Final 2019 Federal Transporta on Improvement ProgramC427AE30-9936... · 2019-02-11 · new projects as required. Amendments are developed in compliance with the metropolitan transportation

Final 2019 Federal Transporta on

Improvement Program

Prepared by

Kings County Associa on of Governments

August 22, 2018

339 West D Street, Suite B, Lemoore, CA 93245

Avenal, Corcoran, Lemoore, Hanford, County of Kings

This page intentionally left blank

Kings County

2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program

(FTIP)

Fiscal Years 2018-19 through 2021-22

Prepared by

Kings County Association of Governments 339 W. “D” Street, Suite B

Lemoore, CA 93245 (559) 852-2654

FAX (559) 924-5632 www.kingscog.org

The preparation of this report has been financed in part by the State of California Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and the member agencies of the Kings County Association of Governments


Kings County Association of Governments

Kings County Association of Governments Transportation Policy Committee

Glenda Woolley City of Avenal

Sid Palmerin City of Corcoran

David Ayers City of Hanford

Ray Madrigal City of Lemoore

Doug Verboon County of Kings

Joe Neves County of Kings

Sharri Bender-Ehlert Caltrans District 6

Kings County Association of Governments Staff

Terri King Executive Director

Yunsheng Luo Regional Planner

Teresa Nickell Regional Planner

Christopher Xiong Regional Planner

Joel Gandarilla Executive Assistant

Mary Madrid Fiscal Analyst



Kings County Association of Governments Technical Advisory Committee

City and County Administrators Melissa Whitten City of Avenal Kindon Meik City of Corcoran Darryl Pyle City of Hanford Nathan Olson City of Lemoore Rebecca Campbell County of Kings

City and County Planning Directors Fernando Santillan City of Avenal Kevin Tromborg City of Corcoran Darlene Mata City of Hanford Judy Holwell City of Lemoore Greg Gatzka County of Kings

City and County Public Works Directors Rob Williams City of Avenal Joseph Faulkner City of Corcoran Lou Camara City of Hanford Frank Rivera City of Lemoore Kevin McAlister County of Kings

Ex-Officio Members John Dirickson Naval Air Station, Lemoore Sharri Bender-Ehlert Caltrans District 6 Troy Hommerding Kings County Public Health Samir Sheikh San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Tribal Council Chair Santa Rosa Rancheria Angie Dow Kings County Area Public Transit Agency



Table of Contents

Introduction

Kings County - Part of the Central San Joaquin Valley ............................................................... 1 The San Joaquin Valley ............................................................................................................. 1

The Federal Transportation Improvement Program, Process and Development

About the Federal Transportation Improvement Program ........................................................... 5 Federal TIP Process and Development ...................................................................................... 5

Environmental Justice ................................................................................................................ 6 Performance Based Planning ..................................................................................................... 7 Federal TIP Presentation ........................................................................................................... 9 Consistency with Other Documents ............................................................................................ 9 Air Quality Conformity Assessment .......................................................................................... 11 Public Participation ................................................................................................................... 11

Financial Plan

Financial Constraint and the Financial Plan .............................................................................. 13 Operations and Maintenance of the Existing Transportation System ........................................ 14

Project Priority .......................................................................................................................... 15 Available Revenues.................................................................................................................. 16 Programmed Expenditures ....................................................................................................... 18 Financial Constraint (Revenues vs. Programming) ................................................................... 20

Project Listings by Mode

Streets, Roads and Highways

Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Program – Non Transit ................................................ 23 Highway Maintenance ........................................................................................................ 25 Minor Program .................................................................................................................... 26 Safety Programs ................................................................................................................. 27 State Highway Operations and Protection Program ............................................................ 28 State Transportation Improvement Program – Regional Choice Program ........................... 29

Mass Transit

Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Program – Transit ....................................................... 31 Federal Transit Administration - Section 5307 Program ...................................................... 32 Federal Transit Administration – Section 5311 Program ..................................................... 33 Federal Transit Administration – Section 5339 Program ..................................................... 34

APPENDIX A Resolutions APPENDIX B Glossary of Terms, Project Codes, and Air Quality Screening Criteria APPENDIX C Projects Exempt from Air Quality Conformity APPENDIX D Projects Not Exempt from Air Quality Conformity APPENDIX E Federally Funded Projects that Implement Approved TCMs APPENDIX F Public Notice and Comments APPENDIX G Grouped Project Back-up Listings APPENDIX H Performance Management APPENDIX I Environmental Justice Analysis APPENDIX J Supplemental Public Participation Plan APPENDIX K Past Accomplishments



Executive Summary A Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) is a multimodal list of capital improvement projects to be implemented over a four-year period. Biennially, Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG), in cooperation with our member agencies, the local Tribal Government, and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), prepares an FTIP for all highways, streets and roads, non-motorized transportation, and transit projects in the Kings County region that use federal funding, require a federal action, or are considered regionally significant. The KCAG Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and KCAG Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) review the FTIP for compliance with state and federal requirements. The Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) is the formal presentation to the state of projects that local agencies wish to implement within the next five years utilizing state funds. Projects not listed in this formal submittal will not be funded. Once projects are approved and presented in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the projects are then incorporated into the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) for ultimate inclusion into the Federal State Transportation Improvement Program (FSTIP). The KCAG RTIP can be found on the KCAG website at: http://www.kingscog.org.

The FTIP establishes a systematic, realistic approach to programming capital improvement projects over a four-year term. Projects listed in the FTIP are designed to be consistent with, and implement, the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The RTP is a long-range plan for transportation in the region. The FTIP is subject to continual review and modifications to assure timely delivery of programs and projects identified in the RTP, RTIP, and FTIP. Amendments to the FTIP are made to effect necessary changes in existing projects and program new projects as required. Amendments are developed in compliance with the metropolitan transportation planning regulations per 23 CFR Part 450 and 40 CFR Part, 93 and consistent with the most recent Federal-Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (FSTIP) Amendment and Administrative Modification Procedures, and with KCAG’s adopted Public Participation Plan (PPP). With the changes made by the modifications and amendments, the FTIP remains a financially constrained document - as demonstrated by the financial summary included in each formal amendment. Amendment Types 1-3 do not affect the regional emissions analysis for the FTIP and conform to the applicable State Implementation Plan (SIP), do not affect the timely implementation of any Transportation Control Measures (TCM) and do not have projects in common with any other amendment currently out for public review or approval. Amendment Types 4 and 5 require additional air quality testing and documentation for compliance with the applicable SIP(s). Amendment Types 4 and 5 also remain financially constrained and do not have projects in common with any other amendment currently out for public review or approval. The current and recent FTIPs and all draft and approved amendments to the FTIPs can be found at: http://www.kingscog.org/programming.html

http://www.kingscog.org/

http://www.kingscog.org/programming.html




Introduction


Kings County Association of Governments Page 1

Kings County - Part of the Central San Joaquin Valley Kings County, comprised of 1,396 square miles, is located in the south-central portion of the San Joaquin Valley. The Valley is bounded on the west by the Coast Range and on the east by the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The Valley extends from Sacramento on the north, to the Tehachapi Mountains on the south. The San Joaquin Valley contains some of the richest farm land in the world. In addition to agriculture, the San Joaquin Valley is home to hundreds of industries and business that depend on the Valley's road and transit systems. Two thirds of Kings County land area is level irrigated farmland, which had a 2016 total gross value of $2 billion in commercial crop production. Elevations range from 175 feet in the Tulare Lake Basin to 3,473 feet at Table Mountain in the extreme southwestern portion of the county. There are four incorporated cities within Kings County, which contain almost seventy-eight percent (78%) of the total county population of 149,537. (Figure 1) Kings County contains approximately 945 miles of county roads, 386 miles of city streets, 130 miles of State Highways and 27 miles of Interstate. There are two public use general aviation airports and approximately 67 miles of rail lines in the county, including the Amtrak "San Joaquins" corridor. State highways play an important role in Kings County's transportation system. Highway traffic in Kings County is generally composed of farm-to-market, commuter and business trips. With increased urbanization taking place in the county, an increasing percentage of commuter and business trips is developing.

The San Joaquin Valley The San Joaquin Valley consists of the counties of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kings and Kern. These eight counties share an air quality basin which currently does not meet the air quality standards set forth in the Federal Clean Air Act or the California Clean Air Act for Ozone, or PM 2.5 (Figure 2). Currently, the eight Valley transportation planning agencies and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to ensure a coordinated transportation/air quality planning approach. The MOU defines a cooperative process designed to achieve compliance with the air quality conformity provisions of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) established by the Federal Clean Air Act and managed by the US EPA. A second MOU exists between the eight agencies to ensure a coordinated, cooperative transportation planning process on issues of mutual concern. One of the planning / programming efforts being addressed in a cooperative effort is the preparation and presentation of the federally required Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP).



Figure 1 Kings County Cities and Communities



Figure 2



The Federal Transportation Improvement Program

Process and Development



About the Federal Transportation Improvement Program The Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) is a federal requirement that was created in 1991 for Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). The Intermodal Surface Transportation Equity Act (ISTEA) of 1991, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) and its three extensions, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), and the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act continue to require that each MPO prepares an FTIP. The TIP is a financially constrained multimodal transportation program developed by KCAG through its member agencies and in cooperation with State and Federal agencies and the eight San Joaquin Valley Counties. The basic premise behind a TIP is that it is the incremental implementation (four years) of the long-range Regional Transportation Plan. The TIP serves to present to federal funding agencies manageable components of projects/funding the long-range plan. The Federal TIP is a compilation of project lists from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), transit, other Federal-aid programs, and all regionally significant transportation projects for which FHWA or FTA approval is required whether or not the projects are to be funded under Title 23 USC of the Federal Transportation Act. (See Figure 3). The TIP is to be composed of two parts. The first is a priority list of projects and project phases to be carried out in each year of the four year period after the initial adoption of the TIP. The second is a financial plan that demonstrates how the TIP can be implemented. The financial plan is also required to indicate all public and private resources and financing techniques that are expected to be used to carry out the plan.

Federal TIP Process and Development The Kings County Association of Governments makes project selection decisions and prepares the Federal TIP in cooperation with its member agencies, transit operators, state and federal agencies, Tribal Government, and the public. As federal funding programs are developed, notifications are sent out to eligible agencies and the public, informing them of the appropriate manner in which projects may be submitted for consideration. KCAG has adopted and utilized an “expedited project selection process” (EPSP) in the development of this FTIP. The State is also required to carry out a public participation process during development and adoption of its programs. The State's programs, upon adoption, are then submitted for inclusion in the appropriate MPO Federal TIP. KCAG as the MPO for Kings County is a part of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin which is in a non-attainment status for federal air quality standards. In order to comply with federal requirements for development of plans, programs, and air quality conformity findings, KCAG takes appropriate actions to insure that air quality issues are addressed and that adequate opportunity is provided for public review. In addition to the general notifications, the Kings County Association of Governments has an enhanced participation process whereby citizen groups/individuals can seek membership on



appropriate committees. An extensive agenda mailing list contains many interested parties who can then review the agenda and determine for themselves if there are any issues upon which they wish to interact with the agency. In addition to these, there are public notices and the required public hearings prior to adoption of the TIP.

Environmental Justice Analysis of the KCAG 2019 FTIP Setting Kings County is an agricultural area of approximately 149,500 of mix of population types (with 11.7% Senior Citizen, 65.8% self-identified as minority, and 42.6% with a primary language other than English). The average annual income is more than 20% below the statewide median, with 19.3% of the population earning below the poverty line, and unemployment figures are consistently double that of the state level. These facts make any analysis of the distribution of benefits and burdens of the transportation investments in Kings County difficult. Definition Environmental Justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. It is the identification and assessment of adverse effects of programs, policies, or activities on minority and low-income population groups. Analysis for the 2019 FTIP For our purposes, environmental justice refers to equity in the distribution of benefits and costs arising from transportation policies, programs and projects included in the 2018 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the 2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). The environmental justice impacts analyzed include: human health and safety, economic development, society and culture, and natural environment. The projects and programs included in the RTP and FTIP will not have a disproportionately adverse affect on the low-income or minority populations of Kings County. In response to Title VI and Environmental Justice requirements, KCAG has placed an increased emphasis on reaching out to and soliciting input from the historically underserved populations in Kings County (i.e. low-income, minority, Native American, elderly, and persons with disabilities). For the Native American Tribal Government in Kings County, KCAG included information exchanged with the Tribal Administration in the development of the 2018 RTP and the 2019 FTIP. The Tribal Administration participated to their level of satisfaction. KCAG did not receive any Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) programming from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). KCAG adopted a Public Participation Plan (PPP) in FY 2007-08, to include the practices of environmental justice. KCAG updated the PPP in 2011 and made additional technical changes in February 2017. The PPP includes enhanced outreach approaches to Environmental Justice populations to meet state and federal principles and to eliminate participation barriers to active



participation in these populations. Please see our Public Participation Plan at: https://www.kingscog.org/get_involved. The 2019 FTIP includes currently programmed investments of more than $87 million. More than $24 million or 28% of those funds are for projects that directly benefit our environmental justice populations. Other projects identified in the FTIP also benefit our environmental justice population while they benefit the remaining population of Kings County as well. These mutually beneficial projects include traffic flow improvements and increased access to public agencies and private commercial facilities. The project types include transit expansions and operations or roadway and safety improvements in areas with a concentrated environmental justice community. In addition to the federally funded safety improvements local agencies are pursuing state funded safety improvements that are not included in the FTIP. Our analysis demonstrates that the investments included 2019 FTIP and 2018 RTP will not have a disproportionately adverse impact on minority or low-income communities. None of the individual projects included in the 2019 FTIP or the 2018 RTP would create significant negative impacts in the environmental justice communities.

Performance Based Planning The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) and Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act placed new and stronger emphasis on measuring and monitoring the performance of transportation systems. States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are required to implement a performance-based approach to planning and programming, which includes transportation performance measures, setting targets, reporting performance, and programming transportation investments directed toward the achievement of transportation system performance outcomes. Performance targets ensure states and MPOs invest resources in transportation projects that assist in achieving national goals in safety, infrastructure condition, congestion, reliability, freight movement, environmental sustainability, and reduced project delivery delays. Transportation Performance Management (TPM) is defined by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as a strategic approach that uses information to make investments and policy decisions to achieve national performance goals. Three sets of performance measures are part of the TPM Regulations as “Performance Management” (PM): PM 1: Safety Measures PM 2: Infrastructure Measures (Pavement/Bridge) PM 3: System Performance Measures KCAG Safety Planning and Programming The first set of TPM program required to be established is the Safety Performance Management Targets (SPMTs). These support the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) as it establishes safety performance requirements for carrying out the HSIP. SPMTs are reported and revised annually.

The safety performance targets consist of 5 performance measures:

https://www.kingscog.org/get_involved



Number of Fatalities

Rate of Fatalities per 100 Million Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)

Number of Severe Injuries

Rate of Severe Injuries per 100 Million VMT

Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Non-Motorized Severe Injuries The State is required to establish targets for each of the five measures, and is required to update targets to FHWA by August 31 of each year. MPOs must establish their own targets within 180 days (February 27) after the State targets have been submitted to FHWA by either agreeing to support the State’s targets or setting separate targets for the MPO planning area. MPOs can elect to support the statewide targets, adopt region-specific targets, or do a combination of the two options. MPOs are required to report and document with Caltrans annually, 180 days after statewide safety targets are officially adopted. The safety performance management targets (PM 1) are set annually and the first annual deadline for reporting to PM 1 targets to Caltrans is February 27, 2018. These targets must also be incorporated into their RTP and TIP development. Consistent with other MPOs of similar size to KCAG throughout the state, KCAG has elected to support the 2018 Caltrans statewide safety performance targets (SPMTs) by planning and programming projects that contribute to these goals. Safety is central to the KCAG planning and programming process and is an initial statement in the Overall Goal of the RTP Policy Element: “To develop a transportation system that encourages and promotes safe and efficient development, management, and operation of surface transportation systems…” The RTP policies and performance measures, which have been developed during the development of the RTP process, provide an objective criterion to evaluate how well the projects in the 2019 FTIP will achieve the desired outcome. Safety is incorporated into many of the policies and objectives within the RTP, which guides transportation planning and programming. Appendix H provides 2018 KCAG RTP-specific policies and performance management. Public safety is a criteria used in evaluating projects and is integral in KCAG’s decision-making forums, which include KCAG’s Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). KCAG conducts monthly public meetings through its TPC and TAC, working closely with member agencies (cities and county) and the Caltrans in identifying safety issues such as nominating projects for the State Highway Operations and Protection Program and the Highway Safety Improvement Program. Many transportation projects within the region address safety issues. The following are some highlighted projects as part of KCAG’s efforts in safety improvement:

Lacey Blvd. and 9th Ave. Intersection – In Hanford near the Costco shopping center at Lacey Blvd. and 9th Ave., replace the existing stop sign intersection with traffic signals. This project is to help improve safety and traffic flow.

SR 41 and Bernard Dr. Intersection– In Kettleman City at the SR 41 and Bernard Dr., replace existing signalized intersection with the construction of a roundabout. This project is to help improve traffic flow and safety on a state highway intersection.



17th Ave. and Houston Ave. Traffic Signal – In Kings County near Lemoore, 17th and Houston is a 4-way stop intersection which handles a large amount of traffic as it is heavily used to access the SR 198 and Houston interchange. A traffic signal is planned to help improve safety and facilitate traffic flow.

12th Ave. and Hume Ave. Traffic Signal – Currently a 2-way stop, a traffic signal on 12th and Hume would improve safety and traffic flow.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Improvement Projects – these projects would increase the safety of bicyclists and/or pedestrians in the region.

FTIP Presentation As a result of the MOU between the eight San Joaquin Valley transportation planning agencies, a committee was formed to coordinate the FTIP format. A consistent presentation of the FTIP project listings was developed, with common sections among the eight agencies, as well as certain map exhibits. This should provide for a more efficient and expedient review process for the San Joaquin Valley. In addition, KCAG has made use of a database application developed by Caltrans – the California Transportation Improvement Program System (CTIPS) to provide a consistent system for tracking FTIP projects and for presentation of the projects in a format which is consistent for most of the eight-county San Joaquin Valley area. Reports generated from this system are included in the project listing section of this document.

Consistency With Other Documents The KCAG 2019 FTIP is consistent with the following documents.

The 2018 Regional Transportation Plan, scheduled to be adopted on August 22, 2018 by the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee/Commission.

The 2018 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) adopted on February 24, 2017 by the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee/Commission.

The 2018 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), adopted on March 21, 2018 by

the California Transportation Commission (CTC).

The 2018 State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) adopted on March 22, 2018 by the California Transportation Commission.

The State Implementation Plan for Air Quality as it applies to Kings County. The 2019 Kings County FTIP is also consistent with the county share for State Highway Account funds and with Federal funding levels resulting from MAP-21 and FAST Act apportionment estimates. For an overview of the FTIP development process, see Figure 3 on the following page.



Figure 3



Air Quality Conformity Assessment The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) has identified Kings County, as part of the San Joaquin Valley Air District, as a nonattainment area for ozone and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) and as a maintenance area for PM-10. As such, we must satisfy federal requirements to consider transportation control measures to reduce emissions adequate to demonstrate conformity with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Air Quality. In nonattainment and maintenance areas, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) must be able to find that the Federal TIP conforms to the adopted SIP and that priority has been given to timely implementation of the transportation control measures (TCM) found in the SIP. The projects in the TIP should not further deteriorate the existing air quality problems. The Kings County Association of Governments provides a conformity determination documenting that local air quality planning issues and programs are sufficient to demonstrate that transportation control measures have been identified through a legitimate planning process; that these measures have received the necessary federal, state and local commitment to ensure implementation; and that these commitments are being maintained through identification in the Kings County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the necessary programming of funds in the Federal TIP. The conformity document can be accessed on the KCAG website: https://www.kingscog.org/airq.

Public Participation The public participation process for the development of the FTIP is guided by the KCAG Public Participation Plan and, as noted earlier, the program is prepared in cooperation and consultation with our member agencies, transit operators, regional, state, and federal agencies, Tribal Government, and the public. To meet our goals of process transparency and full public and private participation in the development of the FTIP, KCAG provided public notices in the general circulation newspaper, open forum opportunities through public works and citizen groups meetings, and notices to an extensive agenda mailing list advertising the public hearing prior to adoption of the TIP. Because the 2019 FTIP is a component of and consistent with the 2018 Regional Transportation Plan and its Environmental Impact Report, the outreach conducted for the RTP and EIR is applicable to the public participation efforts for the 2019 FTIP. The public participation efforts for the 2019 FTIP are also used to satisfy the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Urbanized Area Formula Program, Section 5307 program of projects (POP) The process outlined allows for proper consultation of all affected agencies and for appropriate public input, thereby meeting the FAST Act requirements for an appropriate project selection process. The KCAG Public Participation Plan may be found at: https://www.kingscog.org/get_involved.

https://www.kingscog.org/airq

https://www.kingscog.org/get_involved



Financial Plan



Financial Constraint and the Financial Plan The Federal TIP must, by law, be financially constrained and include a financial plan that demonstrates how the projects can be implemented while the existing transportation system is being adequately operated and maintained. Only projects for which construction and operating funds can reasonably be expected to be available may be included. The revenues and expenditure charts on the following pages are intended to show currently available revenues to finance the projects contained within the TIP. The federal and state revenue projections are based on the best available data as currently provided through the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). For projects that do not have all phases programmed, the estimated total project cost is shown. All costs are provided in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Costs for Caltrans projects are based on Department methodologies and escalated to the programmed year of expenditure using approved factors.

State revenues for the STIP and Active Transportation Program (ATP) are per the California Transportation Commission 2018 Fund Estimate. Revenues for SHOPP and related state-managed programs are based on Caltrans estimates. These programs include funds that are reasonably expected to be available and are used to operate and maintain Federal-aid highways and public transportation. Local funds required for matching purposes are included in each project program as required. Revenue and expenditure summaries are further defined by the assumptions below:

California State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) provides revenue estimates for the following programs:

Federally Funded Programs Managed by MPOs

Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP)

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)

Federally Funded Programs Managed by Caltrans

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)

State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP)

Highway Bridge Program (HBP)

Highway Infrastructure Program (HIP)

Highway Maintenance Program (HM)

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)

Hazard Elimination and Safety (HES), High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR)

Section 130 Grade Crossings

Recreational Trails Program

Transportation Alternative Program (under CA SB 99; part of the ATP)

Project Selection For the federally-funded programs managed by the MPOs:

KCAG is eligible to exchange its share of RSTP funds for State funds. These funds are allocated to each jurisdiction within the County on a formula basis for street/road maintenance and the local agencies select projects within their jurisdiction. There is no requirement to list these funds in the FTIP.



Kings County is in the San Joaquin Valley air quality non-attainment area and is eligible to receive CMAQ funds. KCAG selects projects for this program through a call-for-projects process that is well advertised. Proposed projects are selected on an air quality improvement benefit basis as demonstrated by the “Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Tools” provided by the California Air Resources Board.

Transit agencies are required to produce a financial capacity and certification of assessment that assures their continued ability to operate pursuant to FTA Circular 7008.1A. Since transit grants are on an annualized cycle, amounts shown beyond 2018-19 are projections. As transit grant funding amounts become known, actual figures are amended into the FTIP. These funds are reasonably expected to be available to adequately operate and maintain the local public transit system.

The local funds indicated are available and provided by a variety of sources including Transportation Development Act funds, gas tax revenues, development impact fees, private funds, and local general funds. The local fund commitments are reflected in each entity's local capital improvement program that is adopted annually by local resolution.

Operations and Maintenance Costs to Preserve the Existing System The operations and maintenance of the existing transportation system is a priority within Kings County. Per 23 CFR 450.326 (j) the financial plan must contain estimates of costs and revenue sources that are reasonably expected to be available to adequately operate and maintain Federal-aid highway and public transportation. Local jurisdictions are responsible to maintain their portion of the total 1,346 miles of local streets and roads in Kings County. Funding sources for these agencies to maintain the pavement and improve the operations of the local streets and road are federal (CMAQ), state (exchanged RSTP) and local (gas tax, LTF, etc) funds.

The 158 miles of state highways located in Kings County are the responsibility of Caltrans. Caltrans utilizes, primarily, the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) and Interregional Improvement Program to maintain the pavement and operations of these roadways. The transit systems are maintained by the two transit operators in Kings County. The transit operators utilize federal (FTA 5307 and 5311 primarily) and state (State Transit Assistance) transit funds as well as local (Local Transportation Fund and fare box) funds to maintain the transit operations in Kings County. The expenditures for operations and maintenance in the FTIP (as the first four years of the RTP) are consistent with the explanation of expenditures specified in the 2018 Regional Transportation Plan. Operations and maintenance accounts for all of the planned expenditures in Kings County. Estimated expenditures and revenues for operations and maintenance are available in the table below. Due to the chronic underfunding of transportation, Kings County agencies annually fall behind the estimates of revenues needed to maintain the system. The agencies employ a performance measure program to dispense what funds are available for maintenance and operations.



