HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - October 14, 1987 (95)CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OCTOBER 14,- 1987
12
RESOLUTION ADOPTED
APPROVING 1987-88
TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT ACT
CLAIM
RES. NO. 87-133 Council adopted Resolution No. 87-133 approving the City's
1987/88 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Claim for
CC -7(f) Local Transportation Funds (LTF) and State Transit
CC -7(n) Assistance (STA), and authorized the City Manager to
execute the documents on behalf of the City.
The City's 1987/88 TDA Claim requests all of the LTF
apportionment, which amounts to $757,896, and the STA,
which amounts to $1,491. The STA funds are not a new
apportionment but a clean up of previous years' unclaimed
apportionment and reprogramming STA money that had been put
into streets and roads several years ago and not used. It
is estimated that the City will be using approximately
$202,129 of the LTF and $1,491 STA money for the
Dial -A -Ride system. The City, according to Staff, does not
plan to purchase any new equipment this year.
TGA funds are used in conjunction with other street funds
for the transportation improvement program and maintenance
of City streets. This claim includes work in progress
projects as well as street projects from the City's CIP
which are using the LTF funds. Projects were detailed for
the benefit of the Council. Showing these projects in our
claim allows us the flexibility to use TDA funds. It does
not approve these pro„ects for construction. The
pedestrian/bicycle apportionment ($15,467) will be used on
the City's sidewalk upgrading program, together with other
funds. Since this project improves pedestrian safety, it
meets the requirements cf this portion of the claim.
a �}
w : r
r �
z;
fl
y ��
{R,K
K
- 9
CITY OF LODICOUNCIL COMIMUNICATION x
PUBUC WORKS C-EPARTMENT
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 14, 1981'
AGENDA TITLE: Adopt Resolution Approving 1987/88 Transportation Development
Act Claim
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council adopt a resolution approving the
City's 1987/88 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Claim for Local
Transportation Funds (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA), and authorize
the City Manager to sign on behalf of the City.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City s 1987/88 TDA Claim requests all of the
LTF apportionment, which amounts to $757,856, and the STA., Y!hich amounts to
$1,491. The STA funds are not a new apportionment but a clean up of previous
years unclaimed apportionment and reprogramming STA money that had been put
into streets and roads several y^ars ago and not used. It is estimated that
we will be using approximately $202,125 of the LTE and $1,491 STA money for
the Dial -A -Ride system. We do not plan to purchase any new equipment this
year.
TDA funds are used in conjunction with other street funds for tho
transportation improvement program and maintenance of our streets. This
claim includes work in progces:� projects as well as street projects from our
CIP which are using the LTF funds. Projects are shown on the attached list.
Showing these projects in our claim allows us the flexibility to use TDA
funds. It does not approve these projects for construction. The
pedestrian/bicycle apportionment ($15,467) will be used on the City's
sidewalk upgrading program, together with other funds. Since this project
improves pedestrian safety, it meets the requirements of this portion of the
claim.
A complete claim form is
of this communication.
Jack L. Ronsko'
Public Works Director
JLR/SB/ma
Attachment
APPROVED:
in the City Manager's file but not included as part
erry Glenn
Assistant City Manager
ager
FILE NO.
CTEACLM2/TXTW.02M September 29, 1987
PART III - ROAD AND STREET PROJECTS
Please ,rovide the reauested information for each project being ident�fi(
for transportation Development Act funding.
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND
STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND
STA Cost
Project Title and Description Project Limits Total Cost
I l 1
I f {
I I i
I { 1
t l 1
I i 1
I I 4
l ! 1
I I I
{ 1 1
I ( i
I ! 1
(Use Additional page if Necessary)
LTF Cost
Project Title and Description
Project Limits
Total Cost
I Hutchins Street Widening !
