Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
RESPONSE - RFP - 7261 REGIONAL TRANSIT SERVICE ENTITY FEASIBILITY STUDY
M steer aavies Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Proposal October 2011 _ 7+ " r �', n 1 C _ at S . 1 mmmmdm •M 7R' H[IGNJ Doi .. . r IL — 2 A. FrI k • .t V Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study and media relations. She brings a unique set of skills to the project: effective public communication and outreach combined with a keen understanding of land use, transit system planning, and multi -modal connectivity. The firm is working with Tim Baldwin on the Longmont 1st Et Main Transit and Revitalization Plan and has worked with him on other transit planning projects throughout the West. OV Consulting will be supplemented in the outreach effort by Saundra Dowling Associates, a DBE firm whose principal has major experience in transit planning and outreach and who has worked extensively with Tim Baldwin and other members of the team. 1.10 Finally, we have asked Lonnie Blaydes of Lonnie E. Blaydes Consulting to join our team to provide guidance on governance structures. Lonnie is a former General Counsel at Dallas Area Rapid Transit who has assisted transit systems around the country on their organizational and implementation issues and will be a valuable asset to this project with his national base of experience. He has worked with Tim Baldwin on many other projects and assisted the City of Fort Collins in the past in its dealings with the BNSF Railway. Key Factors of our Proposal 1.11 The SDG Team brings a number of new viewpoints and evaluation tools to this project that have been used successfully and valued by our clients in projects around the world. Our approach to this project is 'top -down' in that we will start with the regional vision that has already been discussed by many stakeholders and develop a regional transit framework to fit that vision. We do not believe that 'one size fits all' when it comes to designing regional transit blueprints, so we want to use this vision -based approach combined with best practices from around the country to help the Fort Collins area develop the regional transit concept. 1.12 Another key SDG tool we want to use in this project is the Multiple Account Evaluation (MAE) process. This user-friendly process provides decision -makers and the local community with systematic documentation that clearly demonstrates the trade-offs among often conflicting factors, such as financial, transportation user benefits, environmental, economic development, social community, and urban development. More information on this process is included in our Work Plan. 1.13 We also propose the use of a peer review panel of representatives from peer cities and systems, including transit agencies in North America where we have worked. They will participate in a regional forum to share their experiences and viewpoints, and review our project recommendations with the Fort Collins community. steer davies gleave 0 0 Charlotte Spetch Senior Consultant �fi3 I haveworkd1 nStee�r Da�vles Gleave ;sdevelopment plamm�g unit for fount years a'nd page, gained conslderble experience;anda broad skill base through undertaking r nsporC assessments, master plamm�g poposals; +F" 4trakf. stadia planning an travel pla s fog a variety ofi development projects I �K have gainea,10S experience, on a number of large�andkcomplex �Ne e'"r4 devvellopment promo tsworki g wlthtmiiltl disciplinary teams l have found ", my background in public tray rt to.beran asset and apply my knowledgef: �. and.expenence to development projects4_ *' xasrur .t�1`.� I have4amexcellent record of understandmg,and meeting clients 'ems max. . requirements and�my commumcation;skills certainly facilitate tlns> I take4 s pnde inn deltiiiv�enn&Nem highest, standard of work on time and to budgets " Background Prior to joining Steer Davies Gleave, Charlotte started her career creating, Qualifications appraising and promoting plans for the development of London's bus network. MSc Business Studies, Aston University, 2001 She led the public transport assessment of various land -use developments in London and assessed the impacts on the bus network, acquiring an excellent BA Hons History & Politics, Warwick University, 1999 knowledge of the importance of transport assessments, particularly from Transport for London's perspective. At Steer Davies Gleave Charlotte is a member of the development planning team located in the London office and Years of Experience has project management experience with both public and private sector 3 Client side clients. 4 Consultancy Relevant Skills Project Management Charlotte is a project manger who demonstrates a clear understanding of the importance of listening to and understanding the objectives of clients. She is able to communicate this to her team in order to deliver high quality results to clients on time and within budget. During her time with Steer Davies Gleave, Charlotte has gained project management experience whilst providing transport input for planning applications, masterplans and stadia proposals. Charlotte has managed a number of commercially sensitive projects and proposals on which she has demonstrated her commercial awareness and ensured the client's agenda is not compromised. Charlotte follows Steer Davies Gleave's quality management system and ensures a quality service and output is delivered. Transport Assessment Production 8 Review Charlotte has produced ■ Transport Assessments for a variety of developments including office, general industrial, warehousing, retail and residential. She has an excellent ■ knowledge of the structure and input necessary to complete a comprehensive Transport Assessment, including trip generation, public transport ■ accessibility analysis, policy review, demand forecasts, impact, travel plan, and assessment and mitigation of traffic impact. Charlotte regularly ■ reviewed and appraised developers' Transport Assessments whilst working at London Buses. She has an excellent knowledge of the importance of these documents, particularly from the point of view of TfL. Her insight was useful ■ when Steer Davies Gleave produced the published TfL Transport Assessment Best Practice Guidance document. ■ Bus Planning Charlotte uses experience gained at London Buses to add value ■ for clients. Since joining Steer Davies Gleave, she has undertaken a number of detailed reviews of bus service provision for Canary Wharf, London Zoo and Rainham Casino. Charlotte evaluates the bus network to provide a ■ number of options for the client. ■ Masterplanning Charlotte has gained masterplanning experience through working on the Battersea Power Station and Crystal Palace Park Masterplan projects. Charlotte is able to appreciate that ideas developed by external ■ project partners should try to be accommodated in transport terms, where possible, to satisfy the development aspirations for the project and facilitate innovative design. ■ CHARLOTTE SPETCH = y,y-jes gleave Projects Summary Project Client Year/Location Role Camden Infrastructure Et Project Management Community LB Camden 2009 Project Manager Infrastructure Levy Study Central London Et Westminster Infrastructure Ft LB Westminster 2008 -2009 Project Manager Community Infrastructure Levy Study Battersea Power Station REO (Power 2007-ongoing, Project Manager Station) Limited London, UK Arsenal Emirates Stadium Arsenal Football 2006-ongoing, Project Manger Club London, UK Orbital Park Salmon Harvester 2006-ongoing, Ashford, Kent, UK Project Manager 86-88 Upper Richmond Heavenly Homes 2005-2007, London, Project Manager Road UK 24 Sutherland Road - Divine Ideas 2006-ongoing, Project Manager Phase 3 London, UK Timber Mill Way BNB Developments 2006, London, UK Project Manager Canary Wharf: Bus Stop J Canary Wharf 2006, London, UK Project Manager Review Group Transport Assessment 24 Sutherland Road - Divine Ideas 2006-2007, London, Project Manager Production Ft Phase 3 UK Review Orbital Park Salmon Harvester 2006 ongoing, Ashford, Kent, UK Project Manager 86-88 Upper Richmond Heavenly Homes 2005-2007, London, Project Manager Road UK Wilton Plaza Land Securities 20 6-2007, London, Consultant UK _.... Timber Mill Way, ....... BNB Developments 2006, London, UK ....... _._...._ . Project Manager Clapham Transport Assessment Transport for 2005-2006, Consultant Best Practice Guidance London (TfL) London, UK Bus Planning Edmonton Bus Strategy City of Edmonton 2008, Edmonton, Senior Consultant Review Canada London Zoo Zoological Society 2006 London, UK Consultant of London Victoria Interchange Land Securities 2005 2006, London, Consultant Programme g Pro UK The Power Station Parkview 2005-2006, London, Consultant Battersea International UK Canary Wharf Bus Service Canary Wharf 2006, London, UK Consultant Review Group Rainham Casino/ Leisure Building Design 2005, London, UK Consultant Centre Study Partnership Masterplanning Battersea Power Station REO (Power 2007-ongoing, Project Manager Station) Limited London, UK Crystal Palace Park London Development 2006-2007, London, Senior Consultant Masterplan Agency UK New Covent Garden Skidmore, Owings 2006, London, UK Consultant Market Masterplan and Merrill CHARLOTTE SPETCH - Awdavies gleave Selected Projects Bus Planning Edmonton Bus Strategy Review Client City of Edmonton Year/Location 2008, Edmonton, Canada Position Held Senior Consultant Steer Davies Cleave was commissioned by the City of Edmonton to develop a comprehensive public transport strategy as part of the Transportation Masterplan. Edmonton's public transport network comprises numerous bus routes and a single - leg light rail transit system. Charlotte reviewed strategic proposals for the bus network in light of travel patterns, demographic trends and the proposed 5-leg LRT system. London Zoo Client Zoological Society of London Year/Location 2006, London, UK Position Held Consultant Steer Davies Gleave was commissioned by the Zoological Society of London to review bus service provision to London Zoo and the Regent's Park area. Charlotte investigated, costed, evaluated and wrote the report that proposed a number of options, including minor restructuring to the existing London Bus network, shuttle bus services, way finding and publicity. Victoria Interchange Programme Client Land Securities Year/Location 2005-2006, London, UK Position Held Consultant Steer Davies Gleave was appointed by Land Securities in January 2005 to provide advice on all transport issues related to the Victoria Interchange Programme. The project comprised the comprehensive redevelopment of Victoria, involving over 1 million sq ft of commercial, retail and residential development. The project also involved the reconfiguring of transport provision, including a proposal for an innovative 'below -grade' bus station, which would facilitate wider improvements such as the delivery of a new public realm to Victoria. Charlotte prepared the report on bus operations in support of the Masterplan proposals. Rainham Casino/Leisure Centre Study Client Building Design Partnership Year/Location 2005, London, UK Position Held Consultant Steer Davies Gleave assisted Building Design Partnership with the transport policy framework, accessibility and transport capacity context for a feasibility study for a new leisure casino complex in Rainham. Charlotte reviewed bus service provision to the proposed site in Rainham. She investigated enhancements to the existing bus network, including frequency enhancements and the rerouting of services. The Power Station Battersea Client Parkview International Year/Location 2005-2006, London, UK Position Held Consultant Charlotte was involved in the Battersea Power Station project looking at public and shuttle bus movements. She reviewed and responded to London Buses' consultation document Proposed Changes to Services in Inner West London highlighting the shortfall in capacity to the Power Station as a result of these proposals and successfully argued the need for London Buses to keep this under review. In conjunction with London Buses' proposals, Charlotte analysed the impact of construction workers on the bus network. CHARLOTTE SPETCH steer davies gleave Selected Projects Transport Assessment Production and Review 24 Sutherland Road - Phase 3, Waltham Forest Client Divine Ideas Year/Location 2006-2008,London, UK Position Held Project Manager Steer Davies Gleave prepared a Transport Statement for a proposed development at 24 Sutherland Road, Waltham Forest. The document addressed the traffic impact of the total development in light of recent land -use policy as per the request of LB Waltham Forest Highway Officer. Charlotte demonstrated that there would be negligible impact on the local road network. The report was submitted on time and to budget to the satisfaction of the client. 