Project Priority In accordance with federal transportation legislation, the Kings County Association of Governments establishes the following priority: 1. All projects (as a group) shown in the first year of the four-year element (2018/19) shall have

first priority. 2. All projects (as a group) shown in the second year of the four-year element (2019/20) shall have

second priority. 3. All projects (as a group) shown in the third year of the four-year element (2020/21) shall have

third priority. 4. All projects (as a group) shown in the fourth year of the four-year element (2021/22) shall have

fourth priority. 5. All projects shown outside the four-year element may, via an approved formal FTIP

Amendment, be advanced into the four-year element as long as financial constraint is still maintained.

KCAG has adopted Expedited Project Selection Procedures (EPSP). Projects from the first four years of 2019 FTIP have been selected using the approved project selection procedures and can be moved within the four-year period of the 2019 FTIP. The EPSP for the four-year period 2018/19 through 2021/22 are included in Appendix A of this document. As a nonattainment area, TCM projects for each year consistent with our approved SIP will be implemented in a timely manner.

FFY 18/19 FFY 19/20 FFY 20/21 FFY 21/22

State Highways

Expenditures 6,000$ 22,000$ 6,400$ 28,000$

Revenues (i) 6,000$ 22,000$ 6,400$ 28,000$

Local Streets & Roads

Expenditures 13,200$ 17,900$ 17,900$ 17,900$

Revenues(ii) 13,200$ 17,900$ 17,900$ 17,900$

Transit

Expenditures 6,031$ 6,031$ 6,031$ 6,031$

Revenues(iii) 6,031$ 6,031$ 6,031$ 6,031$

Total Expenditures 25,231$ 45,931$ 30,331$ 51,931$

Total Revenue 25,231$ 45,931$ 30,331$ 51,931$

Estimated Operations & Maintenance Expenditures and Revenues 2018-2022

(in $1,000s)

Notes:

(i) SHOPP

(ii) Gas Tax, HBP, LTF, and local sources

(iii) FTA, STA, LTF and local contributions



TABLE 1: REVENUE

Funding Source/Program FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Sales Tax

City

County

Gas Tax

Gas Tax (Subventions to Cities)

Gas Tax (Subventions to Counties)

Other Local Funds $239 $93 $391 $263 $986

County General Funds $136 $17 $320 $62 $535

City General Funds $103 $18 $71 $144 $336

Street Taxes and Developer Fees $58 $57 $115

RSTP Exchange funds

Transit

Transit Fares

Other (See Appendix 1) $573 $1,375 $492 $467 $2,907

Local Total $812 $1,468 $883 $730 $3,893

Tolls

Bridge

Corridor

Regional Sales Tax

Other (See Appendix 2)

Regional Total

State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) 1

$6,093 $21,507 $6,400 $27,894 $61,894

SHOPP $6,093 $21,507 $6,400 $27,894 $61,894

SHOPP Prior

State Minor Program

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 1 $298 $298

STIP $298 $298

STIP Prior

State Bond

Proposition 1A (High Speed Passenger Train Bond Program)

Proposition 1B (Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006)

Active Transportation Program (ATP) 1

Highway Maintenance (HM) Program 1

Highway Bridge Program (HBP) 1

$1,421 $478 $1,899

Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB1)

Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP)

State Transit Assistance (STA)(e.g., population/revenue based, Prop 42)


State Total $6,093 $21,805 $7,821 $28,372 $64,091

5307 - Urbanized Area Formula Grants $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $10,000

5309 - Fixed Guideway Capital Investment Grants

5309b - New and Small Starts (Capital Investment Grants)

5309c - Bus and Bus Related Grants

5310 - Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities

5311 - Formula Grants for Rural Areas $370 $410 $410 $410 $1,600

5311f - Intercity Bus

5337 - State of Good Repair Grants

5339 - Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Grants $170 $170

FTA Transfer from Prior FTIP


Federal Transit Total $3,040 $2,910 $2,910 $2,910 $11,770

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program $1,918 $1,956 $1,955 $1,955 $7,784

Construction of Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal Facilities (Ferry Boat Program)

Coordinated Border Infrastructure Program

Federal Lands Access Program

Federal Lands Transportation Program

GARVEE Bonds Debt Service Payments

Highway Infrastructure Program (HIP) $397 $397

Highway Infrastructure Program (HIP) - PRIOR

High Priority Projects (HPP) and Demo


National Highway Freight Program (NHFP)

Nationally Significant Freight and Highway Projects (FASTLANE/INFRA Grants)

Railway-Highway Crossings Program


SAFETEA-LU Safe Routes to School (SRTS)

Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP/RSTP)

Other (see Appendix 5)

Federal Highway Total $1,918 $1,956 $2,352 $1,955 $8,181

Other Federal Railroad Administration (see Appendix 6)

Federal Railroad Administration Total

Federal Total $4,958 $4,866 $5,262 $4,865 $19,951

TIFIA (Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act)


Innovative Financing Total

$11,863 $28,139 $13,966 $33,967 $87,935

Financial Summary Notes:1 State Programs that include both state and federal funds.


2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program Adoption

($'s in 1,000)

4 YEAR (FTIP Period)N

O

T

E

S

REVENUE TOTAL

FED

ERA

L R

AIL

STA

TELO

CA

LFE

DER

AL

TRA

NSI

TIN

NO

VATI

VE

FIN

AN

CE

REG

ION

AL

FED

ERA

L H

IGH

WA

Y



TABLE 1: REVENUE - APPENDICES

Appendix 1 - Local Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Local Transportation Fund (LTF) $530 $1,375 $492 $467 $2,864

State Transit Assistance $43 $43

Local Other Total $573 $1,375 $492 $467 $2,907

Appendix 2 - Regional Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Regional Other Total

Appendix 3 - State Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

State Other Total

Appendix 4 - Federal Transit Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Federal Transit Other Total

Appendix 5 - Federal Highway Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Federal Highway Other Total

Appendix 6 - Federal Railroad Administration Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Federal Railroad Administration Other Total

Appendix 7 - Innovative Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Innovative Other Total



($'s in 1,000)

Federal Railroad Administration Other

Innovative Other

Local Other

Regional Other

State Other

Federal Transit Other

Federal Highway Other



TABLE 2: PROGRAMMED


Local Total $812 $1,468 $883 $730 $3,893

Tolls

Bridge

Corridor

Regional Sales Tax

Other (See Appendix A)

Regional Total

State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) 1 $6,093 $21,507 $6,400 $27,894 $61,894

SHOPP $6,093 $21,507 $6,400 $27,894 $61,894

SHOPP Prior

State Minor Program

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 1 $298 $298

STIP $298 $298

STIP Prior

State Bond





Highway Bridge Program (HBP) 1 $1,421 $478 $1,899




Other (See Appendix B)

State Total $6,093 $21,805 $7,821 $28,372 $64,091

5307 - Urbanized Area Formula Grants $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $10,000





5311 - Formula Grants for Rural Areas $370 $410 $410 $410 $1,600



5339 - Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Grants $170 $170


Other (See Appendix C)

Federal Transit Total $3,040 $2,910 $2,910 $2,910 $11,770

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program $1,816 $1,770 $1,944 $1,805 $7,335






Highway Infrastructure Program (HIP)










Other (see Appendix D)

Federal Highway Total $1,816 $1,770 $1,944 $1,805 $7,335

Other Federal Railroad Administration (see Appendix E)


Federal Total $4,856 $4,680 $4,854 $4,715 $19,105


Other (See Appendix F)


$11,761 $27,953 $13,558 $33,817 $87,089

Financial Summary Notes:1 State Programs that include both state and federal funds.

FED

ER

AL

RA

ILL

OC

AL

PROGRAMMED TOTAL

INN

OV

ATI

VE

FIN

AN

CE

RE

GIO

NA

LF

ED

ER

AL

HIG

HW

AY

FE

DE

RA

L T

RA

NS

ITS

TA

TE

Kings County Association of Governments2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program Adoption

($'s in 1,000)

4 YEAR (FTIP Period)N

O

T

E

S



TABLE 2: PROGRAMMED - APPENDICES

Appendix A - Regional Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Regional Other Total

Appendix B - State Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

State Other Total

Appendix C - Federal Transit Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Federal Transit Other Total

Appendix D - Federal Highway Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Federal Highway Other Total

Appendix E - Federal Railroad Administration Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Federal Railroad Administration Other Total

Appendix F - Innovative Finance Other4 YEAR (FTIP Period) CURRENT

FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 TOTAL

Innovative Other Total



($'s in 1,000)

Innovative Other

Regional Other

State Other

Federal Transit Other

Federal Highway Other

Federal Railroad Administration Other



TABLE 3: REVENUE-PROGRAMMED


Local Total

Tolls

Bridge

Corridor

Regional Sales Tax

Other

Regional Total

State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) 1

SHOPP

SHOPP Prior

State Minor Program

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 1

STIP

STIP Prior

State Bond





Highway Bridge Program (HBP) 1




Other

State Total

5307 - Urbanized Area Formula Grants





5311 - Formula Grants for Rural Areas



5339 - Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Grants


Other

Federal Transit Total

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program $102 $186 $11 $150 $449






Highway Infrastructure Program (HIP) $397 $397










Other

Federal Highway Total $102 $186 $408 $150 $846

Other Federal Railroad Administration


Federal Total $102 $186 $408 $150 $846


Other


$102 $186 $408 $150 $846

Kings County Association of Governments2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program Adoption

($'s in 1,000)

4 YEAR (FTIP Period)

REVENUE - PROGRAMMED TOTAL

LO

CA

LR

EG

ION

AL

FE

DE

RA

L H

IGH

WA

YIN

NO

VA

TIV

E

FIN

AN

CE

FE

DE

RA

L T

RA

NS

ITF

ED

ER

AL

RA

ILS

TA

TE




PROJECT LISTINGS BY MODE




Projects assumed to be under control of the Federal Highway Administration

Highways, Streets and Roads

Kings County 2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program

San Joaquin Format (Highest Official)

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program (Non-transit)

Status

Total Escalated Cost

Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description

Funding Summary (Current & Prior Years)

Four Year Element

(Construction costs escalated per Caltrans percentage)

Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

In Avenal,

At the Avenal Police Department

Purchase solar-powered EV charging stationsConst

4.01

CM5424A

$ 155,000

Avenal, City ofDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000213 Total

RW

PE

155,000

******** Version 1 - 06/06/2018 ********

Prior

Current

155,000

18,000 137,000

CITY/CMAQ

In Corcoran,

At the Corp Yard, Purchase PM 10, PM 2.5 Efficient

Street SweeperConst

4.01

CM5223A

$ 260,000

Corcoran, City ofDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000203 Total

RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********

Project data transfered from 2016 FTIP.

Carry Over

Prior

Current 30,000 230,000

260,000

260,000

CMAQ/CITY

In Corcoran,

Surface Dirt Roads, Install Curb Gutter and Sidewalk

on Benrus Ave. from North to Orange, and Anderson

Street from Benrus to 6 1/2 and Gable Ave. from Benrus Const

1.10

CM5223B

$ 1,133,000


RW

PE

1,063,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

1,063,000

152,000 981,000

70,000

70,000

CMAQ/CITY

In Hanford,

At the Intersection of 9th Ave. and Lacey Blvd.

Install Traffic SignalConst

5.02

CM5091B

$ 550,000

Hanford, City ofDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000206 Total

RW

PE

50,000 500,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

50,000

500,000

63,000 487,000

CMAQ/DEV

In Hanford,

At the intersection of 12th Ave. and Hume Ave.


5.02

CM5091D

$ 453,000

Hanford, City ofDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000208 Total

RW

PE

453,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

403,000

50,000

52,000 401,000

CMAQ/DEV

At Various Locations in Kings County, Seal Unpaved

Roadways as PM Control Measure - Grouped Project

Const

1.10

CM5945022

$ 2,188,000

Kings CountyDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000194 Total

RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

1,623,000

1,623,000 186,000 1,437,000

65,000 500,000

565,000

565,000

CMAQ/CO

Page 1 of 11

23



Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program (Non-transit)

Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

In Kings County

At 17th Ave. and Houston Ave.


5.02

CM5945107

$ 1,656,000


RW

PE

150,000 1,186,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

150,000

1,186,000

320,000

320,000 37,000 283,000

153,000 1,183,000

CMAQ/CO

In Kings County,

Near Kettleman City, at SR 41/Bernard Dr. Intersection

Construct RoundaboutConst

1.06

CM5945B

$ 621,000


RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 06/06/2018 ********

Prior

Current 71,000 550,000

621,000

621,000

CMAQ/CO

In Lemoore,

At City Corp Yard

Puchase Alt Fuel VehicleConst

4.01

CM5115A

$ 330,000

Lemoore, City ofDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000201 Total

RW

PE

330,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

330,000

71,000 259,000

CMAQ/CITY

In Lemoore,

At the City Corp Yard

Purchase Alt Fuel VehicleConst

4.01

CM5115B

$ 300,000

Lemoore, City ofDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000202 Total

RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current 65,000 235,000

300,000

300,000

CMAQ/CITY

In Kings County at Various Locations);

Grouped Projects for Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

Scope: Projects are consistent with 40 CFR Part

93.126 Exempt Tables 2 and Table 3 categories - Const

3.02

GP-BIKE

$ 5,170,000

Various AgenciesDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000169 Total

RW

PE

1,963,000 717,000 500,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

1,963,000 717,000 500,000 1,591,000

1,591,000 194,000 1,397,000

1,253,000 2,326,000

399,000

399,000

CMAQ/LTF

Page 2 of 11

24



Highway Maintenance

Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

In Kings County, Grouped Projects for Pavement

Resurfacing and/or Rehabilitation on the State

Highway System - Highway MaintenanceConst

1.10

GP-HM

$ 11,178,000

CaltransDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000192 Total

RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 05/03/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

11,178,000

11,178,000

06-0S601

11,178,000

NH

Page 7 of 11

25



Minors Program

Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

Grouped Projects for Safety, Shoulder Improvements,

Pavement Resurfacing and/or Rehabilitation - Minor

Program. At various locations in Kings County. (Toll

Credits) Const

1.06

CTMINOR

$ 2,460,000


RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 05/03/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

2,460,000

2,460,000 2,460,000

SHOPPAC

Page 8 of 11

26



Safety

Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

At various locations,

Grouped Projects for Bridge Rehabilitation and

Reconstruction - HBP projects. Non-capacity

increasing projects only (includes seismic retrofit). Const

1.19

KIN-HBP

$ 6,649,000


RW

PE

1,605,000 540,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

1,605,000 540,000 1,056,000

1,056,000 73,000 983,000

423,000 5,170,000 3,448,000

3,448,000

HBRR-L/CO

At Various Locations,

Grouped Projects for Safety Improvements - HSIP

ProgramConst

1.06

HSIP

$ 2,882,000

Various AgenciesDFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000153 Total

RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 05/03/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

2,882,000

2,882,000 907,000 1,975,000

HSIP/LTF

Page 9 of 11

27



State Highway Operations and Protection Program

Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

At Various Locations, SHOPP Grouped Projects for

Collision Reduction Program in Kings County

(Non-Capacity Increasing Projects)Const

1.09

SHOPP-CR

$ 29,637,000


RW

PE

808,000 4,330,000

******** Version 1 - 06/06/2018 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

808,000 4,330,000 18,676,000

18,676,000 18,676,000

10,961,000

5,823,000

5,823,000

SHOPPAC

At Various Locations, Grouped Projects for Bridge

Rehabilitation and Reconstruction - SHOPP-AC

Program (using toll credits)

(Non-Capacity Increasing Projects) Const

1.19

SHOPP-BP

$ 33,294,000


RW

PE

3,100,000 27,894,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

3,100,000 27,894,000 2,300,000

2,300,000 2,300,000

30,994,000

SHOPPAC

At Various Locations, Grouped projects for Emergency

Repair - SHOPP Emergency Response Program

Const

1.12

SHOPP-ER

$ 18,335,000


RW

PE

16,980,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

16,980,000 1,355,000

1,355,000 1,355,000

16,980,000

SHOPPAC

At Various Locations, Grouped Projects for Roadside

Preservation to enhance, preserve or restore scenic

and native landscape areas within or near roadsides -

SHOPP Roadside Preservation Program Const

1.15

SHOPP-RSP

Var

$ 2,959,000


RW

PE

619,000 2,070,000

******** Version 1 - 06/06/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

619,000 2,070,000

2,959,000

270,000

270,000

SHOPPAC

At Various Locations, Grouped Projects for Pavement

Resurfacing and/or Rehabilitation - SHOPP Roadway

Preservation Program

(Non-Capacity Increasing Projects) Const

1.10

SHOPP-RP

Var

$ 29,225,000


RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

29,225,000

29,225,000

0.0/0.0

29,225,000

SHOPPAC

Page 10 of 11

28



STIP / Regional Choice

Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

Planning, Programming and Monitoring.

Const

0.00

STIP-PPM

$ 1,098,000

Kings County

Association of DFTIP Amend 0.00 11600000053 Total

RW

PE

298,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********

Project data transfered from 2018 STIP.

Carry Over

Prior

Current

298,000 800,000

800,000 800,000

298,000

ST-CASH

Page 11 of 11

29



Projects assumed to be under control of the Federal Transit Administration

Mass Transit



Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program (Transit Projects)

Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

KCAPTA In Avenal

Purchase and Install Electric Vehicle Charging Station

Const

2.05

CM6198-02

$ 57,000

Kings County Area

Public Transit DFTIP Amend 0.00 21600000205 Total

RW

PE

57,000

******** Version 1 - 05/02/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

57,000

11,000 46,000

CMAQ/LTF

Page 3 of 11

31



Federal Transit Administration Section 5307 Program

Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

Kings County Area Public Transit Agency

FTA-Urban (5307) Operating Assistance

Const

2.01

KCAPTA031

$ 39,758,000

Kings County Area


RW

PE

2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000

******** Version 1 - 05/03/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 29,758,000

29,758,000 16,215,000 13,543,000

10,000,000

2,500,000

2,500,000

LTF/5307

Page 4 of 11

32




Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

Corcoran Transit - FTA 5311

Non-urban Operating Assistance

Const

2.01

FTA-5311B

$ 5,763,000


RW

PE

280,000 280,000 280,000

******** Version 1 - 05/03/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

280,000 280,000 280,000 4,683,000

4,683,000 3,419,000 1,264,000

540,000 540,000

240,000

240,000

5311/LTF

KCAPTA - FTA 5311

Non-urban (5311) Operating Assistance

Const

2.01

FTA-5311A

$ 24,960,000

Kings County Area


RW

PE

540,000 540,000 540,000

******** Version 1 - 05/03/18 ********


Carry Over

Prior

Current

540,000 540,000 540,000 22,840,000

22,840,000 22,038,000 802,000

1,060,000 1,060,000

500,000

500,000

5311/LTF

Page 5 of 11

33




Status


Phase

Prior Years

StateLocal Federal

Project Comments

Change Description


Four Year Element


Program Schedule

22/23 23/2418/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

Route

Postmile

PIN

Dist-EA

Fund

AQ

Lead

Description

KCAPTA

Transit Facility Maintenance

Const

2.08

FTA5339A

$ 83,000

Kings County Area


RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 06/08/2018 ********

Prior

Current 17,000 66,000

83,000

83,000

5339/TDA

KCAPTA

Purchase CNG Engine for Bus Rehabilitation

Const

2.05

FTA5339B

$ 130,000

Kings County Area


RW

PE

******** Version 1 - 06/08/2018 ********

Prior

Current 26,000 104,000

130,000

130,000

5339/TDA

Page 6 of 11

34




APPENDIX A

POLICIES AND RESOLUTIONS

1

BEFORE THE KINGS COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE

* * * * * * * * * * IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING THE 2018 ) RESOLUTION NO. 18-12 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN / ) SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY, ) 2019 FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION ) IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, AND ) RE: 2018 RTP/SCS, 2019 CORRESPONDING AIR QUALITY ) FTIP AND AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS ) CONFORMITY WHEREAS, the Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG) is a Regional Transportation Planning Agency and a Metropolitan Planning Organization, pursuant to State and Federal designation; and WHEREAS, federal planning regulations require Metropolitan Planning Organizations to prepare and adopt a long range Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for their region; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill (SB) 375 (Steinberg, 2008) requires that Metropolitan Planning Organizations prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as part of the 2018 RTP that demonstrates how the region will reduce the greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from automobiles and light trucks to achieve, if there is a feasible way to do so, the applicable greenhouse gas emission reduction targets approved by the California Air Resources Board (ARB), and WHEREAS, pursuant to SB 375, the applicable ARB per capita GHG emission reduction targets for the San Joaquin Valley region are 5% below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2020 and 10% below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2035; and WHEREAS, the state law requires that the RTP/SCS land-use development pattern is consistent with the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA); and WHEREAS, the 2018 RTP/SCS has been prepared in accordance with state guidelines adopted by the California Transportation Commission and; WHEREAS, a 2018 RTP/SCS has been prepared in full compliance with federal guidance; and WHEREAS, federal planning regulations require that Metropolitan Planning Organizations prepare and adopt a short range Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) for their region; and WHEREAS, projects submitted in the 2019 FTIP must be financially constrained and the financial plan affirms that funding is available; and

2

WHEREAS, the 2019 FTIP has been prepared to comply with Federal and State requirements for local projects and through a cooperative process between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans), principal elected officials of general purpose local governments and their staffs, and public owner operators of mass transportation services acting through the KCAG forum and general public involvement; and WHEREAS, the 2019 FTIP program listing is consistent with: 1) the 2018 RTP/SCS; 2) the 2018 State Transportation Improvement Program; and 3) the Corresponding Conformity Analysis; and WHEREAS, the 2019 FTIP contains the MPO’s certification of the transportation planning process assuring that all federal requirements have been fulfilled; and WHEREAS, the 2019 FTIP meets all applicable transportation planning requirements per 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 450; and WHEREAS, KCAG has established performance targets that address the performance standards per 23 CFR Part 490 , 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) 5326(c), and 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) to use in tracking progress toward attainment of critical outcomes for the region of the MPO; and WHEREAS, KCAG has integrated into its metropolitan transportation planning process, directly or by reference, the goals, objectives, performance measures, and targets described in other State transportation plans and transportation processes, as well as any plans developed under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 by providers of public transportation, required as part of a performance-based program; and WHEREAS, the MPO must demonstrate conformity per 40 CFR Part 93 for the 2018 RTP/SCS and 2019 FTIP; and WHEREAS, the 2018 RTP/SCS and 2019 FTIP includes a new Conformity Analysis; and WHEREAS, the 2018 RTP/SCS and 2019 FTIP conforms to the applicable SIPs; and WHEREAS, the 2018 RTP/SCS and 2019 FTIP do not interfere with the timely implementation of the Transportation Control Measures; and WHEREAS, the documents have been widely circulated and reviewed by the KCAG advisory committees representing the technical and management staffs of the member agencies; representatives of other governmental agencies, including State and Federal; representatives of special interest groups; representatives of the private business sector; and residents of Kings County consistent with the public participation process adopted by the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on July 11, 2018 to hear and consider comments on the 2018 RTP/SCS; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on July 25, 2018 to hear and consider comments on the 2018 RTP/SCS, 2019 FTIP, and Corresponding Conformity Analysis.



Federal Transportation Improvement Program Expedited Project Selection Procedures

The State, Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG), and transit operators have implemented an Expedited Project Selection Process (EPSP) for its Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) as required by Federal Regulations 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 450 and Title 23 United States Code (USC), and as outlined on the attached table. The State, KCAG, and transit operators have selected all of the projects in the first four years of the FTIP based on the attached EPSP table. EPSP has been agreed by all member agencies represented by KCAG, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and the transit operators per 23 CFR 450.332, that the projects within the first four years of the FTIP may be advanced within subject to the program conditions of the EPSP. Projects from the first four years of the 2019 FTIP have been selected using the approved project selection procedures: STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (STIP) The projects within the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) may be advanced subject to amendments approved by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to the STIP. FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (FTIP) 1. Caltrans – Statewide Managed Programs

KCAG and Caltrans agree that the Caltrans Program Managers for the following programs may implement projects within the four year FSTIP element without amending the FTIP/FSTIP.

a. State Highway Operation Protection Program (SHOPP):

Caltrans and KCAG agree the Caltrans State Highway Operation Protection Program (SHOPP) program manager may move projects within the adopted SHOPP document, including the individual SHOPP lump sum components:

SHOPP Bridge Preservation SHOPP Collision Reduction SHOPP Mobility SHOPP Roadway Preservation SHOPP Emergency Response SHOPP Legal and Regulatory Mandates SHOPP Facility Improvements

b. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) c. Highway Bridge Program (HBP) d. Highway Maintenance Program (HM) e. Hazard Elimination and Safety Program (HES) f. High Risk Rural Roads Program (HRRR or HR3)


g. Section 130 - STP Railroad Program h. Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) i. Minor Program (A, B, and Right-of-Way) j. Local Bridge Seismic Safety Retrofit (LBSSR) Program k. Active Transportation Program (ATP) l. Recreational Trails Program (RTP) and m. FTA Programs (subject to FTA approval) For FTA administered funds, projects may be moved within the period of the FSTIP at the request of the agency, as long as funding is available and the change does not negatively impact the delivery or availability of funds for other projects ready for obligation.