Rimby to Vine
I 260,060
Tokay to Lodi
► 290,000
I Traffic Signal ►
Turner Road & Lower Sacramento 60,000
Asphalt Overlay
Various Locations
30,000
( RR Grade Crossing Protection I*Turner•
Road
! 8,000
I !*Loma
Drive
( 8,000
! 1*Cherokee
Lane
1 9,000
1 1
Cluff Avenue
1 10,000
Turner Road
Lower Sacramento Rd. to SPRR
180,000
I*Lower Sacramento Road Engileering (
I 10,000
I*Miscellaneous Traffic Appurten:aces i
Various Locations
200
I*Cherokee Ln/Century Blvd. Intersectionl
( 80,000
1*Street Master Plan Upgrade
10,000
I*Cherokee Lane Rideability Iriprovementl
( 7,000
Street Maintenance
1 I
1 107,000
1
! 1
1
899,213
[,Work 1
11, 00
in progress
! I
I
(Use Additional Page if
Necessary)
STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND
STA Cost
Project Title and Description Project Limits Total Cost
I l 1
I f {
I I i
I { 1
t l 1
I i 1
I I 4
l ! 1
I I I
{ 1 1
I ( i
I ! 1
(Use Additional page if Necessary)
Ct, i:uu�Cit
iOf!'� R ;Rar,.vr SNIDER
"aavo, Pro Tempore CM HALL. 221 WEST PINE CTREET
D-NVID r,1 MNCHMAN CALL BOX 3006
IAI-AFS W PINKERTON. It LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
FRED :%t RFID (209) 333-5634
TELECOPIER . (209) 333.6795
October 21, 1987
C rtv-tanaeerr
?t -;(-E Ni RE; (-HE
City Clerk
RC)N.ALD v STEM:
C;r Attorney
Mr. Gary Dickson
San Joaquin County COG
1860 East Hazelton Avenue
Stockton, CA 95205
Dear Mr. Dickson:
Enclosed herewith please find two executed copies• of the 1987/88
transportation Development Act Claim and the authorizing Resolution
which was approved by the Lodi City Council at its meeting of October
14, 1987.
Please return a fully executed copy of the subject claim at your
earliest convenience.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not
hesitate to call this office.
Very truly yours
Alice M. Reimche
City Clerk
AMR:jj
RESOLUTION Iti%: 01-1,33
RESaLUT IQ:� r:PPPU`:'Iva THE CITY'S 1,987-48
TRANSPORTATION DEVELO,PMEN'T ACT CLAIM FCR
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND
RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi does hereby approve
the City's 1987-88 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Claim for Local
Trafisportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA), a copy of
which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A", and thereby made a part
hereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi does
hereby authorize the City Manager to execute the subject claim on
behalf of the City of Lodi.
Dated: October 14, 1987
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 87-133 was passed and
adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular
meeting held October 14, 1987 by the following vote:
Ayes Council Members - Hinchman, Pinkerton, Reid,
Snider and Olson (Mayor)
Hoes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - None
Alice M. e the
City Clerk
87-133
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND
ro : San Joaquin County Couric i i of Governments
1860 East Hazelton Avenue
Stockton,. CA 95205
FROM: Applicant: - City of Lodi
Address: Call Box 3006 Lodi CA 95241
(City, zip)
Contact Person: Sharon Biaufus -Phone: 333-6700-
The
33-6700
The City of Lodi hereby requests, in accordance
with Chapter 1400, Statutes 1971 and applicable rules and
regulations, that its annual transportation claim be approved in
the amount of $ 1,116,809 for fiscal year 1987/88 to be
drawn from the Local Transportation Fund.
When approved, please transmit this claim to the County Auditor
for payment. Approval of the claim and payment by the County
Auditor to this applicant is subject to such monies being on hand
and available for distribution, and to the provisions that such
monies will, be used only in accordance with the terms of the
approved annual financial plan.
The claimant certifies that this Local Transportation Fund claim
and the financial information contained therein, is reasonable
and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and that the
aforementioned information indicates the eligibility of this
claimant for funds for the fiscal year of the application
pursuant to CAC Section 6G34 and 1-.0734.
APPROVED:
San Joaquin County Council
of Governments
By:
PETER D. VERDOORN
Title: Executive Director
Date: 19
min
Applicant: City of Lodi
By:
Thous A. Peterson
Title: City Manager
Date:
19
ST -"Ti TRANSIT -ASSISTANCE CLAIM
TO: San Joaquin County Council of Governments
1860 East Hazelton Avenue
Stockton, CA 95205
FROM: Applicant: City of Lodi
Address: Call Box 3006, Lodi, CA 95241
(City, Zip)
Contact Person: Sharon Blaufus
Phone: 333-6706
This claimant, qualified pursuant to Section x-9203 and 99315 of
the Public utilities Code, hereby requests, in accordance with
Chapter 1400, Statutes of 1971 as amended, and.applicable rules
and regulations, that an allocation be made in the amount of
$ 1,491 for fiscal year 1987/88 , to be drawn from the
State Transit Assistance trust fund of San Joaquin County for the
following purposes and in.the following respective amounts:
Purposes Amounts
Allocation instruction and payment by the County Auditor to this
claimant are subject to such monies being on hand and available
for distribution, and to the provisions that such monies will be
used only ii accordance with the terms of the approved claim.