86-88 Upper Richmond Road Client Heavenly Homes Year/Location 2005-2007, London, UK Position Held Project Manager Steer Davies Gleave was commissioned by Gardiner Theobald on behalf of Heavenly Homes to produce a Transport Assessment in support of a planning application for a mixed -use development in Putney. Charlotte demonstrated in the Transport Assessment that there would be negligible impact on the public transport and road network as a result of the development. Part of the work included a parking management strategy to show that there would be no adverse impact to on -street parking in the vicinity of the development. The Transport Assessment was submitted on time and within budget. Wilton Plaza Client Land Securities Year/Location 2006, Victoria, London Position Held Consultant Charlotte updated previous work undertaken by Steer Davies Gleave for Land Securities for the Wilton Plaza site. She produced a Transport Assessment for a revised residential and retail scheme. A parking strategy was formulated to defend the low level of parking provision on site. Charlotte also completed an assessment of the site compliance with Bespoke Ecohomes guidance. Timber Mill Way, Clapham Client BNB Developments Year/Location 2006, London, UK Position Held Project Manager Steer Davies Gleave was commissioned to produce a Transport Assessment for a mixed -use development at Timber Mill Way, Clapham. Charlotte reviewed relevant policy, undertook trip generation and distribution assessment and completed junction analysis as part of the production of a Transport Assessment for input into the final report. As project manager, Charlotte ensured that the Transport Assessment was completed on time and to budget to the satisfaction of the client. Charlotte was also involved in post -application negotiations with the Local Authority. Transport Assessment Best Practice Guidance Client Transport for London (TfL) Year/Location 2005-2006, Victoria, London Position Held Consultant TfL Land Use Planning (LUP) wanted to produce a Best Practice Guide for producing Transport Assessments for strategic developments in London. Charlotte reviewed Transport Assessments and provided input into the final guidance. This is now a public document providing developers and consultants working on London projects with clear guidance on TfL's requirements from Transport Assessment documents. It also gives guidance on the process involved and advice on when to consult TfL LUP. CHARLOTTE SPETCH - sWerdavies gleave Albert T. Stoddard III, Ph.D., P.E. TRANSPORTATION Page 1 CONSULTANTS, INC. ■ Experience ■ Over 30 years experience in civil and transportation engineering ■ Serves as Principal in the firm's Colorado Springs office ► Assistant Professor of Transportation Engineering at the University of Alaska Anchorage (1984 to 1987) ► Five years of active duty as a civil engineer with the US Air Force (1975 to 1980) ■ Regional Transit Plans ■ < North Front Range Transit Element (CO) ■ Served as Project Manager for preparation of the long-range Transit Element for the North ■ Front Range. The Transit Element was prepared as part of an update to the Metropolitan Transportation Plan. The plan included both short-term and long-term recommendations for ■ regional transit services. ■ < Intermountain Region Transit Element (CO) Prepared Transit Elements for the Intermountain Planning Region in Colorado. LSC prepared ■ the original Transit Element and then completed two updates as part of the statewide plan- ning process. The plan identified and prioritized improvements for all transit services within the five -county region. ■ < Grand Valley/Mesa County Regional Transit Plans (CO) Prepared the long-range Transit Elements for the Mesa County Regional Transportation Planning Office for the 2030 and 2035 Long -Range Transportation Plans. ■ < Colorado 2035 Transportation Plans ■ Managed the preparation of the Transit Elements and Local Transit Coordination Plans for the ten rural Transportation Planning Regions in Colorado. ■ < Five Valleys Regional Transit Needs Assessment (MT) • Completed an analysis of transit needs for the six -county area surrounding Missoula, Mon- tana. The needs assessment determined the feasibility of providing transit service within the ■ region and made specific recommendations for regional transit services. • < Colorado Springs Innovative Transit System Plan (CO) Developed and evaluated alternatives for restructuring the transit system in the Colorado Springs Region. The alternatives included grid, hub -and -spoke, and multiple hub systems. • < Pikes Peak Specialized Transportation Plan (CO) Prepared a plan for coordination of specialized transportation services in the Pikes Peak • Region. Recommendations included use of a consolidated dispatching program. • • Albert T. Stoddard III, Ph.D., P.E. Paae 2 Transit Cost Analysis < Colorado Transit Performance Measures (CO) Developed performance measures to be used by the Colorado Department of Transporta- tion in evaluating local transit systems as part of the grant application process. The per- formance measures include an analysis of operating costs. < Boone County Coordinated Transportation Study (MO) As part of evaluating the potential for coordination of public transit and human services transportation in Boone County, Missouri, we analyzed the operating costs of the current providers to determine the potential for cost savings. < Billings Community Paratransit Study (MT) Evaluated the costs of current specialized transportation providers in Billings and developed recommendations to consolidate services based on the potential cost savings. Presentations and Seminars ► CTAA Expo: Transit Performance Monitoring < CTAA Expo: Workshop on Cost Allocation ► Financial Management, Cost Allocation, and Performance Evaluation for Transit Managers (multiple seminars held in 10 states) < Oregon Transit Association Conference: Transit Performance Measures • Alaska Transit Association Annual Conference: Transit Performance Measures and Transit Service Design • CTAA Institute for Transportation Coordination: Service Design and Financial Planning Education ► Doctor of Philosophy in Civil and Environmental Engineering (Transportation) - Cornell University 1984 < Master of Science in Civil Engineering - University of Alaska Anchorage 1980 < Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering - US Air Force Academy 1975 Professional Registration/Memberships ► Registered Professional Engineer in Colorado and Alaska < American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) - Committee on Transportation Planning < Transportation Research Board (TRB) - Committee on Transportation Planning for Small and Medium -Sized Communities / Beth Vogelsang, f91CP / / / CON$VLTINO / / / / / / _J Beth Vogelsang, AICP Principal Beth Vogelsang, AICP is a land use and transportation planner with 18 years of experience in land use and transit system planning. She has supplemented her planning expertise with a growing practice in public involvement and jurisdictional coordination. Because she understands the planning and design process, S. Vogelsang has a unique ability to effectively coordinate technical project needs with local community concerns. She recognizes the critical need for participation throughout the project and the efficiency of creating the means for that input early on. Ms. Vogelsang has worked extensively with local jurisdictions to design and implement effective public involvement programs and manage community outreach, coordinate focus groups and stakeholder committees and work with local agencies and jurisdictions. She is an expert in public meeting organization, website design, online survey and data collection, social media and relations. Ms. Voqelsanq has worked extensively with local jurisdictions and their communities throughout Colorado establishing public communication strategies linked to the planning and design processes for multi - modal transportation projects. She brings a unique set of skills to the project: effective public communication and outreach combined with a keen understanding of land use, transit system planning and multi -modal connectivity. Education Master of City Planning, San Diego State University, 1993 Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of Colorado at Boulder. 1988 Professional Reg istrations/Affil iations American Institute of Certified Planners AICP Member, American Planning Association Member, Women's Transportation Seminar Work History OV Consulting, LLC, Principal (Aug. 2002 - Present) URS/BRW, Senior Transportation Planner (Jan 1999 — Aug 2002) City of Corpus Christi, Texas, Senior Planner (Aug 1995 — Dec 1998) North San Diego County Transit District, Planner (May 1993 — May 1995) San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board, Planner (May 1992 — May 1993) / Public Involvement Work Experience / CITY OF LITTLETON PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN, 2011 Public Involvement Lead / Ms. Vogelsang managed the public outreach and involvement program for the Littleton Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. She coordinated with city staff, planning commission and Council on project progress, communicated with the public and school district extensively to . determine local needs, updated project website and developed web -based surveys for the general public and Littleton schools, and organized local focus groups and project open houses. Her efforts ensured a successful and representative planning process. OV Consulting 7707 Ulynkoop 5t• Suite 727 Denver, CO 80401303-5&9-5651 / Beth Vogelsang, HICP CITY OF ENGLEWOOD BICYCLE MASTER PLAN, 2011 Public Involvement Lead Ms. Vogelsang is currently managing the public involvement and school outreach efforts for the Englewood Bicycle Master Plan. She has hosted two public open houses and managed an extensive communication and education program with Englewood schools to promote safe walking and biking. Ms. Vogelsang and Bicycle Colorado joined up to develop bilingual educational and marketing materials highlighting Englewood's efforts and the educational programming and encouragement activities within the community. Local education and input have been essential elements of the planning process and critical to determining long-range and near -term improvements to the City's bicycle network. CITY OF GOLDEN — TRANSIT CIRCULATOR FEASIBILITY STUDY, 2009- 2010 Project Manager, Public Involvement Manager As Project Manager, Ms. Vogelsang ran both the transit planning process and public outreach program for the Golden study. She coordinated all project details through staff and a stakeholder management team, and developed critical input methods for the public including focus group meetings with Golden businesses, Colorado School of Mines, Jefferson County, and area residents. Her efforts to gather public input on future transit services resulted in over 800 survey responses and updates through local blogs and newsletter postings. She held public open houses and managed all communication with city staff, planning commission and City Council, as well as local media. As a result, the local community supported the recommended transit services, RTD partnered with the City of Golden in a successful funding grant application and the City and RTD are now implementing the new service for 2013. RTD FASTRACKS - WEST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL FINAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, 2006-2008 Stakeholder Manager Ms. Vogelsang worked extensively with the residents and local jurisdictions along the line, including the City of Denver, City of Lakewood, City of Golden and Jefferson County to ensure open public input and agency coordination throughout the process. She effectively communicated local concerns for service, station design and community integration to the design team and worked to create community sensitive design solutions. She developed a series of design workshops for residents and agencies to address station design, site layout, and the integration of transit services and bike and pedestrian connectivity to the stations. Ms. Vogelsang developed and administered a web -based comment collection system with supporting back -end database which was utilized at public open houses and by team management. Her efforts were strongly supported by both the local communities and RTD throughout the project. WADSWORTH BLVD/WATERTON CANYON FEASIBILITY STUDY, JEFFERSON COUNTY, 2009-2010 Public Outreach and Stakeholder Manager Ms. Vogelsang managed the public communication and outreach program for Jefferson County's Feasibility Study and worked extensively with project stakeholders including Douglas County, CDOT, Army Corps of Engineers and Denver Water. This technical study required continual stakeholder involvement, coupled with a comprehensive public outreach effort, web - based communications and surveys, e-newsletter project updates, and large-scale public open houses. Ms. Vogelsang's outreach efforts resulted in public open houses with over 300 OV Consulting 7707 Wynkoop St- Suite 727 Denver, CO 80401303-589-5657 Beth Vogelsang, g1CP attendees, significant input to project alternatives and substantial feedback via web surveys and live comment collection. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, 38T" AND BLAKE NEXT STEPS STUDY, 2009-2010 ■ Public Involvement Manager The 38th/Blake East Corridor Station is an integral component of regional mobility for the RTD Fastracks Program that also includes the Central Connector Streetcar line that begins at this station. Transit, pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to and from the station area and surrounding residential and commercial uses was a key focus of the study. The public and S stakeholder involvement program, managed by Beth Vogelsang, was integral to the planning process and ensured that the vision and values of local residents, businesses, developers, and City Council members guided the planning process and resulted in cohesive recommendations. Ms. Vogelsang managed media contact, public open houses, web -based communication tools and coordination with community stakeholders throughout the project. CITY OF LAKEWOOD, FEDERAL CENTERIUNION CORRIDOR CONNECTIVITY PLAN, 2009-2010 Project Manager and Public Involvement Lead OV Consulting was the prime consultant on the Federal Center/Union Corridor Connectivity Study. As Project Manager, Beth Vogelsang was responsible for the integration of planning and rezoning efforts, analysis of travel modes and markets, and the identification of pedestrian and bicycle routes and connections that would enhance local corridor connectivity and regional multi -modal access to the area's light rail station. Ms. Vogelsang ran a robust public outreach r effort with the local residents and the business community, developed online surveys and polls, conducted business, neighborhood and Federal Center focus groups, and managed two public open houses and a design workshop. Ms. Vogelsang was successful in soliciting public input and ideas, identifying connectivity improvements, garnering support for recommendations from both the public and key stakeholders and providing the necessary detail about connectivity . improvements to allow the City to move forward with implementation. OV Consulting 7707 U/ynkoop St- Suite 727 Denver, CO 80407303-5&9-5657 N RANGE OF EXPERIENCE Mr. Wolinetz has more than a decade of professional experience in financial feasibility and economic analysis of transportation and aviation projects. He has expertise in innovative finance, public -private partnerships (P3), performance measurement and benchmarking, economic impact assessment, and benefit -cost analysis. With a background in urban planning, Mr. Wolinetz has extensive rail and transit expertise, and has worked on rail projects in Florida, Illinois, Rhode Island, Colorado, Missouri, and Hawaii. EDUCATION Master of City and Regional Planning, Transportation, 2001, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina B.A., Economics, 1996, Corneill University, Ithaca, NY PROFESSIONAL HISTORY Infrastructure Management Group, Bethesda, MD Since July 2001, Senior Manager (current title) Financial Advisor for Rail Improvements, Miami Dade CITT, Miami, FL. Project manager advising on the financial plan for $10+ billion in transportation projects. Analyzed Miami -Dade Transit pro forma and New Starts application, developed financial risk assessment model, recommended innovative funding strategies. Financial Analysis of Proposed Rail System, State of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI. Lead financial analyst for review of the financial, construction, and operational plan for a proposed $5.1 billion elevated rail system. Analysis included financial model, fiscal capacity analysis of the City, operating plan analysis, and case studies of other transit projects. Performance Audit of Chicago Transit Agencies, Illinois Office of the Auditor General, Springfield, IL. Deputy project manager for the performance audit of the Chicago Transit Authority, Metra regional rail, Pace suburban bus, and Regional Transit Authority. The audit covered 11 functional areas at each agency, and was awarded the Excellence in Accountability Award by the National State Auditors' Association in 2008. Streetcar Financial Plan, Colorado Springs, CO. Lead financial feasibility analysis of proposed streetcar line in Colorado Springs, as part of a multi- disciplinary team. Financial Advisor for TIFIA Loans, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC. Advised TIFIA Project Office on loan applications for $267 million Warwick Intermodal Center (at T.F. Green Airport, Providence, RI), Triangle Expressway in North Carolina, $1.5 billion SH-161 (Texas), and South Bay Expressway (San Diego, CA). Provided financial analysis and supported loan negotiations for each project. Financial Advisor for Greenfield Airport, Panama City, FL. Project manager for financial analysis $320 M airport, which opened in May 2010. Developing detailed financial model and plan, procured $79 M federal and over $165 M state funds, including a Florida State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) loan. Financing recognized as the "2008 Southeast Deal of the Year' by The Bond Buyer. Performance Audit, St. Louis Metro, St. Louis, MO. IMG has been selected to provide a 5-year performance audit of the Metrolink light rail system in St. Louis. Mr. Wolinetz will serve as day-to-day project manager. P3 Concession Advisor, Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, FL. Project Manager for financial advisory for a proposed $1.5 B concession agreement with to design, build, finance, operate and maintain (DBFOM) a 46-mile greenfield toll road near Jacksonville. Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Why the SDG Team? 1.14 Our team is especially qualified to meet your goals and develop a governance structure that serves the short-term, mid -range, and long-term needs of the region: . I Transit master planning is one of our core capabilities. SDG has specialist capability to help public authorities develop their visions for transit, design transit master plans integrated with land use, grow transit revenues, improve efficiency, assist implementation, and deliver results. 1 We bring fresh thinking to transit master planning. Having worked on transit development in some 30 cities in North America, Europe and Asia, SDG brings comprehensive experience on best practice in transit planning and cost and revenue management, as well as proven expertise on approaches to transit development in different land use environments and the applicability of new transportation concepts. . I We bring a tried and tested methodology to transit master planning and governance strategies. SDG can offer a clear and transparent method of approach to developing ■ transit master planning, which has been successfully applied and refined over the past decade, most recently in Sacramento and Ann Arbor. As an example of our work, we have included in the Appendix a summary report of the Ann Arbor Transit Master Plan and its funding plan. Our team has strong coverage of project specialty areas. All of our team members have been chosen based on their in-depth knowledge of the transportation and planning issues faced by the region, as well as specialist skills to interface with Fort Collins' outreach process. In particular, our team member LSC brings considerable knowledge and . experience of local transit planning issues, which will be invaluable in identifying scenarios and strategies going forward. We see the big picture. Our depth of expertise in transit planning allows us to work both ■ at a strategic level and more detailed tactical level. We understand the big issues that need to be tackled to develop a successful transit master plan, as well as the detailed technical, operational and financial issues that need to be addressed to ensure successful implementation. We are not afraid of promoting new thinking or new ideas. 0 Steer loaves gleaw 0 Lou Wolinetz Ccninr Mnnnour Financial Advisor, Phoenix/Mesa Gateway Airport, Mesa, AZ Project Manager for the financial and funding analysis of over $250 million in proposed capital improvements as Gateway Airport seeks to grow into a commercial alternative to SkyHarbor. Equity Toll Road Development in Texas As project manager advised TxDOT on the financial viability and likely bids for six proposed public - private toll road concessions in the Dallas area. Developed a financial model that accounts for the exogenous factors that affect concession bids in addition to evaluating the project financials. SELECTED PRESENTATIONS and PUBLICATIONS • "Changing Partnerships, Changing Times", presentation on airport finance to the Airports Consultants Council, Jacksonville, FL, November 2010. • "Performance Audit of Chicago's Transit Agencies" presented at the APTA Performance Measurement Workshop, December 2008 • P3 Finance Panelist, Florida Infrastructure Forum, Miami, FL, December 2008 • "Financial Stability in Uncertain Times", presented at the Florida Airports Council 39ih Annual Meeting, July 2008. • "Why Will Some Individuals Pay for Travel Information when it can be Free? An Analysis of a Bay -Area Traveler Survey." Wolinetz, L., A. Khattak, and Y. Yim. Transportation Research Record, 1759, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 9-18, 2001. �,1 Infrastructure Management 2 1� Group, Inc. VOLUME 3 Transit Master F Funding Optic DRAFT - August 2011 e, Rld. MOVING YOU FORWARD e carvmwoe marvm mwow Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 I. Current Transit Service and Funding in Washtenaw County 3 Transit Service in Washtenaw County Today 3 Transit Funding in Washtenaw County Today 4 Efficiency of Today's Transit Services 5 II. AATA Near Term Service Improvements 7 III. Countywide Transit: AATA's Response to Regional Realities 9 The Vision: Countywide Transit Services 9 Countywide Governance 10 Countywide Funding Options 11 A Possible Countywide Transit Budget 20 APPENDICES 45 Executive Summary This report examines the current public transit services offered in Washtenaw County and describes how those services are currently funded. The report goes on to describe existing sources of funding for both capital improvements (e.g. bus purchase and replacement, facilities) and operations (services). It is concluded that existing funding is sufficient for the existing system, and may offer some opportunity for limited improvements in service. However, to realize the improvements envisioned in the Transit Master Plan: A Vision for Washtenaw County, additional funding is needed. Each funding source is evaluated as to its potential to yield additional funds, and a number of new funding sources are offered as possible options for paying for the construction and operation of additional services. Based on the outcome of the evaluation of funding options, a hypothetical budget is offered showing a mix of funding that might be used to fund the TMP. Most of the options described cannot simply be enacted by a countywide Authority, but will require legislative actions, public referenda, etc. This document makes no recommendations regarding a funding plan, but sets forth a hypothetical scenario under which the Plan could be funded, laying the groundwork for further public discussion. 2 Current Transit Service and Funding in Washtenaw County Transit Service in Washtenaw County Today There are three main publicly -funded transit services in Washtenaw County today: Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (AATA) or TheRide, the Western Washtenaw Area Value Express (WWAVE) and the People's Express (PEX). Another carrier, Manchester Senior Services, receives only charitable contributions, and the University of Michigan bus service is funded by the University (and free for anyone to ride). Figure 1 illustrates the services. Figure 1 - Existing Public Transit in Washtenaw County f__"____.__"_____..___._ -___ Vfillmole lake _ i 1 LYNDON DEXTER ; WE ESTER NORTNIFIELD ; SALEM I --------------------- r------------ —----- -------------- _ ------------------- _ I � Chd 1 41, SYLVAN 1 C10 AN SUPERIOR 1 1 1 1 :m calm. r 1 I I I 1 � I i ' Ann Artr ' f------- — --- -�- I---------"--" __"_ " ---� 1 � m OFM i upon 1 SHARON a fItE E 0 0 M LODI PI TT FIEID 1 I I 1 1 � 1 SWw i I ' ______________________._"___."_____________.__________ — —_________ram_— ------------- __J 1 �� MtKMWr i � I i 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 ' 1 ' ' 1 I MANCHESTER i BRIDCEWATER SALINE ' YORK AO GU 5TA � 1 i I I c 1�111m won The AATA is a public corporation organized under Act 55 of 1963, giving it authority within the City of Ann Arbor and limited ability to operate outside of the city limits. WWAVE and PEX are non-profit organizations funded by charitable contributions and some public funding. 3 Transit Funding in Washtenaw County Today The capital and operating budgets for these services are shown in Table 1. The remaining discussion describes each line item in further detail. Table 1 - Existing Washtenaw County Transit Services: Sources and Uses of Capital and Operating Funds CAPITAL FUNDS Ten -Year Period,FY01-FY10 Total (x $1,000) Average Annual (x $1000) Sources AATA WWAVE PEX" AATA WWAVE PEX Formula Grants $21,513 $2,151. :.......................................................... ._......._........_..._.;._.............. ,................. ........;.... .... ....... ..--- ._—_._--- .---- .{......................._.................._........ ...... _.._.................. Discretionary (Competitve Grants) 510,798 $1,080 ...........................................:......................................................_............................:............................................................_................... _... State (Match for Federal Grants) $5,144. $514 Totals $37,455 $1,014 5603.$3,7461 $301 $60 Uses Bus Replacements $22,059...._........_..........._$4651 52,206 Bus Expansion .............. $2,500 .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5504i ..................................................... ............................_$`17.;........................................... $2501 $50: Equipment $5,047 .................__....._.._....................................................,.......................................