2. MPO Locally Managed Programs

a. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)

The projects funded within the CMAQ program may be moved within the four-year quadrennial FTIP element subject to project readiness.

b. Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) Exchange

EPSP CONSULTATION AND COOPERATION REQUIREMENTS Region Project Type Selecting

Agency Selection Procedure

Consulted/Cooperating Agency

Kings County (Non-TMA MPO)

Project funded with title 23 USC funds (other than FLHP) and FTA

State and/or Transit Operator

Cooperation KCAG

Projects funded with Federal Lands Highway Program (FLHP) funds

Selected in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 204

KCAG designates Executive Director Terri King to sign below acknowledging that advancement of projects using EPSP with the FTIP four-year element does not invalidate the financial constraint of the FTIP.

Terri King, Executive Director Date: Kings County Association of Governments



Federal Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment Procedures I. Introduction

All requests for amendments to the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), administrative or formal, shall be submitted to the Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG) in writing, on agency letterhead. The request shall show all recommended changes including a description of the revision. KCAG staff shall determine if an amendment, administrative or formal, is necessary for the requested revision. That determination shall be made in writing by KCAG staff prior to presenting the requested revision to the Director (for amendment types 1-3) or to the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee (for amendment types 4 and 5). The following procedures are applicable for processing modifications to the Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (FSTIP). In accordance with the provisions of 23 CFR 450, transportation improvement programs (TIPs) developed by the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are incorporated into the FSTIP and as such, these procedures are also applicable to TIP modifications. These procedures are in compliance to the “Revised Federal-Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (FSTIP) Amendment and Administrative Modification Procedures” adopted November, 17, 2008 and updated June 7, 2011. In accordance with 23 CFR 450.216(n), projects in any of the first four years of the FSTIP may be moved to any other of the first four years of the FSTIP subject to the project selection requirements of 23 CFR 450.220. Such modifications do not require approval, provided expedited project selection procedures have been adopted in accordance with 23 CFR 450.220 and the required interagency consultation or coordination is accomplished and documented.

II. Definitions

A. Administrative Modifications

Administrative modifications are minor changes to the FSTIP/TIP that do not require a conformity determination, a demonstration of fiscal constraint, or a public review and comment period. Administrative modifications can be used to accomplish the following: i. Revise a project description without changing the project scope or conflicting with the

environmental document; ii. Revise the funding amount listed for a project or project phases. Additional funding is

limited to the lesser of 40 percent of the total project cost or $10 million, and programming capacity has to be able to be available in the FSTIP/FTIP prior to programming the modification, and documented in the support materials;

iii. Cost decreases have no cap, however, the request to reduce the cost must originate from the project sponsor and include an explanation for the decrease;

iv. Change the sources of funds; v. Change a project lead agency; vi. Program federal funds for Advance Construction conversion; vii. Change a program year of funds within the 4-year FTIP/FSTIP, provided Expedited

Project Selections Procedures (EPSP) are in place;


viii. Split or combine individually listed projects; provided cost, schedule, and scope remain unchanged.

ix. Change required information for grouped or lump sum project listings, or add/delete projects from grouped or lump sum project listings provided the funding amounts stay within the funding change guidelines above (see #ii)

x. Re-programming of projects for which CMAQ funds were transferred to FTA in the prior FTIP and the FTA had not approved the grant yet; as long as there is not change in the original scope or cost, and the project needs to be programmed with “FTA 5307 (CMAQ transfer funds)” in the FTIP;

xi. Programming FTA projects from the previous FTIP; as long as there is no change in the original scope or cost. Prior year funding must be differentiated from the current year funding by including a narrative in the project description (or in “CTIPS MPO Comments” section) stating the year, amount, and nature of the prior year’s funds.

xii. Make minor changes to the FTA funded grouped project listings. Minor changes include changing the number of transit vehicles purchased by 20% or less and changes to the fuel type of transit vehicles. The change needs to be vetted through the Interagency Consultation (IAC) process to assure that the change is considered minor.

Administrative modifications can be processed in accordance with these procedures provided that: 1. It does not affect the air quality conformity determination, including timely

implementation of Transportation Control Measures (TCMs); and 2. It does not impact financial constraint.

B. Formal Amendments

Formal amendments are all other modifications to the FSTIP/TIP that are not Administrative Actions. Examples include the following: 1. Introduction of a new project; 2. Scope changes that affect the approved air quality conformity analysis; 3. Funding changes that exceed 40% or $10 million; 4. Any and all changes that require a reconsideration of the air quality conformity or the

regional emissions analysis. III. Procedures A. Administrative Modifications (Administrative Actions)

KCAG’s Executive Director has been delegated authority by the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee to approve Administrative Modifications to the FTIP. KCAG has also received delegation from FHWA/Caltrans for the approval of Administrative Modifications to the FSTIP. The Transportation Policy Committee has also delegated this authority to the Executive Director. Each KCAG approved administrative action will be forwarded to Caltrans Headquarters, Division of Transportation Programming for inclusion in the FSTIP, to FHWA CA Division, FTA Division IX and other stakeholders for information.


B. Formal Amendments

Amendments to the FSTIP must be developed in accordance with the provisions of 23 CFR 450.326 and/or 23 CFR 450.216, and approved by the Federal agencies in accordance with 23 CFR 450.220. The KCAG Transportation Policy Committee adopted Resolution 10-02 January 27, 2010, delegating authority to the KCAG Executive Director to approve FTIP and RTP Amendments that do not require a redetermination of the air quality conformity or reconsideration of the emissions analysis (Types 2 and 3). FTIP amendments that require an air quality redetermination or a reconsideration of the emissions analysis (types 4 and 5) are required to be approved by the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee. Each KCAG approved FTIP amendment will be forwarded to Caltrans Headquarters, Division of Transportation Programming for approval on behalf of the Governor. To expedite processing, KCAG will also forward a copy of the amendment to FHWA and FTA at the same time the amendment is sent to Caltrans. Once approved by Caltrans, on behalf of the Governor, Caltrans will forward the amendment approval to FHWA and FTA for Federal approval. Once approved by FHWA and FTA, the amendment will be incorporated into California’s FSTIP. The FHWA and FTA approval will be addressed to Caltrans, with copies to KCAG.

IV. Dispute Resolution

If a question arises on the interpretation of what constitutes an administrative modification or amendment, Caltrans, the MPO, FHWA and FTA (the parties) will consult with each other to resolve the question. If after consultation, the parties disagree regarding what constitutes an administrative modification or amendment, the final decision rests with the FHWA for highway projects and FTA for transit projects.



APPENDIX B

GLOSSARY OF TERMS PROJECT LISTING CODES

AND AIR QUALITY

ASSESSMENT CODES


Glossary of Terms ARB Air Resources Board (State) AQMP Air Quality Maintenance Plan ATP Active Transportation Program BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs CCAA California Clean Air Act CAA Clean Air Act (Federal) CARB California Air Resources Board Caltrans California Department of Transportation CIP Capital Improvement Program CMA Congestion Management Agency (State Designation) CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program CMIA Corridor Mobility Improvement Account CMP Congestion Management Process (State) CMS Congestion Management System (Federal) COG Council of Governments CTC California Transportation Commission DOT Department of Transportation (Federal) EMFAC EMission FACtors: Motor Vehicle Emission Inventory Model EPA Environmental Protection Agency (Federal) FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Act Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act FCOG Fresno Council of Governments FHWA Federal Highway Administration FSTIP Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program FTA Federal Transit Administration FTIP Federal Transportation Improvement Program FY Fiscal Year GHG Greenhouse Gases IIP Interregional Improvement Program ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITIP Interregional Transportation Improvement Program KCAG Kings County Association of Governments KernCOG Kern Council of Governments (also KCOG) LTC Local Transportation Commission MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century MCAG Merced County Association of Governments MCTC Madera County Transportation Commission MOU Memorandum of Understanding MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards RACM Reasonably Available Control Measures RIP Regional Improvement Program ROG Reactive Organic Gases RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/latest_version.htm


RTP Regional Transportation Plan RTPA Regional Transportation Planning Agency SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: - A

Legacy for Users StanCOG Stanislaus Council of Governments SHOPP State Highway Operation and Protection Program SIP State Implementation Plan SJCOG San Joaquin Council of Governments SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District STIP State Transportation Improvement Program STP Surface Transportation Program TCAG Tulare County Association of Governments TCM Transportation Control Measure TE Transportation Enhancements TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century TIP Transportation Improvement Program TMA Transportation Management Association TOG Total Organic Gases TPA Technical Planning Assistance TSM Transportation System Management USDOT United States Department of Transportation


Project Listing Codes Fund Type

AC Advanced Construction BR Bridge Replacement BRR Barrier Rail Replacement CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality F Federal FCR Flexible Congestion Relief FTA Sec. 5307 Section 5307 Grant, Small Urbanized Area Transit FTA Sec. 5310 Section 5310 Grant, Elderly and Disabled Transit FTA Sec. 5311 Section 5311 Grant, Non-Urban Area Transit FTA Sec. 5339 Section 5339 Grant, Bus and Bus Facilities FTA / TPA Technical Planning Assistance Grant HBP Highway Bridge Program HES Hazard Elimination Safety HIP Highway Infrastructure Program HPP High Priority Project (formerly earmarks) HRRR High Risk Rural Roads (or HR3) Program HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program IM Interstate Maintenance IIP Interregional Improvement Program IRR Intercity Rail Program IR Interstate Rehabilitation IRRS Interregional Road System Local Local Agency Funds MA Minimum Allocation MINOR (SHOPP) Minors Program NHS National Highway System OHC Other Highway Construction RAS Rehabilitation and Safety RIP Regional Improvement Program RRP Railroad Grade Crossing Protection RRS Railroad / Highway Crossing Section 130 Railroad Crossing Safety Program SHOPP State Highway Operation and Protection Program SND Soundwall Program SR2S State Safe Routes to Schools Program SRTS Federal Safe Routes to Schools Program STA State Transit Assistance STIP State Transportation Improvement Program STP Surface Transportation Program TE Transportation Enhancements TSM Transportation Systems Management


Federal Project Phases

PE Preliminary Engineering RW Right of Way (includes support and capital) Const. Construction (includes support and capital)


EPA Air Quality Screening Criteria

1.00 Safety Programs 1.01 Railroad/Highway Crossing 1.03 Safer Non-Federal-Aid System Roads 1.04 Shoulder Improvements 1.05 Increasing Sight Distance 1.06 Safety Improvement Program 1.07 Traffic Control Devices and Operating Assistance other than

Signalization Projects 1.08 Railroad/Highway Crossing Warning Devices 1.09 Guardrails, Median Barriers, Crash Cushions 1.10 Pavement Resurfacing and/or Rehabilitation 1.11 Pavement Marking Demonstration 1.12 Emergency Relief (23 USC 125) 1.13 Fencing 1.14 Skid Treatments 1.15 Safety Roadside Rest Areas 1.16 Adding Medians 1.17 Truck Climbing Lanes Outside the Urbanized Area 1.18 Lighting Improvements 1.19 Widening Narrow Pavements or Reconstructing Bridges (no additional

travel lanes) 1.20 Emergency Truck Pullovers

2.00 Mass Transit 2.01 Operating Assistance to Transit Agencies 2.02 Purchase of Support Vehicles 2.03 Rehabilitation of Transit Vehicles 2.04 Purchase of Office, Shop, and Operating Equipment for Existing

Facilities 2.05 Purchase of Operating Equipment for Vehicles (e.g. radios, fareboxes,

lifts, etc.) 2.06 Construction or Renovation of Power, Signal, and Communications

Systems 2.07 Construction of Small Passenger Shelters and Information Kiosks 2.08 Reconstruction or Renovation of Transit Buildings and Structures 2.09 Rehabilitation or Reconstruction of Track Structures, Track, and

Trackbed in Existing Right of Way 2.10 Purchase New Bus or Rail Storage/Maintenance Facilities

Categorically Excluded in 23 CFR Part 771 2.11 Construction of New Bus or Rail Storage/Maintenance Facilities

Categorically Excluded in 23 CFR 771


3.00 Air Quality 3.01 Continuation of Ridesharing and Vanpooling Promotion Activities at

Current Levels 3.02 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

4.00 Landscaping/Signs 4.01 Non-Construction Related Activities 4.05 Engineering Studies 4.06 Noise Attenuation 4.07 Advance Land Acquisitions (23 CFR 712.204(d)) 4.08 Acquisition of Scenic Easements 4.09 Plantings, landscaping, etc. 4.10 Sign Removal 4.11 Directional and Informational Signs 4.12 Transportation Enhancement Activities (excepting rehabilitation and

operation of historic buildings, structures, or facilities) 4.13 Repair of Damage Caused by Natural Disasters, Civil Unrest, or

Terrorist Actions, except Projects Involving substantial functional, locational or capacity increase

5.00 Other

5.01 Intersection Channelization Projects 5.02 Intersection Signalization Projects at Individual Intersections 5.03 Changes in Vertical and Horizontal Alignment 5.04 Intersection Reconfiguration Projects 5.05 Truck Size and Weight Inspection Stations 5.06 Bus Terminals and Transfer Points 5.07 Traffic Signal Synchronization Projects



APPENDIX C

PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY


1.01 Railroad/highway crossing.

1.03 Safer non-Federal-aid system roads.

1.04 Shoulder Improvements.

1.05 Increasing Sight Distance.

1.06 Safety Improvement Program.

1.07 Traffic control devices and operating assistance other than signalization projects.

1.08 Railroad/highway crossing warning devices.

1.09 Guardrails, median barriers, crash cushions.

1.10 Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitation.

1.11 Pavement marking demonstration.

1.12 Emergency Relief (23 U.S.C. 125).

1.13 Fencing.

1.14 Skid treatments.

1.15 Safety roadside rest areas.

1.16 Adding medians.

1.17 Truck climbing lanes outside the urbanized area.

1.18 Lighting improvements.

1.19 Widening narrow pavements or reconstructing bridges (no additional travel lanes).

1.20 Emergency truck pullovers.

2.01 Operating assistance to transit agencies.

2.02 Purchase of support vehicles.

2.03 Rehabilitation of transit vehicles.

2.04 Purchase of office, shop, and operating equipment for existing facilities.

2.05 Purchase of operating equipment for vehicles (e.g. radios, fareboxes, lifts, etc.).

2.06 Construction or renovation of power, signal, and communications systems.

2.07 Construction of small passenger shelters and information kiosks.

2.08 Reconstruction or renovation of transit buildings and structures.

2.09 Rehabilitation or reconstruction of track structures, track, and trackbed in existing right of way.

2.10 Purchase of new buses and rail cars to replace existing vehicles or for minor expansions of the fleet.

2.11 Construction of new bus or rail storage/maintenance facilities categorically excluded in 23 CFR 771.

3.01 Continuation of ride-sharing and van-pooling promotion activities at current levels

3.02 Bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

4.01 Non Construction related activities.

4.05 Engineering studies

4.06 Noise attenuation.

4.07 Advance land acquisitions

4.08 Acquisition of scenic easements.

4.09 Plantings, landscaping, etc.

4.10 Sign removal.

4.11 Directional and infomational signs.

4.12 Transportation enhancement activities

4.13 Repair of damage caused by natural disasters, civil unrest, or terrorist actgs, except projects involving substantial functional, locational or capacity

5.01 Intersection channelization projects.

5.02 Intersection signalization projects at individual intersections.

5.03 Changes in vertical and horizontal alignment.

5.04 Interchange reconfiguration projects.

5.05 Truck size and weight inspection stations.

5.06 Bus terminals and transfer points.

5.07 Traffic signal synchronization projects.

EXEMPT CODES


Exempt Project Listing

Jurisdiction/ Agency

TIP/RTP Project ID

CTIPs Project ID Project Description Estimated

Cost Exemption

Code


STIP-PPM 11600000053 Planning, Programming and Monitoring. $800,000 0.00

Kings County Area Public

Transit Agency FTA-5311A 11600000175

KCAPTA - FTA 5311 Non-urban (5311) Operating Assistance

$22,840,000 2.01

Corcoran Area Transit

FTA-5311B 11600000176 Corcoran Transit - FTA 5311 Non-urban Operating Assistance

$4,683,000 2.01

Kings County KIN-HBP 21600000033

At various locations, Grouped Projects for Bridge Rehabilitation and Reconstruction - HBP projects. Non-capacity increasing projects only (includes seismic retrofit).

$1,056,000 1.19


Transit Agency KCAPTA031 21600000044

Kings County Area Public Transit Agency FTA-Urban (5307) Operating Assistance

$29,758,000 2.01

Caltrans SHOPP-CR 21600000106

SHOPP Grouped Projects for Collision Reduction Program in Kings County at various locations. (Non-Capacity Increasing Projects)

$18,676,000 1.09

Caltrans SHOPP-BP 21600000113

At Various Locations, Grouped Projects for Bridge Rehabilitation and Reconstruction - SHOPP-AC Program (using toll credits) (Non-Capacity Increasing Projects)

$2,300,000 1.19

Various Agencies

HSIP 21600000153 At Various Locations, Grouped Projects for Safety Improvements - HSIP Program

$2,882,000 1.06

Various Agencies

GP-BIKE 21600000169

In Kings County at Various Locations);Grouped Projects for Bicycle and Pedestrian FacilitiesScope: Projects are consistent with 40 CFR Part 93.126 Exempt Tables 2 and Table 3 categories - Bicycle and Pedestrian facilities (both motorized and Non-motorized)

$1,591,000 3.02




TIP/RTP Project ID


Cost Exemption

Code

Caltrans CTMINOR 21600000183

Grouped Projects for Safety, Shoulder Improvements, Pavement Resurfacing and/or Rehabilitation - Minor Program. At various locations in Kings County. (Toll Credits)

$2,460,000 1.06

Caltrans GP-HM 21600000192

In Kings County, Grouped Projects for Pavement Resurfacing and/or Rehabilitation on the State Highway System - Highway Maintenance

$11,178,000 1.10

Kings County CM5945022 21600000194 At Various Locations in Kings County, Seal Unpaved Roadways as PM Control Measure - Grouped Project

$1,623,000 1.10

Kings County CM5945107 21600000200 In Kings County At 17th Ave. and Houston Ave. Install Traffic Signal

$320,000 5.02

Lemoore CM5115A 21600000201 In Lemoore, At City Corp Yard Purchase Alt Fuel Vehicle

$330,000 4.01

Lemoore CM5115B 21600000202 In Lemoore, At the City Corp Yard Purchase Alt Fuel Vehicle

$300,000 4.01

Corcoran CM5223A 21600000203 In Corcoran, At the Corp Yard, Purchase PM 10, PM 2.5 Efficient Street Sweeper

$260,000 4.01

Corcoran CM5223B 21600000204

In Corcoran, Surface Dirt Roads, Install Curb Gutter and Sidewalk on Benrus Ave. from North to Orange, and Anderson Street from Benrus to 6 1/2 and Gable Ave. from Benrus to 6 1/2

$1,133,000 1.10


Transit Agency

FTA5339B 21600000218 KCAPTA Purchase CNG Engine for Bus Rehabilitation

$130,000 2.05

Caltrans HIP 21600000216 Highway Infrastructure projects at various locations in Kings County.

$397,000 1.06




TIP/RTP Project ID


Cost Exemption

Code


Transit Agency CM6198-02 21600000205

KCAPTA, In Avenal, Purchase and Install Electric Vehicle Charging Station

$57,000 2.05

Hanford CM5091B 21600000206 In Hanford, At the Intersection of 9th Ave. and Lacey Blvd.; Install Traffic Signal

$550,000 5.02

Hanford CM5091D 21600000208 In Hanford, At the intersection of 12th Ave. and Hume Ave.; Install Traffic Signal

$453,000 5.02

Caltrans SHOPP-ER 21600000210 At Various Locations, Grouped Projects for Emergency Repair – SHOPP Emergency Response Program

$1,355,000 1.12

Caltrans SHOPP-RP 31600000000

At Various Locations, Grouped Projects for Pavement Resurfacing and/or Rehabilitation - SHOPP Roadway Preservation Program (Non-Capacity Increasing Projects)

$29,225,000 1.10

Caltrans SHOPP-RSP 21600000212

At Various Locations, Grouped Projects for Roadside Preservation to enhance, preserve or restore scenic and native landscape areas within or near roadsides - SHOPP Roadside Preservation Program (Non-Capacity Increasing Projects)

$2,959,000 1.15

Avenal CM5424A 21600000213 In Avenal, At the Avenal Police Department Purchase solar-powered EV charging stations

$155,000 4.01

County CM5945B 21600000214 In Kings County, Near Kettleman City, At SR 41/Bernard Dr. Intersection Construct Roundabout

$621,000 1.06


Transit Agency FTA5339A 21600000217 KCAPTA Transit Facility Maintenance $83,000 2.08



APPENDIX D

Non-Exempt Projects


NONE


APPENDIX E

FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS THAT IMPLEMENT

APPROVED TCMS


Kings County Association of Governments 2019 RACM Timely Implementation Documentation Update

RACM Commitment Agency Measure Title

Measure Description (not verbatim)

Implementation Status

2019 FTIP Conformity Analysis

(as of 7/16) (as of 6/18)

KI3.8 Avenal Purchase vans for vanpools

Purchase a set number of Vans to encourage local employee commute travel

Commitment complete.


KI9.2 Avenal Encouragement of Pedestrian Travel

Encourage the use of pedestrian travel as an alternative to automobile travel

Implementation ongoing.


KI9.5 Avenal Encouragement of Bicycle Travel

Promotion of bicycle travel



KI15.1 Avenal Encouragement of Pedestrian Travel

Promote public awareness



TCM1 Avenal Traffic Flow Improvements

Flow improvements include cross-valley rail, signalization improvement, and corridor improvements

No additional implementation needs have been identified at this time. City will continue to monitor.

No additional implementation needs have been identified at this time. City will continue to monitor

TCM4 Avenal Bicycle Programs

Fund bicycle projects



5.4 Avenal Site-Specific Transportation Control Measures

Considerations will be included in the design and engineering functions



KI1.5 Corcoran Expansion of Public Transportation Systems

Expand and enhance existing public transit services



KI1.6 Corcoran

Transit Service Improvements in Combination with Park-and-Ride Lots and Parking Management

Improve the public transit system and add new Park-and-Ride facilities and spaces as needed



KI9.2 Corcoran Encouragement of Pedestrian Travel

Encourage the use of pedestrian travel



KI9.5 Corcoran Encouragement of Bicycle Travel

Promotion of bicycle travel








(as of 7/16) (as of 6/18)

TCM4 Corcoran Bicycle Programs

Fund bicycle projects



5.3 Corcoran Reduce Traffic Congestion at Major Intersections

Implement traffic control techniques as part of routine road maintenance



5.4 Corcoran Site-Specific Transportation Control Measures

Considerations will be included in the design and engineering functions



KI1.6 Hanford

Transit Service Improvements in Combination with Park-and-Ride Lots and Parking Management

Local jurisdictions and transit agency improve the public transit system and add new park and ride facilities and spaces on an as needed basis.



KI6.1 Hanford Park and Ride Lots

Develop, design, and implement new park and ride facilities in locations where they are needed.

Project was cancelled due to UPRR not willing to sell property for project.


KI9.2 Hanford Encouragement of Pedestrian Travel

Encourage the use of pedestrian travel as an alternative to automobile travel.



KI9.3 Hanford Bicycle/Pedestrian Program

Fund high priority bicycle/pedestrian projects in countywide plans consistent with available funding.

See Project TID Table, K-9.3 (10th Ave. sidewalks and bike route). Project completed in 2014.


KI9.5 Hanford Encouragement of Bicycle Travel

Promotion of bicycle travel to reduce automobile use and improve air quality. Bikeway system planning, routes for inter-city bike trips to help bicyclists avoid other less safe facilities. Development and distribution of educational materials regarding bicycle use and safety.

See Project TID Table, K-9.3 (10th Ave. sidewalks and bike route). Project completed in 2014.


5.3 Hanford Reduce Traffic Congestion at Major Intersections

Implement a wide range of traffic control techniques, including signalization, turn lanes, or median dividers.



5.4 Hanford Site-Specific Transportation Control Measures

Geometric or traffic control improvements at specific congested intersections.








(as of 7/16) (as of 6/18)

5.9 Hanford Bus Pullouts In Curbs for Passenger Loading

Provide bus pullouts in curbs, or queue bumper lanes for passenger loading and unloading.



KI15.1 Lemoore Encouragement of Pedestrian Travel

Promote public awareness and use of walking as an alternative to the motor vehicle.



5.3 Lemoore Reduce Traffic Congestion at Major Intersections




5.4 Lemoore Site-Specific Transportation Control Measures




KI9.2 County of Kings Encouragement of Pedestrian Travel

Encourage the use of pedestrian travel as an alternative to automobile travel.



KI15.1 County of Kings Encouragement of Pedestrian Travel

Promote public awareness and use of walking as an alternative to the motor vehicle.



TCM1 County of Kings Traffic Flow Improvements

Flow improvements include cross-valley rail, signalization improvement, and corridor improvements

See Project TID Table. (Install traffic signal 13th Ave. and Lacey Blvd.) County continues to develop capital projects to improve traffic flow. Implementation ongoing.