The claimant certifies that this State Transit Assistance Fund
Claim and the financial information contained herein, is
reasonable and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and that the
aforementioned information indicates the eligibility of this
claimant for funds for the fiscal year of the application
pursuant to CAC Section 6634 and 6734.
APPROVED:
San Joaquin County Council
of Governments
By:
PETER D. VERDOORN
Title: Executive Director
Date: 19--
Applicant:
9
Applicant: City of Lodi
By
Thomas A. Peterson
Title• City Manager
Date: 19
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT APPORTIONMENTS
Locai Transnortatlor• Fund Available Apportionment
A. Area Apportionment 1987-88 $ 742,42-9
B. Pedestrian/Bicycle Apportionment _ 15,467
C. Previous Years` Unclaimed Apportionment 4,998
D. Unexpended Carryover 353,915
E. Total Available for 1987-88 Claim(s) 1,116,809
F. less any LTF Already Claimed 1987-88 -0-
G.- TOTAL AVAILABLE FOR THIS CLAIM $1,116,809
(Also enter on page -8 -IVa, 1st column) -
II. State Transit Assistance Fund Available Apportionment
A. Area Apportionment 1987-q8 $ 0
B. Special Transit Apportionment 1987-58 0
C. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment 566
D. Unexpended Carryover *925
E. Total Available for 1987-88 Claim(s)
F. less any STA Already Claimed 1987-88
G. TOTAL AVAILABLE FOR THIS CLAIM $
(Also enter on page 8 IVa, 2nd column)
*To be reprogrammed from Streets a:id Roads to Transit.
Eva
1,491
0
1,491
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ALLOCAT%vi<S
Lla;m Purpose I. LTF II. STAB`
1. Public Transoortation
Article 4 (99260) -Operator
202,129
1,49,
Article 8 (99400(c)) -Contractor
II. Pedestrian and Bicycle
N/A
Article 3 (99234)
_
Article 8 (99400(a))
15,467
III. Roads and Streets **
Article 8 (99400(a))
899.213
IV. Other
N/A
Article 8 (99400(b) or
99400(d))
TOTAL THIS CLAIM
a. TOTAL AVAILABLE FOR THIS CLAIM
1,116,809
1,491
b. TOTAL THIS CLAIM
1,116,809
1,491
c. UNCLAIMED APPORTIONMENT
-0-
-0-
1987-88 (a - b)
*This will automatically be classified as Article 6.5 (99313.5)
for purposes of the Act.
IMPORTANT: Please identify any unexpended carryover included
in the amounts being claimed above.
**All unexpended carryover is in Streets and Roads
—s-
PART 1 _ PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Please Circle either: Article 4 operator or Article 8 contractor
F'�NANCTAL INFORMATION
1986-87 198?- 98
I. OPERATING REVENUE Actual or Estimate* Budg,-!t
401 Passenger Fares 40,210* 40,050
402
Special Transit Fares
403
School Bus Service Revenues
404
Freight Tariffs
405
Charter Service Revenues
406
Auxiliary Transportation Revenues
407
Non -Transportation Revenues
408
Taxes Levied Directly by Transit
System (Specify)
409
Local Cash Grants & Reimbursements
(Specify) Local Transportation Fund
(LTF)
193,083
410
Local Special Fare Assistance
_
411
State Cash Grants & Reimbursements
(Specify) State Transit Assistance
Fund (STA)
20,724**
412
State Special Fare Assistance
413
Federal Cash Grants & Reimbursements
(Specify) UMTA Grants
430
Contributed Services
440
(Specify) Interest
220
TOTAL
254.237
IT.
CAPITAL REVENUE
464
Federal Capital Grants & Subsidies
(Specify)
State Capital Grants & Subventions
(Specify) State Transit Assistance
Funds (STA)
Local Capital Provisions (Specify)
Local Transportation Fund (LTF)
4,352
Non -Governmental Donations
TOTAL
4,352
*Tickets are presold; more tickets are sold than used
**Revenue received during 1986/87, actually part of
1985/86 claim
-9-
202,129
1,491 _
F.