__, $505;............................. ..............;.................. ........................ Facilities 57,849 $451 $7851 S5 Totals $37,4551.......................$1,014.d..........................._$643 .............. $3,746; ..............................._...._.. ....._.....__ $301j $6C ..-.__.._.._.._............_.............__........ NOTE. Each a rerc, b+4TA. %WAVE,PEX) appliesseparate ly for State and Fed era l capita l funding "Includes some l ocaI contributions OPERATING FUNDS FY09 ($) FY10 ($) FY11 Projected (5) Sources Urban Non -Urban Urban Non -Urban Urban Non -Urban Federal Grants $2,210,079 $148,330: $3,200,024, $156,554; $2,255,155. $197,765 Other Revenue ............................................................................................................._...._..._.._._I...._.._.._..._.._.._....................._....__..._._.........;...................._.........._........ $134,858 $88,774j .._ $359,866 ............ _.._......................................................... ... State Formula Operating ...........................................................................,........_....._.._.....__......._..........._.._....__......._.� $6,529,270: ...................... .......... ....... :............................. $330,189: -.................. $6,259,4231 .................. _._...._................................... $296,970; _...................._....__.._..._.........................._ $6,798,632; $410,014 ......... ._... State Grants $89,766; $101,849; c.................. $113,134; .......... ..... ....... ...................... Ann Arbor Millage ..........................................:..................................................................... $9,607,092 ............................................:.......................................................................................,............................................................ _..............,........................................... $9 663 422 $9,086,118 _.......... _........... ,....... _...... __........ _............. Passenger Fares $2,198,7544 _..................................... $73,140. ................. ............ $2,427,251; ................ ......._.......,...... ....... $110,070; ..... _._...._......... ....................... $2,880,963 .......... _..__.;............ $113,922 ... _........... ............. . 3rd Party Fares 51,529,052 ..............................................................................._......:._..................__._._.......:.....-. 51,751,126; $2,189,021; _ .........__..._........_. _ ..... _............ _ Local Revenue (POSA) 1 $816,549; $412,329; $776,3231 $316,4251 $715,9351 $435,120 Totals $23,105,420 $963,988 $24,268,192 $880,019 $24,399,824 $1,156,821 Uses Fixed Route Services 519,135,393 $0; $20,133,076; S0 ........._..... $20,931,700; —._.................................................... Demand Responsive Services ......... ...... ....... ................. ........................... $3,56B,662; _..........................................................;..............................._..._. $927,0641 $3,536,190 $846,2351 $3,467,1241 $1,156,821 Totals $22,704,055 $927,Ofi4 $23,669,266 5846,235 $24,398,824 $1,156,821 NCTE: oATA applies for State and Federal operatingfund,ng on behalf cf :a 7: a,E aro FEX Thcsearethe rcr.�rban'figures Capital funding (construction, bus acquisition and replacement, etc.) for transit comes primarily from federal sources, supplemented by the State of Michigan, as shown in Table 1. Further details of the Federal funding programs can be found in Appendix 1. Funds for transit operations come from a variety of sources, as listed in Table 1. What follows is a brief description of those sources: 4 ■ ■ ■ Federal Operating Assistance: There are several categories of federal operating funds available to AATA, WWAVE and PEX. AATA is the recipient of 'urban'funds, and applies for 'non -urban' funds on ■ behalf of WWAVE and PEX, passing the money through to those organizations. The specific federal programs and how each one works is described in Appendix 1. ■ State Operating Assistance: Operating funds are provided to carriers in the State out of a fund called the Comprehensive Transportation Fund (CTF). The CTF is funded primarily by state gasoline taxes, in ■ addition to other sources. These funds are allocated to carriers on the basis of their route -miles of service. ■ Passenger Fares: These are the revenues directly paid by riders. Third Party Fares: These are payments to the AATA from institutions that are willing to pay for all or part of the fares of their employees and/or students. In some cases, the institutions pay an amount to the AATA and their students/staff can then ride the bus by showing their ID. In other cases, an organization may underwrite the cost of a fare, with the rider paying a discounted rate. A major example is the Wide Agreement' whereby AATA is paid by the University to allow students to ride by flashing their student ID. Eastern Michigan University and Washtenaw Community College also participate in similar programs. The goPass program is another example — in this case transit passes are subsidized by the Ann Arbor DDA and by people's employers. Purchase of Service Agreements (POSA's): Areas outside of the Ann Arbor city limits may execute a POSA with AATA, essentially paying AATA to deliver service outside of Ann Arbor. POSA's are currently in place with the City of Ypsilanti, and Superior, Pittsfield, and Ypsilanti Townships. POSA's are now priced on a 'fully -allocated cost' basis. Transit Millages: The City of Ann Arbor has a perpetual charter millage (property tax), dedicated to transit and levied at a rate of 2.056 mils. This has been in place since 1973. The City of Ypsilanti, in November 2010, passed a millage of 0.9789 mills solely for public transit purposes. Ypsilanti uses its millage revenue to pay for its POSA with AATA. Other Revenue: Primarily advertising and interest revenues. Efficiency of Today's Transit Services A number of studies and audits over the years have established that transit resources are efficiently used in this region. A recent example is the "Organizational Audit" produced for AATA in 2010 by McCollum Management Consulting. Figures 2 and 3 are extracted from that report and make the case that 1) AATA's costs per revenue - hour are consistent with the average for similar operations and 2) AATA's productivity (measured here as passengers per service hour) has risen above the peer average. 5 Figure 2 - Peer Review: Bus Cost per Service Hour $140 $120 $100 $80 $60 $40 $20 $0 FY 2008 Bus Cost per Revenue Hour Adjusted for Cost -of -Living I it i IIi. I II '!- �o ONomina I ■ Adjusted for COL Figure 3 - Peer Review - Bus Revenue per passenger 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 Bus Passengers/Revenue Hour 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 • AATA Peers Another measure of TheRide's financial health is the reserve level, that is, the amount of cash on hand that could be used to run the service if funding were to suddenly stop flowing. AATA regularly has a 3-4 month cash reserve. For further information, the last several years of AATA's financial statements are included in Appendix 2. 0 AATA Near Term Service Improvements The next chapter of this report describes efforts to establish a county -wide transit system with a new governing authority and funding base, with a goal of implementing a 30-year Transit Master Plan. As those efforts unfold, however, the AATA remains committed to improving the existing transit system to the extent that existing funding allows. As part of these efforts, the possibility of new and innovative funding sources is being examined. Described below are some of AATA's more significant near —term initiatives. Proposed Service Increase between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti on the #4 Washtenaw Route The #4 Washtenaw route operates between downtown Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, primarily on Washtenaw Avenue. Each year, this route has the highest number of riders of any AATA route. Currently weekday service operates between the two cities every 30 minutes midday (9:15 a.m. — 3:15 p.m.) and every 15 minutes during peak hours (6:15 a.m. — 9:15 a.m. and 3:15 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.). Additional peak trips operate only between the U-M Medical Center and the Ann Arbor city limits at U.S. 23. AATA is proposing to double the number of weekday trips that operate between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti on the #4 route: • Midday — 4 trips per hour in each direction (service every 15 minutes). • Peak Hours — 8 trips per hour in each direction (service every 7.5 minutes on average). • Discontinuing service on the additional trips between U-M hospital and U.S. 23. • Half of the trips providing service to U-M hospital. • Alternate trips providing service to the Central Campus Transit Center and not U-M hospital, which reduces the travel time between the two downtowns by 7 minutes. The ability to fully implement this service is dependent upon finding an additional source of operating funds. So far, funds have been identified for approximately half of the $636,000 per year cost of these service improvements, and efforts are underway to secure additional funding commitments to close the gap Proposed Countywide Van Pool Program i During 2011, the AATA has begun the process of taking over the Washtenaw County portion of the vanpool program currently run by the State of Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT). The AATA program will begin with the organization of up to 12 new van pools, while MDOT continues to run the existing MichiVan van pool services for the next 12 — 36 months. This interim program approach allows AATA time to create the internal administrative and financial structures needed to successfully operate a vanpool program while also providing the ability to quickly expand the number of vehicles operating in Washtenaw County. This approach i also gives staff experience in administering a small number of vanpools before transitioning the existing vanpools to the local operated program. Also, AATA has been having discussions with UM to evaluate the joint administration of a vanpool/carpool ride - matching and administrative website. Staffs from both organizations are exploring avenues for merging their ' two websites, which would result in increased efficiencies for both organizations and would give users from both websites increased opportunities for finding carpool/vanpool partners. Staff is also investigating solutions for providing online customer fare payment options. 7 Proposed Airport Service AATA has been exploring the possibilities of a public / private partnership to provide high -frequency service from Ann Arbor to Detroit Metro airport. At this writing, a solicitation is being developed to attract a private partner, and a tentative target date for service is sometime in the fall of 2011, subject to funding availability. Service to East Ann Arbor Health Center and Domino's Farms As of July, 2011, AATA began providing enhanced service to the areas known as UM East Medical Center and to the Domino Farms complex. These improvements include an extension of A -Ride services to these previously unserved areas, and enhanced coordination of AATA and UM fixed route services to ensure convenient connections. These services are expected to especially benefit seniors, people with disabilities, and the patients visiting UM clinics. 9 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study 6 steer davies gleave ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ III. Countywide Transit- AATA's Response to Regional Realities ■ The Vision: Countywide Transit Services ■ Over the years TheRide has been increasingly asked to provide services to areas beyond its historical jurisdiction. ■ In some cases (e.g. the route down Whitaker Road or the route to Saline), TheRide has received grants to ■ provide services on a demonstration basis, only to discontinue the services after the original demonstration grants are expended. Because there has been very little funding to support service outside of the urbanized area, AATA's ability to provide services beyond Ann Arbor and its POSA partners has been limited. Recognition of the need for countywide services was highlighted by the publication, in 2007, of the Transit Plan for ■ Washtenow County by the Washtenaw Area Transit Study (WATS). In the face of ever-increasing demand from ■ areas outside of AATA's historical service area, the AATA Board in 2009 directed staff to undertake a Countywide Master Plan that would respond to the needs of the entire County. ■ The Countywide Transit Master Plan is presented in Figure 4, and the list of services contained in the Plan is ■ found in Table 2 and in Appendix 3. The TMP Vision and Implementation Strategy, respectively, are companion ■ documents to this report. ■ Figure 4 - The Countywide Transit Master Plan ft. m dw a OWSVIe QpEonl I I bulb CC -BY -SA Cane mphy bV Star Wms G;m ?011 I I Dexter Chelseea...-I • II •�'-a7 ��� []IRRJ Jai ® Ann Vp 15 NW- e D2D �/ flex D2D V Whitmore Lake to Lrvonu — Counrywaefryrnaz _ [yntyWyf.prers to - ymnraan wflmeprptfa / (�'Y /p t5l © V NWGlly ryll snrvlrn Enl�mlcm WAVE 1 r � pmennpl wavE e.