Project completed in 2018. County continues to develop capital projects to improve traffic flow. Implementation ongoing.

5.3 County of Kings Reduce Traffic Congestion at Major Intersections


No additional implementation needs have been identified at this time. County will continue to monitor.

No additional implementation needs have been identified at this time. County will continue to monitor.

5.4 County of Kings Site-Specific Transportation Control Measures


See Project TID Table. (Install traffic signal 13th Ave. and Lacey Blvd.) County continues to develop capital projects to improve traffic flow. Implementation ongoing.

Project completed in 2018. County continues to develop capital projects to improve traffic flow. Implementation ongoing.






(as of 7/16) (as of 6/18)

5.9 County of Kings Bus Pullouts In Curbs for Passenger Loading

Provide bus pullouts in curbs, or queue bumper lanes for passenger loading and unloading.



KI10.2 Kings County Area Public Transit Agency

Bike Racks on Buses

Provide bike racks on buses to promote the use of transit by bike riders.



TCM2 Kings County Area Public Transit Agency

Public Transit

Purchase of CNG buses and improved service routes.




Kings County Association of Governments 2019 Timely Implementation Documentation

RACM Commitment

Agency Commitment Description

Commitment Schedule

Commitment Funding

TIP TIP

Project ID Project Description Implementation Status

2019 FTIP Conformity

Analysis (as of 7/16) (as of 6/18)

KI - 1.6 Avenal Transit Service Improvements in combination with Park-and-Ride Lots and Parking Management

in process CMAQ 2000 CML619811 Purchase Vans for expanded Senior Service

Avenal will continue to monitor the need for a Park-and-Ride Lot. No need identified / warranted at this time.

Avenal will continue to monitor the need for a Park-and-Ride Lot. No need identified / warranted at this time.

KI-5.3 Avenal Reduce traffic congestion at major intersections.

2002 Safe Routes to School

2002 KIN-HES2 A traffic signal has been installed at Interstate 269 and Seventh Avenue.

Completed Completed

KI - 10.2 Corcoran bike racks on two new buses

in process CMAQ 1999 CML522302 Purchase Buses and Associated Equipment

Completed Completed

2000 CML522305 Purchase Buses and Associated Equipment

Completed Completed

2002 CML522306 Purchase Buses and Associated Equipment

Completed Completed

TCM1 Corcoran Traffic Flow Improvements

in process CMAQ 1999 CML522307 Upgrade traffic signals at various locations

Completed. Completed

TCM 2 Corcoran 3 additional buses pending CMAQ 1999 CML522302 Purchase Buses and Associated Equipment for Expanded Service

Completed Completed

2000-Amend. #1

CML522305 Purchase Small Bus for Service Expansion

Completed Completed

2002 CML522306 Purchase Large Bus for Service Expansion

Completed Completed

KI TCM1 Hanford Traffic Flow Improvements

in process CMAQ 2002 CML509101 On UP-SJVRR Coalinga Branch line between Huron and Visalia, upgrade railroad within Kings County.

Completed. Completed


ADDITIONAL PROJECTS IDENTIFIED

5.4 Hanford Site-Specific TCMs FY 07-08 CMAQ 2004 CML509126 Install traffic signal 11th Ave. at

Hume Ave. Completed Completed

CML509127 Install traffic signal 12th Ave. at Hanford Armona Rd.

Completed Completed

FY 08-09 CMAQ 2006 CML-5091H Install traffic signal Grangeville at Centennial

Completed Completed

FY 09-10 CMAQ 2006 CML-5091J Install traffic signal 12th Ave. at Muscat

Completed Completed

FY 07-08 CMAQ 2006 CML509133 Install traffic signal 12th Ave. at Greenfield

Completed Completed

5.3 Hanford Reduce Traffic Congestion at Major Intersections

FY 06-07 CMAQ 2006 CML509129 Traffic Signal Coordination Study Completed Completed

9.3 Hanford Bicycle/Pedestrian Program

FY09-10 CMAQ 2006 CML-5091K Install Sidewalks and Bike Route, 10th Ave. from SR 198 to Hanford Armona Rd.

Complete d in 2014. Completed

5.4 Lemoore Site-Specific TCMs FY 07-08 CMAQ 2004 CML511510 Install traffic signal Bush St. at Belle Haven Dr.

Developer project cancelled. No need for project. Project deleted.

Developer project cancelled. No need for project. Project deleted.

CML511511 Install traffic signal Bush St. at 19th Ave.

Completed Completed

CML-5115F Install traffic signal Bush St. at 19 1/2 Ave.

Agency is not going to proceed with traffic signal project. Project is deleted.

Agency is not going to proceed with project. Project is deleted.

FY 08-09 CML511520 Install traffic signal Hanford Armona Rd. at Fox St.

Completed Completed

TCM1 County of Kings

Traffic Flow Improvements

FY 07-08 CMAQ 2004 CML595465 Install traffic signal 13th Ave. and Lacey Bl.

Implementation ongoing, project delayed to FY 2015/16.

Project completed in 2018.


TCM2 Kings County Area Public Transit Agency

Public Transit FY 05-06 CMAQ 2004 CML619813 Purchase CNG Buses Completed Completed

FY 05-06 CMAQ 2004 CML619814 Operating assistance for expanded Hanford-Lemoore Fixed Route

Completed Completed

FY 08-09 CMAQ 2006 CML619818 Purchase CNG Buses Completed Completed


APPENDIX F

PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE DRAFT 2019 FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, THE DRAFT 2018 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION

PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY, CORRESPONDING DRAFT CONFORMITY ANALYSIS, AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG) Transportation Policy Committee will hold a public hearing on July 25, 2018 at 4:30 p.m. at the Kings County Government Center, Board of Supervisors’ Chambers at 1400 W. Lacey Blvd., Hanford regarding the Draft 2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (2019 FTIP), the Draft 2018 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy (2018 RTP/SCS), the corresponding Draft Air Quality Conformity Analysis for the 2019 FTIP and 2018 RTP/SCS and the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The purpose of the public hearing is to receive public comments on these documents.

The 2019 FTIP is a near-term listing of capital improvement and operational expenditures utilizing federal and state monies for transportation projects in Kings County during the next four years.

The public notice also satisfies the Program of Projects (POP) requirements of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Urbanized Area Formula Program, Section 5307. If no comments are received on the proposed POP, the proposed transit program (funded with FTA Section 5307 dollars) will be the final program.

The 2018 RTP/SCS is a long-term coordinated transportation/land use strategy to meet Kings County’s transportation needs out to the year 2042.

The Supplemental Program EIR document provides an analysis of potential environmental impacts related to the implementation of the RTP/SCS as required by the California Environmental Quality Act.

The corresponding Conformity Analysis contains the documentation to support a finding that the 2019 FTIP and 2018 RTP/SCS meet the air quality conformity requirements for ozone and particulate matter.

Individuals with disabilities may call KCAG staff at 559-852-2654 (with 3-working-day advance notice) to request auxiliary aids necessary to participate in the public hearing. Translation services are available (with 3-working-day advance notice) to participants speaking any language with available professional translation services. An additional public hearing will be held by KCAG staff, to receive public comments on the Draft 2018 Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), on July 11, 2018, at 1:30 p.m. at the KCAG office at 339 W. D Street, Suite B, Lemoore, CA. A concurrent 55-day public review and comment period will commence on June 15, 2018 and conclude on August 8, 2018. The draft documents are available for review at the KCAG office, located at 339 W. D Street, Suite B, Lemoore, CA and on KCAG’s website at www.kingscog.org. Public comments are welcomed at the hearing, or may be submitted in writing by 5:00 p.m. on August 8, 2018 to Yunsheng Luo at the address below. After considering the comments, the documents will be considered for adoption, by resolution, by the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee at a regularly scheduled meeting to be held on August 22, 2018. The documents will then be submitted to state and federal agencies for approval. Contact Person: Yunsheng Luo, Regional Planner 339 W. D Street, Suite B, Lemoore, CA 93245 (559) 852-2584

[email protected] Publish: June 12, 2018



Comments Received for 2019 FTIP

RECEIVED FROM:

COMMENT:

KCAG RESPONSE

Caltrans Office of Federal Transportation Management Program (OFTMP)

OFTMP provided comments regarding the section of Operations and Maintenance Costs to Preserve the Existing System: (a) The 23 CFR 450.324 (h) should be revised to 23

CFR 450.326 (j). (b) 23 CFR 450.326 (j) requires a system-level

estimate of costs and revenue sources that are reasonably expected to be available to adequately operate and maintain the Federal-aid highways. KCAG needs to include a discussion of costs to maintain the Federal-aid highway system in the Draft 2019 FTIP.

(a) The 23 CFR 450.324 (h) has been revised to 23 CFR 450.326 (j).

(b) KCAG has included a more thorough discussion and a table of estimated costs and revenue sources for operation and maintenance for Federal-aid highways to address this comment.

OFTMP requested KCAG to provide more information for the project (CTIPS ID: 21600000204) to ensure its eligibility to receive CMAQ funds.

KCAG had a clarification discussion with the sponsor agency to obtain more information and revised the project description to reflect the accurate information and ensure that the project meets the CMAQ eligibility requirements.

OFTMP pointed out on the page of Glossary of Terms, “FSTIP” should be Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program.

This comment has been address under the Glossary of Terms.

OFTMP pointed out that the term “RACM” should be indicated under the Glossary of Terms.

The term “RACM” has been added under the Glossary of Terms.

OFTMP pointed out that regarding the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Grouped Back-up Listing under CTIPS 21600000169, this backup list is missing the project description.

Project description has been added into the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Grouped Back-up Listing.

OFTMP pointed out that SHOPP Back-up listings are mislabeled and requested KCAG to revise the heading “SHOPP CTIPS ID” to “CT Project ID”.

The heading has been revised to “CT Project ID” in all the SHOPP Back-up listings.



RECEIVED FROM:

COMMENT:

KCAG RESPONSE

Caltrans Office of Federal Transportation Management Program (OFTMP)

OFTMP advised KCAG to remove the Highway Instructure Program (HIP) from CTIPS database because there should be no entries in the database without project identified for this funding source.

KCAG has removed the entry pertinent to HIP from CTIPS database, given that KCAG currently does not have HIP projects.

City of Lemoore

Linda Beyersdorf from City of Lemoore requested KCAG to revise “Lona Avenue” to “Green Lane” under Limits in the Bike and Pedestrian Facilities Grouped Back-up Listing to be consistent with their project description.

This change has been addressed per the request from the city in the Bike and Pedestrian Facilities Grouped Back-up listing.

A public comment period for 2019 FTIP was held from June 15, 2018 to August 8, 2018. KCAG Staff appreciates the review of the 2019 FTIP and

the comment from Caltrans Office of Federal Transportation Management Program and the City of Lemoore.




APPENDIX G

GROUPED PROJECT BACK-UP LISTINGS

Local Unpaved Roadway Seal Projects (SEAL)2019 FTIP Back up List for


Backup List Updated On: June 11, 2018 CTIPS#: 216-0000-0194Amendment #:

Route Limits Length (MI) FY PE R/W CON TOTAL COST CMAQ Local CMAQ PROJECT1 10th Avenue Redding Ave to Racine Ave 1.00 2016/17 170,288$ 150,755$ 19,533$ 150,755$ 2 5th Avenue Nevada Ave to Orange Ave 2.00 340,681$ 301,604$ 39,077$ 452,359$ 3 Racine Avenue 4th Ave to 6th Ave 2.00 340,681$ 301,604$ 39,077$ 753,963$ 851,650$ 1 10th Avenue Racine Ave to Seattle Ave 2.00 2017/18 320,000$ 283,296$ 36,704$ 283,296$ 320,000$ 1 20th Avenue SR41 to Lansing Ave 0.75 2018/19 52,948$ 46,875$ 6,073$ 46,875$ 2 16th Avenue Jersey Ave to Kent Ave 1.00 70,598$ 62,500$ 8,098$ 109,375$ 3 20th Avenue Excelsior Ave to Everett Ave 0.50 35,299$ 31,250$ 4,049$ 140,625$ 4 Hanford-Armona Road 1-1/2 Ave to 2nd Ave 0.50 35,299$ 31,250$ 4,049$ 171,875$ 5 Denver Avenue 7th Ave to 8th Ave 1.00 70,598$ 62,500$ 8,098$ 234,375$ 6 22nd Avenue Laurel Ave to Kings River 1.25 88,247$ 78,125$ 10,122$ 312,500$ 7 8th Avenue Denver Ave to Dover Ave 1.00 70,598$ 62,500$ 8,098$ 375,000$ 8 Nevada Avenue SR41 to Two Miles West 2.00 141,195$ 125,000$ 16,195$ 500,000$ 564,783$ 1 Lacey Boulevard 22nd Ave to South Fork Kings River 1.50 Future 96,000$ 84,989$ 11,011$ 84,989$ 2 15th Avenue Nevada Ave to Newton Ave 1.00 64,000$ 56,659$ 7,341$ 141,648$ 3 7-1/2 Avenue Grangeville Blvd to Fargo Ave 1.00 64,000$ 56,659$ 7,341$ 198,307$ 4 9th Avenue Dover Ave to North Ave 0.75 48,000$ 42,494$ 5,506$ 240,802$ 5 22nd Avenue Laurel Ave to Kings River 1.25 80,000$ 70,824$ 9,176$ 311,626$ 6 22nd Avenue SR41 to Laurel Ave 2.00 128,000$ 113,318$ 14,682$ 424,944$ 7 22nd Avenue SR41 to Laurel Ave 2.00 128,000$ 113,318$ 14,682$ 538,262$ 8 1-1/2 Avenue SR198 to Grangeville Blvd 1.00 64,000$ 56,659$ 7,341$ 594,922$ 9 Kent Avenue 12th Ave to 14th Ave 2.00 128,000$ 113,318$ 14,682$ 708,240$ 10 Kent Avenue SR41 to 21st Ave 1.00 64,000$ 56,659$ 7,341$ 764,899$ 11 5th Avenue Nevada Ave to Waukena Ave 2.00 128,000$ 113,318$ 14,682$ 878,218$ 12 15th Avenue Lacey Blvd to Grangeville Blvd 1.00 64,000$ 56,659$ 7,341$ 934,877$ 13 Kent Avenue 6-1/2 Ave to Cross Creek Rd 0.40 25,600$ 22,664$ 2,936$ 957,540$ 14 21st Avenue Lansing Ave to Laurel Ave 0.50 32,000$ 28,330$ 3,670$ 985,870$ 15 Devils Den Road 25th Ave to 3 miles west 3.00 192,000$ 169,978$ 22,022$ 1,155,848$ 16 17-1/4 Avenue Grangeville Blvd to 1 mile north 1.00 64,000$ 56,659$ 7,341$ 1,212,507$ 17 21-1/2 Avenue Fremont Ave to Elgin Ave 1.00 64,000$ 56,659$ 7,341$ 1,269,166$ 18 Pyramid Hills Road SR33 to 3.0 miles west 3.00 192,000$ 169,978$ 22,022$ 1,439,144$ 19 Glendale Avenue SR41 to 21-1/2 Ave 2.00 128,000$ 113,318$ 14,682$ 1,552,462$ 20 18th Avenue Excelsior Ave to Everett Ave 0.50 32,000$ 28,330$ 3,670$ 1,580,792$ 21 19th Avenue Excelsior Ave to Everett Ave 0.50 32,000$ 28,330$ 3,670$ 1,609,121$ 2,382,380$

TOTALS 43.40 3,554,031$ 3,146,380$ 407,651$

MPO: Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG)Grouped Project for Resurface (Seal) Unpaved Roadways to Reduce PM Production

Phase Funding Program Amount FY TOTALS

Program Amount

From To PE R/W CON FY CMAQ Local

LemooreBike and Pedestrian

Facilities

In City of Lemoore: on Vine Street

from Green Lane to Caddie Loop;

construct bike and pedestrian muti

use trail

Vine Street Green Lane Caddie Loop

174,500$ 2017/18 154,000$ 20,500$

LemoorePedestrian Facilities Iona Ave Champion Ave Lemoore Ave

262,503$ 2018/19 118,341$ 144,162$

19th Ave D Street Sports Complex1,677,103$ 2019/20 756,068$ 921,035$

19th Ave Cinnamon Dr Noble St

Corcoran 26,000$ 2018/19 23,018$ 2,982$

217,000$ 2020/21 192,110$ 24,890$

Corcoran

Pedestrian Warning

FacilitiesDiary Avenue

7,750$ 102,500$ 2018/19 97,604$ 12,646$

Diary Avenue7,750$ 110,000$ 2019/20 104,244$ 13,506$

Diary Avenue7,750$ 110,000$ 2019/20 104,244$ 13,506$

HanfordPedestrian Facilities Lacey Blvd 10th Ave SR 43

50,000$ 2019/20 44,200$ 5,800$

Lacey Blvd Sierra Drive 9 1/4 Ave500,000$ 2020/21 443,000$ 57,000$

Lacey Blvd 9 1/4 Ave 10th Ave500,000$ 2021/22 443,000$ 57,000$

Hanford Bicycle Facilities 12th Avenue Hume Houston40,000$ 525,000$ 2016/17 500,195$ 64,806$

11 ½ Avenue/Milpas/Echo Davis Hume

Glacier Way Flint Fargo

Glacier Way Fargo Cortner

11th Avenue Florinda Ivy

Williams/Jones Street Davis Hume

Redington Street Grangeville Lacey

Irwin Street (10 ½) Hanford Armona Houston

10th Avenue Third Hanford Armona

10th Avenue Hanford Armona Houston

9 ¼ Avenue Leland Grangeville

9 ¼ Avenue Grangeville Lacey

Leland Way Douty 10th

Leland Way 10th 9 ¼

Elm Street Greenfield 11th

Ivy Street 11th 10th

Sixth Street 11th 10th

Davis Street 11 ½ Williams

Hume Avenue 12th Jones

Houston Avenue 12th 10th

13th Avenue Grangeville Lacey

Centennial Drive Berkshire Grangeville

Centennial Drive Grangeville Greenfield

Centennial Drive Greenfield Lacey

Centennial Drive Lacey 12th

12th Avenue Fargo Grangeville

Fitzgerald Avenue Fargo Grangeville

University Avenue Grangeville Greenfield

Campus Drive Greenfield Lacey

Campus Drive Lacey Glendale

11th Avenue Flint Fargo

11th Avenue Fargo Grangeville

11th Avenue Seventh Hanford Armona

11th Avenue Hanford Armona Hume

11th Avenue Hume Houston

Mission Drive Flint 10th

Neill Way Fargo Leland

Pepper Drive Glacier 11th

Pepper Drive/Aspen 11th Encore

Encore Drive Aspen 10th

Encore Drive 10th Fargo

Muscat Place 12th Fitzgerald

Cortner Street Glacier Kensington

Mustang/Berkshire 13th Centennial

Grangeville Blvd 13th Centennial

Liberty Street Centennial 12th

Kings County Drive 12th Lacey

Mall Drive 12th Lacey

Lacey Blvd Centennial Mall Drive

Lacey Blvd Garner Irwin

Lacey Blvd 10th 9th

Lacey Blvd 9th 8th (SR43)

Garner Avenue Lacey Seventh

Seventh Street Mall Drive 11th

Third Street 10th 9th

Hanford Armona Road 10th Airport

In close proximity to various

local school sitesVarious Various

PE R/W CON FY CMAQ Local TOTAL

296,253$ 102,500$ FY 2018/19 238,963$ 159,790$ 398,753$

65,500$ 1,897,103$ FY 2019/20 1,008,756$ 953,847$ 1,962,603$

-$ 717,000$ FY 2020/21 635,110$ 81,890$ 717,000$

-$ 500,000$ FY 2021/22 443,000$ 57,000$ 500,000$

361,753$ -$ 3,216,603$ TOTAL 2,325,829$ 1,252,527$ 3,578,356$

Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG)

Latest Update: 06/06/2018

Sponsor Agency Project Type RouteLimits Phase Funding

Grouped CMAQ Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects: CTIPS #: 216-0000-0169

Project Description

Projects are consistent with 49 CFR Part 93. 126 Exempt Table 2 and Table 3 categories - Bicycle and pedestrian facilities (both motorized

and Non-motorized)

Between Sherman and Whitney

At North Avenue

At Bell Avenue

Bicycle Facilities Whitley Aveue Duran Dairy

In City of Lemoore: on Iona Avenue

from Champion to Lemoore Avenue;

19th Avenue from D Street to Sports

Complex and Cinnamon Drive to

Noble Street; construct pedestrian

facilities; install curb, gutter and

sidewalk

In City of Corcoran: on Whitley

Avenue between Diary and Duran

Avenue; install Class II bike path

In City of Corcoran: on Diary Avenue;

between Sherman and Whitley; at Bell

Avenue; at North Avenue; install

pedestrian activated warning system

In City of Hanford: on East Lacy Blvd;

from 10th Avenue to SR 43; install

sidewalk and ADA Ramps for

pedestrian safety improvement

In City of Hanford: at various locations

throughout downtown Hanford; install

signage and striping along Class II

Bike Lanes and Class III Bike Routes;

install ADA compliant ramps, high

visibility crosswalks and signage for

pedestrians and schools

2016/17-2021/22 Highway Bridge Program

See the appropriate FTIP/FSTIP for current funding commitments. This listing provides the backup project information to support the lump sum amountsprogrammed in the FTIP.

Note id: 24

1) This is the FTIP lump sum “backup” list for HBP funded projects. Please see the Local Assistance web site for the most currentlistings:

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/hbrr99/HBP_FSTIP.html

2) The purpose of this list is to show which projects being advanced by local agencies have met the eligibility requirements of thefederal Highway Bridge Program and have been prioritized for funding by the Department in cooperation with local agencies for funding.

3) Contractual funding levels are determined at time of federal authorization/obligation for given phase of work. For details seeChapter 3 of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual.

4) For FTIP/FSTIP purposes, Federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funding constraint is managed by Caltrans.

5) Prop 1B bond funds for the Local Seismic Safety Retrofit Program (LSSRP) used for matching federal funds are also managed byCaltrans.

6) Financial constraint of LOCAL matching funds (including regional STIP funds) and LOCAL Advance Construction (AC) is theresponsibility of the MPOs and their local agencies.

7) Some projects show that they are programmed using State STP funds. These funds are HBP funds transferred to the STP forbridge work that is not ordinarily eligible for HBP funds. See the HB Program Guidelines for details. Do not confuse these STPfunds with Regional STP funds.

8) Corrections to this report should be addressed to the District Local Assistance Engineer:

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/dlae.htm

Notes:

3/29/2018, 2:41 PM

Caltrans, Division of Local Assistance Page 13/29/2018, 2:41 PM Det2 FL4 SmlTxt brf


District: County:Responsible Agency

06 Kings


HBP-ID Project Description

Kings County BRIDGE NO. 45C0118, 16TH AVE, OVER TULARE LAKE CANAL, 0.3 MI N NEVADA AVE. Replace 2 lane Bridge with 2 lane Bridge 8/13/2010: Toll Credits programmed for PE, R/W, & CON.

Fund Source Summary:

PER/W

Total

75,000

421,000

CON

Total

1,909,000

346,000

75,000

2,330,000

346,000

1,909,0001,909,000

Phase Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total 421,000

LSSRP Bond

Total2,330,000

2,330,000

421,000 1,909,000

1,909,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

3578

5945(081)Project #:

PE Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total 346,000

LSSRP Bond

Total346,000

346,000

346,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

R/W Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total 75,000

LSSRP Bond

Total75,000

75,000

75,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

CON Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total

LSSRP Bond

Total1,909,000

1,909,000

1,909,000

1,909,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond




06 Kings



Kings County BRIDGE NO. PM00144. Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program (BPMP) various bridges in the County of Kings. See Caltrans LocalAssistance HBP website for backup list of projects.


PER/W

Total

CON

Total

1,605,000 1,605,000

560,000 560,000

560,000 1,605,000 2,165,000

Phase Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total

LSSRP Bond

Total495,768 1,420,907 1,916,675

64,232 184,094 248,326

560,000 1,605,000 2,165,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

4340

5945(102)5945(103)

Project #:

PE Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total

LSSRP Bond

Total495,768 495,768

64,232 64,232

560,000 560,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

CON Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total

LSSRP Bond

Total1,420,907 1,420,907

184,094 184,094

1,605,000 1,605,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond




06 Kings



Kings County BRIDGE NO. PM00182, Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program (BPMP) various bridges in Kings County. See Caltrans Local Assistance HBPwebsite for backup list of projects.