III.
OPERATING EXPENSES
986-87
1937=88
Actual r Estimate*
Budget `
501
Labor
Operators Salaries/Mages
n
Other Salaries/Wages
750
502
Fringe Benefits
250
503
services
870
1,000
504
Materials/Supplies
Fuels/Lubricants
Tires/Tubes
Other
0
505
Utilities
506
Casualty/Liability Costs
36,474
37,500
507.
Taxes
508
Purchased Transportation Service
197,263
204,120
509
Miscellaneous Expenses
7
2E0
510
Expense Transfers
511
interest Expense
512
Leases and Rentals
513
Depreciation/Amortization
Operator Funds
Grant Funds
TOTAL'
234.614
243 A70
IV.
CAPITAL EXPENSES
Debt Service
Land/Property Acquisition
F
Vehicles
x
Construction
Other
4,352**
TOTAL
4,352
*Please circle either "actual" or "estimate", as appropriate.
**Cost
of converting two vehicles from diesel
to gasoline engines.
_
-10-
-
4
a
OPERATIONAL INFORMATION*
Actual / A tual st.
FY 1985-86 86-8 i
1.
Patronage
1.00
1.00
a. Total Passengers
68,599
d.
b. Revenue Passengers
2,745
.50
C. Youth Passengers
e.
d. Elderly Passengers
.50
.50
e. Handicapped Passengers
65,854
2.
Vehicle Miles
N/A
N/A
a. Total Vehicle Miles
107,971
g.
b. Revenue Vehicle Miles
107,971
3.
Revenue Vehicle Hours
9,042
4.
Revenue Vehicle Fuel
Consumption
h.
a. Diesel
.52
.53
b. Gasoline
8,734
C. Liquid Natural Compressed
Gas
s
}
5.
Fare Structure
as necessary to
alter or complete
a. Base
1.00
b. Zone
72,879
4,006
Proposed
FY 1987-88
75,600
4,500
68,873 71,100
136,490 140,000
136,490 140,000
11,299 12,000
12,859 13,333
1.00 1.0()
C .
Youth
1.00
1.00
1.00
4
d.
Senior
.50
.50
.50
e.
Handicapped
.50
.50
.50
f .
Monthly Pass
N/A
N/A
N/A
g.
other
_ N/A
N/A
N/A
h.
Average Fare
.52
.53
.53`
s
}
*Attach
additional pages
as necessary to
alter or complete
description
t
*Does not inrlirde County gPrvirP
THREE YEAR FISCAI, PLAN
t 485-83
X309-40
239£3-91
Operating Expenses
$
278,800
$
289,900
$
301,500
Operating Revenues
Sources: LTF
$
226,300
$
235,300
$
244,700
STA -
- -
--- - -
Federal
Fares
52,500
54.6b0
56,840
General Fund
Other
Total
S
278,800
$
289,900
$
301,500
Can i to 1 Expenses
$
$
15.000
$
_
CaAital Revenue
Sources: LTF
$
$
15,000
$
STA
Federal
Other
Total
$
!t
$
15.00Z_
$
0
i
e
f
-12-
FLEET INVENTORY
,Article 4 Operator Only;
[l
Production[
# ofl Fuell
Seat ISnecial Features _
(Make & Modell Year I
I [ [
Veh.1 Typel
1 !
Capacity (AC JEP [WC (Other
f [ f I
[
I Chevrolet
I {
[ f
t I
I [
[ ! I [
I [ f [
I Stationwagon
1 1982 {
2 1 gas (
6 ( X I I I
I Chevrolet
I Stationwagon
I
I
I
I
1 1985 {
I f
f I
I I
f I
5 1 gas (
f I
I [
! I
I I
6 I X
{ I [ [
[ f I [
[ [ [ [
l [ I [
!
[
f
I !
! I
! [
[ [
-
l l [ I
I I [ I
ITOTAL
I
(XxxxxxxxxxX(
I
IXXXXXI
I I I I
Vehicles to be Purchased in FY
AC = Air Conditioned
EP = Environmental Package
WC = Wheelchair Lift
-13-
r•
Artic e 4 Operator TDA Pequir-ements
i. Fare Patio/Local Support Requirements
All Article 4 claimants are required to maintain a specified
ratio of fare revenue to operating cost. in addition, SMTD
only is required to maintain a ratio of fare revenue plus
local support to operating cost of 32%. See 99268.2 -
99268.17 for details and exemptions pertaining to ratios.
