services,

and in progress toward meeting the NAAQS, must meet the goals of cost-effectiveness,

environmental protection, and energy-efficiency.

It should be recognized that regional transportation and air quality plans, and ultimately their

resultant SIPs, embody a commitment of resources by the region as a whole. However, as the

designated MPO for the Southern California regi on, and thus also for the Basin, SCAG bases its

responsibilities on the following four assumptions:

• There will be an appropriate commitment of fiscal resources from State and Federal

sources.

• SCAG will continue to have responsibility over the official growth forecasts for the

region.

• A monitoring system will be maintained to track implementation of the TCMs.

1 

# http://scag.ca.gov/rtp2004/2004draft/techappendi x/Appendix_J_Task_Forces_final.pdf

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

4 

# • There will be an appropriate commitment of resources supporting interagency

consultation from local, State and Federal agencies involved in the process.

Additionally, the Regional Transportation Strategy proposed in the 2007 AQMP is predicated on

the assumption that the following financial strategies adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council

(RC) will be implemented as expected:

• Protect/strengthen existing transportation revenues, including Proposition 42 revenues

from the state sales tax on gasoline, truck weight fee revenues, and federal gas tax

receipts;

• Continue local transportation sales taxes where necessary; allow 55 percent voter

approval for local transportation sales taxes;

• Maximize motor vehicle fuel user fee reve nue through pay-as-you-go and debt financing

(assuming an adjustment to the gas tax rate to maintain historical purchasing power);

• Review methods for collecting revenues from alternative fuel vehicles;

• Support implementation of a development mitigation fee in San Bernardino County;

• Consider the feasibility of high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes for new facilities; and

• Pursue user-fee-supported project financing for major regional investments where

applicable.

Finally, it should be recognized that all the measures in this Appendix are taken from the 2004

RTP and the 2006 RTIP.



# IMPLEMENTING A REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY

The Regional Transportation Strategy for the 2007 AQMP, as embodied in the 2004 RTP and

further defined by the fiscally-constrained portion (f irst two years) of the 2006 RTIP, is part of a

comprehensive vision to improve air quality, while at the same time enhancing mobility and

assuring social and economic development. The transportation strategy and TCM projects

proposed in this Appendix are an interconnected system, with the various components

augmenting and reinforcing one another, rather than merely a mechanical aggregation of standalone actions.

Infrastructure improvements, transit and system management, and information services are being

pursued within the context of a broad vision of the region's future. This transportation strategy

outlines regional and sub-regional commitments to implement transportation improvements

contained in the 2004 RTP and detailed in the first two years of the 2006 RTIP, and continues

the blueprint contained in the 2003 SIP previously submitted to EPA.

The Regional Transportation Strategy is intended to maximize the emission reductions that can

realistically be expected to be achieved from on-road mobile sources. However, it should be

recognized at the outset that potential improvements in air quality deriving from TCM and RTP

strategies applied to on-road mobile sources are minimal. This is due to the fact that motor

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

5 

# vehicle emissions have been substantially reduced through technology, individual TCMs affect

only a small portion of regional travel, and that TCMs generally do not produce large scale

changes in travel behavior. To attain the NAAQS, the Region will need to continue its focus on

reductions from all emission source categories.



# Historic Trends: Context and Conditions

As shown in Table 1, between 1980 and 2000, both population and employment have increased

substantially in Southern California. During this same time period, the absolute number of

home-to-work vehicle trips increased by 25 percent. However, the percentage increase in people

driving to work alone is greater than the percentage increase in people using transit. The

percentage increase in people sharing rides to work also lags appreciably. The absolute number

of people that either work at home (including tel ecommuting), or ride a bicycle or walk to work,

has dropped significantly for this same period as depicted in the “other” category in Table 1.

Clearly, and through the year 2000, the rate of increase in people riding transit and sharing rides

to work has not kept pace with the rate of increase in home-to-work trips. There is a strong

historic trend toward driving alone, and a prim ary goal of the RTP is to counter this trend.

This is one of the key challenges for regional transportation planning, and will continue to be a

central concern for some time to come—ensuring that the proportion of transit and ride-share

trips, as well as non-motorized and information technology-based strategies, increase their share

of the total work-trips for the region, particularly over the next decade.

Table 1

Long-term Transportation System T rends: Southern California Region



# Growth Forecasts: Linking Socio-Econo mic Profiles to Land Use Patterns

As the designated MPO for the Southern California region, SCAG is responsible for generating

the socio-economic profiles and growth forecasts on which land use, transportation, air quality

management and implementation plans are based. The growth forecasts provide the socioeconomic data used to estimate vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Emission

estimates can then be forecast based on these projected estimates. 1980 2000 Change % Change

Population 11,074,483 15,429,162 4,354,679 39%

Employment 5,402,323 7,089,958 1,687,635 31%

Total Home-to-Work Trips 4,898,642 6,102,839 1,204,197 25%

Drive Alone 3,493,490 4,648,117 1,154,627 33%

Carpool 844,424 960,356 115,932 14%

Transit 260,075 310,382 50,307 19%

Other 300,653 183,984 (116,669) -39%

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

6 

# The monitoring of changes in regional socio-economic profiles is a key factor in tracking

changes in land use patterns as they affect transportation system usage and, thus, air quality

impacts. The regional land use forecast consists of allocating population and employment

growth totals among zones, based on existing factors that can shape development. To the extent

that land use policies and programs impact the allocation of population and employment growth,

they will be reflected in the regional land use forecast, and therefore in the mobile source

emissions estimate.

Reductions in emissions due to changes in the socio-economic profile of the region are an

important way of taking account of changes in land use patterns. For example, changes in jobshousing balance induced by changes in urban form and transit-oriented development induce

changes in VMT by more closely linking housing to jobs. Thus, socio-economic growth

forecasts are a key component to guide the Basin toward attainment of the NAAQS. SCAG

provides the mechanisms by which changes in socio-economic profiles, which affect land use

patterns, can be monitored on a systematic and on-going basis.



# Southern California Compass Blueprint: Pl anning for Integrated Land Use and

Transportation

Given the magnitude of growth projected over the 30-year RTP forecast period, and its potential

impacts on traffic congestion, air quality, open space protection, etc., SCAG initiated a

comprehensive growth visioning process called Southern California Compass as part of the 2004

RTP development process. Compass seeks to accommodate growth while maintaining mobility,

livability, prosperity and sustainability goals for all residents in the SCAG region. Specifically,

Compass aims to provide a policy framework for growth forecasts; consider balanced and

efficient growth and transportation patterns; promote affordable housing choices; and provide

direction on producing alternative urban form scenarios for the RTP.

At its core, Compass utilizes a technique referred to as scenario planning. Scenario planning,

endorsed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the U.S. EPA, explores multiple

options for a region’s future and how the choices we make today will affect future outcomes.

SCAG, via Compass, developed literally dozens of different scenarios and modeled and analyzed

each. Through an iterative process these scenarios were refined, and eventually one scenario was

selected as the growth alternative for the 2004 RTP.

The following policy assumptions aiming to better link transportation and land use established

the framework for the 2004 RTP:

• Focusing growth in centers and major transportation corridors

By accommodating growth in existing or emerging centers and corridors, the region can

greatly improve transportation performance. The centers themselves will be easily accessible

from major freeways and also will include their own internal strong street network.

Balancing the location of jobs and housing is an important strategy in meeting regional goals

of relieving congestion, reducing commute times and vehicle trips, encouraging alternate

modes of transportation, and improving air quality. The Growth Vision Alternative achieves

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

7 

# these goals via an in-fill strategy by locating job and housing centers in targeted livable

communities suitable for accommodating additional growth.

• Creating significant areas of mixed-use development

Mixed-use development uses the same strategy as centers-based development and ensures a

strong balance of jobs and housing located near each another. Mixed-use development

sometimes takes the form of well-designed retail shops and services with housing placed

above or adjacent. It also refers to a larger neighborhood area with an appealing mixture of

housing, shops, small offices and services, all within walking distance. The use of in-fill in

aging and underutilized sites provides a means of accommodating growth, revitalizing

neighborhoods, districts or communities, and makes efficient use of the existing

infrastructure. Many existing corridors lack the residential and commercial density to

adequately support non-auto transit uses. By intensifying these corridors with people-scaled

and mixed-use developments, the existing transit system can more fully realize its potential

for accommodating additional trips and taking strain off systems that are already at or overcapacity.

• Targeting growth around transit stations

The principle of transit-oriented development (TOD) is particularly relevant to employment.

For commuting by transit to be effective, major employment areas should not be dispersed

but instead should be easily accessible to transit investments. In the Growth Vision

distribution, employment density near major transit corridors and stations is quite high -

providing an innovative and efficient partnership between land-use and transportation

policies. By intensifying these stations with people-scaled and mixed-use developments, the

existing transit system can more fully realize its potential for accommodating additional trips

and taking strain off systems that are already at or over-capacity.

• Providing housing opportunities to match changing demographics

Changing demographics will have an impact on the Region’s economic future. The large

baby-boomer cohort will begin retiring after 2010. Other changes on the horizon include

increased immigrant (younger) population; increased household size, and lower per capita

income. These changes necessitate variation in housing products as well as amenities to

serve the changing population.

• Ensuring adequate access to open space

Demographic trends, the need for adequate job opportunities and shelter, and the Region’s

historical development pattern set the stage for competing quality-of-life demands.

Development patterns in the Growth Vision Alternative emphasize focusing growth in

appropriate centers and corridors that make most efficient use of developed land and

minimize encroachment on open public space. This should improve access to existing largescale and neighborhood-scale open space.

• Changing land use to correspond to the implementation of a decentralized regional aviation

strategy and its consequent sort- and long-term job creation

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

8 

# The decentralized airport strategy creates a significant number of high-paying jobs in the

short- and long-term. The Growth Vision alternative responds to this by creating the

opportunity for well-balanced communities to support the additional workforce.

• Changing land use to correspond to the implementation of regionally significant major

transportation projects and their consequent short- and long-term job creation

New regionally significant infrastructure, such as highways and high-speed rail, is planned to

serve future housing and job centers in the high desert areas of Los Angeles and San

Bernardino counties and eastern Riverside County. Planned shifts of goods distribution

functions to these areas also create long-term employment benefits.

• Incorporating the local input and feedback on future growth

Ninety percent of the 193 jurisdictions participated during extensive public outreach over a

two- year period for the development of the 2004 RTP Growth Forecast. This technical input

and local expertise were critical in developing the 2004 RTP. Adjustments occur only after a

ramp up period (post-2010) intended to establish consensus on an implementation strategy.

Regional Benefits of Compass

As part of the 2004 RTP planning process, the RTP was analyzed relative to baseline conditions.

The analysis revealed that the strategies of the 2004 RTP contribute benefits to mobility, transit

boarding, air quality and energy consumption over the forecast period. As part of the 2004 RTP

planning process, the RTP was analyzed relative to baseline conditions. The analysis revealed

that the strategies of the 2004 RTP contribute benefits to mobility, transit boarding, air quality

and energy consumption over the forecast period. The 2007 AQMP, while based on the 2004

RTP, incorporates changes to emission factors based on ARB’s EMFAC2007 and to the

socioeconomic data based on actual changes since the 2004 RTP was prepared. While the

Compass 2% Strategy assumptions remain the same, these other changes result in revised

emission projections and benefits compared to what was shown for the 2004 RTP. For example,

Growth Visioning in the 2007 AQMP is estimated to contribute a reduction of approximately 0.5

ton per day of ROG in the year 2020 (approximately 30% of total reductions) versus a reduction

of approximately 2 tons per day in 2020 (approximately 70% of total reductions) when analyzed

for the 2004 RTP. It should be noted that the emission benefits attributed to Compass reflect

only grosser changes in land use, and do not account for the micro land use changes that are

assumed in Compass and are expected to provide additional transportation and emission benefits.

SCAG is working to develop additional analytical tools to better calculate the benefits

attributable to the Compass program.

Implementing the Compass Vision

While Compass has succeeded in garnering citizens, planners and officials to create a shared

regional vision, its ultimate success will be measured over time. Southern California can achieve

maximum mobility, livability, prosperity and sustainability only through a series of agreed upon

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

9 

# and feasible implementation tools. The Compass implementation plan focuses on reaching out

to local decision-makers and the public at large to build support and local actions for the Vision

through demonstrations of how minor changes in land-use and transportation decision-making

can reap heretofore unexpected economic, mobility, and environmental benefits locally, subregionally and regionally. These Compass strategic opportunity areas make up about 2% of the

region, thus, leading to the name “Compass 2% Strategy” for the implementation plan.

The Compass 2% Strategy for focusing growth in smart growth opportunity areas will be most

successful when it compliments local visioning, inform local policy making, and integrates and

aligns local planning with regional transportation investment plans. Collaboration with

transportation commissions, subregional councils of government, municipal governments and

private developers will be a featured element in evolving the vision. Political support for the

vision would be developed by taking the plan to c ities and counties. The State, regions and local

governments can collaborate on future planning to address and alleviate the need for housing.

To ensure collaboration and sustained public and stakeholder involvement, SCAG has convened

the Compass Partnership comprised of business leaders, activists, academics, public officials and

others to meet quarterly and serve as an extension of the Compass program into local

communities.

The SCAG Regional Council continues to support the Compass 2% Strategy as a high priority

program. As such, the following tasks critical to implementation have been underway since the

adoption of the 2004 RTP:

1. Initiating Compass demonstration projects in critical growth opportunity areas with member

cities and Council of Governments and providing technical assistance for projects that

exemplify one or more of the key principles of the Compass Vision.

2. Targeting local governments to align their plans with the Compass Vision and providing

assistance and training support to communities developing or updating general, specific and

redevelopment plans and pilot projects.

3. Providing local governments, subregions and transportation commissions with development

screening, scenario planning and real estate analysis tools, e.g. LA LOTS (Land Use

Opportunity Tracking System) and other inter-regional partnership program tools.

4. Conducting an extensive public education, training and outreach program that promotes

incentive based initiatives supporting Compass goals, e.g., Pilot corridor programs and local

success stories.

5. Establishing benchmarking, program assessment, evaluation and monitoring guidelines in

collaboration with subregional councils of government, transportation commissions, local

government partners, and other applicable stakeholders.



# Goods Movement: Development of a Regional Strategy

The discussion of land use and its relation to mobility and air quality must consider the

significant impact that the region’s goods movement system plays. While international trade and

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

10 

# goods movement activities are key contributors to the State’s and Southern California economic

vitality, air pollution from these activities is a major public health concern at both regional and

community levels. To address the economic growth, mobility, and environmental issues

associated with goods movement, SCAG’s Goods Movement Program seeks to optimize the

region's transportation system through increases in economic efficiency, congestion mitigation,

safety and air quality improvements, and enhancements to system security

( http://scag.ca.gov/goodsmove/ ).

2004 Regional Transportation Plan’s Goods Movement Strategy

The adopted 2004 RTP presents the region’s most am bitious program of strategies and projects

for improving the region’s goods movement system and reducing its current impacts on

congestion and the environment. In fact, the 2004 RTIP already committed $2 billion in goods

movement-related projects that are slated to start within the next six years. Beyond this baseline

and out to year 2030, the 2004 RTP proposed a series of system and physical enhancements

aimed at improving the flow of goods through the region.

For instance, recognizing the need for additional highway capacity to handle increased truck as

well as passenger traffic, the 2004 RTP proposes a $16.5 billion regional system of dedicated

truck lanes along freeway corridors extending fromthe San Pedro Bay Ports, through the EastWest Corridor (to be defined as part of Multi- County Goods Movement Action Plan) and out to

distribution points northeast and southeast of the ur banized areas. Such a regional system would

be funded through user-fees based on a per-mile toll. Implementation dates range between years

2020 and 2030. Therefore, the dedicated facilities offer a viable and potentially self-financing

solution for mitigating congestion and reducing mobile source emissions arising from freeway

operations in Southern California. In addition to the dedicated facilities, the 2004 RTP includes

additional truck climbing lanes on four routes in Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino

Counties, with implementation ranging from 2010 to 2030.

The 2004 RTP also includes provisions for a regional rail capacity improvement program

totaling $3.4 billion, which provides for both additional track capacity and mitigations in the

form of some 130 highway-rail grade separation pr ojects east of downtown Los Angeles. This

strategy was identified as enabling the region to meet mainline rail capacity needs east of Los

Angeles where triple and sometimes quadruple track improvements are needed. Bottlenecks

such as the rail-to-rail Colton Crossing could also be addressed.

The RTP goods movement strategy included studying the viability of developing inland ports

away from the water ports to serve as cargo facilitation centers. These facilities would function

as inland sorting and depository centers for ocean and domestic containers, possibly transported

via dedicated rail or truck facilities.

Subsequent to the adoption of the 2004 RTP, SCAG and its transportation partners developed a

more focused regional consensus goods movement infrastructure project list, referred to as

Southern California Regional Strategy for Goods Movement: A Plan for Action (amended

March 2005), which was provided to the Californi a Department of Business, Transportation &

Housing as input into the State Goods Movement Action Plan. The list calls for approximately

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

11 

# $6 billion in freight rail investments and $20 billion in highway investments to enable the region

to handle the dramatic growth in goods movement. The rail investments consist of additional

mainline capacity and new intermodal capacity to handle this growing segment of international

trade. About a third of the rail-related investments are for grade crossing separations, which

reduce traffic congestion, improve safety, and reduce pollution. The highway investments

include a system of dedicated, toll-financed truck lanes, truck climbing lanes, rebuilt bridges and

port access roads, and other freight related projects. In addition, $10 billion was earmarked for

environmental mitigation that would be coupled with infrastructure proposals.

Air Quality Objectives

While the planning for the 2004 RTP considered the need for increased capacity to handle the

projected flow of goods through the region and support the goods movement industry as an

economic driver, it also considered the beneficial air quality impacts associated with an

improved goods movement system. The public discourse related to goods movement

subsequently evolved to focus more prominently on the environmental impacts from this source.

Air pollution associated with goods movement is now more widely recognized as a major public

health concern. At a regional level, the emissions associated with goods movement activities are

significant contributors to exceedances of the health-based ozone and particulate matter

NAAQS. At a local level, the emissions of diesel particulate matter from goods movement

sources are a major component of increased adverse health risks in communities near the ports

and associated transportation corridors. Health risks associated with exposure to the pollutants

from goods movement activities include premature death, cancer risk, respiratory illnesses, and

increased risk of heart disease.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) estim ates statewide premature deaths from goods

movement to be approximately 2,400 annually, mostly from particulate pollution. Even after

implementation of proposed CARB control measures, the estimate if premature deaths remaining

is still very significant (approximately 1,600). CARB also estimated the cancer risk from

activities specifically at the Ports of Los Angele s and Long Beach and found that the areas with

the greatest impact outside port boundaries have an estimated cancer risk of over 500 in a

million. The study found that the impact areas extend several miles from the ports. 2



# Previous to the CARB studies, an urban toxi cs monitoring and evaluation study was conducted

for the South Coast Air Basin as part of the Environmental Justice Initiatives adopted by the

AQMD Governing Board in October 1997. The Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATESII) 3 

# found that mobile source related compounds tend to be generally high throughout the Basin;

however, spatial variations show higher concentrations occurring along freeway corridors and

junctions. In addition, higher levels of mobile source related compounds are estimated near

major mobile source activities (e.g., ports).

The CARB and SCAQMD studies reveal that livi ng close to freight transportation corridors

increases health risk beyond regional levels. Consequently, the adverse health impacts

2 

# CARB, Proposed Emission Reduction Plan for Po rts and Goods Movement in California , March 2006.

3 

# The SCAQMD is in the process of conducting a follow-up study (MATES-III).

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

12 

# associated with goods movement activities has significant implications for transportation

planning in the region.

There is considerable effort underway by state, regional, and local stakeholders to address the

numerous issues associated with goods movement. However, these efforts are not fully

coordinated nor do they necessarily have the same objectives. While addressing the economic

growth and mobility issues associated with goods movement, transportation planning agencies

must include regional and community air quality improvements as an intrinsic component of a

regional goods movement system. Investigation into a regional goods movement transportation

system based on innovative freight movement technologies which could potentially reduce or

eliminate diesel PM emissions should be the common goal of transportation planners and air

quality agencies and other health officials. To this end, SCAG’s comprehensive Goods

Movement Program includes development, review , and consideration of state-of-the art and

paradigm-shifting system-wide technologies that provide for economic growth, improved

regional mobility, and the mitigation of both adverse localized air quality impacts (i.e., air toxic

emissions) and regional air quality impacts (i.e., criteria pollutant emissions) associated with the

goods movement activities. An overview of potential innovative goods movement technologies

are described later in this section.

SCAG’s Goods Movement Program and Studies

To facilitate the discourse on a goods movement strategy for Southern California, SCAG’s

Goods Movement Task Force meets on a monthly basis as a forum for stakeholders to advance a

regional strategy. Agenda, meeting minutes, and presentations to the Goods Movement Task

Force can be accessed at SCAG’s website ( http://scag.ca.gov/goodsmove/#taskforce ). Over the

past few years, a number of studies, reports, and strategies have been considered through this

process as shown in the following list.

• Goods Movement in Southern California:

The Challenge, The Opportunity, and The Solution, September 2005



# • Southern California Regional St rategy for Goods Movement:

A Plan for Action February 2005, Amended March 2005



# o Southern California Consensus Prio rity Goods Movement Projects



# o Map 1: Existing Goods Movement Sy stem in the SCAG region



# o Map 2: Needed Additions to the Goods Movement System



# • Inland Port Feasibility Study: Draft Report on Inland Port Case Studies

June 2006



# • Final Report: Port and M odal Elasticity Study

November 2005



# • Inland Empire Railroad Main Line Study

June 2005



# • Subregional Freight Movement Truck Access Study

July 2004



# • Logistics and Distribution: An Answer to Regional Upward

Social Mobility June 2004



# • Regional Rail Capacity Improvement Program

January 2004



# • User-Supported Regional Truckways in Southern California

January 2004

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

13 

# • CVAG Southeast Bypass Routing Study Report

May 2003



# • Goods Movement Truck and Rail Study

January 2003



# o Technical Appendix: Subregional Freight Movement Truck Access Study



# • Goods Movement Truck Count Study

September 2002



# • Los Angeles-Inland Empire Railroad Mainline Advanced

Planning Study

October 2002



# • Empty Ocean Container Logistics Study

May 2002



# • Goods Movement Program White Paper: A Survey of Regional

Initiatives and a Discussion of Program Objectives

January 2002



# In addition to the studies listed above, SCAG is either the lead or in partnership with other

agencies/organizations for on-going efforts to address the various issues associated with goods

movement in California and in Southern California in particular. The goal of these efforts is to

develop a system-wide goods movement plan that accommodates the facility needs and

economic opportunities of the region while ensuring that the adverse environmental impacts of

the goods movement system are appropriately mitigated.

Goods Movement Control Measure

As part of the Transportation Strategy for the 2007 AQMP, SCAG is proposing a Goods

Movement Control Measure which consists of two main components: Zero-Emissions Rail

System and Truck-Only Lanes. See Attachment D.

High Speed Transport System

SCAG has recently advanced a vision of additional high performance, environmentally sensitive

regional movement systems based on the introduction of a high speed, regional transport system

(HSRT). Envisioned to move both cargo and people throughout the region, the HSRT would

serve to:

• Link the San Pedro Bay ports with an inland port facility. The proposed regional

strategy to increase capacity via inland ports by connecting them with a high-speed and

high capacity line to the San Pedro Bay ports complex will facilitate efficient and

environmentally sensitive goods handling in areas that have sufficient space outside of

the urban areas. Create a direct, high-speed link between the urban centers and the

airports. This would enable a higher level of service for airport access and connecting

passengers, improved operation of the aviation system for passengers and airborne cargo,

and optimize investment in aviation system infrastructure. This view envisions the

continued use of Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) as a hub while allocating

future traffic, both passenger and cargo, to ot her regional airports based on a high-speed

connection via the HSRT.

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

14 

# • Link the urban centers, serving the needs of commuters while reducing the number of

private vehicles on the road. This would reduce traffic congestion, enhance mobility

options, as well as reduce air and noise pollution from automobiles. By linking the

dispersed activity centers around the region with a high-speed connection, it allows for

improved facilitation of a variety of activities between urban centers and improves

abilities for more efficient land use patterns.

Relative to goods movement, an HSRT system can provide greater throughput and reliability

with near zero emissions (see section on Innovative Goods Movement Technology below).

Essentially, goods would be shuttled from the Ports to an inland port at San Bernardino and/or

Palmdale via an HSRT container movement system. An HSRT system capitalizes on the

inherent savings of multiple uses on a single infrastructure by operating on shared alignments

with the HSRT people movement system. The technology permits operation of HSRT freight

vehicles on a shared guide-way with passenger vehi cles even during peak hour service. Freight

vehicle trips can be interspersed with passenger trips while still meeting required passenger

vehicle headways. Additionally, full utilization of the freight line can be achieved during the

passenger system’s off-peak hours.

Implementation of the HSRT is being proposed on the basis of a potentially self-financing

business plan approach based on aviation, commuter, and freight operations and further bolstered

by HSRT related development. The deployment of a HSRT system would create value in

associated components which could in turn contribute to the HSRT’s total financial performance.

A business and institutional structure for the movement of people, movement of goods, and

associated development patterns has been developed by SCAG to serve as the basis for

implementation of the movement systems. The results reached by SCAG’s business planning

effort indicate that HSRT-based systems for aviation, goods, and people movement can fulfill the

objective of financial independence and feasibility.

A schematic of the business plan is shown below.

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

15 

# A preliminary HSRT network is shown on the map on the following page.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 200716

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007

17 

# Truck-Only Lanes

SCAG is formulating a business plan for a regional truckway system comprising 142 center-line

miles of dedicated truck lanes extending from the San Pedro Bay ports eastward toward Barstow.

The dedicated truckways offer a viable and partially self-financing solution for mitigating

congestion and reducing mobile source emissions. The system would have a graduated toll rate

based on a number of factors including the relative emissions associated with each vehicle. The

truck-only lane would potentially allow each truck to carry multiple containers, reducing

emissions and further improving the efficiency and financial viability of the system. The

requirement that all trucks use alternative clean technology or otherwise meet the 2010 on-road

heavy-duty exhaust emissions standards is also being considered. The EIR/EIS for the I-710

Corridor project mentioned above will include evaluation of specific alternatives for the first

segment of a truckway system from the ports to downtown Los Angeles.

Taken together, the various components of an overall goods movement strategy are the basis for

a goods movement transportation control measure. The enforceability of this measure is

predicated on binding agreements, financing, and pricing mechanisms through existing Joint

Powers Authorities or other applicable institutions or agencies.

A supplemental/alternative approach to achieving emission reductions could take the form of an

emissions reduction market based on binding agreements among the parties and performance

commitments included in the SIP. 4



# Because of the complexity of the issues and the numerous on-going and planned efforts of the

goods movement stakeholders, this control measure will be further refined as part of the 2007/8

RTP. The goods movement strategy developed for the RTP could then become the basis for a

SIP amendment which incorporates applicable emission reduction strategies.

Table 2 below summarizes the current efforts of SCAG and other stakeholders related to goods

movement. Two of the planning studies and an overview of innovative goods movement

technologies are also described in greater detail following the table.