PER/W

Total

CON

Total

1,539,000

540,000 540,000

540,000 2,079,0001,539,0001,539,000

Phase Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total

LSSRP Bond

Total478,062 1,840,539

61,938 238,461

540,000 2,079,000

1,362,477

176,523

1,539,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

New!4606

Project #:

PE Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total

LSSRP Bond

Total478,062 478,062

61,938 61,938

540,000 540,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

CON Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total

LSSRP Bond

Total1,362,477

176,523

1,539,000

1,362,477

176,523

1,539,000

Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond




06 Kings



Number of Projects:

MPO Summary:

Fed $

Local AC

Local Match

Total for all Phases 421,000

LSSRP Bond

Total

495,768 1,420,907 478,062 6,087,213

64,232 184,094 61,938 486,787

560,000 1,605,000 540,000 6,574,000

421,000 3,271,477

176,523

3,448,000

Totals:


Prior 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Beyond

3


Dist County Route Post Miles Location/Description CT Project ID EA PPNO Prog Code FY PA&ED PS&E RW RW SUP CON CON SUP Fund Type Total

Prior 350$ 950$ 40$ SHOPP-AC 1,340$

2018/19 510$ SHOPP-AC 510$

2019/20 770$ 3$ 35$ SHOPP-AC 808$

2020/21 3,790$ 540$ SHOPP-AC 4,330$

TOTAL 860$ 1,720$ 16$ 75$ 8,490$ 1,140$ 12,301$

PE RW CON

1,300$ 40$ 1,340$

510$ 13$ 5,300$ 5,823$

770$ 38$ 808$

4,330$ 4,330$

C 2,580$ 91$ 5,300$ 12,301$

06 KIN 198 8.3/R19.4

In and near Lemoore and Hanford, from

Route 41 to 10th Avenue Undercrossing.

Pave areas beyond gore and bridge

slopes.


State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP)

Collision Reduction Grouped Listing: CTIPS 216-0000-0106

Back up Project List Updated on: 04/13/2018

(Dollars rounded to $1,000's)

0615000053 OT290 6737 201.235

2018/19

06 KIN 198 R19.4/22.5

Near Hanford, from 0.4 mile east of 10th

Avenue Overcrossing to 1.5 miles east of

Route 43/198 Separation. Upgrade gore

areas, construct Maintenance Vehicle

Pullouts (MVPs) and slope paving at

bridges.

5,313$

Prior

2019/20

Total

13$ 4,700$ 600$ SHOPP-AC

0616000037 OU790 6799 201.235

2020/21

2018/19


Prior 640$ 1,880$ 1,000$ SHOPP-AC 3,520$

TOTAL 640$ 1,880$ 130$ 1,000$ 15,000$ 1,850$ 20,500$

PE RW CON

2,520$ 1,000$ 3,520$

130$ 16,850$ 16,980$

2,520$ 1,130$ 16,850$ 20,500$

06 KIN VAR

In Kings and Tulare Counties, on Route

63, 99, 137, 198 and 216. Repair and

replace stolen and damaged electrical

systems and protect electrical and

irrigation facilities. The work is required to

restore incident management, emergency

readiness, mobility, functionality, and

operation efficiency.



Emergency Response Grouped Listing: CTIPS 216-0000-0210



0616000027 OU300 6797 201.131

Total

2019/20 130$

Prior

15,000$ 1,850$ SHOPP-AC 16,980$

2019/20


Prior 2,300$ SHOPP-AC 2,300$

2019/20 2,700$ 400$ SHOPP-AC 3,100$

2021/22 94$ 21,400$ 6,400$ SHOPP-AC 27,894$

TOTAL 2,300$ 2,700$ 94$ 400$ 21,400$ 6,400$ 33,294$

PE RW CON

2,300$ 2,300$

2,700$ 400$ 3,100$

94$ 27,800$ 27,894$

5,000$ 494$ 27,800$ 33,294$



Bridge Preservation Grouped Listing: CTIPS 216-0000-0113



2019/20

2021/22

Total

0616000208 OV110 6873 201.110

Prior

In and near Stratford, from 22nd Street to

Laurel Avenue at the Kings River Bridge

No. 45-0007. Replace 73 year old bridge

due to extensive superstructure and

substructure distress and susceptibility to

liquefaction.

30.6/33.041KIN06


2018/19 270$ SHOPP-AC 270$

2019/20 590$ 7$ 22$ SHOPP-AC 619$

2020/21 1,550$ 520$ SHOPP-AC 2,070$

TOTAL 270$ 590$ 7$ 22$ 1,550$ 520$ 2,959$

PE RW CON

270$ 270$

590$ 29$ 619$

2,070$ 2,070$

860$ 29$ 2,070$ 2,959$

0617000010 OV820 6815 201.210

2019/20

2020/21


Total



Roadside Preservation Grouped Listing: CTIPS 216-0000-0212


2018/19

06 KIN 198 R16.6/R21.5

In and near Hanford, from 0.3 mile west of

12th Avenue to 0.5 mile east of Route

43/198 Separation. Electrical upgrade of

booster pumps, replace irrigation mainline,

valves and valve wiring.

Kings County

SHOPP Lump Sum by Category and Fund Type

Dollars x $1000

2018

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 22/2321/2220/2119/2018/19

SHOPP - Bridge Preservation

$33,294 $3,100$2,300 $27,894 $5,000 $494 $27,800Bridge - State (HBRR)

$33,294 $2,300 $3,100 $27,894 $5,000 $494 $27,800TOTAL

SHOPP - Collision Reduction

$12,301 $808$5,823$1,340 $4,330 $2,580 $91 $9,630National Hwy System

$12,301 $1,340 $5,823 $808 $4,330 $2,580 $91 $9,630TOTAL

SHOPP - Emergency Response

$20,500 $16,980$3,520 $2,520 $1,130 $16,850National Hwy System

$20,500 $3,520 $16,980 $2,520 $1,130 $16,850TOTAL

SHOPP - Roadside Preservation

$2,959 $619$270 $2,070 $860 $29 $2,070National Hwy System

$2,959 $270 $619 $2,070 $860 $29 $2,070TOTAL

$56,350 $1,744 $10,960 $27,894 $6,400 $21,507 $6,093 $7,160 $69,054 MPO TOTAL

4/13/2018 7:05:58AM

Kings County


Dollars x $1000

2018

SHOPP - Bridge Preservation

RWPEDESCRIPTIONRouteEAMPO_ID COCTIPS ID Dist CON

In and near Stratford, from 22nd Street to Laurel Avenue at the Kings River Bridge

No. 45-0007. Replace 73 year old bridge due to extensive superstructure and

substructure distress and susceptibility to liquefaction.

11600000263 KIN 06 0V110 41 5,000 494 27,800

5,000 SHOPP - Bridge Preservation Total: 494 27,800

4/13/2018 7:05:58AM

Kings County


Dollars x $1000

2018

SHOPP - Collision Reduction


In and near Lemoore and Hanford, from Route 41 to 10th Avenue Undercrossing.

Pave areas beyond gore and bridge slopes.

11600000255 KIN 06 0T290 198 1,300 53 5,300

Near Hanford, from 0.4 mile east of 10th Avenue Overcrossing to 1.5 miles east of

Route 43/198 Separation. Upgrade gore areas, construct Maintenance Vehicle

Pullouts (MVPs) and slope paving at bridges.

11600000261 KIN 06 0U790 198 1,280 38 4,330

2,580 SHOPP - Collision Reduction Total: 91 9,630

4/13/2018 7:05:58AM

s110453

Rectangle

Kings County


Dollars x $1000

2018

SHOPP - Emergency Response


In Kings and Tulare Counties, on Routes 63, 99,137, 198 and 216. Repair and

replace stolen and damaged electrical systems and protect electrical and

irrigation facilities. The work is required to restore incident management,

11600000256 KIN 06 0U300 Var 2,520 1,130 16,850

2,520 SHOPP - Emergency Response Total: 1,130 16,850

4/13/2018 7:05:58AM

Kings County


Dollars x $1000

2018

SHOPP - Roadside Preservation


In and near Hanford, from 0.3 mile west of 12th Avenue to 0.5 mile east of Route

43/198 Separation. Electrical upgrade of booster pumps, replace irrigation

mainline, valves and valve wiring.

11600000262 KIN 06 0V820 198 860 29 2,070

860 SHOPP - Roadside Preservation Total: 29 2,070

4/13/2018 7:05:58AM

s110453

Rectangle




APPENDIX H

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

(SOURCE: KINGS COUNTY 2018 RTP/SCS)

2018 Kings County Regional Transportation Plan

Appendix IV

APPENDIX IV

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT


Appendix IV Page IV-1

Transportation Performance Management The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st (MAP-21) is the Federal transportation funding bill signed into law in 2012. A key feature of MAP-21 is the establishment of a performance- and outcome- based program, known as “Performance Based Planning”, with the objective to invest in projects that will make progress toward the achievement of the national goals for the transportation. The most recent Federal transportation bill, Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act of 2016 (FAST Act), carries forward the same performance management framework. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) worked with state and regional agencies to identify performance measures that meet the requirements. Beginning in 2018, state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) and Metropolitan Transportation Organizations (MPOs) will be required to implement the Federal performance measures. Transportation Performance Management (TPM) is defined by FHWA as a strategic approach that uses information to make investments and policy decisions to achieve national performance goals. Three sets of performance measures are part of the TPM Regulations as “Performance Management” (PM): PM 1: Safety Measures PM 2: Infrastructure Measures (Pavement/Bridge) PM 3: System Performance Measures State DOTs, such as Caltrans, are responsible for submitting performance targets and periodic reports on progress to those targets to FHWA. MPOs, such as KCAG, are required to establish targets for the same performance measures for the MPOs’ planning area within 180 days after the state establishes each target. MPOs may elect to support the statewide targets, establish numerical targets specific to their region, or use a combination of both approaches. For MPOs, these targets must be incorporated into their planning process, which includes their Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Table 1 provides the timeline for the TPM target setting.



TABLE 1

Performance Management Implementation Timeline

Final Rule Effective Date States Set Targets By

MPOs Set Targets By

LRSTP, MTP, STIP and TIP Inclusion

Safety Performance Measures (PM 1)

April 14, 2016 Aug. 31, 2017 Up to 180 days after the State sets targets, but not later than Feb. 27, 2018

Updates or amendments on or after May 27, 2018

Pavement/ Bridge Performance Measures (PM 2)

May 20, 2017 May 20, 2018 No later than 180 days after the State(s) sets targets


System Performance Measures (PM 3)

May 20, 2017 May 20, 2018 No later than 180 days after the State(s) sets targets


Safety Performance Measures (PM 1) FHWA issued the Safety Performance Management Final Rule (Safety PM) as an implementation of the Highways Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), effective April 14, 2016. The Safety PM identified the core Federal safety goal “to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads.” The Safety PM establishes five performance measures to carry out the HSIP, defined as five-year rolling averages for: 1. Number of Fatalities 2. Rate of Fatalities per 100 million Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 3. Number of Serious Injuries 4. Rate of Serious Injuries per 100 million VMT 5. Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Non-Motorized Serious Injuries Statewide Safety Targets Caltrans’ approach to setting targets was guided by the Safety PM as well as the Caltrans Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) and Strategic Management Plan (SMP). In cooperation with the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS), Caltrans adopted five Safety Performance Management Targets shown on Table 2.



TABLE 2

State Safety Performance Management Targets

State 2018 Set on August 31 2017 (5 year Rolling Averages)*

Measure Data Source Target Details

Number of Fatalities FARS 3,590.8 Toward Zero Deaths (TZD) – Vison based on a year to year decrease of 7.69% from 2017 onwards

Rate of Fatalities (per 100 Million VMT)

FARS & HPMS

1.029 Toward Zero Deaths (TZD) – Vision based on a year to year decrease of 7.69% from 2017 onwards

Number of Serious Injuries SWITRS 12,823.4Target that decreases 1.5% per year starting in 2017

Rate of Serious Injuries (per 100 Million VMT)

SWITRS & HPMS

3.831 Target that decreases 1.5% per year starting in 2017

Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Non-

Motorized Serious Injuries (Bicycle and Pedestrians)

FARS & SWITRS

4,271.1 Target that decreases 10% per year, from 2017 onwards for both fatalities and serious injuries

*A 5-year rolling average is the unweighted mean of the previous 5 values Caltrans’ methodology for target setting included three steps, which are: (1) estimating the existing trends to determine where we are now, (2) determining what external factors will impact the target in order to forecast future trends, and (3) to estimate targets based on forecasted fatality reductions from safety plans. Since the safety performance targets are set a year in advance where at least two years of collision data is unknown, forecasting future collision trends was required. Caltrans considered external factors that could affect collision, fatality and serious injury rates on public roads. This analysis referenced an active National Cooperative Highway Research Project (NCHRP) 17-67 titled, “Identification of Factors Contributing to the Decline of Fatalities in the United States.”, which preliminarily determined that economic factors contribute up to 85% of the variation of collisions on a yearly basis. Factors, such as Unemployment and per capital Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth, can account for majority the variation in collision trends. To accurately forecast future collision trends, the difficult task of forecasting the economy with political and economic uncertainties would be required. In forecasting trends, Caltrans elected to take a more straightforward approach by taking currently existing data for previous years and extrapolating these values to get the remaining and current years. Caltrans also used a vision-based or “aspirational” target setting approach consistent with the SHSP and SMP, such as the Toward Zero Deaths principle. The number of fatalities and rate of fatalities are shown in Figure 1 and 2. Historical data is from National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), which records data on all public roads. Rate of fatalities is calculated using Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) from the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS). The



figures show a forecasted 13% from 2016 to 2017 based on the trend from the existing data from 2015 to 2016. Fatalities decrease at a rate of 7.69% at 2018 to 2020, based on the SHSP’s goal of Toward Zero Deaths concept by 2030. Figure 1 Caltrans Number of Fatalities Target Setting

Figure 2 Caltrans Rate of Fatalities Target Setting

Number of serious injuries and rate of serious injuries are shown in Figures 3 and 4. Serious injury data is gathered from California Highway Patrol’s (CHP) Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), which includes data from local law enforcement agencies on all public roads. Rate of serious injuries is calculated using VMT from HPMS. These figures represent a 9% increase from 2016 to 2017 consistent with the trend from 2015 to 2016. Stating in the year 2018, serious injuries decrease at a rate of 1.5%. This decreasing rate aims for a vision-based target following the Caltrans’ SHSP.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 4120 4333 4240 3995 3434 3090 2720 2816 2966 3107 3102 3176 3680 4158 3838 3543 3270

5-Yr (TZD or Vision Based") 4024.4 3818.4 3495.8 3211.0 3005.2 2939.8 2942.2 3033.4 3206.2 3444.6 3590.8 3679.0 3697.9

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

NU

MB

ER

(F

AR

S)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatality Rate 1.323 1.286 1.209 1.054 0.953 0.839 0.866 0.908 0.944 0.927 0.930 1.057 1.171 1.059 0.959 0.868

5-Yr (TZD or Vision Based) 1.165 1.068 0.984 0.924 0.902 0.897 0.915 0.953 1.006 1.029 1.035 1.023

0.000

0.200

0.400

0.600

0.800

1.000

1.200

1.400

NU

MB

ER

(F

AR

S &

HP

MS)

Total Annual Fatality Rate Targets (per 100M VMT)



Figure 3 Caltrans Number of Serious Injuries Target Setting

Figure 4 Caltrans Rate of Serious Injuries Target Setting

The last safety performance target includes the number of non-motorized fatalities and non-motorized serious injuries shown on Figures 5. Non-motorized fatalities are sourced from FARS and non-motorized serious injuries are from SWITRS. The target is an aggregate of both fatalities and serious injuries from non-motorized modes (i.e. pedestrian and bicyclists). As part of the “Toward Zero Deaths” vision-based target setting, the 2016 to 2017 forecast is held constant (0.00% increase) and a reduction rate of 10.0% per year from 2017 to 2020 for both non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious Injuries 13,578 13,164 13,089 13,133 11,943 10,369 10,423 10,607 10,864 10,664 10,995 11,942 13,017 14,188 13,975 13,765 13,559

5-Yr (“Vision” Based or SHSP) 12981.4 12339.6 11791.4 11295.0 10841.2 10585.4 10710.6 11014.4 11496.4 12161.2 12823.4 13377.5 13700.9

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

NU

MB

ER

(SW

ITR

S)

Total Number of Serious Injuries (Targets)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Serious Injury Rate 4.020 3.969 3.975 3.666 3.198 3.215 3.263 3.324 3.240 3.285 3.568 3.889 4.239 4.176 4.113 4.051

5-Yr (“Vision” Based or SHSP) 3.766 3.604 3.463 3.333 3.248 3.265 3.336 3.461 3.644 3.831 3.997 4.094

0.000

0.500

1.000

1.500

2.000

2.500

3.000

3.500

4.000

4.500

NU

MB

ER

(SW

ITR

S &

HPM

S)

Annual Total Serious Injury Rate Targets (per 100M VMT)



Figure 5 Caltrans Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries Target Setting

KCAG Safety Planning and Programming As mentioned above, MPOs can elect to support the statewide targets, adopt region-specific targets, or do a combination of the two options. MPOs are required to report and document with Caltrans annually, 180 days after statewide safety targets are officially adopted. The safety performance management targets (PM 1) are set annually and the first annual deadline for reporting to PM 1 targets to Caltrans is February 27, 2018. These targets must also be incorporated into their RTP and TIP development. Consistent with other MPOs of similar size to KCAG throughout the state, KCAG has elected to support the 2018 Caltrans statewide safety performance targets (SPMTs) by planning and programming projects that contribute to these goals. Safety is central to the KCAG planning and programming process and is an initial statement in the Overall Goal of the RTP Policy Element:

“To develop a transportation system that encourages and promotes safe and efficient development, management, and operation of surface transportation systems…”

Safety is incorporated into many of the policies and objectives within the RTP, which guides transportation planning and programming. Public safety is a criteria used in evaluating projects and is integral in KCAG’s decision-making forums, which include KCAG’s Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). KCAG conducts monthly public meetings through its TPC and TAC, working closely with member agencies (cities and county) and the Caltrans in identifying safety issues such as nominating projects for the State Highway Operations and Protection Program and the Highway Safety Improvement Program.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Fatalities 836 919 919 823 791 714 760 807 878 951 933 993 985 985 887 798 718

Serious Injuries 3127 3115 3135 3110 2990 3070 3031 3121 3207 3080 3209 3214 3500 3500 3150 2835 2552

5-Yr (Vision Based) 3953.0 3917.2 3868.6 3843.4 3873.8 3923.8 3995.4 4078.6 4190.0 4270.0 4271.1 4169.3 3981.8

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

NU

MB

ER

(SW

ITR

S)

Non-Motorized Targets (Pedestrians and Bicyclists)



Many transportation projects within the region address safety issues. The following are highlighted projects which improved safety:

SR 198 / 12th Avenue Interchange – Upgraded an existing interchange which was equipped with signals and challenged by the cumulative residential and commercial growth. The purpose of the project was to alleviate future congestion and to improve safety and traffic operations.

Cinnamon Drive Bicycle/Pedestrian Project – Within the City of Lemoore, Cinnamon

Drive is a busy collector roadway that is a common route used to access schools and parks. This project constructed a Class 2 bicycle facility and ADA compliant pedestrian facilities including local bus stop facilities.

SR 198 / 19th Avenue Interchange – Originally an at-grade crossing, this project

constructed a graded interchange with a Class 2 bicycle lane and pedestrian facilities included on the overcrossing.

Kettleman City Safe Routes to School Project – In Kettleman City, this project

constructed curbs, gutters, sidewalks, signs, roadway improvements and lighted crosswalks in front of and around Kettleman City Elementary School.

KCAG Safety Targets KCAG, electing to support the statewide targets, is not required to submit specific numerical safety targets for the region. During the statewide target setting process, Caltrans and FHWA held various workshops pertaining to their methodology. Several issues regarding MPO level target setting were identified over the course of the workshops, including FHWA not evaluating MPO targets and consistency and completeness of the data among Caltrans and MPOs. One issue in particular was the variability of data at the smaller MPO level, which can be seen in the data for the Kings County region. However, as part of KCAG’s efforts in planning and programming towards supporting the Caltrans statewide safety targets, KCAG will track the region’s performance in the five safety indicators annually using the Caltrans’ established methodology explained above, bearing in mind the variability of the data. Safety performance management targets for the KCAG region are presented in Table 3. Figures 6 – 10 show the target setting graphs consistent with Caltrans’ methodology.



TABLE 3

KCAG Safety Performance Management Targets

KCAG 2018

Measures Data Source Target* Percent Reduction

Number of Fatalities FARS 34.5 -7.69%

Rate of Fatalities (per 100M VMT)

FARS & HPMS 2.179 -7.69%

Number of Severe Injuries

SWITRS 63.3 -1.5%

Rate of Severe Injuries (per 100M VMT)

SWITRS & HPMS

4.019 -1.5%

Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and

and Severe Injuries

FARS & SWITRS

10.0 -10%

*Based on 5-year rolling averages Figure 6 KCAG Number of Fatalities Target Setting

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016* 2017* 2018** 2019** 2020**

Fatalities 34 34 28 24 12 22 16 12 35 40 45 41 38 35

Fatality 5yr Avg. (Kings) 26.4 24.0 20.4 17.2 19.4 24.9 29.4 34.5 39.7 39.7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

NU

MB

ER (

FAR

S)

Number of Fatalities



Figure 7 KCAG Rate of Fatalities Target Setting

*13% increase based on State trend ** 7.69% reduction based on “Toward Zero Deaths” vision Figure 8 KCAG Number of Serious Injuries Target Setting

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016* 2017* 2018** 2019** 2020**

Fatality Rate 2.40 2.58 2.10 1.83 0.89 1.64 1.17 0.85 2.37 2.47 2.73 2.47 2.24 2.02

FR 5yr Avg. (Kings) 1.959 1.808 1.527 1.276 1.384 1.701 1.918 2.179 2.456 2.387

FR 5yr Avg. (State) 0.984 0.924 0.902 0.897 0.915 0.953 1.006 1.029 1.035 1.023

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

NU

MB

ER (

FAR

S & H

PM

S)

Fatality Rate (per 100M VMT)

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017* 2018** 2019** 2020**

Serious Injuries 112 85 73 66 50 72 59 38 60 69 75 74 73 72

SI 5yr Avg. (Kings) 77.2 69.2 64.0 57.0 55.8 59.6 60.2 63.3 70.3 72.6

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

NU

MB

ER (

SWIT

RS)

Number of Serious Injuries



Figure 9 KCAG Rate of Serious Injuries Target Setting

* 9% increase based on State trend ** 1.5% reduction based on Caltrans Strategic Highway Safety Plan

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017* 2018** 2019** 2020**

SI Rate 7.91 6.44 5.49 5.03 3.69 5.38 4.32 2.69 4.07 4.30 4.60 4.44 4.29 4.14

SI 5yr Avg. (Kings) 5.711 5.205 4.781 4.222 4.029 4.152 3.995 4.019 4.339 4.353

SI 5yr Avg. (State) 3.463 3.333 3.248 3.265 3.336 3.461 3.644 3.831 3.997 4.094

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

NU

MB

ER (

SWIT

RS

& H

PM

S)

Serious Injury Rate (per 100M VMT)



Figure 10 Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries Target Setting

* Held constant in accordance to Caltrans’ methodology ** 10% reduction based on “Toward Zero Deaths” and Strategic Highway Safety Plan The data for the five safety targets do exhibit a bit of connection between occurrences and economic conditions, such as the great recession and recovery seen in years around and on 2008. As noted above, there is variability in the data due to the small population size of Kings County which is noticeable with the drops in 2014 and sudden rises in occurrences in 2015 and around 2013. Due to the small sample sizes, there is no decipherable trend to inform an evidence-based approach. Despite the challenges in forecasting and identifying trends for a small population such as Kings County, KCAG will continue to track the region’s progress in the five safety indicators. KCAG will continue to follow and participate in Caltrans’ statewide safety target setting process. In March 2018, Caltrans began reassessing the approach to the safety target setting process. Caltrans is exploring different scenarios for setting the 2019 Safety Performance Management Targets and will be working with MPOs in exploring new approaches. KCAG will continue to work with Caltrans and follow the development of the 2019 safety performance targets. Infrastructure Performance Measures (PM 2) The second group of TPM known as “Performance Management 2” or PM 2 is for infrastructure performance, more specifically pavement and bridges, made effective May 20, 2017. These measures assess the conditions of transportation systems and help identify statewide investments to maintain pavement and bridges on the National Highway System (NHS). PM 2

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016* 2017* 2018** 2019** 2020**

Non‐Motorized SI 11 10 10 11 5 6 10 5 9 8 8 7 6 6

Non‐Motorized Fatalities 4 1 2 5 1 3 7 1 3 3 3 3 2 2

Non‐Motorized 5yr Avg. 12.0 10.8 12.0 10.8 10.0 11.0 11.4 10.0 10.6 9.8

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

NU

MB

ER (

SWIT

RS)

Non‐Motorized Fatalities and Severe Injuries (Pedestrian and Bicyclists)



targets are for the purpose of carrying out the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP). There are six federally mandated performance measures: 1. Percentage of Interstate pavements in Good condition 2. Percentage of Interstate pavements in Poor condition 3. Percentage of non-Interstate NHS pavement in Good condition 4. Percentage of non-Interstate NHS pavements in Poor condition 5. Percentage of NHS bridges in Good condition 6. Percentage of NHS bridges in Poor condition Conditions are based on standardized metrics defined by the federal performance management regulations, which outlines measurements and calculation methods for each metric resulting in a “Good”, “Fair”, or “Poor” condition. For pavement conditions, there are four metrics: roughness (based on the international roughness index or IRI), cracking, rutting, and faulting (for concrete pavement). A pavement segment is in “Good” condition when all the metrics are rated as “Good”, “Poor” condition when two or more metrics are rated as “Poor”, and “Fair” for any other combination of ratings. Bridge conditions are based on the National Bridge Inventory (NBI) rating scale which considers the condition rating of: deck, superstructure, substructure, and culverts. The NBI rating scale runs from 0 to 10 where 7 or above is “Good”, 6 to 5 is “Fair”, and 4 or below is “Poor”. Statewide PM 2 Targets Caltrans developed the California Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP), adopted in March 2018, which implemented the PM 2 framework established by FHWA. The TAMP assesses the current conditions of California’s transportation assets, establishes performance measures and identifies statewide investment strategies to achieve the performance measures. As part of FHWA’s TAMP requirements, State DOTs must specify their desired state of repair for the 10-year analysis period of the TAMP. Table 4 shows the statewide 10-year NHS asset performance targets.