A. What is this system's required farebox recovery ratio?
10%
B. Does the attached budget demonstrate that this system
will meet its required farebox recovery and for SMTD
its farebox plus local support ratios? Yes
C. Has this system utilized its grace year? No
D. Has this system been in non-compliance with its required
ratio(s)? No
If yes, identify the year or years
2. Extension of Service/New Service N/A
An extension of service or new service is exempt from the
required farebox and local support ratios if:
A. The extension of service or new service was implemented
in FY 1985-86 or later (99268.8).
B. The clam►ant submits a report on the extension of service
to COG. (For details of the report, see 6633.8(c)).
Is an extension of service/new service being claimed?
If so, please identify:
-14-
3. Fifteen Percent Expenditure Increase
�.f any of the line items on the attached budget exceed by
more than 15% the expenditure for that same item in the
3revious year's budget, then an explanation. for that increase
must be attached.
Item 502 - Last year, the Assistant City Manager, who administrates the
Dial -A -Ride Program, didn't charge any time to the account.
This year, he has budgeted $750 to cover his time.
4. Narrative Description
Describe any changes in service characteristics from the
previous fiscal year. Please attach an additional page if
necessary.
None
SPECIAL NOTES FOR RATIO CALCULATIONS'-=
SMTD - Exclude certain costs and fares as specified in 1985-86 {-
Compliance Audit Report.
Lodi - Exclude County service when calculating fares and t
expenses.
-15-
Article 8 Contractor TDA Reauirements*
For contz-aCtea transnor atlon Service nr ovi dens , the San 3oaouln .
County Council of Governments' Executive Board has waived the
farebox and N\ local support ratios as it is empowered to do and
established a\,two-step process.
1. Match Requirement
To receive the same amount of TDA funds (LTF and STA
combined) thht a service received in the previous year, no
more than 90% bf the operating funds (minus depreciation) in
the budget- mar be TDA derived. The ten percent or more
matching funds may come from any other source available to
the community as\long as it is not TDA.
2. Operating Cost Per\Passenger Objective
To receive an amount of TBA funds (LTF and STA combined) in
excess of what was c aimed the previous fiscal year, the
claimant must estabI sh a specific service objective for the
fiscal year of the clam. This specific objective must be
the operating cost per passenger for the fiscal year of the
claim. The objective should be a realistic one based on
current and past system performance, but should be low enough
to represent an "improvement" when warranted. The COG
Executive Board will adopt the operating cost per passenger
figure that a claimant mustmeet in the fiscal year of the
claim.
If the system failed to meet i s operating cost per passenger
objective in the fiscal year prior to the claim, then it
would only be eligible to file\a claim for the level of TDA
funding received in that fiscal ybar. If a system wishes to
be eligible for increased TDA 4unding in a future fiscal
year, then it should identify an operating cost per passenger
objective.
i. What was the level of TDA fun ing received in the
previous fiscal year for thistsystem (LTF and STA)?
ii. Does the attached budget information demonstrate at
least a 10% match of non -TDA funds'
iii. Is this claim requesting more TDA f\ds then were
received in the previous fiscal year
If yes, how much more?
*If this claim is for the smaller portion of a unified transit
system, do not use pages 16 and 17. Use F. 17a insteak
-16-
4. Narrative Description
Describe any changes in service characteristics from the
previous fiscal year. Please attac�. antadditional page if
necessary.
IMPORTANT: If this claim is for a unified transit s�,stem (per
definition p. 17a), all calculations and numbers on p�}ges 16-17
must include both City and County totals.
-17-
•s.
\;,chat
IV
o.as last year' Operating Cost per Passenger
7
k
What was the
actual operating cost per passenger'?...
a.\,FY 1986-87 Operating Cost S
k
b. Total Passengers
C. Operating Cost. Per Passenger
_
(a`/ b) $
- V.
What is\the operating Cost per Passenger Objective
for this claim?
a
_d. Budget d Operating Cost $
e. Estimated Total Passengers
f. Operating Cost per Passenger
g. FY 19E7-88 gPERATING COST PER
_ PASSENGER OB`ECTZVE $
aim \ s u transit ' t stem
h. If this cl for a unified t� n i system
(see footnotep, has the contributing claimant
�
been appraised bf the planned systemwide objec-
tive set in g. above? <
3. Fifteen
Percent Expenditure Increase
If any
of the line items on the attached budget exceed by
more than 15% the expenditure for\ that same item in the
previous year's budget, then an explanation for that increase
must be
attached. e
4. Narrative Description
Describe any changes in service characteristics from the
previous fiscal year. Please attac�. antadditional page if
necessary.