4 

# A proposal along these lines was included as Appe ndix G: Maritime Good s M ovement Coalition Proposal, Proposed

Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement in California , Approved by ARB on April 20, 2006.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 200718Table 2Goods Movement Programs and StudiesSCAG Lead StudiesEnvironmental Mitigation forGoods MovementDevelop a detailed strategy for investing a potential $10 billion in funding for mitigation of theenvironmental impacts of goods movement in theSCAG region. The study will identify potentialcontrol measures for goods movement sources,including ocean-going vessels, harbor craft, cargohandling equipment at marine terminals and intermodal yards, locomotives, and trucks. The study willrank the measures according to effectiveness(tons of pollution reduced) and cost-effectiveness(dollars per ton) and estimate their cumulative impact on the region’s air quality.12/07Inland Port Feasibility StudyTo determine the potential benefits an Inland Port could provide to both the public and private sectors,such as reduced highway congestion and communityimpacts, improved air quality, and increasedsupply chain efficiency and reliability.6/07Port and Modal ElasticityStudy Phase IIBuilding on the previously completed SCAG Portand Modal Elasticity Study and railroad mainlinestudies, conduct additional outreach and research to further consolidate the case for private sectorparticipation in financing infrastructure for goods movement.6/07Goods MovementConceptual System DesignPhase I & II *Develop a conceptual design for the region’s goodsmovement system. This design will be used tocommunicate with stakeholders about the impacts and benefits of investments in the regional system.It will include more than the existing RTP and project lists, which will help tobuild consensus forimplementation.12/09Feasibility of InnovativeFreight Technologies *The objective of this study is to research potential alternative methods of transporting goods in theregion, (e.g., underground tunnels, pilot-less shuttles, mono-rails, conveyer belt systems) anddetermine which if any of these warrant further study and consideration. The study will determine thefeasibility of implementing such systems, andadvantages and disadvantages compared to currentforms of goods movement such as costs to shippers, capital, operating, and maintenance costs, timesavings, and community, congestion and air quality impacts.12/09Study of Freight Movementby High Speed Rail *Conduct a study of the potential for high-speed rail (MagLev or other technology) to serve as aneconomically viable means of transporting freight across the SCAG region.12/09Missing Link TrucksThe purpose of this project is to determine thetruck traffic impact on the Arroyo Verdugo Subregionshould the I-710 gap closure project be completed.12/072% Strategy: LogisticsInfrastructure & GrowthConsensusTo identify a goods movement pilot projectthat would demonstrate and advance the goals andobjectives of the Compass 2% Strategy.Completed* These three studies are being combined.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 200719Table 2 (continued)Goods Movement Programs and StudiesPartnerships with Other AgenciesState Goods MovementAction PlanA partnership between the State BT&H and Cal/EPA to bring stakeholders together address themovement of goods and reducing associated environmentalimpacts in California. Phase I focuses onthe "why" and "what" of California goods movementneeds. Phase II work addresses infrastructure,environmental impact mitigation, innovative and alternative financing, homeland security and publicsafety, and community impact mitigation, and workforce development.CompletedMulti-County GoodsMovement Action PlanThe objective of the Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan is to work with the CountyTransportation Commissions and Caltrans to develop a regional consensus and framework forimproving the goods movement system, which includesthe ports, trucking, freight rail, inter-modalfacilities, and air cargo, etc., as well as mitigating negative community and environmental impacts.6/07Southern CaliforniaNational Freight GatewayStrategy MOUEstablish a formal process through which state and federal agencies would share responsibility andwork collaboratively with Southern California transportation agencies to address the region’sinfrastructure needs, environmental effects, and community impacts of increasing goods movementthrough the “Southern California National Freight Gateway,” which extends from the San Pedro BayPorts to the cities of Barstow and Indio, California4/07Sub-Regional COG StudiesI-710 EIR/EISTo provide regional technical planning support to the multi-jurisdictional planning team and to satisfythe detailed questions/issues stemming from the completion of the LPS in the areas of corridor-wideand micro-level traffic forecasting, air quality impacts/mitigations (near term strategies and action plan,and conformity determination) and publicinvolvement/outreach as appropriate.TBDGateway Cities COG - SubRegional and Inter-RegionalGoods Movement StudyIntegration of Goods Movement Freight Corridors/Truck Lane Facilities into a system-wide freightcorridor/truck lane system.6/07South Bay Cities Council ofGovernments - South BayHarbor Freeway GoodsMovementWorking with the POLB/POLA/LAWA and other groupssuch as the Multi-County Goods MovementAdvisory Committee, the SBCCOG perform traffic pattern analyses that reviewthe impacts of growthat the ports and the planned improvements on the Harbor Freeway and adjacent arterials to addressthat growth.9/07Gateway Cities COG - GoodsMovement StrategiesExplore potential strategies for goods movement projects as well as linkingtransportation to land usewithin corridorsCompletedCoachella Valley Associationof Governments - SoutheastBypass Routing StudyTo determine the feasibility of constructing a bypassroute extending from the I-10 at Blyth northwestto the I-40 at Ludlow.Completed

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

20 

# Environmental Mitigation Plan for Goods Movement

This SCAG study will determine how $10 billion could best be spent to bring about improved

air quality in the region by reducing emissions fr om the goods movement sector. Specifically,

the study will identify potential control measures for goods movement sources, including oceangoing vessels, harbor craft, cargo handling equipment at marine terminals and intermodal yards,

locomotives, and trucks. Among the potential emission reduction strategies, the study will

evaluate the relative costs and effects of electrification of rail and highway (truck) facilities.

The consultant will rank these measures according to effectiveness (tons of pollution reduced)

and cost-effectiveness (dollars per ton) and estimate their cumulative impact on the region’s air

quality. The analysis will determine whether $10 billion will be enough to achieve a “fair

share” of emissions reductions from the goods movement sector relative to the PM2.5 and 8-

hour ozone attainment demonstrations or whether more funds will be needed and what

additional measures must be taken.

The $10 billion figure is derived from SCAG sta ff and consultant work on goods movement.

This work has established that the private sector finds substantial value in the use of goods

movement infrastructure in our region, both existing and planned. As long as this value

(productivity gain) is realized, it is unlikely that the region would lose a great deal of trade

volume to other areas even if private user fees are adopted to finance new infrastructure. With

the revenue that could be raised in this manner, as much as $36 billion in total could be financed

for freight rail and truck facilities, as well as mitigation of the substantial environmental impacts

of goods movement. Since the estimated regional total need for goods movement infrastructure

is approximately $26.2 billion, about $10 billion could be dedicated to environmental

improvements.

Final results of this study are expected in December 2007.

Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan

Through this effort, local transportation planners have chosen to collectively address how

freight can be moved to and through Los Ange les and its neighboring counties of Orange,

Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, Imperial and San Diego, without disproportionately

impacting local communities and the environment. Project partners are:

- Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro)

- Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA),

- Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC)

- San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG)

- Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC)

- San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)

- Caltrans: Districts 7, 8, 11 and 12

- Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

21 

# The study began in July 2005 with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

(“Metro”), as the administrative lead. The mission of the action plan is to partner with the

private sector in the development of a strategy and implementation plan for an improved

regional goods movement system that:

• Ensures the efficiency and reliability of freight movement

• Maximizes both the economic opportunities associated with goods movement, as well as

opportunities to reduce the associated environmental and community impacts

• Complements local and regional economic goals

• Includes innovative funding strategies

• Encourages coordination and cooperation among the implementing agencies, both public

and private

This effort is intended to be a consensus strategy and implementation plan for the Southern

California goods movement system. Specific objectives include: document existing freight

movement systems and constraints; identify pr ojected goods movement growth and trends, and

possible private sector responses; identify strategies to lessen community and environmental

impacts; identify optimal short-term and long-term infrastructure and operational

strategies/projects; identify private- and public-sector roles in implementation, and funding

sources; and identify partnership opportunities and solutions for implementation and needed

public-private institutional arrangements

As mentioned above, the scope of this effort includes an evaluation of the environmental

impacts of goods movement, including air quality impacts, in the region. The effort will result

in an Action Plan that contains a full range of strategies and options (short, mid and long-term)

that can be implemented for the region as a whole, as well as the individual counties, including

strategies to reduce air quality impacts from this sector.

It is expected that this joint effort will be completed in 2 nd 

# quarter 2007, and its findings and

recommendations will be incorporated into the 2007/8 RTP.

Innovative Goods Movement Technologies

For centuries, freight has been moved by transport technologies such as locomotives on rail and

trucks on road, both of which use diesel fuel. Except for the advent of containerization three

decades ago and intermodalism (i.e., the use of multiple modes of transportation [locomotive

rail, ocean carrier, and heavy-duty trucks along th e supply-chain]), today’s freight technologies

and their pathways have remained relatively unchanged. On-road trucks, in particular, continue

to be an integral and important component of Southern California’s goods movement system.

Almost all of the short-haul and a significant share of medium and long-haul movement of

goods occur by truck. In addition, a significant share of freight is moved through the region and

out of state by diesel locomotives on rail.

As discussed above, there are health and environmental issues as well as issues of congestion

and system inefficiency that create a compelling public interest to look at alternative freight

transport technologies. As such, various forms of alternative freight transport systems have

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

22 

# been proposed that are intended to supplement or replace current truck and rail transportation.

The proposed technology systems could potentially generate system benefits relative to

conventional truck and rail transport such as increased port throughput capacity, reduced

highway and rail congestion, reduced emissions and energy use, and lower operating costs

through automation and increased efficiency.

This section provides an overview of three basic types of conceptual designs: 1) Linear

Induction Motor Systems; 2) Automated Truck Platoons; and 3) Automated Rail Vehicles.

There may be other emerging technologies that are not listed here, but are likely to be variations

of those listed below. It should again be noted that SCAG will be conducting a feasibility study

of these and other alternative freight technologi es for possible application in the region. The

study will identify and evaluate potential alternative methods, alignments and technologies for

transporting goods within the SCAG region.

Linear Induction Motor Systems

Linear induction motor (LIM) systems typically use a girder-like monorail to support or suspend

a container-carrying vehicle. Linear induction motors use electromagnetic force to produce

linear mechanical force, rather than torque as in typical rotary electric motors. Vehicles that use

linear induction motors can have contact with the guideway through the wheels (they may also

levitate on the cushion of air between magnets mounted on the guideway and others on the

vehicle, often referred to as “magnetic levitation” or “maglev” technology). LIM allows for a

very simple electric propulsion system with few moving parts. The four types of LIM systems

described in this section are: freight shuttles, Auto-Go, GRail, and Maglev.

Freight Shuttle

One LIM concept, called the “Freight Shuttle” 5



# , consists of an automated vehicle, a specially

designed guideway, a linear induction propulsion system , and a control system (Exhibit 1). This

system is envisioned as fully automated and unmanned, shifting the complexity to the central

control system. The Freight Shuttle is envisioned as running in a loop between a marine

terminal and an inland terminal.

5 

# The Freight Shuttle: The Crisis in Freight Transpor tation and The Opportunity for a Green Alternative , Stephen S.

Roop, Ph.D., Texas Transportation In stitute, Texas A&M University, 2006

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

23 

# Exhibit 1: Freight Shuttle LIM System

Note that Exhibit 1 shows the Freight Shuttle guideway at ground level in the marine or inland

terminal. Fixed girder-like guideways have the disadvantage of presenting a barrier to terminal

circulation.

The Freight Shuttle concept requires an exclusive, grade-separated right-of-way as it is not

compatible with other systems or with driver-guided vehicles. Exhibit 2 shows the Freight

Shuttle in a freeway median, a common concept for fixed-guideway systems. Since the floor of

the Freight Shuttle vehicle would likely be approximately the same height as a container

chassis, it should fit under freeway and surface overpasses.

Exhibit 2: Freight Shuttle in Freeway Median

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

24 

# Auto-GO

Titan Global Technologies Ltd., a New Jersey ba sed company, developed a suspended freight

monorail concept that utilizes linear induction motors called Auto-GO

. Auto-GO is an

overhead cargo container handling system with fully automated single-container shuttles using

linear induction motors (Exhibit 3). The Auto-GO system envisions container vehicles

suspended from a girder system, each vehicle equipped with a spreader bar and cables to lift and

drop containers at the terminals. This system would also be fully automated.

Exhibit 3: Auto-GO System over Highway

The transportation process would start inside the terminal where a gantry crane drops off the

container (Exhibit 4). A cargo carrying system that is integrated with the carrying vehicle picks

up the container and raises it by means of a specially designed bogie-spreader bar combination.

The container is then secured under the container shuttle, and transported at 50 to 75 mph to its

final destination.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

25 

# Exhibit 4: Auto-GO System in Terminal

Titan has built and tested a scale model of the Auto-GO system. The technologies used in the

Auto-GO system guideway, switches, and movement control system have been tested in the

field and use of linear induction motors have been proven in operation of the monorail peoplemovers that Titan built in Miami, Florida; Pomona, California; and Dallas, Texas.

GRail

An Illinois Institute of Technology team developed a conceptual intra-yard GRail (Grid-Rail)

system that utilizes linear induction motor technology. (Exhibit 5)

Exhibit 5: GRID Rail (GRAIL) Concept

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

26 

# Much of this concept was developed over a period for Sea-Land Corporation by August Design,

Inc., originally for ship-to-shore application, and was not widely documented until 2000.

Exhibit 6 shows the elevated Grail grid structure, similar to the Auto-GO concept shown in

Exhibit 4.

The team also designed an elevated structure to move containers between terminals using a LIM

vehicle. This between-yard structure provide s for connecting freight nodes and allows for

expansion capability by providing space for the under-hung GRail shuttle.

Exhibit 6: GRAIL Terminal Grid Structure

Maglev Systems

By adding magnetic levitation to LIM propulsi on, Maglev proposals offer reduced friction,

reduced noise, and higher speeds (Exhibit 7). These systems are also envisioned as fully

automated. TransRapid International (a joint venture between Siemens and Thyssen-Krupp) is

perhaps the farthest along in developing a Maglev container transport concept. TransRapid

envisions a dedicated express container system connecting the ports to the Inland Empire, to

Victorville, and to Beaumont, with capacity for five million containers per year.

The Center for the Commercial Deployment of Transportation Technologies (CCDoTT) at

California State University, Long Beach, has c onsidered a number of rights-of-way for a

Maglev system. An important consideration with respect to right-of-way is the ability of

Maglev freight systems to climb steep grades. Th e freight Maglev system is claimed to be able

to carry containers up a 6% grade, versus 3% for conventional rail. The 6% claimed maximum

grade for freight Maglev matches the maximum grade on Interstate highways, suggesting

Maglev rights-of-way along interstate medians (assuming such medians are available).

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

27 

# Exhibit 7: Detailed View of General Atomic’s EDS Maglev Design

Exhibit 8 shows the TransRapid freight design in a double-stack configuration.

Exhibit 8: TransRapid Maglev Concept

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

28 

# The combined height of guideway (Exhibit 9), ve hicles (Exhibit 7), and two high-cube (9’6”)

containers would be 25’ – 27’, meaning a doubl e-stack Maglev system would not fit under

Interstate overpasses. A single-stack Maglev system would be 15’ – 17’ high, and would have

to be depressed in the median to fit under most freeway overpasses.

Exhibit 9: TransRapid Maglev Guideway Concepts

Exhibit 10 shows a conceptual Maglev system linking a single port terminal with an inland

terminal. The design shows two-unit and four-unit Maglev vehicles, instead of the single

vehicles in most system proposals. The diagram also reflects the need for crossovers,

maintenance facilities, and storage facilities ignored by other, less detailed proposals.

The terminals shown in Exhibit 10 include marshalling areas and “container storage/retrieval

systems”. Note that only one port terminal and only one terminal are shown. The system

complexity would increase dramatically if the system were to serve multiple terminals on each

end.

In common with the other fixed-guideway proposals the Maglev system may require completely

rebuilding or replacing existing marine terminals. Exhibit 11 shows a terminal concept

developed by TransRapid. The automatic container storage/retrieval system has not been

designed, although several concepts have been developed by other authors for similar systems,

none have been built. Each terminal served by the Maglev system would need a comparable

system.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

29 

# Exhibit 10: TransRapid’s Port to Inland Intermodal Layout

Marshalling area fo r

inbound consists

(decoupling to match

Storage/Retrieval System)

(number of tracks TBD) Maintenance Facility

with parking tracks (offline storage of vehicles

with/without containers)

(number of tracks TBD) Operations &

Maintenance Facility

with parking tracks

(off-line storage of vehicles

with/without containers)

(number of tracks TBD) Marshalling area fo r

outbound vehicle s (coupling to produce 20

- section consists )

(number of tracks TBD)



# Exhibit 11: Maglev Terminal Concept

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

30 

# Exhibit 12 shows estimates of relative transit times and operating costs for a 100-mile trip.

Exhibit 12: Proponents’ 100-mile Transit Time and Cost Estimates

Automated Truck Platoons

Another approach for transporting goods calls for groups of remote controlled, automated trucks

traveling on exclusive roads. The proposed system (Exhibit 13) includes reconfigured marine

and inland terminals with automated multi-lane cranes.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

31 

# Exhibit 13: Conceptual Automated Truck Platoon System

Automated guided vehicles (AGVs) have been proposed and studied in several instances. The

Delta Terminal at the Port of Rotterdam has been operating AGVs to transport containers within

the terminal, while other European and Asian ports are reportedly experimenting with similar

systems.

The system proposed for port to inland trip is much more ambitious. Since the automated trucks

would be required to transport containers between a port and an inland port some distance away,

they will need to travel at much higher speeds than the AGVs operating inside container

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

32 

# terminals. The Center of Transport Technology in the Netherlands studied a container transport

system, called “Combi-Road”, in which each container is pulled on a semi-trailer of an

unmanned vehicle, and the vehicles are electrically driven along specially designed tracks. The

proposed system is composed of automated trucks, automated cranes and a central control

system. The central system would contain all the information on transportation tasks and road

geometry, acquire real time information, and issue commands for all of the trucks, cranes, etc.

Automated trucks would transport containers on a dedicated road. Inside the terminals

containers would be handled by automated cranes. An automated truck would be issued

commands for carrying a container from the inland port, joining a platoon, speeding up to a

desired speed, cruising while on the road, slowing down when entering the container terminal,

positioning itself under a quay crane for unloading, then repeating the cycle.

It is envisioned that all import containers would be transported to the inland port before they are

distributed to different destinations, and all th e export containers would be processed in the

inland port before they are transferred to the container terminal.

Currently, this system is strictly conceptual. Simulations of its performance connecting one

marine terminal to one inland port have been conducted, but none of the equipment has been

designed or demonstrated and more complex multi-terminal operations have not yet been

addressed.

Automated Rail Vehicles

CargoRail

The CargoRail concept developed by the MegaRail Transportation Systems, Inc. employs

rubber-tired vehicles (referred to as “Cargo Ferries”) that would move along an exclusive

elevated guideway (Exhibit 14).

Exhibit 14: CargoRail System

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

33 

# Each vehicle would operate individually, but woul d be fully automated and centrally controlled.

Vehicles would operate on an enclosed weatherproof guideway (Exhibit 15).

Exhibit 15: CargoRail Guideway Concept

MegaRail Transportation Systems claims that this system is ready for a non-stop, 24-hour, 7-

day a week operation at operational speeds of up to 75 mph. The maximum designed payload

per vehicle is 50,000 lbs. This proposal appears to be derived from MegaRails’ similar

proposals for people movers.

CargoMover

Another proposal calls for automated vehicles operating over conventional railroad tracks, each

carrying a single container (Exhibit 16). A vari ation on this proposal would equip each vehicle

to load or unload itself. CargoMover technology is designed to utilize the European and

wireless control systems, which are currently being deployed on several railway systems in

Western Europe. CargoMover can also operate in conjunction with other train control systems.

Siemens is currently testing several CargoMover vehicles.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

34 

# Exhibit 16: Seimens Transportation CargoMover

Cost Analysis

While cost estimates for many of the technology options referenced above are not readily

available, recent studies include limited investment cost evaluations which provide an order of

magnitude in terms of capital and operating cost structures for such systems.

The CCDoTT, for example, conducted a feasibility study of a high speed intermodal corridor

from the ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach out to the Inland Empire (Victorville and

Beaumont). The lower end of the cost range in Table 3 reflects CCDoTT’s preliminary estimate

for a Maglev-Freight system. The higher end of the cost range assumes additional cost

adjustments per SCAG’s initial review of CCDoTT’s findings.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

35 

# Table 3

Preliminary Cost Estimate for Maglev-Freight System

Cost Category Cost Range

Capital Cost

200 track-mile Maglev-freight system to Victorville and Beaumont. Lower

end of cost range per CCDoTT evaluation; higher end per SCAG’s

review—includes direct connection to port terminals and main service

lines. Does not include right-of-way costs and does not include car costs. $26 billion to $28 billion

Operating Cost

Lower end of cost range per CCDoTT evaluation at $40 per container plus

$110 per load/unload lifts; higher end of cost range per SCAG’s review—

adjusts for prevailing market lift rates, round trip operating costs,

depreciation, and final dray costs. Does not include maintenance costs. $150 per container to $440

per container



# The CCDoTT study cites a number of cost considerations for analyses including vehicle capital

cost, guide-way infrastructure, cost of energy supply, right-of-way and environmental

considerations as well as operations and maintenance costs.

Initial findings indicate that the overall investment cost of a freight system using Maglev

technology can be comparable to that of a passenger system. In terms of vehicle capital costs,

configurations may change to accommodate fr eight, however, there may be offsetting cost

factors such as length of freight vehicles (can be shorter) and on-board equipment (not

necessary for freight service). Accordingly, the co st per section of freight vehicles is less than

that of passenger vehicles. Nevertheless, the total number of sections needed to accommodate

the volume of goods moving through the southern California region would be substantial.

Guideway infrastructure would require slightly di fferent configurations due to higher loads. But

the overall design and construction would be simpler than that of passenger systems. Further,

CCDoTT estimates that the cost of energy suppl y and propulsion system for freight would be

comparable to passenger systems. Right-of-way and environmental considerations would be

less for freight—requiring slightly smaller horizont al clearance; also, a freight system would be

traveling at lower speeds than passenger service, thereby minimizing the need for noise

protection measures along the route.

Finally, CCDoTT’s preliminary cost considerations indicate that freight terminals would need to

be highly automated such that operating personnel costs would not be significant; nevertheless

more maintenance personnel would be necessary due to the greater number of substations

needed for freight. In addition, because the systems involve automated control of unmanned

vehicles, the costs of vehicle control systems is not known. Furthermore, it is not clear what the

cost of assembling and acquiring right-of-way needed to construct these systems would be.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

36 

# These are all significant cost considerations that need to be fully analyzed in detail; additionally,

studies need to be initiated to gauge costs associated with the reconfiguration of terminals that

would accommodate proposed alternative technology systems. Overall, a comprehensive

evaluation of the costs and benefits of alternative freight technology options is needed to help

guide decision-makers as they evaluate strategies to optimize the region's goods movement

transportation system.

Next Steps

In addition to pursuing business plans to implement the HSRT and truck-only lanes previously

discussed, studies are currently underway or will begin in the near future to further assess the

potential of alternative freight technologies and determine the extent to which such technologies

offer advantages over conventional truck and rail transportation in terms of shipping time and

reliability, congestion and environmental mitigation, and cost.

The first is the SCAG Inland Port Feasibility Study, which will not analyze specific

technologies but will instead examine the additional options for inland port locations,

configurations, or functions that an alterna tive freight technology system may create. This

study is currently in progress and is expected to be completed by June 2007.

The second is the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach Advanced Cargo Transportation

Technology Evaluation and Comparison (ACTTEC) study, which is currently in the Request for

Proposals (RFP) process. This study will evaluate the use of advanced technologies for moving

containers from the Ports relative to conventional truck drayage with the goal of supporting

sustainable operations while improving the quality of life in the communities around the Ports

and along the major goods movement corridors.

The third is a SCAG study on the Feasibility of Innovative Freight Technologies, which will

build on the work conducted in the ACTTEC study and examine the potential of alternative

technologies to transport marine containers, as well as other non-port related goods, to locations

in the SCAG region. Finally, it is anticipated that a study of container movements via alternative

freight technologies will be conducted as part of the I-710 Environmental Impact Report

(EIR)/Environmental Impact Study (EIS).



# TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURES

Background

TCMs are defined as strategies that adjust trip patterns or otherwise modify vehicle use in ways

that reduce air pollutant emissions, and which are specifically identified and committed to in the

most recently approved AQMP/SIP. TCMs are included in the AQMP as part of the overall

control strategy to demonstrate the region’s ability to come into attainment with the NAAQS.

Historically, the majority of emission reducti ons from mobile sources have come from

technological improvements in vehicle engines a nd fuel, which are stipulated by U.S. EPA and

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

37 

# CARB. By law, and according to the Trans portation Conformity Rule, vehicle technologybased, fuel chemistry-based and fleet maintenance-based measures cannot be considered as

TCMs for timely implementation purposes.

A definition of TCMs is provided in EPA’s Tran sportation Conformity Rule - 40 CFR Parts 51

and 93:

Transportation control measure (TCM) is any measure that is specifically identified and

committed to in the applicable implementation plan that is either one of the types listed in

§108 of the CAA, or any other measure for the purpose of reducing emissions or

concentrations of air pollutants from transportation sources by reducing vehicle use or

changing traffic flow or congestion cond itions. Notwithstanding the above, vehicle

technology-based, fuel-based, and maintenance-based measures which control the emissions

from vehicles under fixed traffic conditions ar e not TCMs for the purposes of this subpart.

The Rule also defines the criteria and procedures for timely implementation of TCMs as follows:

§93.113 Criteria and procedures: Timely Implementation of TCMs

(c) For TIPs, this criterion is satisfied if the following conditions are met:

(1) An examination of the specific steps and funding source(s) needed to fully

implement each TCM indicates that TCMs which are eligible for funding under title

23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws are on or ahead of the schedule established in

the applicable implementation plan, or, if such TCMs are behind the schedule

established in the applicable implementation plan, the MPO and DOT have

determined that past obstacles to implementation of the TCMs have been identified

and have been or are being overcome, and that all State and local agencies with

influence over approvals or funding for TCMs are giving maximum priority to

approval or funding of TCMs over other projects within their control, including

projects in locations outside the nonattainment or maintenance area.

(2) If TCMs in the applicable implementation plan have previously been programmed

for Federal funding but the funds have not been obligated and the TCMs are behind

the schedule in the implementation plan, then the TIP cannot be found to conform if

the funds intended for those TCMs are reallocated to projects in the TIP other than

TCMs, or if there are no other TCMs in th e TIP, if the funds are reallocated to

projects in the TIP other than projects which are eligible for Federal funding intended

for air quality improvement projects, e.g. the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

Improvement Program.

(3) Nothing in the TIP may interfere with the implementation of any TCM in the

applicable implementation plan.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

38 

# CAA Section 108(f)(1)(A) 6 

# lists the following sixteen measures as illustrative of TCMs.

i. Programs for improved use of public transit;

ii. Restriction of certain roads or lanes to, or construction of such roads or lanes for use

by, passenger buses or high occupancy vehicles;

iii. Employer-based transportation management plans, including incentives;

iv. Trip-reduction ordinances;

v. Traffic flow improvement programs that achieve emission reductions;

vi. Fringe and transportation corridor parking facilities, serving multiple occupancy

vehicle programs or transit service;

vii. Programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas or other areas of emission

concentration, particularly during periods of peak use;

viii. Programs for the provision of all forms of high-occupancy, shared-ride services, such

as the pooled use of vans;

ix. Programs to limit portions of road surfaces or certain sections of the metropolitan area

to the use of non-motorized vehicles or pedestrian use, both as to time and place;

x. Programs for secure bicycle storage facilities and other facilities, including bicycle

lanes, for the convenience and protection of bicyclists, in both public and private areas;

xi. Programs to control extended idling of vehicles;

xii. Programs to reduce motor vehicle emissions, consistent with Title II of the Clean Air

Act, which are caused by extreme cold start conditions;

xiii. Employer-sponsored programs to permit flexible work schedules;

xiv. Programs and ordinances to facilitate non-automobile travel, provision and utilization

of mass transit, and to generally reduce the need for single-occupant vehicle travel, as

part of transportation planning and deve lopment efforts of a locality, including

programs and ordinances applicable to new shopping centers, special events, and other

centers of vehicle activity;

xv. Programs for new construction and major reconstruction of paths, tracks or areas solely

for the use by pedestrian or other non-motorized means of transportation, when

economically feasible and in the public interest; and

xvi. Programs to encourage the voluntary removal from use and the marketplace of pre1980 model year light duty vehicles and pre-1980 model light duty trucks.