Table 4 Statewide NHS Asset Performance Targets

Caltrans is required to establish 2- and 4- year performance management targets for pavement and bridge conditions (PM 2) by May 20, 2018. PM 2 targets were not included in the initial cycle due to the target setting deadline being less than six months before the initial TAMP submission deadline (April 20, 2018). As of March 2018, Caltrans is currently developing statewide PM 2 targets and its target-setting methodology. MPOs must either support the statewide targets or establish their own regional targets by November 16, 2018. KCAG will continue to monitor the development of the PM 2 target setting methodology and will work with statewide and local partners to develop targets consistent with state and federal guidelines. System Performance Measures (PM 3) The final performance management category of TPM is “Performance Management 3” or PM 3, which consists of seven performance measures related to the performance of the Interstate and non-Interstate NHS pursuant to: the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP); assessing freight movement on the Interstate System; and assessing traffic congestion and on-road mobile source emissions for the purpose of carrying out the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program. The seven measures for PM 3 are: Performance of the NHS

1. Percent of person-miles traveled on the Interstate that are reliable 2. Percent of person-miles traveled on the non-Interstate NHS that are reliable 3. Percent change in tailpipe CO2 emissions on the NHS compared to the calendar year

2017 level



Freight Movement on the Interstate System 4. Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR) Index

CMAQ Program Traffic Congestion and On-Road Mobile Sources

5. Annual Hours of Peak Hour Excessive Delay (PHED) Per Capita 6. Percent of Non-Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) Travel 7. Total Emissions Reduction

The first two measurements of PM 3 (Percent of person-miles traveled on the Interstate and non-Interstate NHS that are reliable) are measured by the Level of Travel Time Reliability (LOTTR). LOTTR is defined as “…a comparison, expressed as a ratio, of the 80th percentile travel time of a reporting segment to the “normal” (50th percentile) travel time of a reporting segment occurring throughout a full calendar year.” A segment is considered unreliable when the LOTTR ratio is greater than 1.5. Percent change in tailpipe CO2 emissions on the NHS compared to the calendar year 2017 level is the third measure among the PM 3 targets, referred to as the GHG measure. The GHG measure is described in the federal regulations as the change in the total tailpipe CO2 emissions on the NHS for the 2 preceding calendar years of the target setting year (2016/2017 for 2018 target setting). Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR) Index is the fourth measure required under PM 3. This performance measure assesses freight movement on the Interstate System and uses metrics that considers truck travel times for each period of the day. The fourth measure is Annual Hours of Peak Hour Excessive Delay (PHED) Per Capita, which is referred to as the PHED measure. Annual Hours of PHED is defined by federal regulations as “…the cumulative hours of excessive delay…experienced by all people traveling through all reporting segments during peak hours in the applicable urbanized area for the full reporting calendar year.” Percent of Non-SOV Travel is the fifth measure, which essentially is the percentage of travel that is not occurring by driving alone in a vehicle, including travel avoided by telecommuting. The last measure of PM 3, Total Emissions Reduction, tracks the reductions from all projects reported to the CMAQ Public Access System, which is a database of projects funded by CMAQ with the goal of improving air quality and congestion. This measure consists of multiple targets for each applicable pollutant under the CMAQ program. These targets are calculated by summing the total estimated emissions reductions for each criteria pollutant and precursor, in kilograms per day, for all projects funded with CMAQ funds. Statewide PM 3 Targets Caltrans is required to establish performance targets for each PM 3 measure by May 20, 2018, and MPOs must either support the statewide targets or establish their own regional targets by November 16, 2018. For the GHG measure, Caltrans must establish targets no later than September 28, 2018 and MPOs must either support the statewide targets or establish their own regional targets by March 27, 2019.



As of March 2018, Caltrans is currently developing PM 3 statewide targets and its target-setting methodology. Caltrans convened a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) consisting of MPOs to address the different approaches for target-setting. KCAG has been participating in the TAG and attending workshops hosted by Caltrans. KCAG will continue to follow the development of the PM 3 statewide targets and work with statewide and local partners to develop targets consistent with and federal guidelines. H:\RTPA\2018 RTP Update\Final RTP\Appendix IV - Performance Management - Final 2018.docx




APPENDIX I

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ANALYSIS

(SOURCE: DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIR FOR KINGS COUNTY 2018 RTP/SCS)

2018 RTP-SCS PEIR Section 4.6 Environmental Justice

KCAG 4.6-1

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE This section analyzes the impacts of the 2018 RTP/SCS on low-income populations, minority individuals and populations, and low mobility populations. A similar analysis was provided in the 2014 PEIR prepared for the 2014 RTP/SCS; however, the additional projects included in 2018 RTP/SCS have been evaluated, and baseline conditions have been updated. No environmental justice impacts were found to be significant and unavoidable in the 2014 PEIR. 4.6.1 Setting

a. Overview. Environmental justice is defined in the California Government Code as “the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies” (Gov. Code § 65040.12 (e)). In May 2012, the California Attorney General’s office released a report titled “Environmental Justice at the Local and Regional Level – Legal Background” which interprets the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to include considerations of environmental justice, although environmental justice is not explicitly mentioned in the CEQA guidelines. The report defines “fairness” in this context to mean that “the benefits of a healthy environment should be available to everyone, and the burdens of pollution should not be focused on sensitive populations or on communities that already are experiencing its adverse effects.” In the transportation context, environmental justice seeks to ensure that underserved communities are involved in transportation planning and decision-making, benefit equitably from transportation plans and investments, and do not suffer disproportionate burdens from any adverse impacts. Prior to environmental justice emerging as a regulatory issue, the issues underlying environmental justice emerged in the Civil Rights movements and are reflected in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. In 1994, the President signed Executive Order 12898 -- Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, which became effective on February 11, 1994. The Executive Order directs every federal agency to make environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing the effects of all programs, policies, and activities on minority and low-income populations. Hence, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) issued its own order, 5680.2, to clarify and reinforce environmental justice policies related to transportation planning. A branch of the DOT, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), has established policies for integrating environmental justice principles into existing operations. There are three main elements to FHWA’s environmental justice policy: • Avoid, minimize, or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse human health or

environmental effects, including social and economic effects on minority and low-income populations;

• Ensure full and fair participation by all potentially affected communities in the transportation decision-making process; and

• Prevent reduction or significant delay in the receipt of benefits by minority populations and low-income groups.

Issues of environmental justice impact low-income populations; minority individuals and populations; and low-mobility populations, and may include, but are not limited to concerns


KCAG 4.6-2

related to human health and safety, economic development, society and culture, accessibility, and the natural environment. These populations are discussed further below.

Minority populations are further defined by the guidance document prepared by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) titled Environmental Justice: Guidance Under the National Environmental Policy Act (CEQ 1997). In that document, CEQ defines “minority persons” as “individuals who are members of the following population groups: American Indian or Alaskan Native; Asian or Pacific Islander; Black (not of Hispanic origin; or Hispanic” (CEQ 1997). Hispanic or Latino refers to an ethnicity whereas American Indian, Alaskan Native, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Black/African-American (as well as White or European-American) refers to racial categories; thus, for Census purposes, individuals classify themselves into racial categories as well as ethnic categories, where ethnic categories include Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino. The 2010 U.S. Census allowed individuals to choose more than one race. For this analysis, consistent with guidance from CEQ (1997), “minority” refers to people who are Hispanic/Latino of any race, as well as those who are non-Hispanic/Latin of a race other than White or European-American. Although “Other” is quantified, it is not factored into the analysis of concentrations of minority population.

b. Demographics. Kings County consists of four incorporated cities: Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore. The County contains other census designated places and unincorporated communities. Although the baseline year for this EIR is 2017, the most recent available demographic and economic census information for Kings County (2016) is used herein to illustrate existing baseline conditions. For the purpose of this analysis, “communities of concern” were identified through analysis of demographic and socioeconomic data for minority, low-income, low community engagement, and low-mobility populations based on 2016 U.S. Census data, 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates data, California Department of Finance (DOF) data, KCAG population estimates, and KCAG employment and population projections.

Race/Ethnicity. The environmental justice analysis evaluates communities to determine their minority and low-income status based on absolute and relative criteria. A community qualifies as minority or low-income if it meets either of the two criteria that apply to each designation shown in Table 4.6-1. This analysis uses the CEQ criteria of 50 or more percent minority populations as communities of concern.

Table 4.6-1 Absolute and Relative Criteria for Environmental Justice Communities

Designation Absolute Criterion Relative Criterion Minority Blocks

Minority population that is greater than 50 percent of the total block population.

Minority population that is more than 10 percentage points higher than the surrounding area.

Low-Income Block Groups

Low-income population that is greater than 25 percent of the total block group population.

Low-income population that is more than 10 percentage points higher than the surrounding area.

Source: CEQ 1997. Environmental Justice: Guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-02/documents/ej_guidance_nepa_ceq1297.pdf.

Table 4.6-2 shows the total population within the study area as well as the racial and ethnic composition of the cities and communities comprising the KCAG region as of 2016. Note that “Hispanic” is defined as an ethnicity while the others listed in Table 4.6-2 are races. To prevent double counting, persons whom identified themselves as Hispanic were excluded from racial

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-02/documents/ej_guidance_nepa_ceq1297.pdf


KCAG 4.6-3

population counts, but comprise a portion of the total minority population. Data for white and minority populations comprise 100 percent of the KCAG population. As of January 1, 2016, approximately 78 percent of the County population is concentrated in the communities of Hanford (37.1 percent), Lemoore (17.4 percent), Corcoran (15.1 percent), and Avenal (8.2 percent) (DOF 2017). Armona, Home Gardens, Kettleman City, and Stratford collectively comprise approximately 5 percent of the County population and the other unincorporated areas of Kings County comprise the remaining 17 percent of the population. As shown in Table 4.6-2, approximately 66 percent of Kings County residents, or 99,292 persons, were identified as being a minority race or ethnicity (U.S. Census Bureau 2016a; DOF 2017). Figure 4.6-1 shows the distribution of Census Blocks with minority populations greater than 50 percent. The largest minority group in the KCAG region is Hispanic (53.1 percent), followed by black (5.9 percent). Collectively, Kings County contains substantial environmental justice populations, as defined by the CEQ, as minority groups comprise greater than 50 percent of the population within the County.

Table 4.6-2 Race and Ethnicity in Kings County (2016)

Location White Black

American Indian Asian

Pacific Islander Other

Two or More Races Hispanic

Minority Kings County (All)

33.6% 5.9% 0.8% 3.6% 0.2% 0.2% 2.5% 53.1%

66.4%

Cities

Avenal 11.9% 5.7% 0.9% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 78.8% 88.1%

Corcoran 18.6% 10.0% 1.2% 1.0% 0.2% 0.1% 2.1% 66.8% 81.4% Hanford 39.9% 4.4% 0.3% 4.3% 0.1% 0.1% 2.1% 48.7% 60.1% Lemoore 40.2% 4.5% 0.4% 8.2% 0.4% 0.2% 4.3% 41.9% 59.8% Census Designated Places (CDP)

Armona 19.8% 4.7% 1.1% 5.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% 66.6% 80.2% Home Garden

11.4% 12.5% 0.0% 0.5% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 73.9% 88.6%

Kettleman City

1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 98.2% 98.2%

Lemoore Station

48.7% 15.2% 0.3% 3.9% 1.2% 3.1% 5.3% 22.3% 51.3%

Grangeville 56.7% 6.9% 2.2% 4.7% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 26.8% 43.3% Stratford 17.2% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 81.5% 82.8% Hardwick 34.4% 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 64.9% 65.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2016a. “ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates, 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.” https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk. (accessed February 6, 2018). Low-Income. “Low-income” is defined as a person whose median household income is at or below the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) poverty guidelines. Table 4.6-3 illustrates the median income, poverty rate and unemployment rate for the cities and communities within the KCAG region. For comparison purposes, in 2016 the State median income was $63,783 and the median income for Kings County was $47,241. In the KCAG region, Grangeville was the only community to have a median household income higher than the State average and Grangeville, Hanford, Lemoore, and Kettleman City were the communities with median household incomes higher than the County average. Stratford had the lowest median household income of $24,167.

https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk


KCAG 4.6-4

Table 4.6-3 Income and Poverty Rate in Kings County (2016)

Location Household Income Poverty Rate – All People Percent Unemployed Kings County (All) $47,241 21.6% 11.7% Cities

Avenal $35,103 32.8% 13.9%

Corcoran $35,531 36.2% 16.3% Hanford $51,231 19.7% 11.8% Lemoore $50,871 16.5% 7.9% Census Designated Places (CDP) Armona $44,038 20.0% 18.3% Home Garden $33,125 33.8% 17.9% Kettleman City $51,316 32.2% 10.8% Lemoore Station $42,750 10.9% 14.1% Grangeville $88,571 22.2% 20.3% Stratford $24,167 49.0% 22.8% Hardwick NA 37.7% 0.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2016b. “SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS, 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.” https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk. (accessed March 1, 2018). For comparison purposes, in 2016 the State poverty rate was 15.8 percent and the poverty rate for Kings County was 21.6 percent (U.S. Census Bureau 2016b). In the KCAG region, Avenal, Corcoran, Home Garden, Kettleman City, Hardwick, Grangeville and Stratford have higher poverty rates than the County and State average. Stratford had the highest poverty rate of 49 percent, more than double the County average. For comparison purposes, in 2016 the State of California unemployment rate was 8.7 percent and the Kings County unemployment rate was 11.7 percent (U.S. Census Bureau 2016b). Within the KCAG region, several cities and communities had unemployment rates higher than both the County and State average, including Armona, Hanford, Home Garden, Grangeville, Lemoore Station, and Stratford. Stratford had the highest unemployment rate of 22.8 percent.

Concentrations of Minority and Low-Income Groups. The concentration of low-income and minority groups was determined by correlating data presented in Tables 4.6-2 and 4.6-3. The minority population groups of Kings County comprised 66.4 percent of the total population. The Kings County population is comprised of 53.1 percent Hispanic, 5.9 percent black, 3.6 percent Asian, 0.2 percent other ethnicity, 0.8 percent Native American, and 0.2 percent Pacific islander. In Kings County, the median household income is $47, 241, and 21.6 percent of households were considered to be low-income. Figure 4.6-2 shows the distribution of Census Tracts with low-income populations greater than the County average. Generally, within the KCAG region, areas with high concentrations of minority populations also have high concentrations of low-income populations. The only areas in the KCAG region that do not have either minority or low-income populations include the unincorporated areas of the County. All of the communities within Kings County except Grangeville have minority populations greater than 50 percent. Hanford, Lemoore, Lemoore Station and Armona are the four areas with percentages of low-income populations that are lower than the County averages.


LostHills

Monmouth

Hardwick

Alpaugh

LemooreStation

Westside

Stratford

SanJoaquin

HomeGarden

Coalinga

Dinuba

Avenal

Wasco

Riverdale Traver

CantuaCreekKingsburg

Corcoran

Lemoore

KettlemanCity

HanfordArmona

Huron

Naval AirStationLemoore

F R E S N O C O U N T Y

M O N T E R E YC O U N T Y

T U L A R EC O U N T Y

K I N G S C O U N T Y

K E R N C O U N T Y

S A N L U I SO B I S P OC O U N T Y

|ÿ269

|ÿ41 |ÿ43

|ÿ145

|ÿ198

|ÿ46

|ÿ201

|ÿ137

|ÿ155

|ÿ33

Excelsior Ave

Laurel Ave

6Th Av

e

AVE 400

Houston Ave

AVE 228

E Mountain View Ave

S Fow

ler Av

e

Utica Ave

E Manning Ave

W Excelsior Ave

S Beth

el Ave

S 6Th

Ave

Nevada Ave

22Nd A

ve

Grangeville Blvd

14Th A

ve

D evils

Den

Rd

10Th A

ve

Lost H

ills Rd

10 1/2

Ave

S Lem

oore

Ave

Gun C

lub Rd

Twissleman Rd

8Th Av

e

Avenal Cutoff Rd

S Mark

s Ave

S Elm

Ave

E Elkhorn Ave

RD 36

Kecks Rd

AVE 384

W Jayne Ave

S High

land A

veW Kamm Ave

Kansas Ave

W Oakland Ave

Dairy

Ave

CR J22

25Th A

ve

Pond Rd

RD 56

S West

lawn A

ve

W Mount Whitney Ave

King R

d

CorcoranReservoir

Tule River

Kings

River

|ÿ99

§̈¦5

2018 RTP/SCS SEIRSection 4.6 Environmental Justice

Minority Communities in Kings County Figure 4.6-1KCAG

0 84Miles ±

Kings CountyMinority Communities

Imagery provided by ESRI, Google and their licensors © 2018.Additonal data provided by U.S. Census Bureau, 2018.

4.6-5

LostHills

Monmouth

Hardwick

Alpaugh

LemooreStation

Westside

Stratford

SanJoaquin

HomeGarden

Coalinga

Dinuba

Avenal

Wasco

Riverdale Traver


Corcoran

Lemoore

KettlemanCity

HanfordArmona

Huron






K E R N C O U N T Y


|ÿ269

|ÿ41 |ÿ43

|ÿ145

|ÿ198

|ÿ46

|ÿ201

|ÿ137

|ÿ155

|ÿ33

Excelsior Ave

Laurel Ave

6Th Av

e

AVE 400

Houston Ave

AVE 228

E Mountain View Ave

S Fow

ler Av

e

Utica Ave

E Manning Ave

W Excelsior Ave

S Beth

el Ave

S 6Th

Ave

Nevada Ave

22Nd A

ve

Grangeville Blvd

14Th A

ve

D evils

Den

Rd

10Th A

ve

Lost H

ills Rd

10 1/2

Ave

S Lem

oore

Ave

Gun C

lub Rd

Twissleman Rd

8Th Av

e

Avenal Cutoff Rd

S Mark

s Ave

S Elm

Ave

E Elkhorn Ave

RD 36

Kecks Rd

AVE 384

W Jayne Ave

S High

land A

veW Kamm Ave

Kansas Ave

W Oakland Ave

Dairy

Ave

CR J22

25Th A

ve

Pond Rd

RD 56

S West

lawn A

ve

W Mount Whitney Ave

King R

d

CorcoranReservoir

Tule River

Kings

River

|ÿ99

§̈¦5


Low-Income Communities in Kings County Figure 4.6-2KCAG

0 84Miles ±

Kings CountyLow-Income Communities


4.6-6


KCAG 4.6-7

Mobility. Mobility refers to the movement of people via multiple modes, including individual cars, transit, walking, and cycling, among others. Mobility can be an important indicator of quality of life as mobility is correlated with accessibility, which is the ease with which individuals can reach their destinations. Low-mobility populations are limited in their ability to access needed goods and services or the means by which they reach their destination are expensive or inconvenient. Auto-oriented cities and communities with few safe or reliable transportation alternatives are mobility-limiting as residents have few transportation options. Low-income populations may have restricted mobility, and may be transit dependent if they do not have access to a private vehicle. For purposes of this analysis, households are considered transit dependent if there are fewer than two vehicles per household.

Concentrations of Low-Mobility Populations. Table 4.6-4 shows the transit-dependent populations within Kings County communities, the distribution of transportation modes within the KCAG region, and the mean travel times to commute to work. Kings County has fewer transit-dependent populations, higher vehicle usage, lower transit and active transportation (walking/biking) usage, and shorter travel commuting times when compared to the California averages. All the communities within the KCAG region have roughly similar commuting patterns, with single-occupancy vehicles being the most common choice, followed by people who carpool, walk or bike, and take public transportation. Within the Kings County communities, Avenal, Lemoore Station, and Stratford have substantially higher transit-dependent populations compared to the County average. Avenal also has a substantially higher proportion of people who carpool (34.9 percent) compared to the County and State averages. The highest concentration of transit and active transportation is within the communities and cities of Avenal, Home Garden, Lemoore Station, Grangeville, and Stratford. The communities of Home Garden and Grangeville have the highest rates of active transportation usage.

Table 4.6-4 Transit-Dependent Population Percentages in Kings County (2016)

Location Mean Travel

Time (Minutes) Drive Alone Carpool

Public Transit Walk Other

Work at Home

California 28.4 73.5% 10.6% 5.2% 2.7% 2.6% 5.4%

Kings County (All) 21.4 75.5% 15.7% 0.9% 2.3% 1.8% 3.7% Cities

Avenal 33.1 53.1% 34.9% 4.9% 2.2% 2.9% 2.0%

Corcoran 21.0 73.3% 19.5% 0.8% 1.7% 1.6% 3.1% Hanford 20.2 79.9% 15.3% 0.5% 1.8% 1.3% 1.4% Lemoore 21.6 81.4% 13.6% 0.1% 1.0% 1.8% 2.1% Census-Designated Places (CDP) Armona 19.1 75.0% 17.7% 0.0% 1.4% 2.8% 3.1% Home Garden 24.2 62.0% 20.8% 1.3% 9.3% 3.3% 3.3% Kettleman City 40.2 76.8% 18.1% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% 2.7% Lemoore Station 14.4 54.4% 9.2% 3.9% 6.3% 4.8% 21.4% Grangeville 29.3 66.3% 19.5% 0.0% 9.5% 0.0% 4.7% Stratford 19.7 77.5% 9.0% 5.3% 2.8% 0.0% 5.5% Hardwick 24.6 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2016b. “SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS, 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.” https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk. (accessed March 1, 2018).



KCAG 4.6-8

Summary of Environmental Justice Communities. Based on the above discussion, Hardwick, Stratford, Home Garden, Avenal, Corcoran, and Kettleman City are considered areas of environmental justice concern given their high concentrations of low income and minority populations. Figure 4.6-3 shows the distribution of Environmental Justice Communities within Kings County.

Community Outreach. KCAG adopted a Public Participation Plan (PPP) in 2012, to comply with the outreach requirements for environmental justice. The PPP includes enhanced outreach approaches to environmental justice populations to meet State and federal principles and to eliminate participation barriers to active participation in all populations. KCAG updated the program and created a Draft Supplemental PPP in 2017 for the development of the 2018 RTP/SCS. The 2017 Draft Supplemental PPP established strategies for public outreach to encourage the active participation of a broad range of stakeholder groups in the planning process, including, but not limited to affordable housing advocates, transportation advocates, neighborhood and community groups, environmental advocates, representatives from the home building industry, broad-based business organizations, landowners, commercial property interests, all population sectors, and homeowner associations. These stakeholder groups were solicited to participate in the public workshops and became the membership of the RTP Stakeholder Advisory Group. KCAG participated in the Valley-wide SCS public outreach program, Valley Visions, a collaborative effort among the eight metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) located in the San Joaquin Valley. The Valley Visions outreach program received funding assistance from a Proposition 84 grant that was used to support a regional modeling effort, as well as enhanced outreach. KCAG revised the Valley Visions effort to develop a customized Kings Regional Vision outreach program. Given the high number of residents, businesses, and stakeholders that utilize the internet and social media, KCAG created a project website, www.KingsRegionalVision.com, where information about the 2018 RTP/SCS process was readily available. All meeting materials, web-based engagement channels and surveys were available during the planning process to solicit public comments. Bilingual collateral materials included project overview and frequently asked questions handouts in addition to presentation materials. Copies of the materials were made available at all public workshops and presentations and could be accessible from the project website. News media received a series of press releases at key milestones to promote meetings and engagement opportunities. The media list included all local news papers, radio stations, and ethnic media. Two rounds of workshops were held as part of the development of the 2018 RTP/SCS; the first to establish regional priorities and vision and the second to review the proposed scenario alternatives. All workshops were publicly noticed and then promoted through email blasts to stakeholders and local residents, news releases, verbal notices at the KCAG Technical Advisory Committee and KCAG Transportation Policy Committee meetings and Stakeholder Advisory Committee meetings, and at local City Council, Board of Supervisors meetings. In addition, workshop information and materials were posted on the Kings Regional Vision website. All workshops included PowerPoint presentations explaining the planning effort, live interactive

http://www.kingsregionalvision.com/


KCAG 4.6-9

click polling to engage the audience, appropriate maps, displays and other materials as needed. All presentations were provided in both English and Spanish. Presentations were made to the Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore City Councils and the Kings County Board of Supervisors in March and April of 2018 to outline the proposed 2018 RTP/SCS planning process and the four alternative scenarios. In all cases, PowerPoint presentations and support materials were made available at the meetings and online for public review. KCAG staff presented the Draft 2018 RTP/SCS, Draft 2019 FTIP, Corresponding Draft Conformity Analysis, and the Draft Environmental Impact Report to the public for review and comment on June 15, 2018. A public hearing was held on July 25, 2018 to consider comments on the Draft 2018 RTP/SCS, Draft 2019 FTIP, Corresponding Draft Conformity Analysis, and the Draft Environmental Impact Report, and a second public hearing was conducted on July 11, 2018 to consider comments on the draft 2018 RTP/SCS. The documents are proposed to be adopted on August 22, 2018 by the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee.