[mma • I.a'm tmnn[nuln wlN parMn9 CTOEamw 0 r� mm�L lau �eoa ny.,mn<e 1 emm cots6mute p'. mavaefr,pgram • �Tp ©npw mwn-mobal �nterthn�pn !Fuller pel �� Mgh coOanlY Vans1! 0[ar0om 60lnnll OO Ea[nWeJ hour o! a0.ratwa mpm.merrt, p sroy puWnY6mrunxa F+ /JO O Ypo OO ©� Iml! n Mena nnpan oownom nraalnm� ®' [�armacarcwmy.le. .. OWmool/cnmml .. � ®flevnppzmalcf Nw repoml rml semre b s:anm �— Exls[Iny roll llrcs EnMnzwiol btYclln9 ml ns � ImplgrtapµpyptY Sep `a! � � tlrportsn��kplustnri eFWs penny rma.um • Nr(ilan Tn TakW i /r Iniryraua nnenap l./ 0 Table 2 - Projects in the Countywide Master Plan )rban Bus Network Improvements Urban Bus Network Enhancements UBNE) Downtown Circulator Bus Priority Measures Vehicle Enhancements Transit Center Upgrades / New Multi -Modal Interchange Stop Quality and Facility Enhancements untywide Connections (CW) Enhanced WAVE Service Countywide Express Services Local Community Circulators Local Transit Hubs Park & Ride Intercept Lots ntial Services Countywide (D2D, Flex) Door -to -Door Countywide Flex -Ride Services Regional Connections Airport Express Car / Vanpooling Regional Commuter Rail High Capacity Transit (HCT) North -South Ann Arbor (The Connector Study) Ann Arbor - Ypsilanti (Relmagining Washtenaw Avenue) Integrating Transit into the Community Walkability Biking The Countywide Transit Master Plan was the result of a one-year planning process that involved discussion with literally hundreds of people all over Washtenaw County. This process, and the many details of the Plan, is more fully documented in Transit Master Plan Volume 1: A Transit Vision for Washtenaw County, which can be found on the MovingYouForward web site —see http:///www.MovingYouForward.org. Countywide Governance The Plan is only part of achieving Countywide Transit. For the Plan to become reality, there needs to be a countywide organization to build and run the service. Act 196 of 1986 provides a statutory basis for establishing a Countywide authority. It is expected that the new organization would be governed by a new 15- member Board composed of representatives from all over the County, and that the assets of the existing AATA 10 would eventually be turned over to the new Authority. As of this writing, efforts are underway to organize the new Board. The new Act 196 Authority's mission will be to refine the Countywide Transit Master Plan, prioritize services, find funding for the additional services, and then build and operate the new services in a staged manner. Countywide Funding Options This section reviews sources of funding for the Plan -related elements. Funding options must consider both the cost to build transit -related infrastructure (capital funding) as well as funding to operate the services (operating funds). Several assumptions are fundamental to funding the Transit Master Plan: 1) No project or service will be implemented without sufficient funding. Start-up of services without sufficient longer -term funding will only lead to under -supply and/or discontinuation of services later. 2) Evaluation of funding options must ensure fairness, that is, funding burdens must be distributed equitably and not fall too heavily on a particular group or geographic area. Federal Capital Funding Building the TMP infrastructure consists of the following types of activities depending on the service being developed. Examples of capital investments include: vehicle acquisition, construction of facilities such as park - and -ride lots, bus stops, transit centers, maintenance facilities and rail infrastructure. Projects involving rail and bus rapid transit my include station construction and right-of-way improvements. Property acquisition may also be required for some projects and is also a capital expense. Traditional federal capital transit funding is the result of various Surface Transportation Act authorizations over the years, and falls into two broad categories: Apportioned Funds: these are funds that are granted to individual localities based on the amount of service provided and the size of the area served. Agencies do not compete for these funds, and agencies can more or less "count on" these funds to be available at a predictable level year -after -year. ■ Allocated Funds: this category of funding is available by competitive application. Localities apply for these funds by preparing project -specific applications that are judged according to how well they meet the federal funding criteria. Localities may receive the full amount that they apply for, a fraction of the ■ request, or nothing at all. Historically, there have always been more requests than there are available funds, so there is always a greater degree of uncertainty regarding allocated funds. The evaluation process at the federal level typically involves attention to the distribution of grants across the country so ■ that no geographic area is disproportionately favored over others. However, this process is not perfect and in fact Michigan, over the years, with respect to transit, has on average received about 45 cents for every dollar it contributes in taxes. Below is a list and short description of existing federal programs: t Urbanized Area Formula Funding Program (Section 5307): Apportions grant funding for capital . investments in transit vehicles, equipment, maintenance facilities, passenger stations and administration buildings. This can include replacement of buses, overhaul of buses, rebuilding of buses, 11 and construction of maintenance and passenger facilities. Capital investments in new and existing fixed guideway systems (such as High Capacity Transit) would also be eligible. These funds are apportioned using a formula based on a combination of population, population times population density, and the level of service (bus miles) operated. There is also an incentive payment related to passenger miles in relation to operating costs. Discretionary Capital Funding Program (Section 5309): Allocates capital assistance funding for transit investment projects including: • Bus and Bus Related Facilities program: new and replacement buses and facilities • Fixed Guideway Modernization program: modernization of existing rail systems • New Starts program: New fixed guideway systems that provide high frequency service in highly congested and highly populated areas. The statutory requirement is for a minimum local match of 20%, but the FTA has been instructed not to sign any new grant agreements with less than a 40% local contribution. • Small Starts program (smaller new fixed guideway systems, including bus rapid transit) • Very Small Starts program: apply to schemes with total capital cost less than $50 million CMAQ provides funding to support transportation projects in air quality non -attainment areas. Funding is distributed based on each state's share of the population of air quality non - attainment areas weighed by severity of air pollution with each state guaranteed a one-half percent minimum apportionment. • livable Communities Initiative is an FTA program that seeks to improve mobility and the quality of services available to residents of neighborhoods. The basis for the initiative is to enhance the effectiveness of mass transportation projects and provide non -vehicular, capital improvements in fixed -guideway corridors. Small Programs: AATA also receives funding from two programs totaling around $200,000 per annum. These are fixed amounts and are unlikely to be increased significantly to support implementation of the Plan. New Freedom is a formula federal grant program designed to assist individuals with disabilities by expanding services over and above current Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") regulations. Job Access and Reverse Commute ("JARC") program was established to address the transportation challenges faced by welfare recipients and low-income persons seeking to obtain and maintain employment. Most federal transit capital funding has been made available as the result of a series of authorization bills funding federal surface transportation over several decades. The last reauthorization, signed into law in August 2005, expired in September 2009, and funding since that time has been based on short-term extensions of the last reauthorization. The dollar amount received by the county from each of these programs was provided earlier in Table 1. It is difficult to forecast, with any degree of certainty, federal funding availability in the long run. In light of the 12 status of reauthorization, it is now even hard to forecast in the short run. Formula funds have been fairly steady and might be regarded as a baseline for routine capital projects (e.g. bus replacements). Discretionary funds are based on project viability and are affected by competition from other carriers, so the best that can be said is that the Authority presumably increases its chances for funding by having more viable projects as the result of the Transit Master Plan. No new or additional sources of federal capital funding are assumed for the purposes of the Transit Master Plan, although it is assumed that more discretionary money will flow in the area as the result of several large projects in the plan. Other Capital Funding The State of Michigan's role in capital funding has been to provide the matching funds for federal grants. The Michigan Department of Transportation provides the non-federal match for AATA capital grants from the Comprehensive Transportation Fund (CTF). The CTF is an element of the Michigan Transportation Fund with revenues from state gasoline tax, and a portion of auto -related sales tax. Providing the match for federal grants is the first priority for the use of the CTF, after debt service and administration. Other sources of capital funding might be gained through Public / Private Partnerships or through outright private sector grants. An example of the latter is the Detroit Woodward Avenue Light Rail project in which private companies are providing $125 M to supplement federal funding for this project. This project is unique but shows the potential for large highly visible projects to attract private donors. t Public -private partnerships are common in Europe and taking hold in the US. These are described more fully in Appendix 4. There are a wide range of potential structures for a P3 transaction, with varying degrees of risk ■ transfer. Each contract is individually structured to meet the specific needs of the project and availability of funding. Essentially the private sector will fund a portion of the necessary investment using a mix of equity and debt, with the debt secured by the contractual obligation on the Authority to make payments over the term of the concession. s Tax Increment Financing (TIP) is a popular method of financing the public costs associated with development and redevelopment projects in business districts and associated corridors. The funding stream would be based on implementing a TIF development district (e.g. one or more Development District Areas and related Corridor Improvement Area) and diverting tax revenues generated by reassessment of property values and new S development to finance transit improvements benefiting the district. The Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority raises around $4 million annually thorough TIF and several Washtenaw County projects have been funded through TIF by the Brownfield Redevelopment Authority generating $37.7 million, equivalent to 8.1% of estimated investment. There are also loan programs at both the State and Federal levels that can be used to obtain financing in private S markets. Of course, loans must be repaid, making these programs more of a financing and cash -flow ■ management tool than a new source of funds. Debt financing is discussed in further detail in Appendix 5. 13 Operating Funding Existing sources of funding for transit operations were described earlier in this report and in Table 1. Potential new funding for operations might consist of any of the following sources, although some are easier to implement than others, based on both practical considerations and degree of public support. The potential new (or expanded) sources are listed below and subsequently described in more detail, including discussion of potential yields by each source and the assumptions that the calculations are based on. Those estimated yields are used in the following section to construct a hypothetical budget for the Master Plan. • Passenger Fare Revenues • Advertising and Sponsorship • Property Tax (Millage) • Sales Tax • Payroll Tax • Parking Tax • Stakeholder Contributions • Motor Fuel Tax • Vehicle License Fees Passenger Fare Revenues: Revenues from passenger fares are projected to increase to $25.7 million within Washtenaw County by 2040. This represents an increase from 18% of cost coverage (farebox recovery) in 2010 to around 30% by 2040, based on anticipated demand growth and fare increases of 1% per annum in real terms. This would bring the network closer into line with the national average of 31.5% reported by APTA for 2009. (These totals include contributions received for special fare programs for UM, getDowntown, etc., as well as fares paid directly by passengers). Advertising and Sponsorship: AATA generated a total of $0.09m from advertising in 2009, which is around 2% of farebox revenues. The scope for increasing this revenue stream will depend on the strength of the local advertising market and availability/pricing of competing media, such as billboards. In general advertising is aimed at non -transit users and therefore the level of network patronage is not a factor unless there is a high mode share. Sponsorship of transit facilities and naming rights for stations has been used to generate revenues on some new systems. Modeled on sponsorship arrangements for sports stadia and teams, corporate entities agree a financial contribution to the Authority in exchange for the naming rights to a station or route for a defined period. Dubai Metro has generated significant sums from naming rights and the London UK cycle hire scheme is sponsored by a bank. Experience in US transit is limited and more geared to local circumstances (typically the presence of a major employer). Consequently there is no reliable means of assessing the potential value in Ann Arbor. A more limited but accessible form of sponsorship relates to special events or services such as reduced fares on football game days or holidays. This could help defray some of the costs associated with operating the transit system for the Authority but cannot be considered as a consistent or significant source of revenues. We have assumed that the value of this revenue stream will remain at 2% of increasing farebox revenues. 