In addition to the measures listed above, other measures may be considered as TCMs if they

reduce emissions or concentrations of air pollu tants from transportation sources by modifying

vehicle use, changing traffic flow, or mitiga ting traffic congestion conditions. TCMs may be

voluntary programs, incentive-based programs, regulatory programs, as well as market- or

pricing-based programs.

Based on suggestions received from interagency c onsultation and discussions with transportation

and air quality stakeholders via the Transpor tation Conformity Working Group (TCWG), SCAG

formally refines the types of projects to be included as TCMs as appropriate during the

AQMP/SIP and/or RTIP and RTIP Guidelines de velopment process. During the regular update

cycle for each of the listed documents, SCAG, in coordination with the TCWG, will refine and

6 

# See: http://www.epa.gov/oar/caa/contents.html

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

39 

# revise TCM descriptions and definitions in order to clarify the general TCM process as well as

resolve specific implementation issues. It is SCAG’s aim to work with County Transportation

Commissions (CTCs),air quality stakeholders, and any other interested parties, primarily through

the TCWG, to facilitate the TCM process and implement TCMs appropriately.

It is SCAG’s responsibility to ensure that TCM strategies are funded in a manner consistent with

the implementation schedule established in the RTIP at the time a project is identified as a

committed TCM. The transportation conformity process is designed to ensure timely

implementation of TCM strategies. If the implem entation of a TCM strategy is delayed, or if a

TCM strategy is only partially implemented, the emission reduction shortfall must be made up

by either substituting a new TCM strategy or by enhancing other control measures through the

substitution process described in this Appendix.



# 2007 AQMP TCMs

The TCMs included in this Appendix are derived from the TCM projects listed in the first two

years of the 2006 RTIP. The RTIP is the short-range vehicle used to implement the goals and

objectives of the long-range RTP. The 2006 RTIP includes projects committed as TCMs in

previous RTIPs but not yet completed as well as new TCMs. A list of the TCM projects can be

found in Attachment A of this Appendix.

The enforceable commitment for the TCMs is to fund and implement projects and programs

contained in the first two years of the current si x-year RTIP. The remaining four years of the

RTIP represent expectations in project scope and design only. The TCM projects in the RTIP

are based on the projects planned in the RTP, which has a time horizon of 20 years. A full,

illustrative list of these RTP projects can be f ound in Technical Appendix I of the 2004 RTP and

Attachment B of this Appendix. Although the speci fic mix of projects to be funded with future

RTIP dollars may ultimately change, the emission reductions anticipated, in aggregate, from

these projects, set a key benchmark in determining the transportation sector’s contribution to a

mobile source emission budget and its associated conformity determination.



# Rollover and Substitution of TCM Projects

Each time the biennial RTIP is updated by action of SCAG’s Regional Council, the entire list of

TCM projects in the AQMP/SIP will be updated, a nd the new and continuing projects identified

in the fiscally constrained first two years of the new RTIP will be rolled over into the

AQMP/SIP. In the event that a specific TCM project is found to be non-implementable within

the designated time frame, an appropriate TCM will be used as a substitute. In either case, the

parties in the conformity rule interagency consultation process, established in the SCAG region

as the TCWG, shall assess the suitability and implementability for the new TCM projects. Where

a transportation control measure identified in the SIP is no longer implementable, SCAG may

initiate the process described below in the section “Substitution of Individual TCM Projects” to

identify and adopt a new control measures.

Rollover of TCM Projects (RTIP Update)

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

40 

# Approximately every two years, as the RTIP is updated, additional TCMs will be added to the

AQMP/SIP based on the new RTIP and the RTIP Guidelines. The “rollover” of TCMs will

update the AQMP/SIP to include new projects in addition to ongoing projects from previous

RTIPs. The TCMs “rolled over” will be monitored for adherence to the schedule established in

the RTIP at the time a project is identified as a committed TCM. The identification of TCMs

from the RTIP shall be agreed upon by both SCAG and the appropriate CTCs.

For tracking and monitoring purposes, SCAG prepares a timely implementation report with each

RTIP. Once a TCM project or program is committed for implementation in the first two years of

the RTIP, that project must be implemented by the completion date in the prevailing RTIP or

timely implementation report. Completed projects (projects that have completed construction or

have service in place) will be reported as complete and removed from the timely implementation

report. The list of TCMs included in the AQMP/SIP does not include a timely implementation

report.

The rollover process will apply to any RTIP that requires a full conformity analysis and finding.

Generally, a new RTIP is required every two years in accordance with state and federal

planning requirements. However, a new RTIP can be more frequent, for example a new RTIP is

required within six months of the adoption of a new RTP. The described TCM rollover process

shall apply in such cases as well.

Adoption Procedures for RTIP Rollover of TCM Projects

The rollover of the RTIP must be adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council, in accordance with the

RTIP adoption process, as described below.

• The Draft RTIP is reviewed by various SCAG Committees, Task Forces, and Working

Groups, such as the standing Transporta tion and Communication Committee, and the

Technical Advisory Committee;

• The Transportation Conformity Worki ng Group (TCWG), which serves as the

interagency consultation group, reviews the proposed TCMs and RTIP;

• Public notification is provided through major newspapers in the affected sub-regions as

well as on SCAG’s website;

• Draft RTIP materials are distributed, with appropriate cover letters, to approved public

libraries and facilities and also made av ailable on SCAG’s website for access by the

public;

• Input received is compiled and analyzed, and responses to comments are provided by

SCAG Staff, and made available to the public;

• A summary of comments received during the public comment period along with SCAG’s

responses, following the close of the public comment period, is incorporated into the

final RTIP;

• The Final RTIP is adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council;

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

41 

# • SCAG’s adopted RTIP is submitted to the St ate for funding approval and to the federal

agencies (FHWA, FTA and EPA) for final funding and conformity approval; and

• Upon federal approval of the RTIP, the ne w TCMs become part of the applicable

AQMP/SIP.

Substitution of Individual TCM Projects

The CTCs and/or project sponsors shall notify SCAG when a TCM project cannot be delivered

or will be significantly delayed. SCAG and the CTCs will identify and evaluate possible

replacement measures for individual substituti ons, through the TCWG, which includes members

from all affected jurisdictions, federal, state a nd/or local air quality agencies and transportation

agencies.

Substitution of individual TCMs w ill follow the process specified in the CAA section 176(c).

Section 176(c) of the CAA allows for the subs titution of individual TCMs if certain conditions

are met. These include:

"(i) if the substitute measures achieve equivalent or greater emissions reductions than the

control measure to be replaced, as demonstrated with an emissions impact analysis that is

consistent with the current methodology used for evaluating the replaced control measure in

the implementation plan;

"(ii) if the substitute control measures are implemented-

 

# "(I) in accordance with a schedule that is consistent with the schedule

provided for control measures in the implementation plan; or

"(II) if the implementation plan date for implementation of the control

measure to be replaced has passed, as soon as practicable after the

implementation plan date but not later than the date on which emission

reductions are necessary to achieve the purpose of the implementation plan;

"(iii) if the substitute and additional contro l measures are accompanied with evidence of

adequate personnel and funding and authority under State or local law to implement,

monitor, and enforce the control measures;

"(iv) if the substitute and additional control measures were developed through a collaborative

process that included--

 

# "(I) participation by representatives of all affected jurisdictions (including

local air pollution control agencies, the State air pollution control agency, and

State and local transportation agencies);

"(II) consultation with the Administrator; and

"(III) reasonable public notice and opportunity for comment; and

"(v) if the metropolitan planning organization, State air pollution control agency, and the

Administrator concur with the equivalency of the substitute or additional control measures.

In addition to the conditions above, the substitute project shall be in the same air basin and

preferably be located in the same geographic area and preferably serve the same demographic

subpopulation as the TCM being replaced.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

42 

# A substitution does not require a new conformity determination or a formal SIP revision.

Adoption of the new TCM in coordination with EPA concurrence will rescind the original TCM

and apply the new measure.

SCAG will maintain documentation of all approved TCM substitutions. The documentation will

provide the emissions analysis as well as a description of the substitution process, including a list

of the committee or working group members, public hearing and comment process, and evidence

of SCAG adoption. Compliance with the provisions listed above will ensure adequate emissions

reductions are achieved in a TCM substitution.



# TCM Implementation

The TCM measures and strategies listed in Attachment A of this Appendix replace the TCM

strategies contained in all previous AQMPs/SIPs. Table 4 provides an outline of the categories

of TCMs in the 2006 RTIP and 2007 AQMP. As outlined in Table 4, the TCMs include the

following three main categories of transportation improvement projects and programs.

• High occupancy vehicle (HOV) measures,

• Transit and Systems Management measures, and

• Information-based Transportation Strategies.

In the event a question arises as to whether a specific project is a TCM, that project should go to

the TCWG for clarification. The agencies and pa rties at the TCWG will review the project and

determine whether the project meets the definition of a TCM. This process also applies in the

event that a CTC, or other party, wishes to dispute a particular TCM and remove it from the

RTIP and the AQMP/SIP.

Table 4

TCM Project Categories (Based on the 2006 RTIP

Project Description

A. High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Measures

HOV projects, and their pricing alternatives.

 New HOV Lanes – Extensions and Additions to Existing Facilities

 New HOV Lanes – With New Facility Projects

 New HOV Lanes – With Facility Improvement Projects

 HOV to HOV Bypasses, Connectors, and New Interchanges with Ramp Meters

 High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes and Pricing Alternatives

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

43 

# Table 4 (continued)

TCM Project Categories (Based on the 2006 RTIP)

B. Transit and System Management Measures

Bus, rail and shuttle transit expansion and improvemen ts; park and ride lots and inter-modal transfer

facilities; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; railroad consolidation programs such as the Alameda

Corridor, grade separation projects, channelization, over-passes, unde rpasses; traffic signalization;

intersection improvements.

Transit

 Rail Track – New Lines

 Rail Track – Capacity Expansion of Existing Lines

 New Rolling Stock Acquisition – Rail Cars and/or Locomotives

 Express Busways – Bus Rapid Transit and Dedicated Bus Lanes

 Buses – Fleet Expansion

 Shuttles and Para-transit Vehicles – Fleet Expansion



# Intermodal Transfer Facilities

 Rail Stations – New

 Rail Stations – Expansion

 Park & Ride Lots – New

 Park & Ride Lots – Expansion

 Bus Stations & Transfer Facilities – New

 Bus Stations & Transfer Facilities – Expansion



# Non-motorized Transportation Mode Facilities (non-recreational)

 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities – New

 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities – Expansion

 Bicycle Facilities – New

 Bicycle Facilities – Expansion

 Pedestrian Facilities – New

 Pedestrian Facilities – Expansion



# C. Information-based Transportation Strategies

Programs that promote and popularize multi-modal commute strategies to maximize alternatives to

single-occupancy vehicle commute trips; marketing and promoting the use of HOV lanes or rail lines to

the general public; educating the public regarding cost , locations, accessibility and services available at

Park and Ride lots; promoting and marketing v anpool formation and incentive programs; promoting

ride-matching services through the Internet and other means of making alternative travel option

information more accessible to the general public ; Urban Freeway System Management improvements;

Smart Corridors System Management programs; Congestion Management Plan-based demand

management strategies; county-/corridor-wide vanpool programs; seed money for transportation

management associations (TMAs); and TDM demonstration programs/projects eligible for

programming in the RTIP.

 Marketing for Rideshare Services and Transit/TDM/Intermodal Services

 Intelligent Transportation Systems/Control System Computerization

 Telecommuting Programs/Satellite Work Centers

 Real-time Rail, Transit, or Freeway Info rmation Systems (changeable message signs)

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

44 

# Relation of Current TCM Components to Previous Plans

The TCM components listed in the 2007 AQMP are consistent with the TCM elements proposed

in previous plans, and meet the anti-backsliding requirements of Section 110(l) of the CAA.

The CAA restricts EPA’s ability to approve state actions that weaken the California SIP.

Therefore, the requirements must strengthen the SIP and not interfere with an applicable

requirement under the CAA. All TCM commitments from previous AQMPs have been

implemented and documentation is provided in the Timely Implementation Reports of the 2006

RTIP and previous RTIPs. The TCMs in the 2007 AQMP continue SCAG’s TCM commitment

and the TCM status will be reported in the Timely Implementation Reports of subsequent RTIPs.

The 1994 AQMP lists one TCM, comprising various specific strategies (Table 5). Substantial

progress has been made in implementing these measures, and the region remains committed to

assuring continued implementation.

Table 5

TCMs from 1994 AQMP (TCM1*)

Transportation Improvements Current Status

HOV Lanes On going

Transit Improvements On going

Park and Ride Facilities On going - expanded to include all facilities

that substantially promote transfer across modes

of travel.

Traffic Signal Improvements On going - focus is on projects that substantially

improve regional system flow

Urban Freeway Systems Management

Improvements and Smart Corridors On going - Intelligent Transportation

Systems/Control System Computerization

Operational Improvements (Flow

improvements, Congestion relief) On going – focus is on projects that substantially

improve regional system flow

Rideshare Programs On going

TDM Programs On going

Bicycle Facility Improvements On going - expanded to include pedestrian

facilities as well.

* AQMP Appendix IV-C, September 1994, Pg. II-14 – II-16



# In addition to the TCM strategies specified above, indirect source measures (ISRs) were also

considered as TCMs in the 1994 AQMP, and were planned for AQMD rule development (Table

6). However, the legislature has reduced the AQMD’s legal authority to implement ISR

measures.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

45 

# Table 6

Indirect Source Controls – 1994 AQMP

ISR 1 Special Event Centers See H&S 40717.8, 1994

ISR 2 Regional Shopping Centers See H&S 40717.6, 1995

ISR 3 Registration and Commercial Vehicles See H&S 40717.9, 1995

ISR 4 Airport Ground Access See H&S 40717.9, 1995

ISR 5 Trip Reduction for Schools See H&S 40717.9, 1995

ISR 6 Enhanced Rule 1501 See H&S 40717.9, 1995

ISR 7 Parking Cash-Out See H&S 40717.9, 1995

A key step in the 1994 AQMP was the proposal for the formation of the Southern California

Economic Partnership (SCEP, or The Partnership), intended to help develop many of the

innovative and conceptual projects envisioned at that time. It should be noted that The

Partnership has been established as an active and effective entity, and is vigorously pursuing

these and other projects. These include: Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), Smart

Shuttles, Telecommunications, Telecommuting Support, Alternative Fuel Vehicle Support and

Voluntary Emission Reduction Program, the Clean Cities Program, and the Travel Advisory

News Network (TANN) Project (see 2007 AQMP, Chapter 4 and http://www.thepartnership.org/index.htm )

.



# TCM Enforceability and Monitoring

The TCM strategies contained in the AQMP are expected to be real, quantifiable, and

enforceable. The region’s long-range transportati on blueprint (the previously triennial and now

quadrennial RTP) and the shorter-term programmi ng used to fund the improvements (the RTIP)

together form the foundation and the keystone for improving transportation system performance

while at the same time assuring the timely attainment of air quality goals within the Basin.

Assessing the consistency of emissions deriving from these mobility strategies against the

corresponding mobile source emission budgets contained in the applicable SIP serves as the

basis for determining conformity to the SIP. The RTIP provides the information needed in

assuring the timely implementation of TCM strategies described in this document.

The projects and programs that make up the RTP and RTIP form the basis for assuring an

enforceable commitment for each TCM. Federal law requires that funding priority be given to

TCMs in developing the RTIP. Therefore, the report on the timely implementation of TCMs will

continue to serve as one of the methods of monitoring the air quality impacts of transportation

system improvements.

The 2006 RTIP provides for timely implementation of the TCM strategies for the Basin. As the

biennial element of the RTIP is revised, the list of fiscally constrained projects, or, rather, the list

of projects for which funding has been identified, is updated. The U.S. EPA Transportation

Conformity Rule states that timely implementation is to be measured against the TCM strategies

in the applicable implementation plan.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

46 

# The enforceable commitment for TCM measures is to report on the funding and implementation

of the first two years of the six-year biennial RTIP. The list of fiscally constrained projects will

advance, or “roll forward”, and the enforceable commitment will automatically be revised to

encompass the first two years of the constrained projects contained in each new RTIP. The

implementation status of TCM projects is reported on in subsequent RTIPs until the TCM

projects have been reported as completed. In projecting the long-term (2010, 2020, etc.) impacts

which could be ascribed to this measure in the Plan, the facilities proposed to be built in the

long-term timeframe, and programs as they exist today, serve as the basis for modeling travel

and emission impacts.



# REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS

Based on the data generated from SCAG’s Tran sportation Demand Model (e.g., traffic volumes,

vehicle speeds, transit ridership, etc.), an estimate of emissions associated with on-road mobile

sources can be generated using CARB’s emission f actor model (EMFAC). Through this process,

future emissions from on-road mobile sources can be compared for the regional transportation

system assuming implementation of the RTP versus a baseline case without RTP

implementation.

One of the key goals of conventional transporta tion planning has been the provision of sufficient

roadway capacity to reduce congestion and improve mobility through improvements to regional

networks of highways and arterials. And, to the extent that congestion is relieved, there are

significant regional air quality benefits to such flow-improving interventions. Thus, the

emissions benefits historically demonstrated in previous AQMPs and air quality analyses

performed for the RTP and the RTIP have been based on the congestion relief effects associated

with both added infrastructure capacity and implementation of TCMs. It is generally

understood, however, that potential future improvements in air quality deriving from the RTP

and TCMs will be much smaller, since motor vehicle emissions have and will continue to be

substantially reduced through technology (i.e., emission standards for new engines and in-use

standards for existing fleets). For instance, the emissions of ROG go from approximately 300

tons per day in 2005 to approximately 82 tons per day in 2030. Further, most of the TCM

projects in the South Coast Air Basin were adopted into the SIP to meet the one-hour ozone

standard by 2010 and have already been implemented. Thus, the emission reductions associated

with these projects are now included in the baseline emissions and no longer show up in the

TCM benefit values.

The modeling exercises performed for the Final Draft 2007 AQMP are intended to evaluate

emissions associated with the transportation strategy (i.e., the RTP) relative to baseline

conditions for ROG, NOx, and PM2.5. Additional modeling exercises were performed to

estimate the contribution of TCMs and the Compass Growth Visioning program to the emissions

profile of the overall transportation strategy. For the TCM modeling exercise, socio-economic

data variables were held constant and the tran sportation network was modified to account for the

TCMs. To estimate the benefits of Compass, the transportation network was held constant and

socio-economic data associated with Compass was modified between baseline and project

conditions. It must be noted, however, that the regional transportation strategy is appropriately

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

47 

# viewed on a systems-level basis and not by its components (e.g., TCMs, Compass, etc.) since

each of the individual transportation improvements and strategies affect each other and the

system. Isolating and summing the emissions effect of each transportation improvement and

strategy cannot provide an accurate representation of the system’s emissions because the

interactions and feedback among these components alters the end results. Nevertheless, for

purposes of discussion, Table 7 provides the results of the modeling analyses for the RTP as a

whole as well as those for the TCM and Compass components of the RTP for the attainment

years 2014 (PM2.5), 2020 (8-hour ozone), and 2023 (8-hour ozone assuming a “bump-up” to

extreme nonattainment).

It should be noted that SCAG has been working with modeling experts and practitioners to

develop a new Transportation Demand Model that is expected to more accurately forecast

highway traffic volumes, speeds, and other aspects of the transportation system The new model

is in the process of being calibrated and validated. Model runs, with a preliminarily calibrated

and validated model, seem to be consistent with the interim model emissions in the South Coast.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 200748Table 7Transportation Strategy Emissions(tons per day)2010 2014 2020 2023PollutantRTP TCMs CompassRTP TCMs CompassRTP TCMs CompassRTP TCMs CompassROG -2.86 ** *** -1.79 -1.04 *** -1.68 -0.83 -0.50 -1.74 -0.77 -0.67NOX -1.01 ** *** -0.01 -3.48 *** 0.25 -2.20 -0.47 -0.21 -2.15 -0.64PM2.5 -0.26 ** *** -0.24 -0.18 ***   ** **   ** **   ** **Notes: Negative value indicates an emissions reductionPM2.5 and all 2014 values based on annual emissions inventory; all others are summer planning inventoryDoes not include emission reductions associated with proposed goods movement control measures. See Attachment D.* Does not include fugitive dust emissions.** TCMs benefit shown for attainment years only*** Implementation of Compass Growth Visioning Program occurs after 2014**** PM2.5 attainment required by 2015

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

49 

# REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL MEASURE ANALYSIS

Introduction

Clean Air Act Section 172(c)(1) requires SIPs to provide for the implementation of all

reasonably available control measures (RACM) as expeditiously as practicable. Guidance on

interpreting RACM requirements in the context of the 1990 Amendments was set forth in the

General Preamble (57 FR 13498, 13560) in 1992. In the General Preamble, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) interpreted section 172(c)(1) as imposing a duty on States to consider

all available control measures and to adopt and implement measures that are reasonably

available for implementation in a specific nonattainment area. It also retained an earlier

interpretation of RACM that it would not be reasonable to require the implementation of

measures that do not advance the date for attainment.

With regard to TCMs, EPA revised earlier guidance by indicating that it is inappropriate to

presume that all Section 108(f)(1)(A) measures of the CAA are available in all nonattainment

areas. Instead, States should consider Section 108(f)(1)(A) measures as potential options that are

not exhaustive, but indicative of the types of measures that should be considered. In addition,

any measure identified as reasonably available during the public comment period should also be

considered for implementation. EPA indicated that States could reject measures as not

reasonably available for reasons related to local conditions. States are required to justify why

available measures were not considered RACM and not adopted in the SIP.

To meet the RACM requirements articulated in the EPA guidance described above, this RACM

analysis was performed using several steps. First is a description of the process by which SCAG

and related transportation agencies in the South Coast Air Basin identify, review, and make

enforceable commitments to implement TCMs. S econd is the assembly and review of a list of

control measures recently implemented in other ozone nonattainment areas. This effort involved

a review of measures implemented in California nonattainment areas as well those located in

Arizona, Texas, and Washington, and the organization of those measures in the 16 categories

specified in CAA Section 108(f). The third step is to determine RACM measures by contrasting

the list of candidate measures with measures implemented to date in the South Coast Air Basin,

as well as any new commitments in the current AQMP. The fourth step is to provide a reasoned

justification for any of the available measures that have yet to be implemented. These

justifications must address criteria described in the above-cited guidance.



# SCAG TCM Development Process

As defined by EPA, a TCM is any measure that is specifically identified and committed to in the

applicable implementation plan that is either one of the types listed in Section 108(f)(1)(A) of

the CAA, or any other measure for the purpose of reducing emissions or concentrations of air

pollutants from transportation sources by reduci ng vehicle use or changing traffic flow or

congestion conditions.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

50 

# While the implementation of TCMs has played a role in improving air quality in the South Coast

Air Basin, these measures are yielding fewer emission reductions over time because of

technological advances of vehicle fleets. Thus, the CAA’s requirement to adopt all RACM is a

driving force governing whether and which TCMs are necessary for the SIP. During SIP

preparation, areas are obligated to evaluate TCMs and determine whether they qualify as

RACM. The TCM process and RACM analysis run concurrently, rather than consecutively,

with the transportation planning process.

The RACM process relies predominantly on a continuous updating and addition process for

TCMs. The TCM process was established for the South Coast Air Basin by replacing a process

that developed TCMs each time a SIP was produced with a continuous ongoing TCM process.

This process continues to govern the selection and implementation of TCMs today. TCMs are

continuously identified and reviewed throughout the transportation planning process. SCAG’s

ongoing public outreach effort, including an i nvolved interagency input process via the

Transportation Conformity Working Group (TCWG), helps ensure that the process to identify

and review TCMs is robust, inclusive, and comprehensive. Development of TCMs arises from

multiple processes and multiple sources, which include CTCs, subregional agencies, task forces,

committees, and the public. Project sponsors have a strong incentive to develop and help

identify TCMs because TCMs receive special consideration on Congestion Management and Air

Quality (CMAQ) and Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds, and are assured timely

implementation in accordance with the schedule in the RTIP. These funding and scheduling

incentives ensure that TCMs are developed, sponsored, and clearly identified throughout the

process.

The discussion below outlines the multiple processes and entities involved in the TCM planning

process.

County Transportation Commissions

County Transportation Commissions must follow the most current RTIP Guidelines when

preparing their lists of transportation improvements. The RTIP Guidelines state that “the RTIP

is required to advance the RTP by programming the projects, programs, and policies contained in

the Plan, in accordance with federal and state requirements.” 7 

# As stated above, the RTIP

Guidelines ensure that “TCMs require priority of funding (with special claim on CMAQ and

STP funds), as well as timely implementation in accordance with the schedule in the RTP” 8 

# . The

discussion below outlines the process used by Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation

Authority (Metro), the Orange County Trans portation Authority (OCTA), the San Bernardino

Associated Governments (SANBAG), and the Riverside County Transportation Commission

(RCTC) to develop their lists of transportati on projects for each update of the RTIP and RTP. 9

7 

# Southern California Association of Governments. (October 2005). Final 2006 Regional Transportati on Improvement Programs

Guidelines. Los Angeles, CA.

8 

# Southern California Association of Governments. (October 2005). Final 2006 Regional Transporta tion Improvement Programs

Guidelines. Los Angeles, CA.

9 

# Note, the other CTCs in the SCAG region (for Ventura and Imperial counties) are outside the South Coast Air Basin.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

51 

# Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

The Metro begins its Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) process with a call for projects.

The call for projects process meets federal and state planning and programming requirements for

developing an integrated, multi-modal transportation system. The Call for Projects also

addresses Metro’s mandated responsibilities to the California Transportation Commission

regarding the programming of the State TIP. There is a local match requirement that varies

depending on the modal category and a public hearing before the Metro Board officially adopts

the TIP. TCM projects are prioritized throughout Metro’s process. In general, projects are

evaluated based on three criteria: project need and purpose, cost effectiveness, and project

readiness. Thus, TCM projects that are useful, economically feasible, and that are ready to be

implemented in the near-term receive priority of funding and scheduling.

Orange County Transportation Authority

Cities in Orange County propose projects to OCTA through a competitive call for projects.

OCTA, reviews and prioritizes the projects based on an approved set of criteria. Additionally,

OCTA programs regionally significant projects that are of the highest importance to the County

via the Comprehensive Funding Strategy and Long Range Transpiration Plan. Those projects

that also qualify as TCMs are identified and included in the RTP and RTIP.

Riverside County Transportation Commission

The RCTC begins its process with a call fo r projects. RCTC staff and a RCTC Technical

Advisory Committee comprised of local agency public works directors and senior planners

review and evaluate projects for funding consid eration against the funding criteria which may

include air conformity benefits, mobility, congestion relief, safety, project readiness etc. per the

eligibility parameters of the funds. Project s which meet the TCM criteria are identified

immediately and a secondary review occurs to evaluate timely implementation and to ensure

funding is committed to the project. Projects recommended for funding are sent to the RCTC

Board for final approval. Approved projects are programmed in the RTIP with project

monitoring then occurring on a quarterly basis to ensure the project is progressing satisfactorily.

San Bernardino Associated Governments

SANBAG conducts calls for projects. TCM projects receive priority for funding and

implementation through application of evaluation criteria that reward projects that provide the

greatest mobility and emissions benefit per allocated dollar.