LostHills

Monmouth

Hardwick

Alpaugh

LemooreStation

Westside

Stratford

SanJoaquin

HomeGarden

Coalinga

Dinuba

Avenal

Wasco

Riverdale Traver


Corcoran

Lemoore

KettlemanCity

HanfordArmona

Huron






K E R N C O U N T Y


|ÿ269

|ÿ41 |ÿ43

|ÿ145

|ÿ198

|ÿ46

|ÿ201

|ÿ137

|ÿ155

|ÿ33

Excelsior Ave

Laurel Ave

6Th Av

e

AVE 400

Houston Ave

AVE 228

E Mountain View Ave

S Fow

ler Av

e

Utica Ave

E Manning Ave

W Excelsior Ave

S Beth

el Ave

S 6Th

Ave

Nevada Ave

22Nd A

ve

Grangeville Blvd

14Th A

ve

D evils

Den

Rd

10Th A

ve

Lost H

ills Rd

10 1/2

Ave

S Lem

oore

Ave

Gun C

lub Rd

Twissleman Rd

8Th Av

e

Avenal Cutoff Rd

S Mark

s Ave

S Elm

Ave

E Elkhorn Ave

RD 36

Kecks Rd

AVE 384

W Jayne Ave

S High

land A

veW Kamm Ave

Kansas Ave

W Oakland Ave

Dairy

Ave

CR J22

25Th A

ve

Pond Rd

RD 56

S West

lawn A

ve

W Mount Whitney Ave

King R

d

CorcoranReservoir

Tule River

Kings

River

|ÿ99

§̈¦5


Environmental Justice Communities in Kings County Figure 4.6-3KCAG

0 84Miles ±

Kings CountyEnvironmental Justice Communities


4.6-10


KCAG 4.6-11

c. Regulatory Framework

Federal Regulations. KCAG receives funding from federal agencies such as the Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for some of its programs and activities. Therefore, KCAG conducts its federally funded programs and activities in accordance with guidance issued by the federal agencies pursuant to Executive Order 12898 and subsequent implementing guidance from the CEQ. In response to Executive Order 12898, the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) issued an Order to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. This order, issued in April 1995, sets guidelines to ensure that all federally-funded transportation-related programs, policies, or activities that have the potential to adversely affect human health or the environment involve a planning and programming process that explicitly considers the effects on minority populations and low-income populations. Furthermore, in 1998, the FHWA has issued the FHWA Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population that defines and provides guidance for environmental justice issues as they apply to projects overseen by the FHWA. The FTA has also issued regulatory guidance for implementing environmental justice analyses-Circular 4703.1, Environmental Justice Policy Guidance, which was issued September 19, 2011. This guidance is consistent with the implementing guidelines from CEQ which require that, “minority populations should be identified when the minority population of the affected area exceeds 50 percent or when the minority population percentage of the affected area is less than 50 percent but is meaningfully greater than the minority population percentage in the general population or other appropriate unit of geographic analysis.” For the purpose of this analysis, Kings County represents the larger geographic unit of comparison for which the communities within Kings County are compared. Demographic information from State of California has also been presented for comparison purposes.

State Regulations.

California Government Code Section 65040.12. Senate Bill (SB) 115 of 1999 and SB 89 of 2000 (Section 65040.12 of the Government Code) required the California Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to:

• Consult with the Secretaries of the California Environmental Protection Agency, the

Resources Agency, and the Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency, the Working Group on Environmental Justice established pursuant to Section 72002 (now Section 71113) of the Public Resources Code, any other appropriate State agencies, and all other interested members of the public and private sectors in this State.

• Coordinate OPR's efforts and share information regarding environmental justice programs with the Council on Environmental Quality, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the General Accounting Office, the Office of Management and Budget, and other federal agencies.


KCAG 4.6-12

• Review and evaluate any information from federal agencies that is obtained as a result of their respective regulatory activities under federal Executive Order 12898, and from the Working Group on Environmental Justice established pursuant to Section 72002 of the Public Resources Code.

SB 89 also required the formation of an advisory committee, Environmental Justice Advisory Committee (CEJAC), to provide information and assistance to the Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA) and Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (IWG) in establishing and implementing an intra-agency strategy to achieve environmental justice. In 2004, the Cal EPA released its Environmental Justice Strategy and Action Plan based on the IWG recommendations for identifying and addressing any gaps in existing programs, policies, or activities that may impede the achievement of environmental justice and suggested procedures for collecting, maintaining, analyzing, and coordinating information relating to its environmental justice strategy.

California Government Code Section 11135. California Government Code Section 11135 states that no person in the State of California shall, on the basis of race, national origin, ethnic group identification, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, color, or disability, be unlawfully denied full and equal access to the benefits of, or be unlawfully subjected to discrimination under, any program or activity that is conducted, operated, or administered by the State or by any State agency, is funded directly by the State, or receives any financial assistance from the State. 4.6.2 Impact Analysis a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds. A significant impact is defined as “a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment” (CEQA Section 21068). Based on the information provided above, an impact is significant if it would cause disproportionately high and adverse environmental and public health effect and interrelated difficult social and/or economic effect for minority or low-income populations. Therefore, the 2018 RTP/SCS would have a significant impact on a community of concern if:

• Implementation of the 2018 RTP/SCS would lead to disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental impacts to the minority populations, low-income populations, and/or populations with low mobility in the KCAG region.

• The mobility benefits derived from the 2018 RTP/SCS in terms of travel times and accessibility by transit and/or single occupancy vehicle would be substantially less for minority populations, low-income populations, and/or populations with low mobility in the KCAG region.

In addition, population and community data from the U.S. Census Bureau and transit information were utilized to identify potential impacts to Environmental Justice Communities in Kings County. Through the use of this demographic and transportation data, and identified performance measures, it was identified herein whether the Environmental Justice Communities identified in Figure 4.6-3 are disproportionately impacted by the transportation investments made in the region. To determine whether the benefits and burdens of the existing and proposed transportation system under the 2018 RTP/SCS are distributed equitably within


KCAG 4.6-13

Environmental Justice Communities and non-Environmental Justice Communities within the KCAG region, the following three performance measures were developed and analyzed:

• Percent of each Environmental Justice Community within one half-mile of transit; • Percent of each Environmental Justice Community within one half-mile of frequent

transit; and • Percent of each Environmental Justice Community within 500 feet of a major

transportation corridor. b. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures.

Impact EJ-1 Implementation of the 2018 RTP/SCS may cause adverse effects on a minority or low-income population; however, these potential effects would not disproportionately impact an Environmental Justice Community. This would be a Class III, less than significant impact.

Temporary Impacts. During construction of some transportation improvement projects and future development under the 2018 RTP/SCS, some minority and/or low-income populations may be affected. These improvement projects may have short-term temporary impacts on surrounding communities related to construction; including impacts related to air quality, noise, and traffic (refer to Sections 4.2, Air Quality, 4.11, Noise, and 4.12 Transportation and Circulation,). Specific air quality impacts could include exposure to dust due to the operation of construction vehicles, (i.e., scrapers, loaders, dump trucks), and clearing and grading activities. Other air quality impacts include short term exposure to hazardous air emissions including diesel emissions from construction equipment. Construction noise impacts from the use of heavy equipment at construction sites could expose nearby receptors to levels up to 89 decibels at 50 feet from the source. Minority populations or low income populations may be exposed to these impacts; however, such impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level after implementation of the mitigation measures listed in Sections 4.2, Air Quality, and 4.11, Noise. Temporary traffic impacts include delays during road closures or other disturbances from construction activities; however, due to their temporary nature, traffic delay impacts would not be considered significant. Since the 2018 RTP/SCS projects are located throughout the populated areas of Kings County, areas with high concentrations of environmental justice populations would not be disproportionately affected. Thus, these impacts would be less than significant.

Long-Term Impacts. Close proximity to major transportation facilities, particularly

Interstate 5 (I-5) and State Route (SR) 33, SR 41, SR 43, and SR 198, can increase a population’s exposure to health based air contaminates emitted from motor vehicles as well as re-entrained road dust caused by moving vehicles. Environmental justice populations are typically located closer to these types of facilities. However, as discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, diesel PM2.5, PM10 and NOx emissions under the 2018 RTP/SCS would be lower than and would not result in increased toxic air emissions when compared to conditions in 2042 without the 2018 RTP/SCS. Mitigation measures provided in Section 4.2, Air Quality, would reduce impacts associated with exposure to diesel emissions to less than significant. As a result, impacts to minority populations that may occur in proximity to freeways would be less than significant.


KCAG 4.6-14

Proximity to major transportation facilities can still increase a population’s exposure to air contaminants emitted from motor vehicles as well as re-entrained road dust caused by moving vehicles. As mentioned above, one of the performance measures against which this EIR analyzes the 2018 RTP/SCS projects is the percentage of low-income or minority populations within 500 feet of a major transportation corridor. According to demographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau, three Environmental Justice Communities have been identified within 500 feet of a major transportation corridor: Stratford (17.6 percent), Avenal (1.7 percent), and Kettleman City (31.6 percent). However, only a small proportion of these communities are located within the 500-foot distance. Therefore, Environmental Justice Communities in Kings County would not be substantially exposed to potential adverse health impacts resulting from being located in close proximity to major transportation corridors in the event that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) substantially increase by 2042 (see Appendix C for data sheets). VMT throughout Kings County would increase in 2042 compared to current conditions, primarily because population growth would occur regardless of the potential implementation of an RTP/SCS. The Department of Finance (DOF) projects that the population of Kings County will increase by 38,840 people, or approximately 25 percent, between 2018 and 2042 (DOF 2016). However, as discussed in Section 4.12, Transportation and Circulation, implementation of the 2018 RTP/SCS would reduce VMT when compared to conditions in 2042 without implementation of the 2018 RTP/SCS. Nonetheless, VMT in the future would increase compared to current conditions. Ambient noise throughout the region, particularly in urbanized areas, would increase as a result of an increase in VMT compared to existing conditions. However, the increase in VMT would be dispersed across the County and would not be concentrated in any one area. In addition, as a small proportion of three of the six identified Environmental Justice Communities would be within 500 feet of a major transportation corridor, any potential noise increases would not be disproportionately borne by any individual Environmental Justice Community. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. Specific 2018 RTP/SCS transportation improvement projects may result in impacts to the Environmental Justice Communities that are listed in both Table 4.6-2 and Table 4.6-3. These communities contain various minority populations and may be affected by the 2018 RTP/SCS projects; however, many of the projects within these communities would improve access to other parts of the region as well as access to alternative modes of transportation. The benefits of the proposed improvements would outweigh the temporary construction effects and incremental operational air quality, noise, and traffic effects that could occur with the increase in VMT compared to existing conditions. Therefore, the 2018 RTP/SCS projects would not disproportionately impact Environmental Justice Communities, as other non-Environmental Justice Communities populations would be similarly impacted by 2018 RTP/SCS projects. While improvements to transportation could affect Environmental Justice Communities, the dispersion of the proposed improvements and strategies would not be concentrated in a particular area that could disproportionately affect Environmental Justice Communities. Therefore, based on the analysis above, the 2018 RTP/SCS would not disproportionately expose minority or low-income communities to adverse environmental impacts. This impact would be less than significant.


KCAG 4.6-15

Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are required in addition to those recommended to address impacts to Air Quality and Noise, as referenced above.

Significance after Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.

Impact EJ-2 The mobility benefits derived from the 2018 RTP/SCS in terms of bicycling or walking and access to transit would not be substantially less in Environmental Justice Communities in the KCAG region. This impact would be Class III, less than significant.

As mentioned above, several performance measures were reviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of the 2018 RTP/SCS at achieving KCAG’s planning goals and objectives. Performance measures related to social equity and mobility are determined by the distribution of 2018 RTP/SCS investments within Environmental Justice Communities. 2018 RTP/SCS transit projects are likely to improve the overall accessibility to frequent transit within the KCAG region. Proposed transportation improvement projects are distributed throughout the KCAG region and are focused around the higher populated and urbanized areas of the region. As such, the 2018 RTP/SCS projects would increase the ability of the Environmental Justice Communities to use public transit to travel to other parts of the KCAG region. For example, a substantial proportion of the Environmental Justice Communities identified herein are within one half mile of existing transit facilities: Hardwick (100 percent), Stratford (95.7 percent), Home Garden (100 percent), Avenal (11.2 percent), Corcoran (30.9 percent), and Kettleman City (100 percent) (see Appendix C for data sheets). In addition, several projects included in the 2018 RTP/SCS involve rehabilitation of existing or construction of new transit facilities throughout the County. Therefore, it is likely that a greater proportion of Environmental Justice Communities in Kings County would be located within one half-mile of transit in 2042 under implementation of the 2018 RTP/SCS. No Environmental Justice Communities are within one half-mile of a frequent transit facility (facilities with 30-minute headways or less). Kings County is a rural county and most frequent transit facilities are concentrated within or adjacent to Lemoore and Hanford, the County’s two most populous communities, and Armona, the community between Lemoore and Hanford. Implementation of the 2018 RTP/SCS is unlikely to change the proportion of Environmental Justice Communities located within one half-mile of a frequent transit facility, as the transportation improvement project contained in the 2018 RTP/SCS mostly involve roadway rehabilitation, capacity improvements, and construction of new bicycle facilities. However, implementation of the 2018 RTP/SCS is not anticipated to improve frequent transit access to non-Environmental Justice Communities as opposed to Environmental Justice Communities. Therefore, Environmental Justice Communities would not receive disproportionate lack of frequent transit benefits in Kings County under implementation of the 2018 RTP/SCS when compared to benefits anticipated for non-Environmental Justice Communities. Implementation of the 2018 RTP/SCS would yield transportation benefits throughout Kings County and would not disproportionately benefit non-Environmental Justice Communities when compared to Environmental Justice Communities. Adverse impacts that could result from transportation improvement projects included in the 2018 RTP/SCS would not


KCAG 4.6-16

disproportionately affect Environmental Justice Communities compared to existing and baseline scenarios, and as compared to non-Environmental Justice Communities. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures. None required.

Significance after Mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.

c. Projects That May Result in Impacts. The 2018 RTP/SCS is an update to the 2014 RTP/SCS. Therefore, the individual projects included in the 2014 RTP/SCS that could result in potential effects to Environmental Justice Communities, as identified in the 2014 PEIR, would continue to potentially impact these communities. Additionally, the new projects added with the update in the 2018 RTP/SCS involving construction or increased roadway capacity could result in potential localized impacts to Environmental Justice Communities, as discussed under Impact EJ-1. However, overall, the 2018 RTP/SCS is expected to improve access and mobility throughout the KCAG region, including to, from, and within Environmental Justice Communities. Additionally, individual projects could affect Environmental Justice Communities, but would not necessarily do so disproportionately when compared to non-Environmental Justice Communities and the overall population.

d. Cumulative Impacts. This section evaluates the environmental justice impacts of the 2018 RTP/SCS on identified communities of concern in Kings County through the year 2042. Although identified Environmental Justice Communities may be exposed to environmental impacts such as air quality contaminants and noise, identified communities would not be impacted in a disproportionate manner compared to the total population. The 2018 RTP/SCS would improve mobility benefits for Environmental Justice Communities, as well as non-Environmental Justice Communities through 2042. In addition, as discussed in Impact EJ-2, the 2018 RTP/SCS would not disproportionately expose minority populations, low-income population or low-mobility populations to adverse environmental impacts. The 2018 RTP/SCS’s contribution to environmental justice impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.




APPENDIX J

SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN


Supplemental

Public Participation Plan

for the

2018 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy

Developed by Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG)

Final February 22, 2017

Final Supplemental Public Participation Plan

Supplemental

Public Participation Plan

for the

2018 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy

Prepared by

Kings County Association of Governments 339 W. “D” Street, Suite B Lemoore, California 93245

(559) 852-2654 www.kingscog.org


Table of Contents

Table of Contents Page

I. Introduction ................................................................................ 1 A. Regional Transportation Plan ............................................................... 2 B. Sustainable Communities Strategy ....................................................... 2 C. Alternative Planning Strategy ................................................................ 3 II. Public Participation Plan Requirements ................................. 4 A. SB 375 Outreach Requirements ........................................................... 4 III. Development of the Public Participation Plan ........................ 8 A. What We Heard From the Public .......................................................... 8 IV. Public Outreach Techniques .................................................. 10 A. KCAG Website .................................................................................... 10 B. Social Media ....................................................................................... 10 C. E-Newsletter ....................................................................................... 10 D. Visualization ........................................................................................ 10 E. Notifying the Public ............................................................................. 11 F. Public Meetings/Workshops ................................................................ 11 Appendix A: Survey ........................................................................ A-1 Appendix B: Survey Results ........................................................... B-1 Appendix C: Disadvantaged Communities Map ............................. C-1


Introduction 1

I. Introduction This specific Public Participation Plan for the development of the 2018 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) is a Supplemental Public Participation Plan to the comprehensive KCAG Public Participation Plan (KCAG-PPP) adopted on December 7, 2011 by the KCAG Commission and an update to the adopted 2013 Supplemental Public Participation Plan. The draft KCAG-PPP is available online at http://www.kingscog.org/planning.html. This document does not replace or supersede any elements in the 2011 KCAG-PPP, but should be seen as complementary. The purpose of this supplemental document is to describe how KCAG will engage the public through the 2018 RTP Update and development of the Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Kings County region. California’s Global Warming Solution Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32 or AB 32), gives the California Air Resources Board (ARB) authority to regulate sources of greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. According to the ARB, transportation accounts for 40 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, with cars and light trucks accounting for almost three-quarters of those emissions (30 percent overall). The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (Senate Bill 375 or SB 375), builds on the existing framework of regional planning in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicle trips. SB 375 became effective on January 1, 2009 and is expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 5 million metric tons statewide. ARB has set regional targets for reducing greenhouse gases that must be accounted for in the RTP Updates. SB 375 requires that the 18 California Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) prepare a SCS (and, if the SCS does not meet the targets, an Alternative Planning Strategy or APS) in collaboration with stakeholders in the region. Specific opportunities for input by local officials and the public are discussed in this document. KCAG is the MPO tasked with developing the RTP and SCS for the Kings County region with the 2018 update of the RTP. In addition, SB 375 synchronizes the timing of the formerly separate RTP and Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) cycles, so that transportation decisions and housing are now coordinated together. The RHNA is a forecast of future household growth with detailed economic allocations that is given to each Council of Governments (COGs) by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to be distributed to their member jurisdictions. The RHNA distribution must be consistent with the development pattern included in the SCS. The member jurisdictions will use their share of the RHNA as the primary assumption for their respective Housing Elements, which are due 18 months after adoption of the RTP. SB 375 uses the SCS to serve as a common


Introduction 2

set of land use assumptions for both the RTP and the RHNA. KCAG is tasked with distributing the RHNA to its member agencies as part of the RTP Update and development of the SCS. The latest RHNA prepared by KCAG was adopted on January 28, 2015 and utilized in the 2014 RTP/SCS. COGs are encouraged to work with HCD in incorporating the appropriate RHNA within their RTP Updates. A. Regional Transportation Plan The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is the principal long-range planning document developed by KCAG that prioritizes and guides the transportation investment in Kings County for (at least) the next twenty years. The RTP is the comprehensive plan for transportation investments (transit, highway, local roads, bicycle, and pedestrian projects) and establishes the financial foundation for how the region will invest in its surface transportation system. The RTP identifies how much money is available to address critical transportation needs and determines the policies on how projected revenues are to be spent. Therefore, the RTP establishes the region’s goals, policies, and objectives for meeting current and future transportation mobility needs. The RTP is developed in coordination with each city in Kings County, the County of Kings, Caltrans, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, transit operators, and citizen groups. The RTP is made available for participation and comment to other federal, state, regional and local agencies through the Inter-Agency Consultation (IAC) Process. RTPs through the 2011 Update contained three basic elements: Policy Element, Action Element, and Financial Element. Beginning with the 2014 RTP Update, as required by SB 375, the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) is the fourth element of the RTP. As required by the 2018 RTP Update, KCAG will consult with federal land use management agencies as appropriate during the development of the RTP. B. Sustainable Communities Strategy The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) will describe how the Kings County region will address reducing greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The SCS is a regional growth strategy that provides the basis for the integration of the land use decisions made by our cities and county and the transportation investments in the region with a goal of reducing the greenhouse gas emission from cars and light trucks in the region. The SCS must be based on “current planning assumptions”. The SCS must identify the “general location of uses, residential densities, and building intensities” including areas sufficient to house all the economic segments of the projected regional population, while still meeting the greenhouse gas


Introduction 3

targets as set by ARB. SB 375 requires that transportation funding decisions in the RTP be consistent with the SCS. Therefore, the SCS is a fiscally constrained element of the RTP. Because KCAG is committed to meeting the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets set by ARB with the development of a SCS for the region; throughout this document, when a reference is made to the SCS understand that this includes the development of an APS in the unforeseen event that KCAG is unable to document the required GHG reductions in the SCS – although the APS will not necessarily be mentioned at the time. C. Alternative Planning Strategy An Alternative Planning Strategy (APS) must be prepared if the SCS cannot meet the greenhouse gas targets set by ARB. Unlike the SCS, the APS is not fiscally constrained and is not an element of the RTP. The APS would meet the greenhouse gas targets through a combination of alternative development patterns, infrastructure investments, or additional transportation measures or policies. KCAG will strive to meet the ARB established GHG reduction targets with the development of a SCS.


Public Participation Plan Requirements 4

II. Public Participation Plan Requirements A. SB 375 Public Outreach Requirements The California Transportation Commission (CTC), through its legislatively assigned authority, has provided guidance in the 2010 Regional Transportation Plan Guidelines on legal requirements applicable to development of the SCS and an APS. Accordingly, the MPO shall adopt a Public Participation Plan in advance of developing an SCS (and an APS as necessary) that should include: An outreach effort encouraging the active participation of a broad range of

stakeholders in the planning process, consistent with the agency’s adopted Federal Public Participation Plan. This includes, but is not limited to, affordable housing advocates, transportation builder representatives, broad-based business organizations, landowners, commercial property interests, and homeowner associations.

Consultation with congestion management agencies, transportation agencies, and transportation commissions.

Regional public workshops with information and tools providing a clear understanding of policy choices and issues. At least one workshop in each county. For counties with a population greater than 500,000, at least three workshops must be held. To the extent possible, each workshop shall include urban simulation computer modeling to create visual representations of the SCS.

Preparation and circulation of a draft SCS (and APS, if one is prepared) not less that 55 days before adoption of a final RTP.

For multiple-county MPOs at least three public hearings shall be held on the draft SCS in the RTP (and APS, if one is prepared). For a single county MPO, at least two public hearings shall be held. To the maximum extent feasible, the hearings shall be in different parts of the region to maximize the opportunity for participation by members of the public throughout the region.

A process enabling the public to provide a single request to receive notices, information, and updates.

KCAG in accordance with state guidelines developed a focused outreach strategy that detailed how KCAG will engage the public and stakeholders during the 2014 RTP Update and development of the SCS. While a separate Public Participation Plan is not required, KCAG felt that a separate and Supplemental Public Participation Plan, consistent with our adopted 2011 KCAG-PPP, would be the most efficient and user friendly format to detail the focused outreach strategy. KCAG will continue to consult with other agencies and commissions and will actively seek public input throughout the development of the 2018 RTP Update



and the development of the SCS (and APS, if applicable). Striving to create a collaborative transportation process, KCAG will consult with local elected officials as key stakeholders. The State requires that KCAG provide outreach to all local elected officials and their member jurisdictions affected by the SCS. KCAG will also coordinate and consult with local land use authorities within each of our member cities and county in the development of the RTP and SCS. In preparing an SCS, KCAG shall consider spheres of influence that have been adopted by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) of Kings County. KCAG may consult with LAFCO of Kings County regarding special districts within the region that provide property-related services such as water or wastewater services, and may further consult with these regional special districts. KCAG may also consult with school districts in the Kings County region as school-related trips constitute a significant portion of all vehicle trips. If possible, KCAG may incorporate current and future school needs into the 2018 RTP Update. Interagency Coordination As KCAG begins the 2018 RTP Update and SCS, staff will undertake interagency coordination with both federal and state agencies and will notify all interested parties. Interagency consultation should include but not be limited to: Federal agencies including: Federal Highways Administration (FHWA),

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) California Air Resources Board (ARB) California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Appropriate Resource Agencies Adjacent MPOs and RTPAs with which the MPO shares a significant amount

of interregional travel

The California Transportation Commission (CTC) also encourages State agencies to work with KCAG to provide the best data and information available as they develop their greenhouse gas emission modeling methodology together with ARB. KCAG will work with HCD as well as local land use authorities to incorporate our appropriate Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) within our 2018 RTP Update and development of the SCS. KCAG prepared the latest RHNA in coordination and consultation with local land use authorities to allocate each jurisdiction’s fair share of new housing units projected to be needed from January 1, 2014 to January 31, 2024. The latest RHNA was adopted in January 28, 2015 and its regional housing needs distribution was used in the 2014 RTP/SCS.