14 Property Tax (Millage): The current Ann Arbor City Charter millage at the rate of 2.056 is just sufficient to cover the operating costs of the existing network. Table 3 illustrates the yield associated with several different countywide millage rates. The rate for any new millage must, by law, be consistent across the county. Also, we have assumed that the Ann Arbor millage continues, with an additional Countywide millage introduced at the rate of 1.000 by 2015, increasing to 1.500 by 2025. It is also assumed that the Ypsilanti millage — with an approximate annual yield of $280,000 — will remain in place. Table 3: Potential Local Property Tax Revenues ($m per annum, 2010 valuation estimate) Local Property Tax: millage rates 2.056 Ann Arbor (current) 9.5 9.5 Overlaid by 1.000 Countywide 4.6 4.6 5.3 14.5 1.500 Countywide 6.9 6.8 8.0 21.7 2.000 Countywide 9.2 9.1 10.6 29.0 There are many possible variations for a hypothetical budget (see next section). For example, if it is desired to eliminate dependency on property taxes as soon as possible, it may be feasible to establish the alternative(s) at a date earlier than is currently assumed. For example, perhaps a sales tax or payroll tax could be introduced earlier, making it possible to eliminate the millage after the first five-year period. Alternatively, the hypothetical gas and/or vehicle registration fees could be introduced at higher rates, minimizing or eliminating the need for the property tax. The final decision(s) regarding an appropriate mix of funding options will be up to the new Authority that is created to implement the Transit Master Plan. Sales Tax: Reliance on a property tax for transit funding is relatively unusual. Analysis of funding sources for transit in urbanized areas (source: APTA Public Transportation Investment Background Data, 4`" edition, May 16 2011) indicates that, in 2009, 67% of dedicated operating revenues were derived from sales taxes, and just 6% based on property taxes (with comparable amounts raised by income taxes and gas taxes). There is some geographical bias with cities in the West and South more likely to use sales taxes to generate local funds for the 15 building and operation of transportation projects while east coast/northeast areas tend to be more often taxed through property assessments, with sales tax initiatives generally far less popular or successful. The typical range of sales taxes dedicated to transit is between 0.25c and lc. Sales taxes are potentially a more progressive solution than property taxes as contributions drawn from all beneficiaries, including people working in and visiting the area, rather than just local residents. However, all people pay the same rate regardless of their income, so they also have a regressive element. While these revenues grow in line with inflation, the yield is sensitive to any downturn in economic conditions. There is currently a state sales tax of 6.0%, which generated $6.167 billion in 2009/10, of which 1% was allocated to the Comprehensive Transportation Fund. A supplementary sales tax of 1c dedicated to transit would generate $1.03 billion and if allocated pro-rata to population, the Washtenaw County share would be worth $35.8 million per annum. Since 2001, personal consumer expenditure has risen at 2.0% per annum in real terms, although this included a period of stronger 2.5% annual growth to 2007 before the recession. Using a conservative assumption of 1% real growth (half the long term trend), the yield would amount to $41.1 million by 2025, rising to $47.8 million by 2040. A is sales tax would therefore yield approximately the same revenue as continuation of the Ann Arbor millage at the current rate, in combination with a 2.000 Countywide millage. Introducing a local sales tax instead of one applied statewide may be more appropriate but would require a voter led amendment to the State Constitution. However, this would carry the risk that the applicable supplementary charge could push consumers to make higher value purchases outside the sales tax area, adversely impacting some local retailers and generating additional cross -boundary car trips. It has been suggested that a local 1c sales tax funding of transit would be a preferable long term alternative to an increasing millage. Given the legislative requirements, we have assumed that this measure could be introduced at some time between 2025 and 2040. Payroll Tax: A payroll tax could be levied on salaries paid by local employers. By applying taxes based on location of employment rather than residence there is less potential for "free riding" by commuters who work in one jurisdiction but live and pay taxes elsewhere. However, the approach is open to criticism over lack of representation by the taxpayers, and that it acts as an incentive for businesses to locate outside the taxed area. It may be necessary to provide exemption for smaller companies. In Oregon the state administers a payroll tax of .6918% in Tri-Met Transit District in Portland and the Lane Transit District in Eugene. The tax rate increases annually by 1/100 of a percent. France has a national system of payroll tax "versement transport" with the rate set according the size of the urban area and corresponding transit dependency. Without data on the current incomes of employees in the region it is difficult to make a meaningful estimate of the potential revenue which could be raised through a payroll tax. Therefore, no estimates have been made and this mechanism has not been assumed as part of the hypothetical budget in the next section. Instead it is treated as a possible substitute for a sales tax, with the assumption that it could yield approximately the same amount. As additional analysis of funding options takes place, these estimates could be confirmed. Parking Tax: A number of US cities apply a parking tax on commercial parking in downtown areas. In theory a tax on parking should encourage use of transit for commuting, although the lack of equivalent charges in suburban areas could lead to undesirable migration of business. Rates vary, with many cities in the range 10-12% 16 ■ ■ ■ although substantially higher rates of 20-25% apply in some major cities. Chicago uses a flat rate tax instead of a percentage levy. Residential parking is normally exempt. ■ Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority (DDA) manages the public parking system by contractual ■ agreement with the city and has the authority to set parking rates. Parking revenues totaled $14.6 million in ■ 2009-10 and are expected to increase to around $16.5 million in 2012-13 with the opening of a new parking structure, The terms of a new parking agreement approved by the DDA in May will see 17% of parking ■ revenues passed to the City. The agreement runs to June 2033, although there is potential for an opt out or renegotiation after 11 years. ■ An assumed 20% tax would therefore be expected to raise $3.2 million per annum but could not be ■ implemented before 2022. Stakeholder Contributions: Potential funding of operations by other local stakeholders as beneficiaries of the project should also be considered. There are several Purchase of Service Agreements (POSA) related to services in the City of Ypsilanti and three neighboring Townships. Existing POSA's are assumed to disappear once the millage is extended Countywide, although there may be POSA's for jurisdictions outside Washtenaw County. The University of Michigan (the "University") makes a contribution to special fares on AATA bus but also currently operates its own network of buses. One of the High Capacity Transit corridors has potential to replace a significant element of the University's network and there would be justification for the University to make a contribution to its operating costs from savings made in their own bus operating costs. For purposes of the hypothetical budget, a base contribution of $3.8 million per annum is assumed (equivalent to the current state contribution to operating expenses of University of Michigan Parking and Transportation Services), with the associated farebox revenue captured directly on the new mode. Additional stakeholder contributions might be gained by going directly to local employers and organizations to seek sponsorship of services. (NOTE: The following two options — Motor Fuels Tax and Vehicle License Tax could either be levied at the State or local level. If levied at the State level, changes might be part of a revision to the tax regimes which currently support the Comprehensive Transportation Fund. State enabling legislation would be required to implement these taxes at the local level.) Motor Fuels Sales Tax: Fuels sales taxes are widely applied and understood and have the merit of being relatively easy to collect and administer. In Michigan the tax is established in the Motor Fuels Tax Act (2000 PA 403) and rates were last increased in 1997. In FY 2010/11 State motor fuel sales taxes on gasoline ($0.19 per gallon) and diesel ($0.15 per gallon) contributed revenues of $941 million. Motor fuels are also subject to sales tax in Michigan. ■ It is understood that the State of Michigan considered an increase in the fuel tax rate from 19 cents to 23 cents ■ per gallon for unleaded fuel in 2010, followed by a further increase to 27 cents per gallon within three years. If ■ implemented in full, the measure would raise approximately $350 million per annum in additional revenue across the State. Similar increases in tax on diesel to raise the rate to 27 cents per gallon would raise a further ■ $92 million. Washtenaw County represents around 3.3 percent of Michigan's population, and it is assumed that ■ its potential share of an increase in taxes would therefore be $7.3 million based on the first stage increase ($5.8m gas + $1.5m diesel), rising to $14.7 million per year at 27 cents per gallon ($11.6m gas + $3.1m diesel). ■ 17 ■ The estimated yields from these calculations are shown in Table 4 and are as assumed elements of the hypothetical budget. Obtaining approval for a significant increase during a period of historically high fuel prices is likely to be challenging, but it may become a more realistic option at some stage in the future. The option of a more localized application should be investigated as an alternative if a full statewide tax increase is rejected. Nine states permit cities or counties to impose a local tax on fuel, but this does not currently apply in Michigan. In this event the Washtenaw County share should be similar to the projections shown here. Using fuel taxes to fund transit rather than highway infrastructure is open to criticism that those paying the tax are generally not those using the service, but the existence of a transit option does provide non -user benefits through reduced road congestion. However, it is necessary to take into account the potential decline in fuel tax receipts overtime as fuel efficiency of automobiles improves (at around 2.4% per annum in recent years), and the fact that these tax rates are not automatically adjusted for inflation. As a conservative assumption, it is assumed that the potential net value of the revenue stream will decline by 4% per annum in real terms by 2025, and thereafter at the assumed inflation rate (1.6% per annum). This results in, by 2040, a Washtenaw share worth $4.1 million from the existing tax rate and $2.8 million from the increment (in 2010 equivalent prices). Vehicle Licenses: Michigan State derived $989 million in FY 2010/11 from licenses and permits, including a vehicle registration fee of $98.6 per vehicle. If the rate was raised by $15 it would contribute an additional $127 million Statewide, and the equivalent local share (related to Washtenaw County population) would amount to $4.2 million per year. Table 4 shows the revenue generated by a $1 increment and a full $15 increase. Again it may be possible to apply the tax on a localized basis with the appropriate enabling legislation. However, there may be reasons to work together with other transit agencies to implement such a measure on a state-wide basis. Table 4: Potential Fuel