Sub-regional Coordination and Regional Tr ansportation Planning for Air Quality

Management

The Subregional Coordinators Group is an impor tant part of SCAG's participatory planning

process and assists in balancing regional need s and prospects against local constraints and

opportunities. Established in 1990, at the sub-region's initiative, the Group comprises

administrators from Councils of Governments (C OGs), cities and counties within the region and

assists SCAG in the design and implementation of its administrative and programmatic tasks

within realistic fiscal and local constraints.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

52 

# The subregions help coordinate community outreach for discussion of the transportation policies,

programs and projects, including effective and e fficient TCM projects, nominated for inclusion

in the long-range RTP and the short-range RT IP. SCAG then synthesizes these projects,

programs and policies into a regionally coherent transportation strategy and assesses the

environmental and equity consequences for the region as a whole.



# Assembly and Review of Candidate RACM

EPA and related court decisions have maintained that TCMs considered RACM must be

measures that 1) advance the attainment date, typically by at least one year and 2) are

technologically and economically feasible. Measures must pass both the advance attainment and

technical/economic feasibility tests to be deemed RACM.

U.S. EPA guidance documents provide help in identifying the type of measures to be considered.

CAA Section 108(f)(1)(A) provides a list of si xteen categories of TCMs that are potential

options that should be considered indicative types of control measures:

i. Programs for improved use of public transit;

ii. Restriction of certain roads or lanes to, or construction of such roads or lanes for use

by, passenger buses or high occupancy vehicles;

iii. Employer-based transportation management plans, including incentives;

iv. Trip-reduction ordinances;

v. Traffic flow improvement programs that achieve emission reductions;

vi. Fringe and transportation corridor parking facilities, serving multiple occupancy

vehicle programs or transit service;

vii. Programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas or other areas of emission

concentration, particularly during periods of peak use;

viii. Programs for the provision of all forms of high-occupancy, shared-ride services, such

as the pooled use of vans;

ix. Programs to limit portions of road surfaces or certain sections of the metropolitan area

to the use of non-motorized vehicles or pedestrian use, both as to time and place;

x. Programs for secure bicycle storage facilities and other facilities, including bicycle

lanes, for the convenience and protection of bicyclists, in both public and private areas;

xi. Programs to control extended idling of vehicles;

xii. Programs to reduce motor vehicle emissions, consistent with Title II of the Clean Air

Act, which are caused by extreme cold start conditions;

xiii. Employer-sponsored programs to permit flexible work schedules;

xiv. Programs and ordinances to facilitate non-automobile travel, provision and utilization

of mass transit, and to generally reduce the need for single-occupant vehicle travel, as

part of transportation planning and deve lopment efforts of a locality, including

programs and ordinances applicable to new shopping centers, special events, and other

centers of vehicle activity;

xv. Programs for new construction and major reconstruction of paths, tracks or areas solely

for the use by pedestrian or other non-motorized means of transportation, when

economically feasible and in the public interest; and

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

53 

# xvi. Programs to encourage the voluntary removal from use and the marketplace of pre1980 model year light duty vehicles and pre-1980 model light duty trucks.

EPA guidance has emphasized that these sixteen measures are an illustrative, but not exhaustive

list. Instead, TCMs need to be evaluated on an area-by-area basis to determine which are

reasonably available. In addition to the measures listed above, the 1992 General Preamble of the

CAA cite other sources to include TCMs that were a) suggested during public comments (e.g. at

workshops, public hearings, in written comments, etc.); b) adopted in other nonattainment areas

of the country; and c) specifically identified by the EPA (i.e. EPA TCM database, support

documents for rulemaking, etc.). 10



# To develop a list of candidate RACM, SCAG performed a review of available TCMs in

California, as well as in other states. SCAG reexamined the candidate RACM identified during

the comprehensive RACM analysis performed for the 2003 AQMP. Additionally, SCAG

coordinated with other MPOs and air quality districts to identify measures that are being

implemented or considered in other nonattainment areas. SCAG reviewed TCMs implemented

in California from various nonattainment areas (Sacramento, San Joaquin Valley, and the Bay

Area). SCAG also coordinated with other agencies outside of the SCAG region in an effort to

ensure that all RACM were considered (t he Houston-Galveston Area Council [H-GAC] in

Texas; Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments [MWCOG] in Washington D.C. 11; 

# the

Maricopa County Air Quality Department in Ar izona, and the North Central Texas Council of

Governments [NCTCOG]. 12 

# SCAG also utilized information from Arizona and Texas obtained

in the 2003 AQMP RACM Analysis. The comprehensive list of candidate TCMs for RACM

compiled in the UC Davis-Caltrans Air Quality Project, Transportation Control Measures:

Guidance for Conformity and State Implementation Plan Development (August 2004), was also

reviewed as part of the current RACM analysis.

Additionally, TCMs were discussed and reviewed at numerous TCWG meetings as part of the

2006 RTIP development process, as well as the development of this 2007 AQMP. Further,

SCAG has an extensive and robust public participation process for the development of the

RTP/RTIP through ongoing public meetings, and technical, advisory, and policy committees.

These groups generally meet on a monthly basis and provide explicit opportunities for the public

to participate and contribute.

In summary, SCAG performed the RACM analysis based on information reviewed from the

following sources:

• CAA Section 108(f)(1)(A)

• 2003 South Coast AQMP RACM Analysis

• Other nonattainment areas in California

10 

# Seitz, John S. (December 14, 2000) Memo from John Seitz: Guidance on the Reasonably Availabl e Control Measures (RACM)

Requirement and Attainment Demonstration Submissions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas. Available at:

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/revracm.pdf.

11 

# Draft list of candidate RACM were used for reference only and not published. Per e-mail from Jeff King, Metropolitan Washingt on

Council of Governments (MWCOG). (June 8, 2006).

12 

# Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.(December 13, 2006). Dallas-Fort Worth 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Attainment

Demonstration: Revisions to the State Implementat ion Plan (SIP) for the Control of Ozone Air Pollution . Available at:

http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/dfw.html.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

54 

# • Other nonattainment areas outside California

• Interagency Consultation (TCWG)

• RTP/RTIP Updates

• Candidate TCMs for RACM – UC Davis-Caltrans Air Quality Project 13



# The candidate measures were reviewed to determine which can be considered RACM. As

discussed above, the RACM TCM requirement consists of two core criteria that must be

satisfied: 1) TCMs must advance attainment of the air quality standards; and 2) TCMs must be

both technically and economically feasible. EP A has left their definitions vague and has

preferred to allow flexibility in each region’s determination. EPA did not provide definitive

guidance on “advancing attainment,” but in practice, agencies have based their determination on

whether a measure or group of measures would help an area achieve attainment one year earlier

than in the absence of the measure or group of measures. In other words, TCM implementation

must significantly reduce emissions to facilitate attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) one year earlier than without the TCMs. Considering the magnitude of the

emissions reductions necessary to demonstrate attainment in the South Coast Air Basin, the

implementation of TCMs is not expected to meet this criterion.

Similarly vague is U.S. EPA’s definition for the second criterion - technical and economical

feasibility. Technical feasibility has been determined in terms of local factors, such as

environmental impacts, availability of control measure, and ability to achieve the emission

reduction. 14 

# EPA has not set firm thresholds to determine economic feasibility. Costeffectiveness has been considered a determining factor. As a recent example, the Maricopa

Association of Governments defined economic f easibility based on guidance from California air

agencies, which included AQMD and Bay Area Air Quality Management District guidelines.

They established that TCMs at or below approximately $8,400 to $9,000 per ton of PM10

reduced annually were cost-effective. 15



# Determining RACM Measures

For this step of the RACM analysis, SCAG compared the list measures implemented within the

South Coast Air Basin with those implemented in other areas. SCAG then organized all

measures, including candidate measures and those measures currently implemented in the region,

according to the sixteen categories specified in Section 108(f)(1)(A) of the CAA. No formal

requirement exists on how to organize TCMs. However, SCAG utilized this organization

scheme as a way to highlight those measures that fall within the sixteen CAA categories, which

are formally recognized as "TCMs" and subject to CAA and federal conformity requirements.

SCAG found a number of candidate measures that were not currently implemented in the region

and not included in the 2003 AQMP RACM analysis.

13 

# UC Davis-Caltrans Air Quality Project. (August 18, 2004). Transportation Control Measures: Gu idance for Conformity and State

Implementation Plan Development

. 14 

# UC Davis-Caltrans Air Quality Project. (August 18, 2004). Transportation Control Measures: Gu idance for Conformity and State

Implementation Plan Development

. 15 

# Eisenger, D. and D. Niemeier. (November 2003). Transportation Control Measures: Feder al Requirements and SIP Development

Considerations Poster

. Prepared for the Transportation Resear ch Board's Annual Meeting, 2004.

# Final 2007 AQMP

June 2007

55 

# Reasoned Justification

The fourth step is to provide a reasoned justification for any of the available measures that have

yet to be implemented or will not be implemented. In 1999, EPA issued a memorandum entitled

“Guidance on the Reasonably Available Control Measures Requirement and Attainment

Demonstration Submissions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas.” 16 

# In this memorandum, EPA

states that in order to determine whether a state has adopted all RACM necessary for attainment

and as expeditiously as practicable, the state must explain why the selected implementation

schedule is the earliest schedule based on the circumstances of the area. This indicated that

States could reject measures as not reasonably available for reasons related to local conditions.

In such cases, States are obligated to provide justification as to why potentially reasonable

measures have not been adopted. Valid reasons for rejecting a measure include that it would not

advance the attainment date, it is economically infeasible, or it is technologically infeasible.

The complete listing of all candidate measures evaluated for RACM determination is included in

Attachment C. A “Measure Number” is assigned for each strategy for ease of discussion (not

rank in priority). The “Description” column provides a brief description of the relevant measure

in discussion. “Has It Been Implemented?” confirms whether the measure is currently

implemented in the SCAG region. The final column “Reasoned Justification for Not

Implementing” provides a reasoned justification for those measures that were not considered

RACM. SCAG appropriately considered a numbe r of factors that included technical and

economic feasibility, enforceability, geographic applicability, and ability to provide emission

reductions. Of the TCMS that were deemed candidate measures, none were found to meet the

criteria for RACM implementation.



# Conclusion

CAA Section 172(c)(1) requires SIPs to provide for the implementation of all RACM as

“expeditiously as practicable.” EPA and related court decisions have maintained that TCMs

considered RACM must be measures that 1) advance the attainment date, typically by at least

one year and 2) are technologically and economically feasible. Measures must pass both the

advance attainment and technical/economic feasibility tests to be deemed RACM.

Based on a comprehensive review of TCM projects in other nonattainment areas or otherwise

identified, it is determined that the TCMs being implemented in the South Coast Air Basin are

inclusive of all RACM. None of the candidate m easures reviewed herein and determined to be

infeasible meets the criteria for RACM implementation.

SCAG and the local transportation agencies have in place a comprehensive, formal process for

identifying, evaluating, and selecting TCMs. The regular RTP, RTIP, and AQMP/SIP public

update processes ensure that TCM identification and implementation is a routine consideration

that helps SCAG and the AQMD demonstrate attainment of applicable NAAQS.

16 

# Seitz, John S. (December 14, 2000). Memo from John Seitz: Guidance on the Reas onably Available Control Measures (RACM)

Requirement and Attainment Demonstration S ubmissions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas. Available at:

http:// www. epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/revracm.pdf

# ATTACHMENT A

2007 AQMP Transportation Control Measures (TCMs)Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)HOV Improvements - New HOV Lanes, Extensions, Additions To Existing FacilitiesLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCALTRANS1178AIN LOS ANGELES AND CULVER CITY FROM ROUTE 90 TO ROUTE 10 - HOV LANES(SB 5+0 TO 5+1; NB 5+0 TO 5+1 HOV) (2206LK CFP) OBLIGATED 6207 (034)2008CALTRANSLA000357FROM ROUTE 170 TO ROUTE 118 HOV LANES (10 TO 12 LANES) (CFP 345) (2001 CFP8339; CFP2197). (EA# 121901, PPNO 0158K)2010CALTRANSLA000358FROM ROUTE 134 TO ROUTE 170 HOV LANES (8 TO 10 LANES) (CFP 346)(2001 CFP8355). (EA# 121801, PPNO 0142F)2010CALTRANSLA000359IN EL MONTE AND BALDWIN PARK FROM BALDWIN AVE TO ROUTE 605 HOV LANES(8+0 TO 8+2) AND TOS PROJECTS. (EA# 10695, 22350, 22340 PPNO 0295M, PPNO2969,PPNO 2968)2006CALTRANSLA000548FROM PUENTE TO CITRUS HOV LANES FROM 8 TO 10 LANES (C-ISTEA 77720) (PEONLY) (EA# 117080, PPNO# 0309N)2015CALTRANSLA01342RT 10 FROM RT 605 TO PUENTE AVE HOV LANES (8+0 TO 8+2) (EA# 117070, PPNO0306H)2011CALTRANSLA01344RT 5 FROM RT 118 TO RT 14 FROM 10 TO 12 LANES HOV LANES. EA# 122001, PPNO0162P. GARVEE project2010CALTRANSLA0B951ROUTE 10 TO ROUTE 60 - EXPRESSWAY TO FREEWAY CONVERSION - ADD 1 HOVLANE AND 1 MIXED FLOW LANE . (2001 CFP 8349, TCRP #50) (EA# 210600, PPNO2741)2012CALTRANSLA0C8344EXTENSION OF N/B I-405 HOV LANE-TO EXTEND THE HOV LANE ON N/B I-405 FROMSOUTH OF VENTURA BL TO SO. BURBANK BLVD WHERE IT WILL JOIN THE EXISTINGHOV LANE. (EA# 199620, PPNO# 2788).2008CALTRANSLA0D73LA MIRADA, NORWALK & SANTA FE SPRINGS-ORANGE CO LINE TO RTE 605JUNCTION. WIDEN FOR HOV & MIXED FLOW LNS, RECONSTRUCT VALLEY VIEW (EA2159A0, PPNO 2808).2016CALTRANSLA195900RTE. 405 - WATERFORD AVE. TO RTE 10 -AUX LANE: LOS ANGELES - WATERFORDAV. TO RTE 10 - CONSTRUCT S/B AUX LANE& S/B HOV LANE (2001 CFP 8354) (EA#195900 ,PPNO 2333). GARVEE 12/032009CALTRANSLA963724IN LA VERNE AND CLAREMONT, FROM FOOTHILL BLVD TO SAN BERN COUNTYLINE, CONSTRUCT 8-LN FWY INCLU 2 HOV LNS2009CALTRANSLA996137RTE. 60 HOV LNS. FROM RTE. 605 TOBREA CANYON RD. -- CONSTRUCT ONE HOVLANE IN EACH DIRECTION) (CFP: 358, 4262, 6137=67,150+IIP: 5,100) (EA#129410,129421, PPNO 0482R,0482RA)2008CALTRANSLA996138RTE.5 HOV LNS. FROM FLORENCE AVE TO RTE.19 - ADD ONE LANE IN EACHDIRECTION2016CALTRANSORA000195ON SR-22 (I-405 TO SR55) ADD 2 HOV LANES/1 EA DIR (FRM 0 - 2); & 2 AUX LANES/1EA DIR (FRM 0- 2) (I-5 TOBEACH) & OPERATING IMPROVMENTS2007A-1Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)HOV Improvements - New HOV Lanes, With New Facility ProjectsLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateANAHEIMORA000100GENE AUTRY WAY WEST@ I-5 (I-5HOV TRANSITWAY TO HASTER) ADDOVERCROSSING ON I-5 (S)/MANCHESTERAND EXTEND GENE AUTRY WAY WESTFROM I-5 TO HARBOR.2009CALTRANS10167I-5 FROM SR-91 TO LA COUNTY LINE INBUENA PARK - ADD 1 MIXED FLOW LN AND1 HOV LN IN EACH DIRECTION. FROM 6 - 0 TO 8 - 2 LANES.2008CALTRANS354801JCT RTE 15 TO VALLEY WAY - ADD 1 HOV LN AND 1 M/ F LN IN EA. DIR. INCLUDINGOPERATIONAL STRIPING (IN SBD CNTY 9.05 - 9.95 & AT THE EAST END) ALSOWIDEN 5 UC'S & 1 OH2008CALTRANS0121DON I-215/SR91/SR60, RIV I215 COR IMPROV PROJ - FROM 60/91/215 JCT TO 60/215SPLIT - WIDEN 6 TO 8 LNS, INCLUDING MAINLINE/IC IMPROVS, ADD HOV, AUX, & SBTRUCK CLIMB LN (EA: 3348U1)2009GARDEN GROVEORA981104RECONSTRUCT HARBOR BLVD INTERCHANGE. 4 LANES EACH DIRECTION. (1/4MILE BEFORE AND AFTER SR-22 RAMPS) 2 HOV LNES(1 E/B & 1 W/B) ANDPROPOSED SR-22 HOV LANES.2007MORENO VALLEY32300AT SR60/NASON ST IC - MODIFY/RECONSTRUCT IC & NASON ST FROM ELDER TOFIR: REALIGN EB, WB EXIT PLUS EB & WB ENTRY RAMPS, ADD EB & WB RAMP HOVLNS, & ADD AUX LANES (EA: 32300)2007VARIOUS713I-215 CORRIDOR NORTH - IN SAN BERNARDINO, ON I-215 FROM RTE 10 TO RTE 30-ADD 2 HOV LANES 1 LANE IN EA. DIR. AND OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS2010VARIOUS20620UPLAND TO SAN BERNARDINO FROM LOS ANGELES COUNTY LINE TO ROUTE 215 -8 LANE FREEWAY INCLUDING 2 HOV LANES (6+2) - 210 CORRIDOR PROJECT W/AUXLANES THROUGOUT SEGMENT 9-112009A-2Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)HOV Improvements - HOV Bypasses, Connectors, and New Interchange with Ramp MetersLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCALTRANS12570RTE. 57/60 HOV CONNECTOR INDUSTRY FROM OLD BREA CANYON ROAD TOGRAND AVENUE - HOV DIRECT CONNECTORS AND COLLECTOR ROAD (BOTHDIRECTIONS) (EA# 12570, PPNO# 0499Q)2007CALTRANSLA996134RTE. 5/14 INTERCHANGE & HOV LNS ON RTE 14 - CONSTRUCT 2 ELEVATED LANES -HOV CONNECTOR (DIRECT CONNECTORS) (EA# 16800)(2001 CFP 8343) (PPNO0168M)2010ORANGE COUNTY TRANSAUTHORITY (OCTA)ORA000193SR-22/I-405 AND I-405/I-605 INTERCHANGES. DESIGN HOV TO HOV LANECONNECTORS2015ORANGE, CITY OFORA990443SR-22 AND CITY DRIVE INTERCHANGEIMPROVEMENTS. RECONFIGURE FREEWAYINTERCHANGE AT SR-22 FROM SR-57 TO LEWIS STREET -- FROM 6/0 TO 6/2 LANES(ADDING 2 HOV LANES)2007RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSCOMMISSION (RCTC)RIV010212ON SR91 - ADAMS TO 60/215 IC: ADD HOV LNS, AUX LNS (MADISON-CENTRAL),BRIDGE WIDENING & REPLACEMENTS, EB/WB BRAIDED RAMPS, ICMOD/RECONSTRUCT + SOUND/RETAINING WALLS2013A-3Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes and Pricing AlternativesLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateTCA10254SJHC, 15 MI TOLL RD BETWEEN I-5 IN SANJUAN CAPISTRANO & RTE 73 IN IRVINE,EXISTING 3/M/F EA.DIR.1 ADD'L M/F EA DIR,PLUS CLIMBING & AUX LNS AS REQ, BY2015 PER SCAG/TCA MOU 4/5/01. [2008 COMPLETION DATE FOR PHASE 1 ONLY]2008TCAORA050ETC (RTE 241/261/133) TOLL RD (RTE 91TO I-5/JAMBOREE) EXISTING 2 M/F EA.DIR, 2ADD'L M/F IN EA. DIR, PLUS CLIMB AND AUX LNS AS REQ, BY 2015 PER SCAG/TCAMOU 4/05/01. [2010 COMPLETION DATE FOR PHASE 1 ONLY]2010TCAORA051(FTC-N) TOLL RD ( OSO PKWY TO ETC) (13MI) EXISTING 2 MF IN EA. DIR; 3 MF EA.DIR BY 2010; 4 MF EA. DIR BY 2015, PLS CLMBNG & AUX LANS PER SCAG/TCA MOU4/05/01. [2010 COMPLETION DATE FOR PHASE 1 ONLY]2010TCAORA052(FTC-S) TOLL RD (I-5 TO OSO PKWY) (15MI) 2 MF EA. DIR BY 2010; AND 1ADDITIONAL M/F EA. DIR. PLS CLMBNG & AUX LANES AS REQ BY 2015 PERSCAG/TCA MOU 4/05/01. [2010 COMPLETION DATE FOR PHASE 1 ONLY]2010A-4Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Transit - Rail Track, Capacity Expansion of Existing LinesLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCALTRANSLA963519ADD 3 MILES OF TRIPLE TRACK AT BANDINI, MP 148.5 & 151.7 BETWEENFULLERTON & LAUS (2002 IIP)2007LAC MTALA29212XYMETRO RAIL GOLD LINE EXTENSION- PASADENA TO MONTCLAIR 24- MILE, 12-STATION LRT EXTENSION. SAFETEA-LU # 285 LEAD AGENCY WILL CHANGE TOMETRO GOLD LINE2014A-5Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Transit - Rail Track, New Rolling Stock AcquisitionLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateLAC MTALA990305LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT FLEET- 50 NEW RAIL CAR.PPNO 3225.2010SOUTHERN CALIF REGIONALRAIL AUTHORITYRIV010214PURCHASE/REHAB ROLLING STOCK - RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHARE (13 CARS INFY02/03 AND 18 CARS IN FY 03/04)2008SOUTHERN CALIF REGIONALRAIL AUTHORITYRIV011242PURCHASE EXPANSION ROLLING STOCK (2 CAB CARS AND 3 LOCOMOTIVES) FORMETROLINK IEOC AND RIVERSIDE/FULLERTON/LA LINES (EA: RIVFUL, PPNO: 0079E)2009SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAREGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITYLA963758METROLINK ROLLING STOCK-PHASE II (SCRRA). PURCHASE ADD'L METROLINKROLLING STOCK TO ALLOW SYST EXPANSION(4 LOCOMOTIVES AND UPTO 31 CARS(JOINTLY FUNDED LA, ORA,RIV,SBD) LA0C82312009A-6Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Transit - Express Busways, Bus Rapid Transit, and Dedicated Bus LanesLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateLAC MTALA29202U1SAN FERNANDO VALLEY E/W BRT (FROM TERMINUS OF METRO RED LINE IN NOHOLLYWOOD TO WARNER CTR)14-MILE EXCLUSIVE BUS LANES AT FORMER RAILRD ROW (PPNO 3333 AB3090REP ) SAFETEA-LU # 3262010LAC MTALA29202U3SAN FERNANDO VALLEY NORTH/SOUTH BRT EXTENSION PHASE I: METRO RAPIDSERVICE ALONG RESEDA BLVD. AND SEPULVEDA BLVD.2009LAC MTALA29202U4SAN FERNANDO VALLEY NORTH/ SOUTH BRT EXTENSION PHASE II: BUS SPEEDIMPROVEMENTS ALONG METRO RAPID CORRIDORS AND EXPANSION OF EXISTINGPARK & RIDE FACILITY.2010LAC MTALA29202U5SAN FERNANDO VALLEY NORTH/ SOUTH BRT EXTENSION PHASE III: STATIONACCESSIBILITY AND PEDESTRIAN ENHANCEMENTS ON RESEDA BLVD.,SEPULVEDA BLVD., AND LANKERSHIM BLVD.2010LAC MTALA29202U6SAN FERNANDO VALLEY NORTH/ SOUTH BRT EXTENSION PHASE IV: COMPLETIONOF A NORTHBOUND BUS ONLY LANE ON A PORTION OF SEPULVEDA BLVD. ANDOTHER IMPROVEMENTS.2010LAC MTALA29202VEASTSIDE TRANSIT CORRIDOR - UNION STATION TO ATLANTIC VIA 1ST ST. TOLORENA, THEN 3RD ST. VIA 3RD/BEVERLY BLVD. TO ATLANTIC (EASTSIDE LRTPPNO 3358)2010LAC MTALA29202WMID -CITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR: WILSHIRE BLVD. FROM VERMONT TO SANTAMONICA DOWNTOWN- MID-CITY WILSHIRE BRT INCL. DIV. 10 EXPANSION2012ORANGE COUNTY TRANSAUTHORITY (OCTA)ORA110501BUS RAPID TRANIST - 28MI FIXED BRT FRM BREA MALL TO IRVINE TRANS CNTR.INCLUDES STRUCTURES, ROLLING STOCK,AND FEEDER SVC & IBC SHUTTLE- CNGSHUTTLES FROM JWA TO IBC.2010ORANGE COUNTY TRANSAUTHORITY (OCTA)ORA120325OCTA - INTER COUNTY EXPRESS BUS SERVICE - VEHICLE CAPITAL LEASE2010ORANGE COUNTY TRANSAUTHORITY (OCTA)ORA120531BUS RAPID TRANIST (HARBOR BOULEVARD BRT) - 19MILE FIXED RT BRT BETWEENFULLERTON AND COSTA MESA; INCLUDES STRUCTURES AND ROLLING STOCK2011ORANGE COUNTY TRANSAUTHORITY (OCTA)ORA120532BUS RAPID TRANIST (WESTMINSTER/17TH BRT) - 22MILE FIXED RT BRT BETWEENSANTA ANA AND LONG BEACH; INCLUDES STRUCTURES AND ROLLING STOCK2011A-7Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Transit - Buses, Fleet ExpansionLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateBURBANKLA0D25PROCUREMENT OF (3) ALTERNATIVE FUEL TRANSIT VEHICLES2005CARSON, CITY OFLAE0108PURCHASE TWO TRIPPER BUSES TO RELIEVE OVERCROWDING DURING PEAKPERIODS. ROUTE G AND D, BLUELINE STATION AT DEL AMO BLVD/I-710 TO SOUTHBAY PAVILION MALL, DEL AMO BLVD2010CARSON, CITY OFLAE0132PURCHASE OF ONE BUS.REPLACEMENT OF A 1983 CROWN DIESEL FUEL SCHOOLBUS WITH THE PURCHASE OF A NEW CNG-POWERED SCHOOL BUS. BUS WILLREDUCE EMISSIONS & CONTINUE TO PROVIDE TRANSPORTA2011CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8241PICO UNION/ECHO PARK DASH VEHICLE PROCUREMENT. PURCHASE (3) LOWFLOOR, PROPANE-POWERED 30' BUSES FOR THE PICO/UNION ECHO PARKSHUTTLE SERVICE.2010GLENDALELAE0001APURCHASE OF CNG BUSES FOR GLENDALE BEELINE TRANSIT SYSTEM2010LA GARDENALA0D340PURCHASE FIVE (5) 40 FT. ALTERNATIVE FUEL BUSES FOR SERVICE EXPANSION2010LA MIRADALA0D349PURCHASE EXPANSION BUSES WITH ALTERNATE FUEL (HYBRID/ELECTRIC): FY06=22008LAC MTALA01B120EXPANSION OF DIVISION 1 TO ADD ADDITIONAL CAPACITY OF APPROX 67 BUSESAND ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACE OF EMPLOYEES. ACQUISITION OF A VACANTPARCEL SOUTH OF DIV 12007LAC MTALA963542ACQUISTION REVENUE VEHICLES - 2,513 CLEAN FUEL BUSES: LEASED VEH, FY02(370) FY03 (30 HC) + FY04 (70 HC) + (200 ARTICS); FY05-FY10 TOTAL OF 1000 BUSES.2012MONTEBELLOLA0D287PURCHASE OF 29 REPLACEMENT BUSES. GASOLINE-ELECTRIC HYBRID LOWFLOOR 40' COACH. PURCHASE OF 6 EXPANSION BUSES. GASOLINE=ELECTRICHYBRID LOW FLOOR 40' COACH2009ORANGE COUNTY TRANSITDISTRICT (OCTD)ORA041501PURCHASE (52)STANDARD 30FT EXPANSION BUSES - ALTERNATIVE FUEL - (12) INFY05-06, (5) IN FY06-07, (2) IN FY07-08, (5) IN FY08-09, (27) IN FY09-10, AND (1) INFY10-112010ORANGE COUNTY TRANSITDISTRICT (OCTD)ORA55241PURCHASE (79) STANDARD 40 FT EXPAN ALT FUELBUSSES - (28) IN FY04/05, (21) INFY05/06, (14) IN FY06/07, (9) IN FY08/09, (7) IN FY09/102010PASADENALA0D99PURCHASE 2 EXPANSION LOW-FLOOR, HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE, ALTERNATIVEFUEL TRANSIT BUSES.2006SAN FERNANDOLAE0127PROCUREMENT OF (3) CNG TRANSIT VEHICLES AND RELATED INFRASTRCTUREEQUIPMENT FOR FIXED ROUTE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.2010SANTA CLARITALA0C8371SANTA CLARITA TRANSIT EXPANSION BUSES; WILL ALLOW PHASE 1 OF 5 YEARMASTER PLAN TO BE IMPLEMENTED WITH SEVEN LOCAL BUSES AND FOURCOMMUTER BUSES.2008SANTA CLARITALA0F018PURCHASE (2) EXPANSION BUSES FOR ROUTE 8 TO THE SAN FERNANDO VALLEY2009A-8Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Transit - Buses, Fleet ExpansionLead AgencyProject ID Description2006 RTIPCompletion DateSANTA CLARITALAOD363SANTA CLARITA TRANSIT PHASE 2 - EXPANSION BUSES - (9) LOCAL TRANSIT CNGBUSES & (4) OVER THE ROAD COMMUTER BUSES.2009SIERRA MADRELA0C8372EXPANSION OF SIERRA MADRE BUS ROUTE. PURCHASE OF 3 CNG VANS TOEXPAND SIERRA MADRE ROUNDABOUT SYSTEM.2007VARIOUS AGENCIESORA030302(9) EXPANSION MEDIUM BUSES (TYPE II) AND (11) MOBILE RADIOS - ORANGECOUNTY ARC - PROVIDE SERVICES TOSENIORS AND DISABLED PERSONS.2006A-9Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Transit - Shuttles and Paratransit Vehicles, Fleet ExpansionLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateACCESS SERVICES, INC.LA900520PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL 386 VEHICLES FROM FY06 TO FY09. 100 VEHICLES INFY06, 114 VEHICLES IN FY07; 110 IN FY08 AND 62 IN FY09.2009ARCADIALA990712NEW & EXPANDED SHUTTLE SERVICE THRUDOWNTOWN ARCADIA CONNECTINGHOTELS & BUSINESSES TO SANTA ANITA RACE TRAK & FASHION MALL(HUNTINGTON ST) & PROPOSED TRANSIT STATION2010BALDWIN PARKLAE0076CONSTRUCT ADD'L VEHICLE PARKING (200 TO 400 SPACES), BICYCLE PARKINGLOT AND PEDESTRIAN REST AREA AT THE TRANSIT CENTER2010CARSON, CITY OFLAE0407PURCHASE ONE TROLLEY BUS VEHICLE FOR EXISTING SERVICE ALONG CARSONST. BETWEEN THE HARBOR TRANSIT WAY STATION AND THE CARSON CIVICCENTER AT AVALON BLVD2010CITY OF LOS ANGELESLAE0566EXPANSION OF LAX REMOTE TERMINAL FLYAWAY SHUTTLE BUS SYSTEM. LAWAAIRPORTS WILL OPERATE BUSES BETWEENTHESE PARK-N-RIDE LOTS AND L.A.INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. SITES BEING CONSIDERED2011CULVER CITY MUNI BUSLINESLA0B400PROCUREMENT OF FIVE (5) 40' CNG EXPANSION BUSES/420K PER BUS2008LAC MTALA0B7023GET ABOUT FLEET IMPROVE (POMONA VAL TRANS. AUTHORITY)-PURCHASE 18, 21PASSENGER VEHIC TO INCR CAPACITY OF SUBREG PARATRANSIT SYS2008LAC MTALA996044VEH ACQ FOR EST L.A. SHUTTLE PURCH 4 VEH'S TO REMEDY EXISTINGOVERCROWDED CONDITIONS2006OMNITRANS2002171(1) EXPANSION PARATRANSIT VAN2003ORANGE COUNTY TRANSITDISTRICT (OCTD)ORA020119PURCHASE PARATRANSIT VEHICLES EXPAN (142) - (66) IN FY04/05, (21) IN FY05/06,(14) IN FY06/07, (13) IN FY07/08, (14) IN FY08/09, (14) IN FY09/102010REDONDO BEACHLAOD299ACQUISITION OF (6) ALTER FUEL TRANSIT/PARATRANSIT VEHICLES NOT TOEXCEED 35' SAFETEA-LU TRANSIT #2512010RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSCOMMISSION (RCTC)RIV020902IN WEST RIV CO FOR EXCEED, A DIVISION OF VALLEY RESOURCE CENTER -PURCHASE 1 EXPANSION 20' MODIFIED VAN, 1 EXPANSION 22' MEDIUM BUS, AND 2RADIOS - SECTION 5310 FY 02/03 CYCLE2008RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSCOMMISSION (RCTC)RIV030902IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY FOR EXCEED, A DIVISION OF VALLEY RESOURCECENTER - PURCHASE 2 EXPANSION SMALL BUSES AND 1 EXPANSION MINIVAN(5310 FY 03/04 CYCLE)2008RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSCOMMISSION (RCTC)RIV051006IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY FOR CARE CONNEXXUS INC.: PURCHASE 1EXPANSION LARGE BUS (APPROX 16 PASSENGERS, GAS/DIESEL) W/ LIFT ANDTIEDOWNS (5310 FY 05/06 CYCLE)2009RIVERSIDE TRANSITAGENCYRIV041009IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY FOR RTA - DEBT FINANCING (FY 04/05 PORTION)FOR 57 TRANSIT COACHES, 25 REPLACEMENT, 32 EXPANSION (FY 05 5307)2006RIVERSIDE TRANSITAGENCYRIV050538IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY FOR RTA - DEBT FINANCING (FY 05/06 PORTION) FOR57 TRANIST COACHES, 25 REPLACEMENT, 32 EXPANSION (FY 06 5307, UZA: RIV-SAN)2007A-10Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Transit - Shuttles and Paratransit Vehicles, Fleet ExpansionLead AgencyProject ID Description2006 RTIPCompletion DateRIVERSIDE TRANSITAGENCYRIV051005IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY FOR RTA: PURCHASE 10 EXPANSION MINIVANS(APPROX 5 PASSENGERS EACH, GAS/DIESEL) (5310 FY 05/06 CYCLE)2009SAN FERNANDOLA0D284PROCUREMENT OF TWO EXPANSION CNG TRANSIT VEHICLES AND RELATEDINFRASTRUCTURE EQUIPMENT FOR FIXED ROUTE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATIONWITHIN THE CITY OF SAN FERNANDO.2005SAN FERNANDOLA0D314PROCURE 2 CNG EXPANSION TRANSIT VEHICLES WHICH WILL PROVIDE FIXEDROUTE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN SAN FERNANDO.2005VARIOUS AGENCIESORA030301(1) EXPANSION MINIVAN - A.S. FOUNDATION - PROVIDE SERVICES TO SENIORS ANDDISABLED PERSONS.2005A-11Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)System Management – Railroad Consolidation ProgramsLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateLOS ANGELES COUNTYLA990353ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST- NOGALES ST. GRADE SEP (T21-491, SGVCG)2008SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COGLA0C56ACE/GATEWAY CITIES-CONSTRUCT GRADE SEPARATION AT VALLEY VIEW AVENUEIN SANTA FE SPRINGS (PART OF ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST PROJECT)2008SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COGLA0C57ACE/GATEWAY CITIES-CONSTRUCT GRADE SEPARATION AT PASSONS BLVD INPICO RIVERA (AND MODIFY PROFILE OF SERAPIS AVENUE)(PART OF ALAMEDACORRIDOR EAST PROJECT).2010SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COGLA990359GRADE CROSSINGS/SAFETY IMPRVMT & GRADE SEP. ALONG 35- MILE FREIGHTRAIL CORIDOR THRGH SAN GABRIEL VALLEY - EAST L.A. TO POMONA ALONG UPRRALHAMBRA &L.A. SUBDIVISIONS - ITS 23182010ALAMEDATRANSPORTATIONCORRIDOR AGENCYLA0D45ALAMEDA CORRIDOR TRUCK EXPRESSWAY. ELEVATED 4-LANE EXPRESSWAYBETWEEN COMMODORE HELM BRIDGE AND ALAMEDA STREET (SR-47).2011A-12Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Intermodal Transfer Facilities - Rail Stations, NewLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateBUENA PARKORA55286COMMUTER RAIL STATION (DALE STREETAND MALVERN) IN BUENA PARK.CONSTRUCT NEW RAIL STATION. 