Stakeholders There are several stakeholders that will be targeted for input during the 2018 RTP Update and development of the SCS. These stakeholders may include but are not limited to: Citizens Affected Public Agencies Representatives of Public Transportation Employees Freight Shippers/ Operators Private providers of transportation Major trucking firms Representatives of users of public transportation Representatives of users of pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation

facilities Representatives of people with disabilities Home Builder Representatives Commercial Property Interests Homeowner Associations Chamber of Commerce Large Employers and Business Organizations Federally Recognized Tribal Nation Affordable Housing Advocates Neighborhood and Community Groups Environmental Advocates Health Advocates Representatives of local public health Environmental Justice and disadvantaged Groups Farming and Agricultural Interests KCAG will maintain a record of its public participation efforts during the 2018 RTP Update and development of the SCS. As the KCAG region has a population of 150,400, at least one public workshop on the draft SCS with information and tools will be held. The draft SCS (and APS, if applicable) will be circulated for a minimum of a 55 day public review and comment period, prior to adoption of the final 2018 RTP. KCAG will also provide an option on the agency’s website, www.kingscog.org for interested parties to sign up to receive notices, information, and updates on the 2018 RTP Update and development of the SCS (and APS, if applicable). As with development of this 2016 Supplemental Public Participation Plan and past updates of the RTP, KCAG staff is always available to meet with interested parties.



Meetings/ Workshops During the development of the SCS, KCAG must conduct at least two informational meetings for members of the board of supervisors and city councils. Only one informational meeting is needed if it is attended by representatives of the county board of supervisors and city councils that represent a majority of the population in the incorporated areas of that county. The purpose of this meeting(s) shall be to discuss the SCS (and APS, if applicable), including the key land use and planning assumptions (provided by the cities and county), with the members of the board of supervisors and city council(s) and to solicit and consider their input and recommendations. Notices of these meetings will be sent to the clerks of the board of supervisors and city councils.


Development of the Public Participation Plan 8

III. Development of the 2013 Supplemental Public Participation Plan

During the development of the 2013 Supplemental Public Participation Plan, in order to get a sense of how best to engage the Kings County region in our public participation efforts, a brief six question survey was made available electronically and in hard copy format in both English and Spanish. In order to encourage the highest response rates the website links for both language versions (via Survey Monkey) was provided to over sixty key stakeholders in the region through email and hard copies in both English and Spanish were made available. KCAG staff encouraged interested parties to fill out the survey at meetings of the KCAG Technical Advisory Committee and the KCAG Commission. Hard copies of the survey were also available at these meetings. A total of 24 surveys were received at the close of the survey. This included 23 responses from the online survey links and 1 hard copy. Staff met with the KCAG Technical Advisory Committee and KCAG Commission to discuss the Supplemental Public Participation Plan and finalized the plan for adoption. During development of the 2013 Supplemental Public Participation Plan, KCAG was available to meet with interested groups or individuals to discuss the Plan. In addition, this Supplemental Public Participation Plan went through the Inter-Agency Consultation (IAC) process. The IAC provided an opportunity for regional, state, and federal agencies to provide comments on the draft document. The IAC consists of representatives from the San Joaquin Valley MPOs, Caltrans, Federal Highways, Federal Transit, Environmental Protection Agency, and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. A. What We Heard From the Public During development of the Supplemental Public Participation Plan, KCAG used key survey data to provide guidance on the best methods to engage the public in the 2014 RTP Update and development of the SCS. The question and answer summaries immediately following will help guide the public participation efforts. 1. Please select the category that best describes your organization/affiliation?

The majority of survey participants noted that they were from a local governmental agency at 46%, followed next by farmer/ agricultural interests at 21%, and public transportation/ transit service responding at 2%.


Development of the Public Participation Plan 9

2. What is the most effective method of providing updates to you and or your organization/ affiliation on the RTP and SCS process? Overwhelmingly, the public told us that the most effective method to provide updates was through email. To a much lesser degree, the KCAG website and mailings of flyers or invitations were noted as the preferred methods. It was also suggested that KCAG post flyers in public areas.

3. In your opinion, how best can KCAG advertise upcoming workshops or key meetings to the general public? The majority of the surveys indicated that email blasts were the preferred advertising method, followed by notices in the local paper, and on the KCAG website. Additional popular responses included mailing flyers or invitations, radio announcements, and the use of social media. KCAG will continue to use these preferred methods and will consider the use of the additional methods as time and resources allow.

4. What is the most convenient time of day to attend a workshop or key meeting for you and or your organization/ affiliation from Monday through Friday?

The survey respondents equally chose morning between 9:00 a.m. – noon and afternoons between noon and 5:00 p.m. as the most convenient time of day to attend a workshop or key meeting.

5. Would you and your organization/ affiliation like to request a face to face

meeting to further discuss development of the KCAG 2013 Supplemental Public Participation Plan? KCAG staff contacted one interested person that left the necessary contact information. A telephone interview was conducted and the individual will continue to participate in future RTP/SCS work.

6. Please provide any comments relative to the KCAG 2013 Supplemental Public Participation Plan. This plan will provide guidance on how KCAG will engage the public during the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Update with the newly mandated Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) element. Survey question six was purposely written as an open ended question to allow participants to provide additional input not confined to a specific question. The following response was provided:

“Thanks for working to better public transit for our clients.”


Public Outreach Techniques 10

IV. Public Outreach Techniques KCAG will utilize a variety of public participation strategies to communicate and encourage interaction with the public during the 2018 RTP update and development of the SCS. A. KCAG Website The KCAG website is located at www.kingscog.org and provides information on current activities and planning documents. A separate page devoted solely to the 2018 RTP update and development of the SCS will be made available. A feature will also be added to allow individuals to sign up to receive notifications, information, and updates on the 2018 RTP and SCS. Local agencies will also be encouraged to provide links on their websites to direct the general public who are interested in RTP/SCS development updates to KCAG website for further information. B. Social Media KCAG will use social media tools to help keep the public informed on progress during the RTP update and development of the SCS. KCAG will launch a Facebook Fan Page to post updates, workshops and meeting announcements. The Facebook Page will also allow the public to provide feedback about the plans and processes. C. E-Newsletter Regular updates regarding RTP/SCS development will be delivered via e-newsletters to stakeholder groups and other interested parties. The general public can sign up to receive e-newsletter through the KCAG website or Facebook page. D. Visualization KCAG will utilize a variety of visualization tools to encourage public input and participation in the SCS development process, including: Maps and figures: visualize KCAG planning effort for RTP/SCS update

Voting clickers: enable participants to provide feedback



Factsheets: deliver necessary information on complex planning matters in a simplified version.

E. Notifying the Public A combination of press releases and official public notices will be used to notify the general public of upcoming meetings and/or the availability of documents for review and comment. Throughout the project duration, press releases will be distributed through KCAG’s existing media mailing list to keep the public informed about the development and progress of the 2018 RTP update and development of the SCS. As KCAG meets with city councils and the board of supervisors in mandated SB 375 meetings, notices will be sent to the clerks of the board of supervisors and city councils. Additionally, public notices will be posted in the local newspaper to announce official actions during the 2018 RTP and development of the SCS. When the Draft 2018 RTP and SCS are made available for the mandated 55-day public review and comment period, a noticed public hearing will occur during the period. The public notice will include the beginning and ending dates of the public review period and will provide the date that the draft 2018 RTP and SCS will be considered for adoption by the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee. F. Public Meetings/ Workshops KCAG will use public meetings and workshops as a forum to solicit public participation and share information during the 2018 RTP update and development of the SCS. Meeting locations and times will be scheduled in an effort to be the most convenient for stakeholders and the greater community. KCAG is open to co-hosting workshops with community groups or other governmental agencies as opportunities become available. Also, KCAG staff will take advantage of existing regularly scheduled meetings, such as City Council or Planning Commission meetings in our member agencies jurisdictions. To inform the public of upcoming meetings and workshops, press releases, public notice hearings, flyers, emails, newspaper articles, word of mouth, and direct mailings may be utilized. Disadvantaged communities will be invited to public meetings/ workshops to ensure that their input will be reflected throughout the new RTP/SCS development process. (see Appendix C for Kings County Disadvantaged Communities Map).



KCAG regularly consults and coordinates with the Standing Committees and Boards throughout the entire SCS development process. The following list of Committees will actively engage in the development of the RTP and SCS. KCAG Commission and Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) The Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) serves as the governing board for KCAG with final approving authority on policy decisions and all RTPA activities. The TPC is a committee of the KCAG Commission and composed of members of the regular KCAG Commission with the addition of the Director of the Caltrans District 6 representing the Director of Caltrans Headquarters. KCAG Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) is comprised of members from the cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, Lemoore, and the County of Kings, in addition to others. The primary responsibility of the TAC is to review all issues that KCAG will consider and to provide technical input to advise the Commissioners in making their decisions on a broad range of planning issues. The Committee includes county and city public works and planning directors, city managers, county administrative officer, Caltrans District 6 staff, a Kings County Area Public Transit Agency (KCAPTA) representative, a Lemoore NAS representative, a San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District representative, Kings County Public Health representative, and a Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe representative. Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (SSTAC) The SSTAC is a statutorily created committee with specific responsibilities that include advising the TPC on transit needs issues of the elderly, persons with disabilities, and low income citizens. The members of the SSTAC consist of representatives of social service providers and transit users from the above mentioned needs group, as well as citizens who are interested in the transit planning process. The KCAG Technical Advisory Committee meets every second Wednesday of each month at 1:30 p.m. in Lemoore and the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee and KCAG Commission meet every fourth Wednesday of each month at 4:30 p.m. in Hanford. These meetings are open to the public and include an opportunity for public comments. Throughout the 2018 RTP update and development of the SCS, KCAG staff will provide regular updates at these meetings. The meeting agendas are always posted at the KCAG office and available at least 72 hours in advance on the KCAG website at

Draft Supplemental Public Participation Plan


www.kingscog.org. In addition, the agendas for the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee and KCAG Commission meetings are also posted at the meeting room location at 1400 W. Lacey Blvd. in Hanford at the Board of Supervisors Chambers. KCAG will hold additional meetings during the 2018 RTP update and development of the SCS to share information and provide an opportunity for the public to provide input on the project. Formats for meetings may include an informal open house style or a more structured presentation manner. KCAG staff will strive to use a variety of visualization tools during these meetings that may include maps, charts, photographs, table top displays, or other illustrated formats. KCAG staff will also be available to groups or individuals who would like to have face to face meetings. KCAG staff will use workshops when there is specific input that is being requested by the public during the 2018 RTP update and development of the SCS. When a meeting is legally required by SB 375, KCAG staff will follow all legal notification and posting requirements. KCAG must conduct at least two informational meetings for members of the board of supervisors and city councils. Only one informational meeting is needed if it is attended by representatives of the county board of supervisors and city councils that represent a majority of the population in the region.


Appendix A: Surveys A-1

Appendix A


2013 Supplemental Public Participation Plan

Surveys


Appendix B: Survey Results B-1

Appendix B


2013 Supplemental Public Participation Plan

Survey Results


Appendix C: Kings County Disadvantaged Communities Map C-1

Appendix C


Supplemental Public Participation Plan

Kings County Disadvantaged Communities Map



APPENDIX K

PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Annual Listing of Projects with Federal Funding for Federal

Fiscal Year 2017

December 2017


339 W. “D” Street, Suite B Lemoore, CA 93245

Phone: (559) 852-2654 Fax: (559) 924-5632

Website: www.kingscog.org

11

Purpose The transportation authorization Act passed in 2012, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) outlines the requirement for Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to publish an annual listing of projects for which federal funds have been obligated in the preceding year including a listing of pedestrian and bicycle projects. From MAP-21 (H.R. 4348), 23 U.S.C. 134(j)(7)(B)(i) and (ii), 23 U.S.C. 135(g)(5)(B)(i) and (ii), 49 U.S.C. 5303(j)(7)(B)(i) and (ii), and 49 U.S.C. 5304(g)(5)(B)(i) and (ii):

An annual listing of projects, including investments in pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities, for which Federal funds have been obligated in the preceding year shall be published or otherwise made available by the cooperative effort of the State, transit operator, and metropolitan planning organization for public review. The listing shall be consistent with the categories identified in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

This report is published in response to the above requirement by listing all federally funded transportation projects in the Kings County region that were obligated during the federal fiscal year 2016-17. Obligation refers to the federal government’s commitment to pay or reimburse the lead agency for the federal share of a project’s cost. Obligation does not indicate expenditure or project completion; only that the project has been approved for federal reimbursement. Programmed project costs can be found in the corresponding Federal Transportation Improvement Program and Regional Transportation Plan.

Background The Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG) is a council of governments responsible for addressing problems of an inter-jurisdictional nature. KCAG is a voluntary organization whose members are the County of Kings and the cities of Hanford, Lemoore, Corcoran, and Avenal. Transportation is a major area of concentration. KCAG is a state-designated regional transportation planning agency (RTPA) recognized by the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA) and a federally recognized Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). As an MPO/RTPA, KCAG prepares and maintains the Regional Transportation Plan, prepares a Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and a Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), reviews the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and other state transportation programs, monitors local public transit operations, oversees federal transportation grant proposals, and administers the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) fund. The Kings County Association of Governments fosters intergovernmental communication and coordination, undertakes comprehensive regional planning with an emphasis on transportation, provides for citizen involvement in the planning process and supplies technical services to its member governments. In all these areas the Kings County Association of Governments serves as a consensus builder to develop an acceptable approach on how to handle problems that do not respect political boundaries.

22

Who are the members, their representatives, and how do they vote? KCAG’s member agencies are represented on the KCAG Commission. The KCAG Commission consists of one member from the city council of each of the four cities and two members from the Kings County Board of Supervisors. All RTPA activities of the KCAG Commission are governed by a Transportation Policy Committee (TPC). The TPC is a committee of the KCAG Commission and composed of members of the regular KCAG Commission, plus the Director of the Caltrans District 6 representing the Director of Caltrans Headquarters.

Members Area Representation Joe Neves, Chair Kings County Ray Madrigal, Vice Chair City of Lemoore Glenda Woolley City of Avenal Sid Palmerin City of Corcoran David Ayers City of Hanford Doug Verboon Kings County Sharri Bender-Ehlert Caltrans District 6

The Commission is advised by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) whose members include KCAG staff, county and city public works and planning directors, city mangers, county administrative officer, Caltrans District 6 staff, a Kings County Area Public Transit Agency (KCAPTA) representative, a Lemoore NAS representative, a San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District representative, and a Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe representative. The primary responsibility of the TAC is to review all issues that KCAG will consider and to provide technical input to advise their respective Commissioners in making their decisions.

The Regional Transportation Plan The Regional Transportation Plan is a long-range (minimum 20-year) plan that provides a blueprint for future transportation improvements and investments based on specific transportation goals, objectives, policies and strategies. The RTP is based on federal transportation law requiring comprehensive, cooperative, and continuous transportation planning. The Kings County Association of Governments meets these requirements by developing comprehensive transportation plans that include all surface transportation modes (multi-modal planning), to ensure the efficient movement of people and goods throughout the region. The purpose of the RTP is to provide strategic direction for transportation capital investments by assessing regional growth and economic trends. Thus, the RTP helps planners link transportation investments to provide a cohesive, balanced and multimodal transportation system that will help relieve traffic congestion, improve safety and provide for economic development.

33

The Federal Transportation Improvement Program As the designated metropolitan planning organization for the region, the Kings County Association of Governments prepares and maintains the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). The program includes a listing of all transportation-related projects requiring federal funding or other approval by the federal transportation agencies. The FTIP also lists non-federally funded but regionally significant projects for information and air quality modeling purposes. Projects included in the FTIP are consistent with the Kings County Association of Government’s Regional Transportation Plan and are part of the area's overall strategy for providing mobility, congestion relief and reduction of transportation-related air pollution in support of efforts to attain federal air quality standards for the region.

Public Involvement The Kings County Association of Governments aims to proactively engage the public in the regional transportation planning process and embrace federal requirements that MPOs provide the public with complete information, timely public notice, full public access to key decisions, and early and continuing involvement in developing the TIP, Regional Transportation Plan, and other products.

Annual Listing of Projects with Federal Funding for Federal Fiscal Year 2017 Federal law requires the Kings County Association of Governments to publish for public review an annual listing of projects for which federal funds have been obligated in the preceding year, as a record of project delivery and a progress report for public information and disclosure. This report is divided into the funding types administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Projects are listed by Lead Agency, FTIP Program, Federal ID and KCAG ID. The KCAG ID number is a unique project identifier used in the FTIP; the category Total Dollar Amount in FTIP is included for reference of total project funding. Multiple Federal IDs can correspond with one KCAG ID. Note this list includes only federal funds obligated; no state or local funds are reported. The information contained in this report was provided by the California Department of Transportation. A net total of $9,422,197 of Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) funds was obligated for highway transportation projects in the region between October 1, 2016 and September 30, 2017. A total of $641,888 of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds was obligated for transit projects. A total of $203,412 of federal funds was obligated for projects that include investments in pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities.

Lead Agency

FTIP Program

Funding Type

Project No. Status Agency ID Work Description and LocationLast Action

DateFederal Funds

ObligatedPhase

Total Dollar Amount in FTIP

Total Project Funds

Remaining

Bicycle/Pedestrian

Related Projects

FED$ for Bike/Ped projects

FTA Transfer

Hanford CMAQ CML 5091054 Closed CM5091019HANFORD CORPORATION YARD, PURCHASE PM-10/PM-2.5 EFFICIENT SWEEPER

04/03/2017 -$4.01 CON $260,000.00 $0.00

Hanford CMAQ CML 5091055 Closed CM5091055 HANFORD CORPORATION YARD, REPLACE DIESEL ENGINE 74 03/24/2017 -$2,774.89 CON $110,000.00 $0.00

Hanford CMAQ CML 5091056 Closed CM5091056HANFORD CORPORATION YARD, REPLACE 1990 DIESEL ENGINE

03/24/2017 -$4,537.07 CON $110,000.00 $0.00

Hanford CMAQ CML 5091058 Active CM5091058HANFORD CORPORATION YARD, PURCHASE PM-10 STREET SWEEPER

06/06/2017 $66,783.00 CON $260,000.00 $0.00

Hanford CMAQ CML 5091061 Active GP-BIKE *VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE CITY OF HANFORD BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES

12/23/2016 $35,412.00 PE $40,000.00 $0.00 $40,000.00 $35,412.00

Lemoore CMAQ CML 5115032 Active CM5115015 CITY OF LEMOORE PURCHASE ONE CNG TRUCK 12/23/2016 $120,000.00 CON $420,000.00 $0.00

Lemoore CMAQ CML 5115034 Active CM5115018

INTERSECTIONS OF LEMOORE AVENUE AND SKAGGS STREET, AND LEMOORE AVENUE AND LARISH STREET INSTALL SYNCHRONIZED PEDESTRIAN IN-PAVEMENT ROADWAY WARNING LIGHTS

03/24/2017 $168,000.00 CON $190,000.00 $0.00 $190,000.00 $168,000.00

County CMAQ CML 5945065 Active CML594565INTERSECTION OF 13TH AVE. AND W. LACEY BLVD. INSTALL TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND TURN LANES

07/19/2017 $1,189,843.00 CON $1,344,000.00 $157.00

County CMAQ CML 5945095 Closed CML5645HVARIOUS LOCATIONS - KINGS COUNTY ROAD REHABILITATION

10/21/2016 -$1.71 CON $451,000.00 $0.00

County CMAQ CML 5945107 Active CML5645AINTERSECTION OF 17TH AVENUE AND HOUSTON AVENUE, TRAFFIC SIGNAL

05/19/2017 $283,000.00 PE $320,000.00 $0.00

County HSIP HSIP 5945099 Active HSIP*VARIOUS LOCATIONS ALONG AVENAL CUTOFF RD, INSTALL RIGHT TURN LANES AND ACCELERATION LANES

07/06/2017 $741,300.00 CON $1,035,900.00 $0.00

County HSIP HSIP 5945100 Active HSIP*VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN KINGS COUNTY, INSTALL RIGHT TURN LANES AND FLASHING BEACONS

02/21/2017 $238,400.00 CON $325,500.00 $0.00

County HBP STP 5945102 Active HBP*PM00144 VARIOUS COUNTYWIDE BRIDGE LOCATIONS BRIDGE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (BPMP) ADMINISTRATION

02/21/2017 $22,132.00 PE $560,000.00 $0.00

County HBP STP 5945103 Active HBP*

PM00144 FOR 12 BRIDGES: 45C0006, 45C0013, 45C0015, 45C0033, 45C0044, 45C0081, 45C0095, 45C0096, 45C0101, 45C0113, 45C0114, AND 45C0119. BRIDGE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (BPMP) PROJECT

02/21/2017 $473,635.00 PE $560,000.00 $0.00

Caltrans Minor SHOPP-AC P041133 Active CT-MINOR

ON STATE ROUTE: 41. KINGS COUNTY IN LEMOORE FROM 0.3 MILE SOUTH OF BUSH STREET UNDERCROSSING TO 0.2 MILE NORTH OF BUSH STREET UNDERCROSSING. INSTALL PLANTS AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM (TC)

06/15/2017 $848,100.00 CON $1,790,000.00 $0.00

Caltrans SHOPP NHS 000C337 Closed HM2KINGS & TULARE CO AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS, RUBBERIZED HMA TYPE O OVERLAY (TC)

02/23/2017 $80,685.82 CON $2,264,000.00 $0.00

Caltrans SHOPP STP P198060 Active SHOPP-BP *ON STATE ROUTE: 198. KINGS CO NEAR HANFORD AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS FROM 14TH AVENUE UC TO 11TH AVENUE UC REHABILITATE BRIDGE DECKS (TC)

09/15/2017 $931,354.81 CON $9,732,000.00 $0.00

Caltrans SHOPP STP P198075 Active SHOPP-CR *ON STATE ROUTE: 198. KINGS COUNTY IN HANFORD AT REDINGTON STREET AND 4TH STREET INTERSECTION. INSTALL SIGNALS AND MODIFY CURB RAMPS

08/18/2017 $1,128,600.00 CON $2,325,000.00 $0.00

Caltrans STIP NHS P198059 Active STIPON STATE ROUTE: 198. KIN/TUL CO'S NEAR HANFORD FROM 0.5 MILE E OF SR43/198 TO 0.4 MILE W OF SR99/198 INSTALL IRRIGATION / HIGHWAY PLANTING (TC)

08/18/2017 $460,183.00 CON $470,000.00 $0.00

Caltrans STIP NHS P198056 Active STIPON RTE 198 IN KINGS CO FR RTE 41 TO 18-1/2 AVENUE (VINE STREET) CONSTRUCT INTERCHANGE (TC)

11/17/2016 $902,586.00 CON $29,634,000.00 $0.00

Caltrans STIP NHS P198074 Active STIP

ON STATE ROUTE: 198. KINGS COUNTY IN HANFORD FROM 0.4 MILE WEST OF 12TH AVENUE OVERCROSSING TO 0.3 MILE EAST OF 12TH AVENUE OVERCROSSING. HIGHWAY PLANTING (TC)

09/07/2017 $1,520,500.00 CON $1,503,000.00 $0.00

Caltrans STIP STIP-AC P198064 Active STIPON STATE ROUTE: 198. KINGS CO IN & NR LEMOORE FRM 0.5 MILE W. TO 0.7 MILE E. OF 19TH AVENUE LANDSCAPING AND PLANT ESTABLISHMENT (TC)

05/25/2017 $219,000.00 CON $1,124,000.00 $0.00

$9,422,196.95 $54,828,400.00 NA $230,000.00 $203,412.00 $0* Indicates Grouped Project Listing

FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY PROJECTS - FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2017

NET OBLIGATIONS FOR STATE AND LOCAL AGENCY

FTA 5339 Program

Agency ID Work DescriptionFederal

16/17 FFY Monies

Total Dollar Amount in

FTIP

Total Project Funds

RemainingKCAPTA Capital Grant (CA-2017-084) 525,351$ 660,000 0

FTA 5311 Program

Agency ID Work DescriptionFederal

16/17 FFY Monies

Total Dollar Amount in

FTIP

Total Project Funds

RemainingCorcoran Operating Assistance 116,537$ 196,000 0

Total FTA Funds Obligated 641,888$

Net Obligation for 2017 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Funds