IMPORTANT: If this claim is for a unified transit s�,stem (per
definition p. 17a), all calculations and numbers on p�}ges 16-17
must include both City and County totals.
-17-
r'+RTICLE 8 CONTRACTOR TDA REQUIREMENTS (CONTRIBUTING CLAIMANTS)
in the C35e of a "Unified transit system," this page iS td
be used b,r the "contributing claimant" rather than pages 16
and 17.\\ A "unified transit system" is defined as orae which
has the`,,same fare structure throughout the service area, but
whose TDA expenses are claimed separately by two different
TDA claimants. Additionally, to qualify as a unified tran-
sit system all system TDA funding must be claimed under
Article 8( ) (both claimants). "Contributing claimant" is
defined as tie claimant contributing a minority of the uni-
fied transit system's TDA funds. The claimant furnishing
the majority f TDA funds is defined as the "primary claim-
ant."
Currently, the following local services qualify as unified
transit systems:
FY 1987-88 Unified ransit Systems This Page Used by:
Tracy Trans County
Tracy Taxi County
Escalon Public Transit System County
In addition, the City of Manteca will use this page as a
contributing claimant For the SCAT service, if Manteca con-
tributes TDA funds to SCAT x FY 1987-88.
II. 1. Name of unified transit system
2. Date of primary claimant's adopted transit claim (from
that claim, page 5, lower left corner)
3. Systemwide operating cost per passenger objective iden-
tified in primary claimant's adopted transit claim (from
that claim, page 17 v.g.)
IMPORTANT:
The operating cost per passenger objective identif:`�d in 3. above
will be applied uniformly to the total of City aAid County TDA
funds used by the unified transit system, to determin eligibil-
ity for increased TDA funding as explained on page 16 Separate
calculations will not be done for City and County.
-17a-
PART II - PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PROJECTS
LCCAL, Ti:yiiSrGRTAI'ION FUtvD
ro_ject Title and Description
Sidewalk Upgrading
STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND
Protect Limits
Varies
LTF Cost
Total Cost
15,467
5 ;000
-18-
r.om MROT^.CTC
PART ZII - KVAU ti1VL :1RLLt rsty .ru
Please provide the reauested information for each proiject being identifi(
.or Transportation Development Act funding.
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND
Project Title and Description
! Hutchins Street Widening
I Traffic Signal
Asphalt Overlay
LTF Cost
Proiect Limits Total Cost
Rimby to Vine I 260,0e0
Tokay to Lodi 290,000
Turner Road & Lower Sacramentq 60,000
Various Locations 30,000
1 RR Grade Crossing Protection I*Turner• Road 1 8,000
{ (*Loma Drive I 8,000
I I*Cherokee Lane { 9,000
{ I Cluff Avenue I 10,000
*Turner Road I Lower Sacramento Rd. to SPRR f 180,000
I*Lower Szcramento Road Engineering I ► 10,000
I*Miscellaieous Traffic Appurtenances 4 Various Locations 200
1*.herokee Ln/Century Blvd. Intersection[ 1 80,000
1* Street Master Plan Upgrade 10,000
I*Cherokee Lane Rideability Improvement[ I 71000
*Street Maintenance
t
1
I
I*Work in progress
STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND
[ 107,000
1
{
[ 899,213
11,00—,200
fUse Additional Page if Necessary)
STA Cost
Project Title and Descri tion Project Limits Total Cost
! I I
{ I I
I I I
I I t
t l I
I l 1
i {
I I I
{ f i
f 1 I
i ( i
j l !
i I !
(Use Additional page if Necessary) u.
PARI IV .- OTHER PURPOSES
It is possible that a claimant may wish to expend TDA funds for
purposes allowed within the Act, but not covered by the three
previous parts. For instance, TDA funds may be claimed to
subsidize AMTRAK service in a community. To complete this
section, please identify the project, the purpose of the project,
the estimated cost, and the fund from which money is being
claimed. It is advisable to communicate with COG staff before
completing this section.