308 PARKING SPACES.2006A-13Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Intermodal Transfer Facilities - Rail Stations, ExpansionLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateBALDWIN PARKLA0D281DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT PARKING IMPROVEMENTS AT AND ADJACENT TO THECITY'S EXISTING METROLINK STATION2006CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8173NORTHRIDGE METROLINK STN PARKING IMPRVMENT. CONSTRUCT ADDT'L 100PRKING SPCS & RECONFIGURE SOUTHERN PRTION OF EXISTING PRKING LOT TOYIELD AN ADDT'L 40 NET PRKING SPCES TOTAL 400 SPC.2007FULLERTONORA020113FULLERTON TRAIN STATION - PARKING STRUCTURE, PHASE I AND II. TOTAL OF670 SPACES.2008LAC MTALA0C10MID-CITY/EXPOSITION CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT PHASE I TOVENICE-ROBERTSON STATION2010RIALTO200450RIALTO METROLINK STATION- INCREASE PARKING SPACES FROM 225-7752007A-14Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Intermodal Transfer Facilities - Park & Ride Lots, NewLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateFOOTHILL TRANSIT ZONELA0B311PARK AND RIDE FACILITY TRANSIT ORIENTED NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRAM2010HEMETRIV990708CONSTRUCT TRANSPORTATION/ TRANSIT CENTER/PARK-N-RIDE LOT ON CORNEROF HARVARD AND LATHAM AVE, APP 100 SPACES2006LAC MTALAE0276MUSEUM OF LATIN AMERICAN ART, LONGBEACH TO BUILD INTERMODAL PARKAND RIDE FACILITY2010LAC MTALAE0364CONSTRUCT INTERMODAL PARK AND RIDE FACILITY AT SANTA MONICA COLLEGECAMPUS ON SOUTH BUNDY DRIVE NEAR AIRPORT AVENUE2010LOS ANGELESREDEVELOPMENT AGENCYLA0C53'HOLLYWOOD INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC PARKING CENTER ONHAWTHORNE AVE. BETWEEN HIGHLAND AVENUE AND NORTH ORANGE DRIVE.2007RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSCOMMISSION (RCTC)RIV051201IN CORONA - IMPLEMENT NEW 60 SPACEPARK-AND-RIDE LOT (via annual leaseagreement) AT FAITH BIBLE CHURCH AT 1114 W. ONTARIO AVE (TCM substitution forCorona's 3 expansion buses)2009TEMECULARIV62029AT HWY 79 SO AND LA PAZ, ACQUIRE LAND, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT PARK ANDRIDE - 250 SPACES (FY 05 HR4818 EARMARK)2009A-15Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Intermodal Transfer Facilities - Park & Ride Lots, ExpansionLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCLAREMONTLA0D103THE CITY AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY WILL EXPAND ON AN EXISTINGPARKING FACILITY (500 PARKING SPACE)FOR ADDITIONAL USE BY TRANSITPATRONS.2006A-16Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Intermodal Transfer Facilities - Bus Stations & Transfer Facilities, NewLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCALABASASLAOD322TRANSIT FACILITY TO INCLUDE BUS MAINTENANCE STRUCTURE, BUS STORAGE,TRANSIT HUB, PARK-N-RIDE, TRAIL HEAD, AND A VISITOR SERVING KIOSKCARSONLA0C8219SOUTH BAY PAVILION REGIONAL TRANSIT CTR. CONSTRUCTION OF A TRANSITCTR AT THE SOUTH BAY PAVILION SHOPPING CTR TO BE SERVED BY ALL 8CARSON CIRCUIT RTES & MTA LINES #205 & #446-4472010CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8319TAXI/SHUTTLE STANDS AT METRO RED LINE STA AT N HLWD & UNIVERSAL CITYAUTHORIZED TAXI STANDS AT TWO METRO RED LINE STATIONS (UNIVERSAL CITYON LANKERSHIM AND N. HLWD ON CHANDLER.2006CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8380CHINATOWN/COLLEGE STREET GOLD LINE STATION - INTERMODAL TRANS.CENTER ENHANCE MENT ( PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY BRIDGE, BUS STATION, AND ABIKE STATION)2010CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA962148WESTLAKE COMMUNITY BASED INTERCEPT INTERMODAL FACILITY (95 CALL, CAT2) [CALL #2446]2007CITY OF LOS ANGELESLAE0567LAX INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION CENTER RAIL & BUS FACILITIES AT THENORTHEAST CORNER OF AVIATION BLVD AND IMPERIAL HWY. INCLUDESPEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING GREEN LINE .2010FOOTHILL TRANSIT ZONELA963762MONROVIA TIMED TRANSFER CENTER2006LAC MTALA0C8364NORTH LA COUNTY NON-ADVERTISING BUS STOP SHELTERS. INSTALLATION OFBUS SHELTERS WITH SEATING AT BUSSTOPS WITH GREATEST # OF DAILYBOARDING IN NORTH LOS ANGELES COUNTY. PPNO 3229.2010LAC MTALA974181LAC+USC MEDICAL CENTER BUS TRANSIT STATION FACILITY WILL HAVE 4 BUSBAYS AND 4 LAYOVER BAYS BUS STOP IMPROVEMENT PRJ2007MONROVIALAE0039TRANSIT VILLAGE - PROVIDE A TRANS. FACILITY FOR SATELLITE PARKING FORSIERRA MADRE VILLA GOLD LINE STA, P-N-R FOR COMMUTERS, A FOOTHILLTRANSIT STORE.2010OMNITRANS981118BUS SYSTEM - PASSENGER FACILITIES: DESIGN AND BUILDING OF ONTARIOTRANSCENTER2008ORANGE COUNTY TRANSAUTHORITY (OCTA)ORA1100501BUS RAPID TRANSIT - 28MI FIXED BRT FRM BREA MALL TO IRVINE TRANS CNTR.INCLUDES STRUCTURES, ROLLING STOCK,AND FEEDER SVC & IBC SHUTTLE- CNGSHUTTLES FROM JWA TO IBC.2010RIVERSIDE TRANSITAGENCYRIV990902IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY IN THE CITY OF PERRIS - CONSTRUCT NEWMULTIMODAL TRANSIT FACILITY (BUS & RAIL) AT 4TH AND D STREETS2007A-17Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Intermodal Transfer Facilities - Bus Stations & Transfer Facilities, ExpansionLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateBURBANKLAE0396UPGRADE EXIST - REG,L TRANSIT & LAYOVER FACILITY ADJACENT TO THEBURBANK-GLENDALE-PASADENA AIRPORT.WILL FACILITATE TRANSFER OFPASSENGERS TO & FROM MANY GROUND TRANS. (PE ONLY)2011CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8242BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS ON SAN FERNANDO ROAD & TC LIGHTING; ENHANCEPASSENGER FACILITIES AT THREE BUS STOPS WITH GREATEST NUMBER OF DAILYBOARDINGS ON EAST SIDE OF SAN FERNANDO ROAD.2010CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA974165MACARTHUR PARK STATION IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE DESIGN ANDCONSTRUCTION OF A PLAZA TO ACCOMMODATE PUBLIC ACCESS (PEDESTRIANENTRANCES, WALKWAYS, BICYCLE FACILITIES) PPNO# 34172008CULVER CITY MUNI BUSLINESLA0C8382SEPULVEDA BLVD BUS STOP IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. BUS STOP AMENITIES INCLIGHTING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, SHELTERS, SEATING, LANDINGS AND TRASHRECEPTACLES.2010FOOTHILL TRANSIT ZONELA0C8362EL MONTE STATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND TRANSIT STORE EQUIPMENT2007FOOTHILL TRANSIT ZONELA963526BUS STOP ENHANCEMENT AND SCHEDULE CAROUSELS2008FOOTHILL TRANSIT ZONELA9811007AVL SYSTEM, ARRIVAL SIGNS, FUEL MGMT. SYSTEM (SMART BUS PROJECT)2007LAC MTALA0C8413METRO RAPID BUS STATIONS-PHASE II: INCLUDES COMMUNICATIONS &EQUIPMENT2009LONG BEACH PUBLICTRANSPORTATION CO.LA0C8383LONG BEACH TRANSIT: BUS STOP IMPROVEMENT PROJ. ENHANCE 9 OF RAILSTATION FEEDER BUS STOPS TO EASE TRANSFERS, MAKE PUBLIC TRANSIT MOREAESTHETICALLY PLEASING & SAFER, INC RIDERSHIP.2010LONG BEACH PUBLICTRANSPORTATION CO.LA973029BUS STOP AMENITIES2006MONTEBELLOLA55201CONTINUING PROJECT - BUS STOPIMPROVEMENTS ,AMENITIES ,SHELTERS ,ETC2010ORANGE COUNTY TRANSAUTHORITY (OCTA)ORA000104TRANSITWAY IMPROVEMENTS AT IRVINE TRANSPORTATION CENTER; BUILD 900SPACE PARKING STRUCTURE, INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL, DESIGN ANDCONSTRUCTION.2007PASADENALA974129PASADENA GOLD LINE COMMUNITY LINKAGES PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS TOTWO PLANNED METRO PASADENA GOLD LINESTATIONS WITHIN THE CITY (PPNO#3422)2006RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSCOMMISSION (RCTC)RIV520109RECONSTRUCT & UPGRADE SAN JACINTO BRANCH LINE FOR RAIL PASSENGERSERVICE (RIVERSIDE TO PERRIS) (PERRIS VALLEY LINE)2012RIVERSIDE TRANSITAGENCYRIV051008INSTALL MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL ATIS AT TRANSIT CENTERS & HIGH TRAFFICCORRIDOR BUS STOPS INCLUDING REAL TIME SCHEDULES, IMPROVED SIGNAGE& LIGHTING (MAGNOLIA CORRIDOR PHASE)2007A-18Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Intermodal Transfer Facilities - Bus Stations & Transfer Facilities, ExpansionLead AgencyProject ID Description2006 RTIPCompletion DateSAN BERNARDINO, CITY OF20020802METROLINK ADD'L PARKING STRUCTURE- CONSTRUCT 5 LEVEL PARKINGSTRUCTURE TO SERVE EXISTING METROLINK STATION AT SANTA FE DEPOTLOCATION2006SANTA CLARITALA0B7020ADDITIONAL (150) PARKING AT NEWHALL METROLINK STATION-CONSTRUCTADEQUATE PARKING AT NEWHALL METROLINK STATION, INCLDE PARK & RIDE,KISS & RIDE & DISBLED -ACCESS SPACES.PPNO 29012007SANTA MONICALA57101BUS FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS2008SCRAA/LACMTA/SANBAGLA29204LA-SAN BERNARDINO CR (SF UNION STATION-SAN BERNARDINO) CAPACITYIMPROVEMENTS (3037) (JARC $1982). DEMOT21 = 30372007A-19Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Non-motorized Facilities - Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities, NewLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateBELLFLOWERLA996275WEST BRANCH GREENWAY MULTI-MODAL TRANS. CORRIDOR DESIGN ANDCONSTRUCT 2.5 MILE CLASS I BIKE PATH ALONG MTA-OWNED SANTA ANA BRANCHROW INCL. PEDESTRIAN AND LANDSCAPING (3145)2007CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA002738BIKEWAY/PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER LA R RIVER AT TAYLOR YARD CLASS I (CFP738, 2077)2009LAC MTALAE0195DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT IMPROVEDPEDESTRIAN LINKAGES BETWEEN LOSANGELES PIERCE COLLEGE AND MTA'S RAPID BUS TRANSIT STOPS TO INCLUDEPASSENGER AMENITIES2010LAC MTALAE0388ADESIGN AND CONSTRUCT IMPROVEDPEDESTRIAN LINKAGES BETWEEN LOSANGELES MISSION COLLEGE AND PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICES TO INCLUDELIGHTING, LANDSCAPIND, AND PASSENGER AMENITIES2010SANBAG200074LUMP SUM - TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES PROJECTS FOR SANBERNARDINO COUNTY-BIKE/PED PROJECTS2006SANBAGSBD031505VARIOUS LOCATIONS - LUMP SUMS LTF, ARTICLE 3 BICYCLE/PEDESTRIANPROJECTS (PROJECTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH 40 CFR PART 93.126, 127,128,EXEMPT TABLES 2 & 3)2008SANTA CLARITALA0C8156SANTA CLARITA REGNL COMUTR TRAIL - I-5 TO FAIRWAYS DRIVE: CNSTRCTN &SOME ACQUISITION OF 1.0 MILES OF CLASS I BIKE PATH & A BRIDGERESTORATION ADJACENT TO SANTA CLARA.(PPNO 3127).2007SANTA MONICALA030001CALIFORNIA INCLINE SIDEHILL VIADUCT BR 53C0543 ADD, INCLUDED INSTATE INSTATE HBRR PROGRAM (0.3 MILE, 1-S,1-N) SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY WIDENING &SEISMIC (53C0543)2008VARIOUS AGENCIESORA990906LUMP SUM. TEA FUNDS FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITY PROJECTSTHROUGHOUT ORANGE COUNTY.2009A-20Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Non-motorized Facilities - Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities, ExpansionLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateLAC MTALA974124SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD TRANSIT PARKWAY TRANSIT PEDESTRIAN ANDBIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS ALONG SANTA MONICA BLVD IN WEST LOS ANGELES,SPANS 2.52007LONG BEACHLA0C8163BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS. 1.2 MILE CLASS I BIKE/PED PATHFROM WALNUT AVE TO WILLOW ST AT THE BLUE LINE STATION. (PPNO# 3408)2006LOS ANGELES COUNTYLA996289SOUTH BAY BIKE TRAIL PED. ACCESS RAMPS/SIDEWALKS - DESIGN OF RAMPS,WALKWAYS TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE STH. BAY TRAIL AT DOCKWEILER STATEBEACH (2006 STIP)2010A-21Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Non-motorized Facilities - Bicycle Facilities, NewLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0B7330SAN FERNANDO RD ROW BIKE PATH PHSE II-CONSTRUCT 2.75 MILES CLASS IFROM FIRST ST TO BRANFORD ST,ON MTA-OWND ROW PARCEL TO SANFERNANDO RD. LINK CYCLISTS TO NUMEROUS BUS LNE. PPNO 28682007CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8330BICYCLE COMMUTER TECHNOLOGY ACCESS, CITY'S WEB PAGE FOR BICYCLEPROGRAM2006COLTON2002164ON VALLEY BLVD. IN COLTON TO NORTH TO 10TH STREET CONNECTING TOABANDONED RR CORRIDOR ON WEST SIDEOF COLTON AVE.-CONSTRUCT CLASS IBIKEWAY, LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING2007FONTANA200431INLAND PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL - ONOLD SP ABANDONED RR BETWEEN I-15 TOJUNIPER AVE.-CONSTRUCT CLASS 1 BIKE LANE (APPROX. 7 MILES LONG)2007LA CANADA-FLINTRIDGELA0C8159LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE EAST/WESTBIKEWAY CORRIDOR. DESIGN ANDCONSTRUCTION OF 3.42 MILES OF EAST/WEST DIRECTIONAL CLASS II BIKE LANESIN THE CITY OF LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE.2007LAC MTALA000274FROM SEPULVEDA TO MORENO CONSTRUCT DIVIDED PKWY WITH TRANSITPKWAY IMPROVEMENTS, BIKE LANES & RT. 2/405 INTERCHANGE (94CFP; CAT. 2,210, 98STIP00027) TEA21-#15312007LAC MTALA002633THOMPSON CREEK BICYCLE TRAIL (93/97 CFP; BIKE PROGRAM) CLASS I (2 MILES)2005LAC MTALA974083CHANDLER/BURBANK BIKE PATH-WHITEOAK TO PIERCE COLLEGE A 3.2 MILECLASS I BIKEWAY ON MTA'S CHANDLER/BURBANK RAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY WILLIMPROVE NON-MOTORIZED ACCESS (COMBINED W/LA974078)2008ORANGE, CITY OFORA990452TUSTIN BRANCH RAIL TRAIL (SANTA ANA RIVER TO FAIRHAVEN ST) CONVERTRAILS TO BIKE TRAIL THROUGH VILLAPARK AND ORANGE. CONNECTS 9 MILETRAIL.2006RANCHO CUCAMONGA20020201PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL – PHASE 1 – HAVEN AVENUE TO 1200’EAST OF ETIWANDA AVE (3.4) MILES) CONSTRUCT CLASS 1 BIKE TRAIL & ROWACQ, ETIWANDA DEPOT2007WEST LAKE VILLAGELA960142LINDERO CANYON ROAD FROM AGOURA RD TO JANLOR DR CONSTRUCT BIKEPATH, RESTRIPE STREET, INTERSECTIONWIDENING, SIGNAL COORDINATION,RAMP WIDENING (TEA21-#65)2008A-22Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Non-motorized Facilities - Bicycle Facilities, NewSANTA CLARITALA0B7335SANTA CLARA RIVER REGIONAL TRAIL-DESIGNING OF 7 MILES OF CLASS IBIKE/PED PATH ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OFTHE RIVER FROM I-5 ON THE WEST TODISCOVERY PARK ON THE EAST2006WHITTIERLA0B7322'WHITTIER GREENWAY TRAIL-ACQUISITION, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCT OF 2 MILESCLASS I BIKE/PED PATH ON AN ABANDONED RAIL ROW FROM NORWALK TO FIVEPOINTS.PPNO 28722008WHITTIERLA0C8161WHITTIER GREENWAY TRAIL: SEGMENT 1 DEVT& SEGMENT 3 P/E AND DEVT.DESIGN, CONSTRUCT & SOME ACQUISITION OF 2.86 MILES CLASS I BIKE/PEDFACILITIES ON ABANDONED ROW IN WHITTIER (3440)2008Non-motorized Facilities - Bicycle Facilities, ExpansionLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCALABASASLA974100U.S. 101 INTER-JURISDICTIONAL BIKE LANE GAP CLOSURE CONSTRUCTION 4.5MILES OF BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS TO CLOSE SEVERAL GAPS WITHIN A 12 MILECORRIDOR(TEA21-#69)2006CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8164EXPOSITION BLVD RIGHT-OF-WAY BIKE PATH-WESTSIDE EXTENSION. DESIGN ANDCONSTRUCTION OF 2.5 MILES OF CLASS 1 BIKEWAY, LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING &INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS. (PPNO# 3184)2009CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8171GAYLEY AVE BIKE LANES & STREET WIDENING. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF.25 MILES OF CLASS II BIKE LANES ON GAYLEY AVE FROM EXISTING BIKE LANES ATLEVERING AVENUE TO THE UCLA CAMPUS2010CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8318LA CITY AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES BICYCLE MAP-PROJECT WILL UPDATEBIKEWAY MAPPING INFO. FOR THE CITY OF LA AND PLOT BICYCLE LANE AND PATHINFORMATION ON A NEW MAP.2006COMPTONLAOB7326COMPTON CREEK BIKEWAY EXTSN - PHASE III.DSIGN & CNSTRUCT .6 MI OF CLASS1 BIKE/PED PATH FRM GREENLEAF BL TO ARTESIA FWY.WILL INC BIKE PATH, PEDWALKWAY SIGNAGE, STRPNG. (PPNO 2869).2009LAC MTALA996285SOUTH BAY BIKE TRAIL RECONSTRCT AT PLAYA DEL REY - DESIGN ANDRECONSTRCT SEGMENT OF THE TRAIL AT DOCKWEILER STATE BEACH.2008LAC MTALA996288SAN GABRIEL RVR. BIKE TRAIL REHAB PHASE I - FROM WHITTIER NARROWS DAMTO FLORENCE AVE.2006PASADENALA0C8155'8 SEGMENTS OF PASADENA BIKEWAY; INCLUDES IMPROVEMENTS TO SIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONS FOR BICYCLE DETECTION,SIGNAGE, RESTRIPING OF TRAFFICLANES & STRIPING OF BIKE LANES.2005A-23Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Non-motorized Facilities - Pedestrian Facilities, NewLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCITY OF CARSONLAE2932213TH ST. PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK BRIDGE OVER DOMINGUEZ CHANNEL.CONSRUCT 213TH ST. PEDESTRIAN BIRDGE TO PROVIDE SAFE PASSAGE FORPEDESTRIANS AND WHEELCHAIRS OVER DOMINGUEZ CHANNEL2010CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0B7293SAN PEDRO PEDESTRIAN WAY-PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WAYS LINKINGEXISTING TRANSIT FACILITIES AND PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURE TOSURROUNDING & OTHER DESTINATIONS IN DOWNTOWN SAN PEDRO2007COVINALA0D206METROLINK PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PROJECT. THIS FACILITY WILL BECONSTRUCTED ON THE WEST SIDE OF CITRUS AVE. THE METROLINK STATION ISON THE EAST SIDE OF CITRUS AVE.2006LAC MTALAE0036WILSHIRE/ VERMONT PEDESTRIAN PLAZA IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERMODALPEDESTRIAN LINKAGES2011PASADENALA0D372SOUTH ACCESS PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE TO SIERRA MADRE VILLA LIGHT RAILSTATION. THIS PEDESTRIAN BRIDGEOVER THE ROUTE 210 FREEWAY WILLPROVIDE A DIRECT AND SAFE APPROACH FOR PEDESTRIANS2007SANBAG20020106MONTCLAIR PEDESTRIAN UNDERCROSSING-CONSTRUCTION OF A 2ND PLATFORMCREATES NEED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW UNDERCROSSING2006A-24Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Non-motorized Facilities - Pedestrian Facilities, ExpansionLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8174LITTLE TOKYO PEDESTRIAN LINKAGES. CONSTRUCT OF IMPRVMENT: SIDEWALK &CROSSWALK ENHANCEMENTS, STREET FURNITURE & LANDSCAPING TO PROMOTEPEDESTRIAN TRAVEL W/IN LITTLE TOKYO. PPNO 3116.2007CITY OF LOS ANGELESLA0C8209HOLLYWOOD MEDIA DISTRICT-PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS. INCLUDING SMARTCROSSWALKS, TRAFFIC SIGNAL, LANDSCAPING ETC. BET. BUS STOPS ALONGSANTA MONICA BLVD, VINE ST AND HIGHLAND AVE.2008LAC MTALA974294IN LOS ANGELES - DOWNTOWN OVER FREEWAY 101 - PEDESTRIAN BRIDGEENHANCEMENT2007A-25Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Information-based Strategies Marketing and Promotion of Rideshare and Intermodal ActivitiesLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateLAC MTA927333RIDESHARE ACTIVITIES2006LAC MTALA0C8109'COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION SYS.AWARENESS & SATISFACTION. PROJECTWILL USE AND EXPAND UPON IT'S PREDECESSOR'S WORK, THE SERVICEPLANNING MARKET RESEARCH PROGRAM (SPMRP) FOR TRANSIT2007LAC MTALA0C8114'LA CNTY RIDESHARE SERVICES;PROVIDE COMMUTE INFO, EMPLOYERASSISTANCE AND INCENTIVE PROGRAMS THROUGH CORE & EMPLOYERRIDESHARE SERVICES & MTA INCENTIVE PROGRAMS. PPNO 90032010LAC MTALA0C8315ELECTRIC BIKE AND SCOOTER DEMONSTRATION PROJECT. PURCHASE OFELECTRIC BIKES AND SCOOTERS AS A TEST FOR FEASIBILITY AS SUBSTITUTESFOR SHORT COMMUTE TRIPS TO PARK AND RIDE LOTS.2007MISSION VIEJOORA990902MISSION VIEJO (CITYWIDE) REMOTE TMC AND TRAVLER/PUBLIC INFO ACCESSCENTER. PROVIDES TRAFFIC INFO TO PUBLIC LIBRARIES. EST COMM INTERTIEBETWEEN CITY AND CALTRANS2006ORANGE COUNTY TRANSAUTHORITY (OCTA)ORA65002RIDESHARE SERVICES RIDEGUIDE, DATABASE, CUSTOMER INFO, AND MARKETING.(ORANGE COUNTY PORTION).N/ARIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSCOMMISSION (RCTC)RIV520111REGIONAL RIDESHAREN/ASANBAG94163RIDESHARE ACTIVITIES FOR SOUTH COAST AIR BASINN/AA-26Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Information-based Strategies - Intelligent Transportation Systems/Control System ComputerizationLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateCORONARIV010227CORONA ADVANCED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ATMS)2010LONG BEACHLAE1296LONG BEACH INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS2011PASADENALA0D47SR 710 MITIGATION PROJECT-TRAFFIC CONTROL AND MONITORING SYSTEMINTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS). CONSTRUCT AND INSTALL ITSTECHNOLOGY AND VARIOUS DEGREES OF SMART SIGNALS2008SANTA CLARITALA0C8130INCIDENT MANAGEMENT - TRAVELER INFORMATION SUBSYSTEM; INSTALLATIONCONSISTS OF 4 STATIONARY ELECTRONIC CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGNS & AHIGHWAY ADVISORY RADIO SYSTEM.2007TORRANCELA0D379AUTOMATIC VEHICLE LOCATOR (AVL) PROJECT-PHASE 22007WEST COVINALAE1407PLAZA DRIVE FROM VINCENT AVE. TO CALIFORNIA AVE. INCLUDING INSTALLATIOOF TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYS AT INTERSECTION OF PLAZA DR & CALIF. THE SYNC OFTWO TRAFFIC SY, & ADD'L TURN LANES.2009A-27Final 2007 AQMP2007 AQMP TCM ProjectsAppendix IV-CJune 2007(from 2006 RTIP)Information-based Strategies - Real-Time Rail, Transit, or Freeway Notification SystemsLead AgencyProject IDDescription2006 RTIPCompletion DateLAC MTALA962214PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FROM MCCLURETUNNEL TO TRANCAS CANYON RD TRAFFIC MAN. & BUS SPEEDIMPROVEMNT(TEA21-#707). LACDPW LEAD AGENCY INSTEAD CALTRANS.2007LOS ANGELES COUNTYLA0C8316TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION PROJECT (TIP) EQUIP COUNTY EMPLOYEES AT41 SITES THROUGHOUT LA COUNTY WITHTHE TOOLS NEEDED TO PROVIDEINDIVIDUALIZED TRANSIT ITINERARIES ETC.2007PASADENALAE3790THE PASADENA ITS INTEGRATES 2 COMPONENTS: TRAFFIC SIGNALCOMMUNICATION AND CONTRL, TRANSIT VEHICLE ARRIVAL INFO, AND PUBLICPARKING AVAILABILITY INFO.SAFETEA-LU PRJ #3790 AND #3992010A-28

# ATTACHMENT B

Fiscally Constrained Projects from the 2004 RTP 1

1 

# See www.scag.ca.gov/rtp2004/2004draft/techappendix/Appendix_I_ProjectList_final.pdf [2004 RTP:p.

I161-I174]Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-12004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDIM Arterial SR-115 I-8 Evan Hewes HwyConstruct 4-laneextension$55,000,000 2012 6M0400EIM Arterial SR-98 SR-111 Dogwood Rd/SR-98Corridor improvements -widening and/orrealignment$30,000,000 2012 6M04001IM Arterial SR-78at Proposed SDSUCampus in BrawleyAccess improvements $3,000,000 2012 6M04001AIM Arterial SR-111 South of SR-98 Port of Entry Improvements $50,000,000 2012 6M01002IM Mixed Flow SR-111 SR-98 I-8Upgrade to 4-lanefreeway withinterchange(s) at severallocations$90,000,000 2012 6M01003IM Arterial SR-111 SR-78 (Brawley) SR-115 (Calipatria)Upgrade to 4-laneconventional$50,000,000 2012 6M01004IM Arterial SR-98West of SR-111 @RR crossingConstruct bridge structure $1,500,000 2022 6M01007IM ArterialDogwood RdCorridor / I-8OverpassSR-98 I-8Corridor improvements -widen to 6 lanes fromMcCabe to I-8; I-8improvement to 6 lanes$90,000,000 2012 6M04018IM O&MState Highway andArterial PreservationCountywideState Highway andArterialPreservation/Maintenance$157,500,000 2030 6PL04IM TDM TDM/Non-motorized CountywideTDM (Non-motorized,telecommute, etc.)$32,000,000 2030 6TDL04IMTotal Imperial County$559,000,000$0LA ArterialArterialImprovementsCountywideRegional SurfaceTransportationImprovements - refer toseparate Arterials projectlist$583,200,000 2030 1AL04LAGradeCrossingGrade Crossing CountywideArterial Goods Movement- refer to separate GradeCrossings project list$522,600,000 2030 1GL04LA HOV I-5/SR-170North to South/Southto NorthHOV Connector $43,000,000 2025 1H0102Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-22004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDLA HOV I-5/I-405North to South/Southto NorthHOV Connector $85,000,000 2025 1H0103LA HOV SR-60 Grand AveConstruct HOV dropramps at Grand Ave$6,000,000 2025 1H0405LA HOV SR-14 Ave. P-8 Ave. L Add 1 HOV lane each dir $27,000,000 2015 1H0101LA HOV I-710 I-10 Huntington DrConstruct 1 HOV laneeach dir$100,000,0002012 1H0104ALA HOV I-710 Huntington Dr I-210Construct 1 HOV laneeach dir$150,000,0002025 1H0104BLA Mixed Flow I-710 I-10 Huntington DrConstruct 3 MF laneseach dir$300,000,0002012 1M0101ALA Mixed Flow I-710 Huntington Dr I-210Construct 3 MF laneseach dir$450,000,0002025 1M0101BLA Mixed Flow I-5 Interchanges Orange County Line Rosemead BlvdInterchangeimprovements$209,000,000 2025 1M0103LA Mixed Flow SR-57/SR-60 Interchange improvement $209,000,000 2025 1M0104LA Mixed FlowGerald DesmondBridge replacementReplacement of existingbridge connectingTerminal Island to I-710$570,400,000 2009 1M0171LA O&MState Highway andArterial PreservationCountywideState Highway andArterialPreservation/Maintenance$3,030,000,000 2030 1PL04LA TDM Non-motorized CountywideBikeway and PedestrianImprovements,TransportationEnhancements$513,300,000 2030 1NL04LA TDM TDM CountywideTransportation DemandManagement$186,600,000 2030 1TDL04LA TDM Rideshare Countywide Rideshare Services $114,300,000 2030 1RL04LA ITS ITS CountywideSignal Synchronization &Bus Speed Improvement$676,500,000 2030 1ITS04LA TransitMetrolink CommuterRailCountywide Service Expansion $388,000,000 2030 1CR04Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-32004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDLA TransitCountywide BusSystemImprovementCountywideCountywide Bus SystemImprovement$2,197,000,000 2030 1TL104LA TransitTransit CapitalProject FundingCountywideTransit Capital ProjectFunding$293,000,000 2030 1TL204LA TransitTiered TransitSystemCountywide Implementation TBD 2030 1TL304LA TransitCommunity TransitServiceCountywideCommunity TransitService (shuttles, localcirculators)TBD 2030 1TL404LA TransitGreen LineExtensionMariposa@Nash toCentury@Sepulveda(LAX Term.)Light Rail $168,000,000 2020 1TR0101LA Transit Crenshaw CorridorTransit Corridor(technology TBD)$201,000,000 2008 1TR0102LA Transit Gold Line Extension PasadenaClaremont Light Rail $595,000,000 2012 UT103LA TransitMetro CenterConnectorBlue Line/ExpositionLineGold LineDowntown Light RailConnector$126,000,000 2012 1TR0404LA Transit Red Line Extension Western Ave Fairfax Ave Subway $710,000,000 2012 UT101LA CorridorEl Camino Real(US-101) CorridorSR-23 in VenturaCountySR-134/SR-170User-Fee-BackedCapacity Enhancement$329,000,000 $4,100,000,000 2030 1T0401LATotal Los AngelesCounty$12,044,500,000$4,838,400,000OR ArterialArterialImprovementsCountywideSmart Street and OtherImprovements - refer toseparate Arterials projectlist$326,600,000 $687,600,000 2030 2AL04OR ArterialArterialImprovementsCountywideMeasure MRegional/Local Projects &MOE$355,700,000 $276,800,000 2011 2L183OR ArterialArterialImprovementsCountywideRegional SurfaceTransportation ProgramProjects - Capital andMaintenance Streets andRoads Projects$661,000,000 2030 2L184Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-42004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDOR ArterialArterialImprovementsCountywideTCRP Subventions andProposition 42City/County Funding$781,000,000 2030 2L185OR ArterialArterialImprovementsCountywideGas Tax Subventions forStreetProjects/Maintenance(With projects, represents100% of anticipatedsubventions for localjurisdictions)$1,360,000,000 2030 2L186ORGradeCrossingGrade Crossing CountywideGrade CrossingImprovements - refer toseparate GradeCrossings project list$318,400,000 2020 2GL04OR Toll SR-91/SR-241Add direct toll-to-toll orHOV connection fromnorth/south SR-241 toSR-91 toll lanes to/fromthe east$65,000,000 2015 2T01135OR Toll SR-91 SR-241 SR-71Add toll lane and tollconnection at SR-71(RIV) (per Four CornersStudy)$160,000,000 2020 2T04136OR HOV I-5 NB/SB Coast Highway PicoAdd 1 HOV lane eachdirection$70,000,000 2020 2H01143OR HOV SR-22/I-405 HOV Connector $75,000,000 2020 ORA000193OR HOV I-405/I-605 HOV Connector $105,000,000 2020 2H01145OR HOV I-405 at Von Karman HOV Drop Ramp $50,000,000 2020 2H01148OR Mixed Flow SR-57 NB Orangethorpe Lambert MF or Aux Capacity $77,000,000 2010 2M01117Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-52004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDOR Mixed Flow SR-57 NB at SR-91 Add 4th through lane $1,000,000 2010 2M01118OR Mixed Flow SR-91 EB/WB SR-55Riverside CountyLineAdd 1 MF lane eachdirection$250,000,000 2010 2M04121OR Mixed Flow I-405 SR-73 BeachAdd 1 MF lane eachdirection$130,000,000 2030 2M04132AOR Mixed Flow Chokepoints CountywideCountywide Other Chokepoints $69,200,000ongoing to20302L133OR Mixed Flow SR-91 EB/WB Truck scales ImperialAdd storage lane at truckweigh in motion station$8,000,000 2007 2M01124OR Auxiliary I-5 SB La Paz Road Oso ParkwayExtend auxiliary lanethrough interchange$1,500,000 2030 2M01108OR Auxiliary I-5 SB Alicia ParkwayExtend auxiliary lanethrough interchange$5,000,000 2030 2M01110OR Auxiliary SR-55 17th / 4th / I-5 areaAdd southbound auxiliarylane from SR-22 to I-5 toaddress lane drop/mergeissues$10,000,000 2010 2M04114OR Auxiliary SR-55 SB Dyer MacArthur Auxiliary lane $1,300,000 2010 2M04115OR Auxiliary SR-57 NB Katella on-ramp Lincoln off-rampAuxiliary lane, fullstandard median$18,100,000 2020 2M01119OR Auxiliary SR-57 SB Ball off ramp Katella on ramp Add auxiliary lane $75,000,000 2030 2M01120OR Auxiliary SR-91 WB SR-71 SR-241 Add auxiliary lane $10,000,000 2010 2M01122OR Auxiliary SR-91 EB SR-241 SR-71Add auxiliary lane EBwhich drops at GreenRiver, another extends toSR-71$36,000,000 2007 2M01123OR Auxiliary SR-91 WB NB SR-55 WB SR-91 atTustin Add auxiliary lane $35,000,000 2010 2M01125Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-62004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDOR Auxiliary SR-91 WB SR-57 I-5 (WB Only) Add auxiliary lane $20,000,000 2010 2M01126OR Auxiliary I-405 NB SR-133 Sand CanyonWiden NB I-405 SR-133to Sand Canyon, add auxlane$2,100,000 2004 2M0423OR Auxiliary I-405 SB Irvine Center Drive Irvine Center Drive Add 2nd auxiliary lane $1,300,000 2010 2M04130OR Auxiliary I-405 NB Jeffrey Culver Add auxiliary lane $3,100,000 2010 2M04131OR Auxiliary I-405 NB Sand Canyon CulverTie auxiliary lanestogether$2,500,000 2030 2M01132OR Auxiliary I-405 SB Beach I-605Continuous auxiliary lane,operational improvements$75,000,000 2030 2M04132BOR IC/Ramps I-5 NB/SB La Paz RoadRe-construct interchangeto increase storagecapacity of ramps$29,400,000 2010 2M01109OR IC/Ramps I-5 Stonehill DrAdd southbound I-5 off-ramp at Stonehill$7,000,000 2020 2M04109AOR IC/Ramps I-5 NB/SB Avery ParkwayAvery parkway ramprelocation,reconfiguration, upgrades$13,900,000 2010 2M01111OR IC/Ramps I-5 NB/SB Jamboree RoadProvide two lanes off andwiden terminal section ofoff-ramp, modify NB ramp$6,000,000 2010 2M01112OR IC/Ramps I-5 NB/SBI-5/SR-74SeparationRebuild interchangeincluding widening of SR-74 overcrossing$50,000,000 2010 2M01113OR IC/Ramps I-5 SB 1st and SR-55Reconfigure to reduceweaving - interim project$50,000,000 2020 2M01107OR IC/Ramps SR-91 Fairmont DriveAdd intermediate accessto 91 Express Lanes atFairmont Drive to/from theeast$70,000,000 2010 2T04128OR IC/Ramps SR-91LakeviewInterchangeConstruct barrierseparated on-ramp (2lanes) from SB Lakeviewto WB SR-91$15,000,000 2010 2M01127Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-72004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDOR IC/Ramps I-405/SR-55 South Bristol BraidDelete left turn accessfrom NB Bristol to SB I405. Provide right turnon-ramp from NB Bristolto SB I-405 via a newbraid that also providesdirect access to NB SR55.$40,000,000 2020 2M01129OR O&MState Highway andArterial PreservationCountywideState Highway andArterialPreservation/Maintenance$760,000,000ongoing to20302PL04OR Other Motorist Services CountywideFreeway Service Patroland Callbox Program$150,800,000 2030 2L149OR Other Soundwalls CountywideRetrofit SoundwallProgram$87,000,000 2030 2L150OR OtherProjectDevelopmentCountywide Project Development $84,000,000 2030 2L222OR Other Other TEA CountywideTransportationEnhancement Activities$45,200,000 2030 2L224OR Other Cal Nevada HS Rail Anaheim Ontario AirportStudy feasibility of addinghigh speed rail betweenAnaheim and OntarioAirportTBD 2S1OR OtherSR-57/Santa AnaRiver CorridorSR-22/SR-57/I-5 I-405Regionally SignificantTransportation InvestmentStudy (RSTIS)$1,007,000 2S2OR Other SR-91 Orange County Riverside CountyRegionally SignificantTransportation InvestmentStudy (RSTIS)$2,250,000 2S3OR Other I-405Regionally SignificantTransportation InvestmentStudy (RSTIS)$1,150,000 2S4OR Other I-5 SouthRegionally SignificantTransportation InvestmentStudy (RSTIS)$1,500,000 2006 2S5OR Other Other StudiesOther studies included inFY 03-04 Work Program$2,690,000 2SL04Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-82004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDOR TDM Rideshare CountywideRegional Rideshare -Invest in transportationdemand managementprograms$27,000,000 2030 2L219OR TDM Non-motorized CountywideBuild the CommuterBikeways Strategic Plan$115,000,000ongoing to20302L220OR ITS ITS CountywideInvest in IntelligentTransportation SystemsPrograms$29,000,000 2030 2L221OR Transit Fixed Route Bus CountywideCountywide Fixed Route,Express, Rail Feeder,Rapid Bus. Expand localservice to achieve 10-minute headways in thecore of the county.Expand to 2.5 millionannual vsh by 2030.$1,892,800,000 2030 2L206OR Transit Express BusCountywide (intercounty and intracounty)Industry to AnaheimResort (04); 4 rtes btwnOR to RV Co (03);Rancho Santa Margaritato Irvine Transp Ctr (10);Long Beach to SouthCoast Metro (04); SanClemente to South CoastMetro (04); Long Beach toOrange (07); Laguna Hillsto Anaheim (04); Othercosts included inFixed Route Buscategory2030 2L207OR Transit Rail Feeder Bus CountywideRail Feeder - AddStationLink service to anestimate 40,000 annualvshcosts included inFixed Route Buscategory2030 2L208Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-92004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDOR Transit Bus Rapid Transit CountywideAdd Bus Rapid Transit inmixed traffic with signalpriority on the followinglines: Harbor ('07),Westminster ('09), Katella('13), Edinger ('17), Beach('11), La Palma ('15)costs included inFixed Route Buscategory20302TR01209A,2TR04209B,2TR01209C,2TR04209D,2TR04209E,2TR04209FOR TransitElderly &HandicappedAssistanceCountywideParatransit - Expandspecialized transit to meetADA mandates -estimated from .400million to .700 millionannual vsh. Includesparatransit bus base ($12million)$274,580,000 2030 2L210OR TransitElderly &HandicappedAssistanceCountywideSenior Mobility Program -Provide community basedsenior transportationservices$68,000,000 $25,500,000 2030 2L210AOR Transit Bus Stops CountywideBus Stop AccessbilityProgram - Invest inmaking bus stopsaccessible for people withdisabilities$10,000,000 2011 2L211OR TransitMetrolink CommuterRailOrange Line/IEOCLine/91 LineExpand service - OrangeLine to 30 daily trains,IEOC to 21 daily trains,91 line to 21 daily trains.Plan for middayintracounty serviceLaguna Niguel toFullerton.$266,300,000 2030 2TR01212OR TransitTrack La MiradaBastaLa MiradaDT Junction to La MiradaTriple Trackcost included inMetrolinkCommuter Railcategory2004 2TR01212Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-102004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDOR TransitMetrolink CommuterRailAnaheim StadiumParking Structures andPlatform Extensions -Metrolink Station$73,200,000 TBD 2TR04217OR TransitCenterLine LightRailFunding Reserve forExtensions (ExtendCenterLine north toFullerton or west alongPE ROW) + Santa AnaCollege Link$770,000,000 2030 2TR04218OR Transit Transit CenterConstruct IntermodalCenter at the Metrolinkstation in Santa Ana(CenterLine station)$50,000,000 2020 2TR04223ORTruckClimbingSR-57 NB LambertTonner CanyonRoadTruck Climbing Lane $68,300,000 2010 2TK01116ORTotal Orange County$7,740,677,000$3,469,100,000RV ArterialArterialImprovementsCoachella ValleyWiden/construct regionalarterials$628,000,000 2030 3AL104RV ArterialArterialImprovementsWestern CountyWiden/construct regionalarterials$300,000,000 2030 3AL204RV ArterialArterialImprovementsCountywideCountywide arterialimprovements - refer toseparate Arterials projectlist$1,971,000,000 $962,000,000 2030 3AL304RVGradeCrossingGrade Crossing CountywideGrade CrossingImprovements - refer toseparate Grade Crossingprojects list$672,995,000 2030 3GL04RV CorridorCETAP -Cajalco/RamonaHemetCorona/LakeElsinoreCajalco/Ramonaexpressway (3 lanes eachdir) from Sanderson Aveto I-15$466,000,000 2010 3C01MA01Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-112004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDRV CorridorCETAP - MorenoValley to SanBernardino CountyMoreno ValleySan BernardinoCountyConstruct new intercountytransporation corridor$181,000,000 $1,051,000,000 2030 3C01MA02RV CorridorCETAP - RiversideCounty to OrangeCountyRiverside County Orange CountyConstruct new intercountytransporation corridor$402,000,000 $2,348,000,000 2030 3C01MA03RV CorridorCETAP - TemeculaCorridorWinchester (SR-79/SR-74)TemeculaOn I-15, widen to 1 HOV& 6 MF each dir from I215 to Winchester, 1 HOV& 5 MF each dir fromWinchester to San DiegoCounty Line; on I-215,widen to 1 HOV & 4 MFeach dir from Newport Rdto I-15; improve I-15/I-215interchange$150,000,000 2030 3C01MA04RV HOV SR-60/I-215 SR60/I-215 E. JctEast to SR-60 andSouth to I-215HOV Connector $40,000,000 2025 3H01SH03RV HOV I-15San Diego CountyLine (R0.0)SR-60 (51.5)Add 1 HOV lane eachdirection (EA's 33790G,33800G)$359,000,000 2025 3M01MA06RV HOV SR-91/I-15South to West/Westto SouthHOV Connector $243,000,000 2025 3M04MA11RVMixed Flow& HOVI-215SR-60/SR-91/I-215JctSan BernardinoCounty LineAdd 1 MF and 1 HOVlane each direction (EA467200)$231,000,000 2015 3M01MA08RV Mixed Flow I-10 Monterey Ave (44.5) Dillon Rd (58.9)Add 1 MF lane eachdirection (EA 0A030K)$71,000,000 2025 3M01SH06RV Mixed Flow I-10/SR-60Construct newinterchange$129,000,000 2030 3M04MA05RV Mixed Flow I-215Eucalyptus Ave(R37.4)I-15 (R8.9)Add 1 MF lane eachdirection (EA's 35380K,35390K, 35370K)$210,000,000 2025 3M01MA07RV Mixed Flow SR-71 SR-91San BernardinoCounty LineWiden to 3 MF lanes eachdirection$68,000,000 2030 3M01MA09Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-122004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDRV Mixed Flow SR-91 Pierce Street Orange County LineAdd 1 MF lane eachdirection$161,000,000 2015 3M04MA10RV Mixed Flow SR-91/SR-71 Improve interchange $26,000,000 2030 3M04MA12RV Mixed Flow SR-79 Ramona ExpwyDomenigoniParkwayRealign highway(construct 4 lanes)$132,000,000 2015 3A01MA01RV Mixed Flow SR-79 Hunter Ramona ExpwyWiden from 4 to 6 lanes(note: RTIP#46460widens to 6 lanes fromHunter to Domenigoni)$65,000,000 2025 3A04SH12RV Auxiliary I-10Calimesa @ CountyLine Rd (R4.0)500 meters e/oSandlwood Dr I/C(R4.3)Replace Bridge, Ramps,Construct Auxiliary Lanes,and Realign Calimesa Rd(EA 0A710K)$60,000,000 2015 3M04SH05RV Auxiliary SR-600.4 mi e/o I-15/SR-60 IC0.2 mi e/o Main StAdd auxiliary lanes bothdirections$5,000,000 2009 3M04SH11RV Auxiliary SR-91 WB SR-71 Orange County Line Add auxiliary lanesee OrangeCounty listing2010 2M01122RV Auxiliary SR-91 EB Orange County Line SR-71Add auxiliary lane EBwhich drops at GreenRiver, another extends toSR-71$29,120,000 2007 2M01123RV IC/Ramps I-10at SR-79/BeaumontAvebtwn 6th St & 1st StReconstructinterchange/ramps$14,500,000 20203M04WT001RV IC/Ramps I-10 at 8th Stbtwn Ramsey St &Lincoln StReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20203M04WT002RV IC/Ramps I-10 at Ave 50Construct newinterchange$19,468,000 2006 3M01CV01RV IC/Ramps I-10at CalimesaBlvd/Sandalwood Drbtwn 7th St &Sandalwood DrReconstructinterchange/ramps$29,000,000 20083M04WT003RV IC/Ramps I-10McNaughton Pkwy(approx. 3.38 mi e/oDillon Rd)Construct interchange $20,000,000 2008 3M04SH07RV IC/Ramps I-10 at Pennsylvania Ave btwn 6th St & 3rd StReconstructinterchange/ramps$14,500,000 20203M04WT004Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-132004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDRV IC/Ramps I-10 at Portola Avebtwn Dinah Shore &VarnerConstruct new IC (4lanes) and ramps incl.bridge over UPRR &Varner realignment$19,750,000 2008 RIV031209RV IC/Ramps I-10 at Monterey AveReconfigure IC, add 1 NBlane, construct new WBentry loop ramp fromMonterey & WB entryramp from Varner,realign/relocate WB exitramp$4,250,000 2005 RIV031208RV IC/Ramps I-15 at 6th Stbtwn Hamner Ave &Sierra AveReconstructinterchange/ramps$14,500,000 20103M04WT005RV IC/Ramps I-15 at Bellegrave Avebtwn Hamner Ave &Wineville RdAdd signals and ramps.0.1 mi.$3,289,000 2025 3A04A26RV IC/Ramps I-15at Hidden ValleyPkwybtwn Hamner Ave &Beyond NB ExitRampReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20103M04WT007RV IC/Ramps I-215 at SR-74/4th Stbtwn G St & SanJacinto AveReconstructinterchange/ramps$14,500,000 20083M04WT008RV IC/Ramps I-215at SR-74 (MatthewsRd)btwn Case Rd &Trumble RdReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20253M04WT009RV IC/Ramps I-215 at Cactus Avebtwn W. FrontageRd & Elsworth StReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20093M04WT010RV IC/Ramps I-215 at Center Stbtwn Stephens Ave& Iowa AveReconstructinterchange/ramps$13,000,000 20253M04WT011RV IC/Ramps I-215 at Columbia Avebtwn Primer St &Brandywine AveReconstructinterchange/ramps$12,000,000 20203M04WT012RV IC/Ramps I-215 at Ethanac Rdbtwn Barnett Rd &Trumble RdReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20123M01WT013RV IC/Ramps I-215 at Garbani Rdbtwn Haun Rd &Antelope RdConstruct newinterchange - add 4-laneoverpass and ramps. 0.1mi.$10,914,000 2025 3A04A27Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-142004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDRV IC/Ramps I-215 at Keller Rdbwn Zeiders Rd &Antelope RdConstruct 4-laneovercrossing and ramps$2,000,000 2030 3A04A28RV IC/Ramps I-215 at Nuevo Rdbtwn A St & E.Frontage RdReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20133M04WT014RV IC/Ramps I-215/SR-60 at Central Avebtwn Springs Blvd &Watkins DrReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20063M04WT015RV IC/Ramps I-215/SR-60 at University Avebtwn Iowa Ave &Canyon Crest DrReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20203M04WT016RV IC/Ramps SR-60 at Etiwanda Avebtwn San SevaineWy & Iberia StWiden ramps 1 to 2 lanes.0.1 mi.$224,000 2015 3A04A29RV IC/Ramps SR-60 at Heacock Stbtwn Hemlock Ave &Sunnymead BlvdReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20113M04WT017RV IC/Ramps SR-60 at Main Stbtwn Russell St &Stoddard AveReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20203M04WT018RV IC/Ramps SR-60 at Milliken Avebtwn Etiwanda Ave& Wineville RdWiden ramps 1 to 2 lanes.0.1 mi.$75,000 2020 3A04A30RV IC/Ramps SR-60 at Mission Blvdbtwn WB On Ramp& Etiwanda AveReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20253M01WT019RV IC/Ramps SR-60 at Mission Blvdbtwn Granite Hill Dr& Sevaine WayReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20253M01WT020RV IC/Ramps SR-86 S at Ave 50 Construct interchange $9,276,000 2010 3M01CV02RV IC/Ramps SR-86 S at Ave 52btwn La Hernandezand PolkConstruct newinterchange$19,700,000 2015 3M04SH08RV IC/Ramps SR-86 at Ave 54btwn SR-111 &FillmoreConstructbridge/interchange w newSR-86$11,210,000 2030 3M01CV03RV IC/Ramps SR-86 Sat Airport Blvd/Ave56btwn Orange &FillmoreConstruct newinterchange (Spread-Diamond)$17,800,000 2008 3M04SH09RV IC/Ramps SR-86 Sat SR-195 (Avenue66) R10.63/R11.43Near Mecca, constructnew interchange$19,350,000 2010 0E620KRV IC/Ramps SR-86 S Tyler St w/o SR-86S Tyler St e/o SR-86SConstruct newinterchange$19,000,000 2015 3M04SH10Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-152004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDRV IC/Ramps SR-91 at 14th Stbtwn Olivewood Ave& Commerce StReconstructinterchange/ramps$14,500,000 20103M01WT021RV IC/Ramps SR-91 at Adams Stbtwn Diana Ave &Indiana AveReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20203M01WT022RV IC/Ramps SR-91 at Madison Stbtwn Garden St &Indiana AveReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20203M01WT023RV IC/Ramps SR-91 at Magnolia Avebtwn Merced Dr &Fillmore StReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20203M01WT024RV IC/Ramps SR-91 at Serfas Club Drbtwn Frontage Rd &Wardlow RdReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20153M01WT025RV IC/Ramps SR-91 at Tyler Stbtwn Diana Ave &Indiana AveReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20203M01WT026RV IC/Ramps SR-91 at University Avebtwn Lemon St &Vine StReconstructinterchange/ramps$2,900,000 20103M01WT027RV O&MState Highway andArterial PreservationCountywideState Highway andArterialPreservation/Maintenance$552,000,000 2030 3PL04RV OtherEconomicDevelopmentWestern CountyInfrastucture & facilityimprovements incentives$40,000,000 2030 3EL04RV TDM Rideshare CountywideRCTC CommuterAssistance Program:rideshare and otherincentive programs, TDM(telecommute, park andride, etc.)$66,400,000 2030 3RL04RV TDM Non-motorized Countywide Non-motorized $50,000,000 2030 3NL04RV ITS ITS CountywideIntelligent TransportationSystems$25,000,000 2030 3ITS04RV TransitMetrolink CommuterRailCountywideMetrolink Improvements(track, rolling stock)$280,000,000 2030 3CR104RV TransitMetrolink CommuterRailIEOC & 91 LinesMetrolink Rail StationImprovements$20,000,000 2030 3CR204Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-162004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDRV TransitMetrolink CommuterRailMetrolink Construct NewStation At 3360 VanBuren Blvd In Riverside(Parking 550 Spaces)$9,500,000 2015 RIV011243RV Transit Bus Rapid Transit Corona Moreno ValleyBus Rapid Transit (BRT):65 IntersectionsRetrofitted for SignalPriority for Transit andAutomated TravelInformation at 15 BusStops$850,000 20063TR04A,3TR04BRV Transit Bus Rapid Transit Coachella Valley Rapid Bus/BRT $10,000,000 2010 3TR04CRV TransitMetrolink CommuterRail & Intercity BusWestern CountyMetrolink & commuter busservices expansion$255,000,000 2030 3CR304RV TransitElderly &HandicappedAssistanceCoachella ValleyElderly & HandicappedAssistance$19,500,000 2015 3TL104RV TransitElderly &HandicappedAssistanceCountywideProvide additionalsenior/special transitservices$85,000,000 2030 3TL204RV TransitLocal TransitServiceCoachella ValleyOperations andMaintenance - LocalTransit Service$156,000,000 2015 3TL304RV Transit Transit ITS Coachella ValleyITS/Consistency withReg. Project; GFI, BusCameras, Smart FareBoxes$2,000,000 2006 3TL404RV Transit Bus Purchases Coachella ValleyPurchase 3 AdditionalExpansion HydrogenBuses, Routes TBD$1,000,000 2005 3TL504RV Transit Bus StopsWestern RiversideCounty areaSafety and SecurityEnhancements at BusStops (e.g. LightedShelters, Bus Benches,and Concrete Pads) 250stops - specificimplementation locations$976,000 $24,000 2005 3TL604Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-172004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDTBARV Transit Transit CenterBanning/ Beaumont/Calimesa areaTransit Center $6,000,000 2007 3TC04TR1RV Transit Transit Center City of Temecula Transit Center $6,000,000 2006 3TC04TR2RV Transit Transit Center Coachella ValleyConstruct 3 TransitCenters in the CoachellaValley, locations TBD$15,000,000 2010 3TC04TR3RV Transit Transit Center Downtown Riverside Transit Center $6,000,000 2006 3TC04TR4RV Transit Transit CenterHemet/San JacintozoneTransit Center $6,000,000 2006 3TC04TR5RV Transit Transit CenterMenifee(southwesternRiverside County)Transit Center $6,000,000 2008 3TC04TR6RV Transit Transit CenterMoreno Valley/PerrisTransit Center $6,000,000 2007 3TC04TR7RV Transit Transit CenterNorthwest RiversideCounty zone - EastVale/ NorcoTransit Center $6,000,000 2008 3TC04TR8RV Transit Transit CenterSouth Corona/Riverside CountyareaTransit Center $6,000,000 2007 3TC04TR9RV Transit Transit CenterSouthwest LakeElsinore/ MurrietaTransit Center $6,000,000 2008 3TC04TR10RV TransitFacility Acquisition/ConstructionThousand PalmsFacilityAcquisition/Construction$10,000,000 2007 3TC04TR11RVTruckClimbingI-10San BernardinoCounty Line (R0.0)Banning City Limits(12.9)Add eastbound truckclimbing lane$75,000,000 20153TK04MA12RVTruckClimbingSR-60Badlands area eastof Moreno ValleyBadlands area -west of SR-60/I-10JctAdd eastbound truckclimbing lane$26,000,000 20303TK04MA13Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-182004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDRVTotal Riverside County$8,708,347,000$4,361,024,000SB ArterialArterialImprovementsCountywideCountywide arterialimprovements - refer toseparate Arterials projectlist$703,000,000 2030 4AL04SBGradeCrossingGrade Crossing CountywideGrade Crossings - refer toseparate GradeCrossings project list$500,000,000 2020 4GL04SB HOV I-10 I-15 SR-38Add 1 HOV lane eachdirection, widen UC's,reconstruct ramps$350,000,000 2020 4H01001SB HOV I-10 SR-38 Yucaipa BlAdd 1 HOV lane eachdirection$0 2020 4H01002SB HOV I-10 Yucaipa BlRiverside CountyLineAdd 1 HOV lane eachdirection$23,000,000 2025 4H01003SB HOV I-15Riverside CountyLineI-215Add 1 HOV lane eachdirection$99,000,0002025 4H01004SB HOV I-15 I-215 US-395Add 1 HOV lane eachdirection$114,000,0002020 4H01005SB HOV I-15 US-395 D StAdd 1 HOV lane eachdirection$74,000,0002020 4H01006SB HOV I-215Riverside CountyLineI-10Add 1 HOV lane eachdirection$86,500,000 2015 4H01007SB HOV I-215 SR-30 I-15Add 1 HOV lane eachdirection$48,000,000 2025 4H01008SB HOV I-10/I-215South to East/Eastto SouthHOV Connector $15,000,000 2025 4H01009SB HOV I-10/I-15South to West/Westto SouthHOV Connector $14,000,000 2025 4H01010SB HOV I-10/I-15North to West/Westto NorthHOV Connector $14,000,000 2025 4H01011SB Mixed Flow I-10 WB Yucaipa Bl Ford St Add 1 MF lane westbound $30,000,000 2015 4M04200SB Mixed Flow I-215Riverside CountyLineI-10Add 1 MF lane eachdirection$86,500,000 2015 4M04001Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-192004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDSB Mixed Flow I-215 I-10 SR-30Add 1 MF lane eachdirection (restriping)$500,000 2010 4M01002SB Mixed Flow I-215 SR-30 I-15Add 1 MF lane eachdirection$48,000,000 2025 4M01003SB Mixed Flow SR-210 I-215 I-10Add 1 MF lane eachdirection and widen UC's$120,000,000 2020 4M01005SB Mixed Flow SR-18Los Angeles CountyLineUS 395Widen from 1 to 2 laneseach dir$27,000,000 2020 4A01900SB Mixed Flow SR-180.8 mi west ofOrchard Dr (PM79.9)2.1 mi west ofOrchard Dr (PM81.2)Construct Passing Lanes(PM 79.9/81.2) and TurnLanes (PM 73.76/84.33)$13,600,000 2010 4A04902SB Mixed FlowSR-38(Orange/Lugonia)Redlands City Limit(W)Redlands City Limit(E)Widen from 1 to 2 laneseach dir$6,000,000 2020 4A01382SB Mixed FlowSR-62 (TwentyninePalms Hwy)Fairway Dr SR-247Widen from 2 to 3 laneseach dir$7,000,000 2020 4A01383SB Mixed Flow SR-83 (Euclid) Merril Av Kimball AvWiden from 2 to 4 laneseach dir$1,000,000 2010 4A01384SB Mixed FlowSR-142 (Chino HillsPkwy)Carbon Canyon Rd Pipeline DrWiden from 2 to 3 laneseach dir$3,000,000 2020 4A01385SB Mixed FlowSR-247 (OldWoman Springs Rd)North of SR-62 Griffith RdWiden from 1 to 2 laneseach dir$3,000,000 2020 4A01386SB Auxiliary I-10 and I-215On I-10 from 0.1 kmw/o I-215 (PM 23.6)to 0.9km e/o SR-38(PM 31.4)On I-215 fromRiverside CountyLine (PM 0.0) to JctI-10/I-215 (PM 4.03)Install Fiber OpticCommunications (FOC)backbone system,Changeable messagesigns (CMS), Rampmetering stations (RMS),modify existingcommunication hub,CCTV, VDS, TOSCabinets; widen on-rampson I-10 and I-215; addaux lanes on I-10 (variouslocations)$9,500,000 2006 4M04021Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-202004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDSB Auxiliary US-395NB from 0.84mi s/oDesert Flower Rd to2.84mi n/o PurpleSage St, and from4mi n/o ShadowMountain Ave to6.07mi n/o ShadowMountain AveSB from 2.72mi n/oPurple Sage St to0.95mi s/o DesertFlower Rd, and from5.95mi n/o ShadowMountain Ave to3.88mi n/o ShadowMountain AveAdd Passing Lanes inboth directions and adjustvertical and horizontalalignments$26,000,000 2015 4M04009SB Auxiliary I-10Waterman Av (PM25.5)Tippecanoe Ave(PM 26.27)Add eastbound auxiliarylane (500m) and wideneastbound Tippecanoeoff-ramp from 1 to 2 lanes$740,000 2005 4M04053SB IC/Ramps I-100.1 km e/o I-15 (PM9.9)0.4 km e/o I-215(PM R24.5)Install RMS, CCTV ESU;widen entrance rampsfrom 1 to 2 lanes at: EB &WB at Cherry Ave, CitrusAve, Cedar Ave,Riverside Ave and MtVernon Ave; WB atRancho Ave; EB at 9th St$9,240,000 2008 4M04023SB IC/Ramps I-100.8 km e/o EtiwandaAve OC (PM 11.6)1.5 km w/oRiverside Ave OC(PM 19.1)In Fontana widen exitramps from 1 to 2 lanes atCherry Ave, Citrus Ave, &Cedar Ave IC toaccommodate proposedaux lanes at Cherry AveIC E/B aux lane PM11.99/12.85, W/B Auxlane PM 13.38/13.68;Citrus Ave IC E/B auxlane only PM 14.58/14.88;Cedar Ave IC E/B auxlane PM 17.36/17.83,W/B aux lane PM18.94/19.41$19,000,000 2009 4M04024SB IC/Ramps I-10 Alabama St Interchange $16,000,000 2025 4M01025Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-212004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDSB IC/Ramps I-10 Beech Av Interchange $25,000,000 2012 4M01026SB IC/Ramps I-10 California St Interchange $16,000,000 2020 4M01027SB IC/Ramps I-10 Cedar Av Interchange $16,000,000 2020 4M01028SB IC/Ramps I-10 Live Oak Canyon Interchange $8,000,000 2006 4M04029SB IC/Ramps I-10 Mountain View Av Interchange $16,000,000 2020 4M01030SB IC/Ramps I-10 Mt Vernon Av Interchange $16,000,000 2020 4M01031SB IC/Ramps I-10 Wabash Av Interchange $16,000,000 2020 4M01032SB IC/Ramps I-10 Wildwood Canyon Interchange $11,000,000 2020 4M04033SB IC/Ramps I-15 6th Street Interchange $16,000,000 2025 4M01035SB IC/Ramps I-15 Cajon Jn/SR-138 Interchange $16,000,000 2020 4M01037SB IC/Ramps I-15 Duncan Canyon Rd New Interchange $15,000,000 2012 4M01038SB IC/Ramps I-15 Foothill Blvd (SR-66)Add 400m decelerationlane on NB I-15 andwiden NB off-ramp from 1to 2 lanes$725,000 2005 4M04054SB IC/Ramps I-15 Mojave St Interchange $16,000,000 2020 4M01039SB IC/Ramps I-15 Oak Hill Rd Replace overcrossing $1,000,000 2010 4M01040SB IC/Ramps I-15 Sierra Av Interchange $16,000,000 2025 4M01041SB IC/Ramps I-15 Stoddard Wells Rd Interchange $16,000,000 2010 4M01042SB IC/Ramps I-215 Barton RoadWiden over-crossing 2-4lanes$1,000,000 2010 4M01043SB IC/Ramps I-215 Palm Av Interchange $16,000,000 2025 4M01044SB IC/Ramps I-215 Pepper-Linden Av Interchange $16,000,000 2025 4M01045SB IC/Ramps I-215 University Pkwy Interchange $16,000,000 2020 4M01046SB IC/Ramps SR-60 Central Av Upgrade Interchange $10,000,000 2020 4M04050SB IC/Ramps SR-60 Grove Av Interchange/Ramps $500,000 2005 4M04051SB IC/Ramps SR-30 (SR-210) Del Rosa Av Interchange $16,000,000 2025 4M01047SB IC/Ramps SR-30 (SR-210) Highland Av Interchange $16,000,000 2025 4M01048SB IC/Ramps SR-30 (SR-210) Waterman Av Interchange $16,000,000 2025 4M01049SB IC/Ramps I-10 and SR-60 Haven AvInterchangeImprovements$30,000,000 2015 4M01052Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-222004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDSB O&MState Highway andArterial PreservationCountywideState Highway andArterialPreservation/Maintenance$1,664,500,0002030 4PL04SB OtherProjectDevelopment &Traffic MitigationCountywideProject Development &Traffic Mitigation$64,000,000 2030 4PD04SB OtherSouthern CaliforniaLogistics Airport RailProjectTrack and intermodal yardimprovements (Phases 1through 4)$278,500,000 2030 4FR04SB ITS ITS CountywideIntelligent TransportationSystems$48,500,000 2030 4ITS04SB TDM Rideshare CountywideMotorist AssistanceProgram$36,000,000 2030 4RL04SB TDM Non-motorized Countywide Non-motorized $39,000,000 2030 4NL04SB TDM TDM CountywideTDM (Telecommute, parkand ride, etc.)$6,500,000 2030 4TDL04SB TransitSan Bernardino-Redlands Extension4th St/Mt. Vernon Grove/CentralExtend rail service toRedlands (10 miles); railtechnology TBD; 15-min.freq. daily$60,000,000 2014 4TR0101SB Transit Gold Line ExtensionClaremont in LosAngeles CountyMontclair in SanBernardino CountyLight Rail extension (1.5miles)$76,000,000 2014 4TR0102SB TransitMetrolink CommuterRailCountywideService Expansion; SBLine 52 daily trains,Riverside line 40 dailytrains, IEOC line 28 dailytrains$464,000,000 2030 4CR04SB TransitLocal TransitServiceCountywide Local Transit Service $364,000,000 2030 4TL104SB TransitElderly &HandicappedAssistanceCountywideElderly & HandicappedAssistance$137,000,000 2030 4TL204SBTruckClimbingI-15 Devore Summit Truck Climbing Lane $10,000,000 2010 4T01003SBTotal San BernardinoCounty$5,794,305,000$278,500,000Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-232004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDVE ArterialArterialImprovementsCountywideMisc. Arterial SystemImprovements - refer toseparate Arterials andGrade Crossings projectlists$135,000,000 2020 5AL04VE Mixed FlowSR-33 (CasitasBypass)Foster Park Creek Rd Expressway $120,000,000 2020 5A0101VE Mixed Flow SR-118 SR-232 MoorparkExpressway $104,000,000 2015 5A0103VE IC/Ramps US-101 La Conchita Mussel Shoals Interchange Improvement $17,000,000 2005 5M0104VE IC/Ramps US-101 At Del Norte BlvdInterchange improvementand 4 lane overcrossingwith left turn pocket$10,000,000 $10,000,000 2006 5M0405VE O&MState Highway andArterial PreservationCountywideState Highway andArterialPreservation/Maintenance$292,500,0002025 5PL04VE ITS ITS CountywideMisc. ITS ProjectImplementation$80,000,000 2025 5ITS04VE TDM TDM/Non-motorized CountywideTDM (Non-motorized,telecommute, etc.)$30,000,000 2025 5TDL04VE TDM Non-motorized MontalvoLos Angeles CountyLineSanta Paula BranchRecreational Trail$35,000,000 2015 5N011VE TransitTransit ServiceExpansionCountywide Transit Services $325,000,000 2025 5TL04VE TransitMetrolink CommuterRailVenturaLos Angeles CountyLineService Expansion $131,000,000 2020 5CR104VE Transit Tunnel 26Rail TunnelReconstruction$12,000,000 $2,000,000 2005 5CR304VE TransitMetrolink CommuterRailCoast Main LineEnhanced MetrolinkCapital Maintenance$45,000,000 2025 5CR204VETotal Ventura County$1,336,500,000$12,000,000REG Maglev Maglev RegionwideBy 2018 - IOS (West LAto Ontario); By 2030 -Total Regional System$29,400,000,000 2030 MAGFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007B-242004 RTP - Plan ProjectsCOCategoryRoute/ProgramFromToDescriptionPublic Funding(02$)Private/OtherFunding (02$)CompletionYearRTP IDREG Corridor I-710 CorridorPort of LongBeach/Los AngelesSR-60User Fee-BackedCapacity Improvement2020 UFC1REG CorridorEast-West Corridor(I-210, SR-210, I-10,SR-60, SR-91)I-710 CorridorI-10/SR-60InterchangeUser Fee-BackedCapacity Improvement$16,500,000,000(includes I-710,East-West, andI-15 corridors)2030 UFC2REG Corridor I-15 Corridor East-West Corridor BarstowUser Fee-BackedCapacity Improvement2030 UFC3REGRailroadCapacityRegional railcapacityimprovementprogramRegionwideMain line tracks andgrade separationimprovements$3,400,000,000 2030 RRCREGTOTAL SCAG$36,183,329,000$62,259,024,000

# ATTACHMENT C

Reasonably Available Control Measure (RACM) AnalysisFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-1Section 108 (f) 1. Programs for Improved Public TransitMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies1.1Regional Express Bus ProgramPurchase of buses to operate regional expressbus services.YesCTCs (MTA,OCTA), TransitOperators1.2Transit access to airportsOperation of transit to airport to serve airpassengers.YesTransitOperators, CTCs(MTA, SCRRA)1.3Accelerate Bus Retrofit ProgramAccelerate application of retrofit of diesel-poweredbuses to achieve earlier compliance with stateregulations.YesCTCs (MTA,OCTA), TransitOperators1.4Mass transit alternativesMajor change to the scope and service levels.YesSCAG, CTCs1.5Expansion of public transportationsystemsExpand and enhance existing public transitservices.YesCTCs1.6Transit service improvements incombination with park-and-ride lotsand parking ManagementLocal jurisdictions and transit agency improve thepublic transit system and add new park-and-ridefacilities and spaces on an as needed basis.YesCTCs(MTA,SCRRA)1.7Free transit during special eventsRequire free transit during selected special eventsto reduce event-related congestion andassociated emission increases.NoThe Legislature significantlyreduced authority of AQMD toimplement indirect sourcecontrol measures throughrevisions tothe Health &Safety Code (HSC 40717.8).Transit agencies shoulddecide individually whetherthis measure is economicallyfeasible for them.1.8Require that government employeesuse transit for home to work trips,Require all government employees use transit aspecified number of times per week.YesCTCsFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-2Section 108 (f) 1. Programs for Improved Public TransitMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgenciesexpand transit, and encourage largebusinesses to promote transit use1.9Increase parking at transit centers orstopsEncourage transit convenience by providingadditional parking at transit centers.YesCTCs1.10Expand regional transit connectionticket distributionProvides interchangeability of transit ticket.YesCTCs, MetrolinkFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-3Section 108 (f) 2. Restriction of Certain Roads or Lanes to, or Construction of SuchRoads or Lanes for Use By, Passenger Busesor High Occupancy VehiclesMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies2.1Update High Occupancy Vehicle(HOV) Lane Master PlanAnalysis of increased enforcement, increasingoccupancy requirements, conversion of existingHOV lanes to bus only lanes and/or designationof any new carpool lanes as bus-only lanes;utilization of freeway shoulders for peak-periodexpress bus use; commercial vehicle buy-in toHOV lanes; and appropriateness of HOV lanes forcorridors that have considered congestion pricingor value pricing.YesSCAG, Caltrans,CTCs2.2Fixed lanes for buses and carpoolson arterialsProvide fixed lanes for buses and carpools onarterial streets where appropriate.YesCTCs (MTA,OCTA), LA City2.3Expand number of freeway milesavailable, allow use by alternativefuel vehicles, changes to HOV lanerequirements and hoursVarious measures evaluated in many ozonenonattainment areas. Specifics vary according tofreeway system, use patterns and localcharacteristics.YesARB, CaltransFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-4Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-Based Transportation Management Plans, Including IncentivesMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies3.1∗Commute solutionsThe federal law that complements parking cashout is called theCommuter Choice Program. Itprovides for benefits that employers can offer toemployees to commute towork by methods otherthan driving alone.YesAQMD,Employer3.2*Parking cash-outState law requires certain employers who providesubsidized parking for their employees to offer acash allowance in lieu of a parking space.YesAQMD,Employer3.3*Employer Rideshare ProgramIncentivesEmployer rideshare incentives and introduction ofstrategies designed to reduce single occupantvehicle trips. Examples include: publicawareness campaigns, TransportationManagement Associations among employers,alternative work hours, and financial incentives.YesAQMD,Employer3.4*Implement Parking Charge IncentiveProgramEvaluate feasibility of an incentive program forcities and employers that convert free publicparking spaces to paid spaces. Review existingparking polices as they relate to new developmentapprovals.YesAQMD, Cities,Employer3.5*Preferential parking for carpools andvanpoolsThis measure encourages public and privateemployers to provide preferential parking spacesfor carpools and vanpools to decrease thenumber of single occupant automobile work trips.The preferential treatmentcould include coveredparking spaces or close-in spaces.YesAQMD,Employer3.6*Employee parking feesEncourage public and private employers toYesAQMD,∗This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primaryimplementer is the employer.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-5Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-Based Transportation Management Plans, Including IncentivesMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgenciescharge employees for parking.Employer3.7Merchant transportation incentivesImplement “non-work” trip reduction ordinancesrequiring merchants to offer customers mode shifttravel incentives such as free bus passes andrequiring owners/managers/developers of largeretail establishments to provide facilities for nonmotorized modes.NoThe Legislature has limitedauthority to implementemployee trip reductionmeasures through revisions tothe Health & Safety Code(HSC 40717.6.)3.8*Purchase vans for vanpoolsPurchasea specified number of vans for use inemployee commute travel.YesAQMD,Employer3.9*Encourage merchants and employersto subsidize the cost of transit foremployeesProvide outreach and possible financial incentivesto encourage local employers to provide transitpasses or subsidies to encourage less individualvehicle travel.YesAQMD,Employer3.10∗Compressed work weeksSelf explanatory.YesAQMD,Employer3.11*TelecommutingGoal of specified percentage of employeestelecommuting at least once per week.YesAQMD,Employer∗This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primaryimplementer is the employer.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-6Section 108 (f) 4. Trip Reduction OrdinanceIn December 1995, Congress changed the Clean Air Act Amendments tomake the Employee Commute Option program voluntary (no longer mandatory). California State Lawprohibits mandatory employer based trip reduction ordinance programs (SB437). (HSC 40717.9) To account for these restrictions,SCAQMD Rule 2202 provides employers with amenu of options to reduce mobile source emissions generated fromemployee commutes. Rule 2202 complies with federal and stateClean Air Act requirements, HSC 40458,and HSC 182(d)(1)(B) of the federal Clean Air Act. Nevertheless,some jurisdictions continue to implement Trip Reduction Ordinances. For example, the City of Santa Monicarequires new and existing non-residential development projectsto adopt Emission Reduction Plans and pay transportation impactfees to reduce traffic congestion and improveair quality in the city.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-7Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs That Achieve Emissions ReductionsMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies5.1Develop Intelligent TransportationSystemsThe term “Intelligent Transportation Systems”includes a variety of technological applicationsintended to produce more efficient use of existingtransportation corridors.YesCTCs, Caltrans5.2Coordinate traffic signal systemsThis measures implements and enhancessynchronized traffic signal systems to promotesteady traffic flow at moderate speeds.YesCTCs, LA Cityand other cities5.3Reduce traffic congestion at majorintersectionsThis measure implements a wide range of trafficcontrol techniques designed to facilitate smooth,safe travel through intersections. Thesetechniques include signalization, turn lanes ormedian dividers. The use of grade separationsmay also be appropriate for high volume orunusually configured intersections.YesCTCs, Cities5.4Site-specific transportation controlmeasuresThis measure could include geometric or trafficcontrol improvements atspecific congestedintersections or at other substandard locations.Another example might be programming left turnsignals at certain intersections to lag, rather thanlead, the green timefor through traffic.YesCTCs, Cities5.5Removal of on-street parkingRequireall commercial/industrial development todesign and implement off-street parking.YesCTCs, Cities5.6Reversible lanesImplement reversible lanes on arterial streets toimprove traffic flow where appropriate.YesCTCs, Cities5.7One-way streetsRedesignate streets (or portions of in downtownareas) as one-way to improve traffic flow.YesCTCs, Cities5.8On-Street parking restrictionsRestricton-street parking where appropriate.YesCTCs, CitiesFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-8Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs That Achieve Emissions ReductionsMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies5.9Bus pullouts in curbs for passengerloadingProvide bus pullouts in curbs, or queue jumperlanes for passenger loading and unloading.YesCTCs, Cities5.10Additional freeway service patrolOperation of additional lane miles of new rovingtow truck patrols to clear incidents and reducedelay on freeways during peak periods.YesCTCs, CHP5.11Fewer stop signs, removeunwarranted and "political" stop signsand signalsImprove flow-through traffic by removing stopsigns and signals. Potential downside in safetyissues.YesCTCs, Cities5.12Ban left turnsBanning all left turns would stop the creation ofbottlenecks although slightly increase traveldistances.NoNo clear demonstration of airquality emissions benefits.5.13Changeable lane assignmentsIncrease number of one-way lanes going incongested flow direction during peak traffic hours.YesCaltrans, CTCs,Cities5.14Adaptive traffic signals and signaltimingSelf explanatory.YesCounties, Cites5.15Freeway bottleneck improvements(add lanes, construct shoulders, etc.)Identify key freeway bottlenecks and takeaccelerated action tomitigate them.YesCaltrans5.16Minimize impact of construction ontraveling public. Have contractorspay when lanes are closed as anincentive to keep lanes open.Prohibit lane closures during peak hours, limitwork to weekends and/or nights.YesCaltrans5.17Internet provided road and routeinformationReduce travel on highly congested roadways byproviding accessible information on congestionand travel.YesSCAG, CTCs,Caltrans, LA City5.18Regional route marking systems toencourage underutilized capacityEncourage travel on local roads and arterials bybetter route marking to show alternatives.YesCaltrans, LA CityFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-9Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs That Achieve Emissions ReductionsMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies5.19Congestion management field teamto clear incidentsSelf explanatory.YesCTCs, CHP5.20Use dynamic message signs todirect/smooth speeds duringincidentsSelf explanatory.YesCaltrans5.21Get real-time traffic information totrucking centers and rental caragenciesReduce travel in congested areas by providinginformation directly to high volume travelers.YesSCAG, CTCs,Caltrans5.2255 mph speed limit during ozoneseasonSelf explanatoryNoReductions in freeway speedsare governed by CaliforniaVehicle Code 22354, whichauthorizes Caltrans to lowerspeeds after doing aengineering, and traffic survey,which shows that thelegislatively- set maximumspeed of 65 mph, is more thanis reasonable or safe.No consideration of emissionsis contemplated under thisstatute. This measure is notfeasible until the statute ischanged.5.23Require 40 mph speed limit on allfacilitiesDepends on area’s emission factors.NoThe California Vehicle CodeSections 22357 and 22358mandates a methodology forsetting speed limits for localareas. This measure is notfeasible until the statute ischanged.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-10Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs That Achieve Emissions ReductionsMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies5.24Require lower speeds during peakperiodsSelf explanatory.NoThe California Vehicle CodeSections 22357 and 22358mandates methodology forsetting speed limits for localareas. This measure is notfeasible until the statute ischanged.5.25On-street parking restrictionsRestrict on-street parking where appropriate.YesState,CitiesFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-11Section 108 (f) 6. Fringe and Transportation Corridor Parking Facilities Serving Multiple Occupancy Vehicle Programs or TransitServiceMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies6.1Park-and-ride lotsDevelop, design, and implement new park-andride facilities in locations where they are needed.YesCTCs, TransitOperators,SCRRA6.2Park-and-ride lotsserving perimetercountiesSpecific to a locality.YesCTCs, TransitOperators,SCRRAFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-12Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak UseMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies7.1Off-peak goods movementRestrict truckdeliveries by time or place in orderto minimize traffic congestion during peakperiods.YesPierPassA non-profitorganization ofmarine terminaloperators at thePorts of LosAngeles andLong Beach.7.2Truck restrictions during peak periodsRestrict truck travel during peak periods in orderto minimize traffic congestion.YesSee Measure 7.17.3Involve school districts to encouragewalking/bicycling to schoolDecrease vehicle emissions due to school trips byreducing these trips through education and outreach programs.YesSchool Districts7.4Adjust school hours so they do notcoincide with peak traffic periods andozone seasonsMeasure to reduce travel during peak periods andozone-contributing periods in the early morning.NoSchool hours are dictated bymany variables, includingovercrowding and year-roundschooling. This measure isnot feasible.7.5Area-wide tax for parkingReduce driving by limiting parking through pricingmeasures.YesCounties, L.A.City, and OtherCities7.6Increase parking feesReduce driving by limiting parking through pricingmeasures.NoAttorney General ruled AQMDlacks authority to implementthis measure.7.7Graduated pricing starting withhighest in Central Business DistrictCharge the most for parking in the centralbusiness or other high volume areas in a city todiscourage vehicle travel in these areas.YesMarket DrivenFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-13Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak UseMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies7.8Buy parking lots and convert to otherland useLimit parking by converting available parking toother land uses to discourage driving.YesCities7.9Limit the number of parking spaces atcommercial airlines to support masstransitReduce airport travel by limits on parking atairports.NoRegulatory agencies do nothave the legal authority tomake local land usedecisions. It is at thediscretion of the regional orlocal airport authority to makelocal land use decisionspertaining to airports.Additionally, It is necessary tohave significant mass transitavailable at airports beforethis measure can beimplemented. This iscurrently not the case.7.10No Central Business District (CBD)vehicles unless LEV or alt fuel orelectricDefine high-use area and ticket any vehiclespresent unless they are low emitting, alternativefueled or electric.NoThe Legislature significantlyreduced authority toimplement indirect sourcecontrol measures throughrevisions tothe Health &Safety Code (40717.6,40717.8, and 40717.9).7.11Auto restricted zonesNo vehiclesallowed in certain areas where highemissions, congestion or contribution to ozoneproblems.YesCities7.12Incentives to increase density aroundtransit centersLower travel by increasing residential andcommercial density in areas near transit.YesCitiesFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-14Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak UseMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies7.13Land use/air quality guidelinesGuidelines for development that contributes to airquality goals.YesARB,AQMD,SCAG7.14Cash incentives to fosterjobs/housing balanceSpecific to locality – encouraged by CaliforniaClean Air Plan.NoNo dedicated source offunding for this measure.7.15Trip reduction oriented developmentLand use decisions that encourage tripreductions.YesSCAG7.16Transit oriented developmentLanduse decisions that encourage walkablecommunities and multi-modal transit systems.YesSCAG7.17Sustainable developmentLand use decisions that create equitablestandards of living to satisfy the basic needs of allpeoples, all while taking the steps to avoid furtherenvironmental degradation.YesSCAGFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-15Section 108 (f) 8. Programs For the Provision of All Forms of High-Occupancy, Shared-Ride ServicesMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies8.1∗Financial Incentives, Including ZeroBus FaresProvide financial incentives or other benefits,such as free or subsidized bus passes and cashpayments for not driving, in lieu of parking spacesfor employees who do not drive to the workplace.YesAQMD,Employer8.2Internet ride matching servicesProvide match-lists, route info, hours and contactinformation over the internetto assist individualsin joining or developing carpools.YesCTCs, SCAG8.3*Preferential parking for carpoolersProvide free, covered, near-building or similarincentives to carpoolers.YesAQMD,Employer8.4*Credits and incentives for carpoolersSelf-explanatory – form depends on locality.YesAQMD,Employer8.5*Employers provide vehicles tocarpoolers for running errands oremergenciesHaving vehicles available for workday errandsmakes it easier to go to work without one.YesAQMD,Employer8.6Subscription servicesFree van services to provide transportation for theelderly, handicapped or other individuals whohave no access to transportation.YesCounty,Employer8.7School car poolsSelf explanatory.NoNot economically feasible andinsufficient resources availablefor implementation.8.8*Guaranteed ride homeSelf explanatory.YesAQMD,Employer∗This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primaryimplementer is the employer.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-16Section 108 (f) 9. Programs to Limit Portionsof Road Surfaces or Certain Sections ofthe Metropolitan Area to the Use of Non-Motorized Vehicles or Pedestrian Use,Both as to Time and PlaceMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies9.1Establish Auto-Free Zones andpedestrian mallsEstablish auto free zones and pedestrian mallswhere appropriate.YesCities9.2Encouragement of pedestrian travelThismeasure involves encouraging the use ofpedestrian travel as an alternative to automobiletravel. Pedestrian travel is quite feasible for shortshopping, business, or school trips. Promotion ofpedestrian travel could be included in air pollution.YesCTCs, Cities9.3Bicycle/Pedestrian ProgramFund high priority projects in countywide plansconsistent with funding availability.YesCTCs, Cities9.4Close certain roads for use by nonmotorized trafficDuring special events, weekends, or certain timesof the day, close some roads to all but nonmotorized traffic.YesCities9.5Encouragement of bicycle travelPromotion of bicycle travel to reduce automobileuse and improve air quality. Bikeway systemplanning, routes for inter-city bike trips to helpbicyclists avoid other, less safe facilities. Anotherarea for potential actions is the development anddistribution of educational materials, regardingbicycle use and safety.YesSCAG, CTCs,CitiesFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-17Section 108 (f) 9. Programs to Limit Portionsof Road Surfaces or Certain Sections ofthe Metropolitan Area to the Use of Non-Motorized Vehicles or Pedestrian Use,Both as to Time and Place9.6Free bikesProvide free bikes in the manner of Boulder, CO.Simple utilitarian bikes that can be usedthroughout the metro area and dropped off atdestination for use by anyone desiring use.NoEvidence suggests that bicycletheft is a problem in otherprograms and renders themeasure technically andeconomically infeasible.9.7∗Cash rebates for bikesProvide financial incentives to purchase bicyclesand thereby encourage use.YesAQMD,Employer9.8Close streets for special events foruse by bikes and pedestriansSelf Explanatory.YesCities9.9Use condemned dirt roads for biketrailsSelf Explanatory.NoNot applicable because thereare no condemned dirt roadsin the region.∗This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primaryimplementer is the employer.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-18Section 108 (f) 10. Programs for Secure Bicycle Storage Facilitiesand Other Facilities, IncludingBicycle Lanes, for the Convenience and Protection of Bicyclists, inBoth Public and Private AreasMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies10.1∗Bike racks at work sitesSelf Explanatory.YesAQMD,Employer10.2Bike racks on busesBike racks would be placed on a to-bedetermined number of buses to increase bicycletravel.YesCTCs, TransitOperators, SCRRA10.3Regional bike parkingBike Transit CentersYesCTCs10.4Development of bicycle travelfacilitiesEncourages a variety of capital improvements toincrease bicycle use. Off-street bikeways wherehigh-speed roadways preclude safe bicycling.Clearly mark travel facilities with signs andprovide adequate maintenance.YesCTCs, TransitOperators, SCRRA10.5Expedite bicycle projects from RTPCreate bicycle and pedestrian master plan andbuild out at an accelerated rate to achievebenefits in time for attainment deadline.YesSCAG10.6Provide bike/pedestrian facilitiessafety patrolsSelf Explanatory.YesCounties, Cities10.7Inclusion of bicycle lanes onthoroughfare projectsSelf Explanatory.YesState,Counties,Cities10.8Bicycle lanes on arterial and frontageroadsSelf Explanatory.YesState,Counties,Cities10.9Bicycle route lightingSelf Explanatory.YesState,Counties,Cities∗This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primaryimplementer is the employer.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-19Section 108 (f) 11. Programs to Control Extended Idling of VehiclesMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies11.1Limit excessive car dealershipvehicle startsRequire car dealers to limit the starting of vehiclesfor sale on their lot(s) to once every two weeks.Presently, a number of new and used car dealersstart their vehicles daily to avoid battery failureand assure smooth start-ups for customer testdrives.NoThis measure wasinvestigated by the AQMD andit was determined that incontrast to colder climateswhere vehicles are started ona daily basis, vehicles in theSouth Coast started much lessfrequently. For this reason itwas determined not to betechnically feasible.11.2Encourage limitations on vehicleidlingEncourage limitations to limit extended idlingoperations.YesARB11.3Turn off engines while stalled intrafficPublic outreach or police-enforced program.NoThis measure raises safetyand congestion concerns.No clear demonstration of airquality emissions benefits.11.4Outlaw idling in parking lotsPolice enforced program.NoEnforcement of idlerestrictions is a low priority forpolice relative to their othermissions. The costeffectiveness of this measurehas not been demonstrated. Itis not economically feasible.11.5Reduce idling at drive-throughs; bandrive-throughsMandate no idling or do not allow drive-throughwindows during ozone season.NoNo clear demonstration of airquality emissions benefits.This measure is noteconomically feasible.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-20Section 108 (f) 11. Programs to Control Extended Idling of VehiclesMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies11.6Promote use of pony enginesUsespecial battery engines to keep airconditioning and other truck systems workingwhile truck not in use.YesARB, AQMD11.7Idle restrictions at airport curbsidesPolice enforced.YesAirportauthorityFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-21Section 108 (f) 12. Program to Reduce Motor Vehicle Emissions Consistent with Title II,Which Are Caused by Extreme Cold StartConditionsNot applicable. The definition of an "extreme coldstart" specifies temperatures below 20 degreesFahrenheit.Not applicable in the South Coast - No extreme cold startconditionsFinal 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-22Section 108 (f) 13. Employer-sponsored programs to permit flexible work schedulesMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies13.1∗Alternative work schedulesEnables workers to choose their own workinghours within certain constraints. Flextimeprovides the opportunity for employees to usepublic transit, ridesharing, and otherNonmotorized transportation. A related strategy,staggered work hours, is designed to reducecongestion in the vicinity of the workplace.Alternative workweeks have been implementedextensively by large private and public employers.YesAQMD,Employer13.2*Modifications of work schedulesImplement alternate work schedules that flex thescheduled shift time for employees. Encouragethe use of flexible or staggered work hours topromote off-peak driving and accommodate theuse of transit and carpooling.YesAQMD,Employer13.3*TelecommunicationsTelecommuting/TeleconferencingEncourage the use of telecommuting-telecommuting/teleconferencing in place of motorvehicle use where appropriate.YesAQMD,Employer∗This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primaryimplementer is the employer.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-23Section 108 (f) 14. Programs and Ordinances tofacilitate Non-automotive travel, provision to and utilization of mass transit,and to generally reduce the need forsingle-occupant vehicle travel, as part of transportation planning and development effortsMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies14.1Areawide public awareness programsThis measure focuses on conducting ongoingpublic awareness programs throughout the yearto provide the public with information on airpollution and encourage changes in drivingbehavior and transportation mode use.YesAQMD14.2Special event controlsThis measure would require new and existingowners/operators of the special event centers toreduce mobile source emissions generated bytheir events. A list of optional strategies would beavailable that reduce mobile source emissions.The definition of “special event center” could bedeveloped through the rule development process.YesCities, SpecialEvent Operators14.3Land Use/development alternativesThis measure includes encouraging land usepatterns, which support public transit and otheralternative modes of transportation. In general,this measure would also encourage land usepatterns designed to reduce travel distancesbetween related land usesYesARB, SCAG,AQMD, Cities14.4Voluntary No-Drive Day programsConduct voluntary No-Drive Day programs duringthe ozone season through media and employerbased public awareness activities.YesSCAG, CTCs14.5∗∗New Development Air Quality ImpactEvaluationEvaluate air quality impacts of new developmentand recommend or require mitigation forsignificant adverse impacts.YesAQMD, SCAG,Counties, Cities∗∗AQMD and SCAG recommend mitigation as commenting agencies on newdevelopment projects; cities and counties require mitigation under their discretionary authority as lead agency.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-24Section 108 (f) 14. Programs and Ordinances tofacilitate Non-automotive travel, provision to and utilization of mass transit,and to generally reduce the need forsingle-occupant vehicle travel, as part of transportation planning and development efforts14.6Transportation for LivableCommunities (TLC)/HousingIncentive programProgram provides planning grants, technicalassistance, and capital grants to help cities andNonprofit agencies define and implementtransportation projects that support communityplans including increased housing near transit.YesSCAG14.7Incentives to increase density aroundtransit centersLower travel by increasing residential andcommercial density in areas near transit.YesSCAG, CTCs14.8Incentives for cities with gooddevelopment practicesProvide financial or other incentive to local citiesthat practice air quality-sensitive development.YesCounties,Cities14.9Increase state gas taxSelf Explanatory.NoNo clear demonstration of airquality emissions benefits.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-25Section 108 (f) 15. Programs for new construction and major reconstructions of paths, tracks or areas solely for the use by pedestrian or other Non-motorized meansof transportation when commerciallyfeasible and in the public interestMeasure #Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies15.1∗Encouragement of pedestrian travelPromotepublic awareness and use of walking asan alternative to the motor vehicle.YesAQMD, SCAG,CTCs, Employer15.2Pedestrian and bicycle overpasseswhere safety dictatesOngoing implementation as development occurs.YesCounties,Cities∗This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primaryimplementer is the employer.Final 2007 AQMPAppendix IV-CJune 2007RACM AnalysisC-26Section 108 (f) 16. Program to encourage the voluntary removal from use and the marketplace of pre-1980 model year light duty vehicles and pre-1980 model lightduty trucksMeasure#Measure TitleDescriptionHas It BeenImplementedReasoned Justification forNot Implementing MeasureImplementingAgency orAgencies16.1Counties assess ten dollar license platefee to fund repair/replacement programfor high-emittersCounties assess ten-dollar license plate fee tofund repair/replacement program for highemitters.YesARB, BAR16.2Buy vehicles older than 1975Selfexplanatory.YesARB, AQMD16.3Demolish impounded vehicles that arehigh emittersSelf explanatory.NoNot economically feasible.16.4Do whatever is necessary to allow citiesto remove the engines of high emittingvehicles (pre-1980) that are abandonedand to be auctionedSelf explanatory.NoNot economically feasible.16.5Accelerated retirement programIdentify high emitting vehicle age groups anddevelop a program to remove them from use.YesARB, AQMD

# ATTACHMENT D

Goods Movement Control Measures

Subsequent to the Regional Council action in May on the 2007 South Coast AQMP, SCAG’s

transportation partners raised concerns regar ding the two proposed goods movement control

measures included in SCAG’s portion of the AQMP. In light of these discussions, SCAG staff

requested that the AQMD Governing Board delay action on the measures when it considered the

AQMP at its June 1, 2007 public hearing until its next meeting on July 13, 2007.

Since the AQMD Governing Board heari ng and SCAG’s Regional Council and Policy

Committee meetings in June, SC AG staff has initiated furthe r consultation with the County

Transportation Commissions to review the proposed measures. Based on these discussions, staff

has concluded that there is need to conti nue consultation on the proposed goods movement

control measures and requested hat the AQMD Governing Board not ta ke action on the two

measures at its July 13, 2007, public hearing.

SCAG will continue its e fforts to bring the goods movement meas ures forward such that they can

be considered for inclusion in the SIP.

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007



# HIGH-SPEED TRANSPORT SYSTEM

SOURCE CATEGORY: LOCOMOTIVES (FREIGHT)

CONTROL METHODS: ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY, HIGH SPEED TRANSPORT

SYSTEM

EMISSIONS (TONS/DAY):

SUMMER PLANNING

NOx INVENTORY 2014

18 2023

23

NOx REDUCTION 18 23

NOx REMAINING 0.0 0.0

CONTROL COST: Based on partially self-financing business plan and public/private

partnership

IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES: Consortium under jurisdiction of Joint Powers Authority



# DESCRIPTION OF SOURCE CATEGORY

Diesel-electric locomotives have a large diesel engine (main traction engine) for generating

electric power which in turn drives electric mo tors in each axle. Modern line-haul or freight

locomotives have 4400-horsepower diesel engines w ith six drive axles. Switch locomotives are

smaller, and usually older, four-axle loco motives, with 1200-2500 horsepower engines.

PROPOSED METHOD OF CONTROL

This control measure envisions moving cargo from the San Pedro Bay Ports to an inland port

facility. Goods would be shut tled from the Ports to an inla nd port at San Bernardino and/or

Palmdale via a zero-emissions hi gh speed trans port (HST) system (see section on Innovative

Goods Movement Technology in main volume of Appe ndix IV-C). Such a system capitalizes on

the inherent savings of multiple uses on a single infrastructure by operating on shared alignments

with a people movement system. The technol ogy permits operation of freight vehicles on a

shared guide-way with passenger vehicles even during peak hour service. Freight vehicle trips

can be interspersed with passenge r trips while still meeting requi red passenger vehicle headways.

Additionally, full utilization of the freight lin e can be achieved during the passenger system’s

off-peak hours.

A map depicting a preliminary HST network is shown in the goods movement section of

Appendix IV-C.

D-1

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007



# EMISSION REDUCTION

The preliminary emission reduction estimates are based on replacing 100% of the freight

locomotives with a zero-emission system, in cluding a high speed transport system. The

preliminary emission reduction estimates do not account for emissions associated with the

incremental increase in electricity generation which may be needed.

The emission reduction commitments for AQMP cont rol measures are discussed in Chapter 4 of

the main volume of the AQMP. It is proposed that ARB take on the full legal commitment to

backstop the reductions of this control meas ure if necessary; however, both SCAG and the

AQMD have agreed to an annual review mee ting to monitor the implementation of these

measures and to explore additi onal controls that both the AQ MD and SCAG can implement to

backstop the original measures.

IMPLEMENTING AGENCY

Implementation of the HST system is being propos ed on the basis of a pote ntially self-financing

business plan approach based on aviation, commuter, and freight operations and further bolstered

by HST system related development. A schematic of the business plan is shown in the goods

movement section of Appendix IV-C. The depl oyment of a HST system would create value in

associated components whic h could in turn contribute to the HS T’s total financial performance.

A business and institutional structure for the movement of people, movement of goods, and

associated development patterns has been de veloped by SCAG to serve as the basis for

implementation of the movement systems. The results reached by SCAG’s business planning

effort indicate that HST-based systems for aviation, goods, and people m ovement can fulfill the

objective of financial inde pendence and feasibility.

A consortium under jurisdiction of Joint Powers Au thority would be necessary to implement this

control measure.

D-2

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007



# TRUCK-ONLY LANES

SOURCE CATEGORY: ON-ROAD HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL FREIGHT TRUCKS

CONTROL METHODS: PORT TRUCKS: TRUCK-ONLY LANES; TWO CONTAINERS

PER TRACTOR

EMISSIONS (TONS/DAY):

SUMMER PLANNING

NOx INVENTORY 2014

18 2023

15

NOx REDUCTION * 9.0 7.5

NOx REMAINING 9.0 7.5

CONTROL COST: Based on partially self-financing business plan and public/private

partnership

IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES Consortium under jurisdiction of Joint Powers Authority

* The estimated emission reductions do not account for poten tial emission benefits of any heavy duty-diesel truck

control measures proposed by the San Pedro Bay Ports, the ARB, or AQMD.



# DESCRIPTION OF SOURCE CATEGORY

Emissions from heavy-duty diesel mobile sour ces continue to represent a significant and

increasing portion of the emissions inventory in the South Coast Air Basin, adversely effecting

regional air quality. The two primary pollutants resulting from diesel fuel combustion are

particulate matter (PM) and oxide s of nitrogen (NOx). PM typi cally constitutes the visible

emissions from diesel engine exhaust, and it contains over 40 known cancer-causing substances.

PROPOSED METHOD OF CONTROL

This control measure envisions a regional truckway system comp rising 142 center-line miles of

dedicated truck lanes extending from the San Pedr o Bay ports eastward toward Barstow. The

dedicated truckway offers a viable and partiall y self-financing solution for mitigating congestion

and reducing mobile source emissions. The syst em would have a gradua ted toll rate based on a

number of factors including the relative emissions associated with each vehicle. The truck-only

lane would potentially allow each truck to carry multiple containers, further improving the

efficiency and financial viability of the system . The potential for requiring all trucks to use

alternative clean technology or otherwise meet the 2010 on-road heavy-duty exhaust emissions

standards is also being considered.

D-3

# Final 2007 AQMP Appendix IV-C

June 2007



# EMISSION REDUCTION

The preliminary emission reduction estimates ar e based on 100% of the port trucks using the

truck-only lane and each tractor hauling two containers.

The emission reductions do not account for potent ial emission benefits of reduced regional

congestion or of any control measures proposed by the San Pedro Bay Ports, the ARB, or

AQMD.

The emission reduction commitments for AQMP cont rol measures are discussed in Chapter 4 of

the main volume of the AQMP. It is proposed that ARB take on the full legal commitment to

backstop the reductions of this control meas ure if necessary; however, both SCAG and the

AQMD have agreed to an annual review mee ting to monitor the implementation of these

measures and to explore additi onal controls that both the AQ MD and SCAG can implement to

backstop the original measures.

IMPLEMENTING AGENCY

A consortium under jurisdiction of Joint Powers Au thority would be necessary to implement this

control measure.

D-4