and License Plate Fee Revenues Motor Fuels Tax Gasoline +2 cents 21 cents 87.6 2.9 +4 cents 23 cents 175.2 5.8 +8 cents 27 cents 350.4 11.6 Diesel +6 cents 21 cents 46.2 1.5 +12 cents 27 cents 92.4 3.1 18 steer davies gleave 2 Qualifications of Key Personnel ingfiela �— ■ ■ r Vehicle license plate charge ■ $1 $99.60 8.5 0.3 ■ $15 $113.60 127.3 4.2 ■ Federal Operating Grant: The Authority currently receives apportioned federal operating grant funding under ■ FTA Section 5307 (urbanized formula). The formula is based on population, population multiplied by population ■ density, and level of service (bus miles) operated. There is also an incentive payment related to passenger miles in relation to operating costs. ■ The hypothetical budget assumes a continuation of the annual funding formula for bus operations at the same rates in real terms. Expansion of bus output can be expected to result in a higher allocation based on bus miles. Although a wider population will be served the formula benefits may be offset to some extent by a reduction in average density of the population served. However, additional passenger miles will also mean an increase in bus ■ incentive payments by 2.5 times by 2015 and 2.6 times by 2025 after allowing for higher operating costs. ■ It is estimated that the annual federal funding apportionment would increase by 33% by 2015 to $3.3 million, excluding current contributions to planning and ARRA operating assistance. ■ ■ The new network will also qualify for fixed guideway tier payments once High Capacity Transit is operational. We have assumed that this element would qualify for an incremental $0.7 million in annual funding (in 2010 ■ prices), taking the equivalent contribution to $4.0 million by 2040. ■ ■ A number of the foregoing options cannot be implemented simply by a decision of a new Act 196 Authority. Some options may require state legislation, either to enable local establishment of the tax or to establish it ■ statewide. Some measures such as millages generally require a voter referendum. Some measures may be specifically prohibited by the state constitution. The legalities surrounding the various measures have not been ■ investigated in detail, and further study of these issues is recommended. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ r ■ ■ 0 19 ■ ■ ■ A Possible Countywide Transit Budget ■ This section describes the estimated costs to build the Transit Master Plan and to operate the services contained ■ in it. Based on the previously discussed potential sources of funding, hypothetical budgets have been created that match potential funding sources with those costs. r Table 5 lists the several categories of planned service improvements, along with estimated costs for each during r several time frames. ■ Table 5: TMP Capital Expenditure by Strategy (in 2010 $ prices)Implementation ■ Phase (Spend in $m) Washtenaw Co Share ■ Strategy Years 1-5 Years 6-15 Years 16-30 Total Value $m % Total • ■ Existing urban bus' ■ (on -going replacement) 29.7 36.2 43.9 109.8 109.8 100% ■ Urban Bus Network Improvements2 12.4 10.8 11.0 34.2 34.2 100% ■ Countywide Connections 8.0 8.3 3.0 19.3 17.4 90% ■ Essential Services Countywide3 - - - - - ■ r Regional Connections 13.3 105.7 14.0 133.0 39.9 30% ■ High Capacity Transit 8.5 203.4 70.6 282.5 282.5 100% ■ Integrating Transit into the ■ Community° 5.0 15.0 - 20.0 20.0 100% ■ ■ TOTAL 76.95 379.4 142.5 598.8 503.7 84% ■ Notes ■ 1 Includes provision for fleet expansion to 85 hybrid buses 2010-15 2 Includes additional bus storage ($2m in 2010-15, $2m in 2025-40) ■ 3 No capital cost as services are operated under contract (contractor provided vehicles) 4 These projects may be funded by local cities or townships but have been included in the County total at this stage ■ 5 The Washtenow County share of the Plan in the first 5 years is assumed to be $67m ■ r ■ 20 ■ ■ Table 6 presents the overall capital cost of the Countywide Transit Master Plan and shows a hypothetical mix of funding measures that could be used to pay for the capital costs of the plan over the thirty-year period. Note that the funding strategy involves using federal funds in two ways: 1) a pay-as-you-go approach that spends grant money on projects as that money flows into the region 2) a debt -financed component whereby loans are taken out to pay upfront costs of certain projects, and then are re -paid later out of the stream of federal grants. Table 6: Hypothetical Sources of TMP Capital Funds by Plan Strategy ($m in 2010 prices) Base urban bus (renewals) Urban Bus Network Improvements Countywide Connections 44.9 64.9 20.0 - 14.2 13.7 109.8 34.2 3.7 17.4 Regional Connections 2.0 37.9 39.9 High Capacity Transit 19.8 93.2 169.5 - 282.5 Integrating Transit into the Community' 20.0 20.0 TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE $m 98.3 66.9 14.2 37.9 93.2 169.5 23.7 503.7 1 ultimately funded by local cities and townships. NOTE: Total cost excludes non-Washtenaw portions of commuter rail projects. * Please see Table 2 for the list of plan elements (services) contained in each strategy As services are implemented, operating costs for the system increase. Estimated annual cost of plan operations are shown Table7, broken down by service category (Strategy) and by time frame. Table 7: TMP Annual Operating Costs, by Plan Strategy ($m in 2010 prices) Base Urban Bus (excl depreciation) 19.3 20.0 17.5 16.2 Base Urban Door -to -Door 4.6 4.6 6.4 10.3 Urban Bus Network Improvements 6.4 12.1 13.9 21 Countywide Connections 0.8 1.1 1.2 . Essential Services Countywide 6.5 15.5 26.4 . Regional Connections 1.7 5.9 6.6 S High Capacity Transit 0.0 7.8 11.3 ■ TOTAL $m 23.9 40.0 66.3 85.8 ■ Note that introduction of High Capacity Transit results in reduction of Base Urban Bus services and hence reduction in their operating cost . * Please see Table 2 for the list of plan elements (services) contained in each strategy. Total cost excludes non-Washtenaw portions of commuter rail projects. ■ • In order to pay for TMP operations, a new mix of funding sources is needed. Using the various options described earlier, a hypothetical operations budget has been constructed and is presented in Table 8. Table 8: Hypothetical Sources of TMP Operating Funds by Plan Strategy ($m in 2010 prices) Actual Projecte d Revenues and Payments (2010 prices) Value $rn % Value $m % Value $rn % Value $m % Operations Fares Revenues 4.6 18% 8.4 20% 15.8 22% 25.7 27% • Advertising / Sponsorship 0.1 0% 0.2 0% 0.3 0% 0.5 1% Local Funding Property Tax Ann Arbor 2.056 9.7 38% 9.5 23% 9.5 13% Property Tax Countywide 1.000 14.5 35% Property Tax Countywide 1.500 21.7 30% Sales Tax (lc) incl 1% pa real growth 47.8 50% . or equivalent from Payroll Tax . Parking Tax 3.2 4% 3.2 3% ■ Stakeholder Contribution 0.9 3% - 0% 3.8 5% 3.8 4% State Funding Existing contribution 6.7 27% 6.1 15% 5.6 8% 4.1 4% t 22 New contribution - motor fuels tax New contribution - vehicle license Federal Funding Section 5307 operating 2.4 Section 5307 planning + ARRA 0.9 TOTAL SOURCES 25.1 Operating Costs Contribution to Financing Costs 10% 4% 100% 3.6 5% 2.8 3% 4.2 6% 4.2 4% 3.3 8% 3.9 5% 4.0 4% 41.9100% 71.6 100% 96.1 100% (40.0) (66.3) (85.8) 1.9 5.3 10.3 23 Appendices 1. Details: Federal Funding programs 26 2. AATA Financial Statements - last three years 32 3. Transit Master Plan Details 36 4. Details: Public / Private Partnerships 40 5. Details: Debt Financing 46 6. Details: Leveraging Grants 52 7. Details: TIF Districts 58 24 4470-k, Appendix 1: Federal Funding It I R2 If f ■ ■ ■ Federal Grant Funding ■ Federal transportation grant funding programs provide grants directly to state or local governments for capital projects based on formula, application or congressional earmark. To be considered for federal transportation ■ funding, states must develop a long-range transportation plan. ■ The Federal Aid Program is funded by proceeds of the federal motor fuel tax, the federal heavy vehicle use tax and federal motor carrier excise taxes collected in the Federal Highway Trust Fund ("HTF") and in the Mass ■ Transit Account of the HTF. The Federal Highway Act of 1956 established the HTF and subsequent reauthorizations established formulas for apportioning surface transportation funding to the states and their ■ jurisdictions. In 2005, President Bush signed the latest reauthorization of the federal transportation program, Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act ("SAFETEA-LU"), which expired in September 2009. Since then SAFETEA-LU has been operating on a series of short-term extensions. Congressional action is needed to provide for continued federal funding of transit. ■ In general, federal transportation funding falls into two categories, apportioned and allocated, depending on the ■ manner in which the funds are distributed. Apportionments refer to grants that a state or locality is guaranteed ■ to receive as long as authorizing legislation is in place. Allocated funds do not include such a guarantee and are subject to annual congressional discretion. Apportionments are distributed annually via formula and the use of ■ such funds is subject to statewide and metropolitan planning process requirements. Allocations are distributed either through a U.S. Department of Transportation competitive selection process or through congressional ■ earmarking. Projects seeking such "discretionary' funding must participate in the competitive selection process with the administration and/or Congress. ■ Most federally funded projects require a match with state or local funds of at least 20% of the total project cost. ■ In general, there is a time delay between the application for federal grant programs and their award. Programs that are managed by state agencies can often have a much quicker turn -around between application and award. ■ Once awarded, each grant has specific reporting and audit requirements, which vary according to program. ■ Operating Funding ■ The AATA currently receives 13.3% of its operating revenue from a variety of federal grant funding programs including FTA Sections 5307, 5311, 5313, 5316 (Job Access/Reverse Commute), and New Freedom programs. ■ Table A1.1 — AATA Federal Funding provides a breakdown of federal operating revenue under various programs between 2008 and 2010. ■ Table A1.1— Federal Funding to AATA for Operations AATA Federal Funding for ■ O.-(2008-2010) Program 2010$ ■ 0000 Unified Planning Program (Section 5303) 49,440 49,440 49,440 Planning (5307 and 5304) 617,431 258,621 169,189 Planning (5313) Non Urban (Section 5311) Capital Cost of Contracting (Section 5307) 156,554 148,330 142,628 200,000 200,000 200,000 ■ ■ CMAQ (Section 5307) 162,190 231,826 48,756 ■ Job Access/Reverse Commute 51,608 33,628 ■ Operating Assistance (ARRA) 280,000 ■ New Freedom 35,914 16,564 ■ Preventive Maintenance (Section 5307) 1,475,000 1,250,000 1,294,538 ■ Travel Demand (CMAQ) 225,000 170,000 205,165 ■ Other 103,441 ■ TOTAL 3,356,578 2,358,409 2,109,716 ■ ■ ■ Section 5307 The Urbanized Area Formula Funding program (49 U.S.C. 5307) makes federal resources available to urbanized ■ areas and to Governors for transit capital and operating assistance and for transportation related planning. An ■ urbanized area is an incorporated area with a population of 50,000 or more that is designated as such by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. The extent of the Ann Arbor urbanized area is shown in ■ Table A1.2 (overleaf). ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 27 ■ ■ Table A1.2 — Federal urbanized area boundaries Federal Urbanized Areas =Ann Arbor =Milan (Small Urban Place) =Detroit =South Lyon/Howell/Brighton 0 3 6 9 Miles a Section 5307 grants provide funding for capital investments in bus and bus -related activities such as replacement of buses, overhaul of buses, rebuilding of buses, crime prevention and security equipment and construction of maintenance and passenger facilities. Other eligible uses of 5307 funds are capital investments in new and existing fixed guideway systems including rolling stock, overhaul and rebuilding of vehicles, track, signals, communications and computer hardware and software. Regional connectivity, including new rail service plans, could be funded under this section of the 5307 program since it involves capital funding of a new fixed guideway transportation. These 5307 funds are apportioned using a formula based on a combination population, population times population density, and the level of service (bus miles) operated. There is also an incentive payment related to passenger miles in relation to operating costs. I 28 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study 2 Qualifications of Key Personnel Team Organization 2.1 Our team's organizational structure is shown in the accompanying organizational chart. The following sections summarize the qualifications and experience of our key team members. Full resumes of all project staff are included the Appendix. City of Fort Collins LEGEND: DA Dowling Associates' IMG - Infrastructure Management Group LEBC - Lonnie E Blaydes Consulting LSC - LSC Transportation Consulting OV OV Consulting' SDG - Steer Davies Cleave ' DBE firm steer davies gleave 7 Section 5309 and New Starts Section 5309 provides capital assistance for transit investment projects including: New and replacement buses and facilities (Bus and Bus Related Facilities program) New fixed guideway systems (New Starts program) and corridor based bus initiatives (Small Starts) Modernization of existing rail systems (Fixed Guideway Modernization program). The first category could include the enhancement and expansion of the bus network. Certain of the bus network initiatives are potentially eligible under the Small Starts / Very Small Starts program. This is discretionary and competitive grant program covering a maximum of 80% of project costs and the total funding available under the scheme is capped at $200 million per year. Funds can be applied to corridor -based bus projects operating at 10 minute peak/15 minute off-peak headways (or better) for at least 14 hours each weekday using low floor buses. To be eligible the project must include substantial transit stations and traffic signal priority. Very Small Starts have additional requirements in that they must have existing ridership exceeding 3,000 per average weekday, and total capital cost less than $50 million. Corridors with any pre-existing elements are not eligible under the program, although they do qualify for FTA's formula capital and discretionary bus programs. An additional hurdle is posed by the financial evaluation criteria, with the sponsor expected to demonstrate that additional operating and maintenance cost of the project is less than 5 percent of the transit agency's operating budget in order to achieve a "medium" rating (the effective minimum for progress). The project may be rejected if it does not meet this test. The New Starts program is the primary federal source for major transit capital investments for construction of new fixed guideway systems or extensions to existing systems. Since January 2010 the FTA project evaluation criteria for New Starts include economic development and environmental benefits, as well as congestion relief. The High Capacity Transit scheme would appear to be compatible with the New Starts funding program, but not S Small Starts, as the total investment exceeds $250 million. The New Starts project evaluation process requires a local financial commitment. The statutory requirement is for a minimum local contribution of 20%, but the FTA has been instructed not to sign any new grant agreements with less than a 40% local contribution. The steps in the process are: S • The project must be included in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). ■ • The project is moved into the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for preliminary engineering (PE) activities. • Project is evaluated as required by 49 U.S.C. Section 5309(e) (6) — the Federal Transit ■ • Administration will make a decision on whether or not to advance the project to preliminary engineering (PE). This does not constitute a funding commitment. • Full National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation included as part of PE activities • Initiation of final design, right of way acquisition, and utility relocations begins once all NEPA processes i are complete. 29 ■ ■ • Local financial commitment subject to evaluation to make the required approvals for entry into final design and to execute a Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) and funding recommendation to ■ Congress. The process is rigorous and lengthy, with FTA holding transit agencies accountable for results, and ensures that ■ the federal obligation to the project is protected from any cost over -runs (which are borne locally). A key ■ component of the FTA project rating system is the cost effectiveness of the proposed system, and only projects providing high frequency service in highly congested, highly populated metropolitan areas are likely to meet ■ these criteria. ■ Small Programs AATA receives funding from a number of small programs totaling around $200,000 per annum. These are fixed amounts and are unlikely to be increased significantly to support implementation of the Plan. ■ CMAQ provides funding to support transportation projects in air quality non -attainment areas. Funding is distributed based on each state's share of the population of air quality non -attainment areas weighed by ■ severity of air pollution with each state guaranteed a one-half percent minimum apportionment. CMAQ projects can generally be classified in one of the following categories: transit improvements, shared -ride ■ services, traffic flow improvements, demand management strategies, pedestrian and bicycle programs, •■ inspection and maintenance programs. Capital investments in low emission buses or in other projects that improve air quality could qualify for CMAQ funding. New Freedom is a formula federal grant program designed to assist individuals with disabilities by expanding ■ services over and above current Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") regulations. Designated recipients are required to provide funding through a competitive application process that relies on a coordinated planning ■ process to identify strategies that work towards closing gaps in service for target populations. ■ Job Access and Reverse Commute ("JARC") program was established to address the transportation challenges faced by welfare recipients and low-income persons seeking to obtain and maintain employment. Section 5316 ■ funds are apportioned among the recipients by a formula which is based on the ratio that the number of eligible low-income and welfare recipients in each such area bears to the number of eligible low-income and welfare ■ recipients in all such areas. Eligible grant funding uses include capital, planning and operating expenses for projects that transport low-income individuals to and from jobs and activities related to employment, and for ■ reverse commute projects. ■ livable Communities Initiative is an FTA program that seeks to improve mobility and the quality of services ■ available to residents of neighborhoods. The basis for the initiative is to enhance the effectiveness of mass transportation projects and provide non -vehicular, capital improvements in fixed -guideway corridors. Eligible ■ recipients of the FTA planning funds are transit operators, metropolitan planning organizations, city and county governments and other public bodies with the authority to plan or construct transit projects. It would only be ■ ancillary to funding needed to implement a fixed -guideway scheme. ■ 8 01" Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Project Manager 2.2 The SDG team will be led by Project Manager Tim Baldwin, AICP. Tim directs the firm's US transit practice from its Denver office. He has 35 years of experience in transit and transportation planning, government relations, and public policy analysis in both the public and private sectors. He specializes in managing complex interdisciplinary multi -modal transportation projects and is also adept in public policy development and local and regional transportation planning. 2.3 As mentioned earlier, Tim has been directly involved in leading major regional transit planning efforts in Texas and elsewhere, including: 1 The North Front Range Transportation Alternatives Feasibility Study. 1 The Longmont 1s` Et Main Station Area Plan. 2.4 s The RTD Northwest Rail alternatives analysis/environmental evaluation and related projects. The Colorado Springs Downtown Transit Feasibility Study and Streetcar Feasibility Study. The Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) system plan. The Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) service plan and subsequent alternatives analysis and environmental documentation. Numerous transit system planning and corridor studies in Colorado, Texas, California, Arizona, Arkansas, and other states. Tim will be directly accountable to the City for coordination, team management, and our work products. His project management approach is unique in comparison to his peers. Tim does not simply lead the team - he is an active member facilitating the team, conducting analysis, research, and providing his transit expertise. He focuses on efficient delivery of projects through team building, clear communications, setting expectations, and adherence to budget and schedule. Tim has extensive experience on the client side as well as from the consultant side, and thus understands well the wider political and stakeholder and public drivers that can influence a project's direction. ■ steer davies *ave ■ ■ Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Other Key Team Members 2.5 Chris Proud, AICP, of SDG will lead the team's planning and analysis activities. Chris is a senior transportation planner with more than 15 years in the industry. His career has focused on 1ir7 developing sustainable public transit projects including transit alternatives analysis, planning studies, and environmental analysis. He has a proven project track record delivering complex multi -modal transportation projects in cities through FTA-sanctioned AA/EIS studies in the Denver area. out the US. He recently helped lead He was instrumental in the accelerated (3-year) delivery of RTD's Gold Line project, which was the first FTA Outstanding Achievement Award for Excellence in Environmental Document Preparation award winner. A. T. Stoddard, Ph. D, PE of LSC will lead all aspects of the project's transit operations ' analysis. Dr. Stoddard is Principal at LSC and developingtime spent has more than 30 years of experience in civil Transit Study. [The LSC] team did a and transportation engineering, 24 of those Joe Delmagorio, MPO Planner, years with LSC. His primary areas of expertise , f Farmington, NM are in transportation systems analysis, computer modeling of transportation systems, and multimodal transportation planning. Dr. Stoddard served as the Project Manager for the Pikes Peak Region Specialized Transportation Plan and the Colorado Transit Needs and Benefits Study. He is currently managing the Montana Statewide Transit Plan and a research project for the Transit Cooperative Research Program. . 2.7 Beth Vogelsang, AICP, of OV Consulting, wilt lead the project's outreach activities. Beth is an expert in understanding the dynamic between local and regional mobility issues and local community concerns. Beth has managed transit planning and outreach efforts for Use Study, and our own Golden Transit numerous studies throughout the west and has Feasibility Study.... She possesses a unique coordinated public meetings, focus groups, web combination coordinationcommunication and based surveying and comment collection forsuccessthis rote." RTD in Denver for the past ten years on projects such as the Central Platte Valley LRT, theDirector FasTracks West Corridor Final Design, and the • Development, Gold Line Environmental Assessment, US 36, Northwest Rail and North Metro Environmental Assessment (all working with Tim Baldwin and Chris Proud). She has conducted numerous transit feasibility studies in Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. She and her firm have managed alternatives modes analysis and related public involvement for the cities of Lakewood, Littleton, Englewood, Centennial, and Denver, and have assisted with these activities for the DCTA project and the TEX Rail project in Fort steer davies gleave 9 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Worth (with Tim Baldwin). Prior to starting OV Consulting, Beth worked with Tim Baldwin at BRW/URS in Denver as a transportation planner. 2.8 Funding/financial analysis will be led by Sasha Page, Chief Operating Officer and Vice President for Transportation and Finance at Infrastructure Management Group (IMG). He has more than two decades of experience in public -private partnerships, finance, and project development for toll roads, transit, parking and airport infrastructure throughout the U.S. and internationally. That has included the $2 billion First Coast Outer Beltway in Florida, the $2.6 billion LBJ Expressway in Texas, and the $500 million Third Chicago Airport. He also served as financial advisor to the California High Speed Rail Authority, and has worked on rail and transit financing and funding engagements in Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Miami, New York and San Juan. Sasha is a member of the Transportation Research Board's revenue and finance committee, the American Public Transportation Association's Finance, Public -Private Partnership and High -Speed Rail committees. He led the funding and finance analysis for the Colorado Springs Streetcar Feasibility Study. 2.9 Quality Assurance/Quality Control will be led by Ian Druce of SDG, who directs the company's Vancouver office and its transit planning activities. Ian was Project Coordinator for the Sacramento Transit Master Plan (adopted by the RT Board in August 2009). He has specialist skills in developing plans and projects that tie transportation and transit infrastructure investment to land -use planning. He has worked with Portland Metro (the MPO) on the development of its High Capacity Transit Plan, and he is currently leading numerous transit planning and appraisal projects in the Vancouver area and is supporting two comprehensive operational assessments for which SDG is a subconsultant, in Sacramento and Orange County, California. steer davies gleave 0 0 steer davies gleave 3 Project Approach and Relevant Experience ■ Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Project Approach and Relevant Project Experience Approach and Understanding 3.1 The Fort Collins area, like many areas in North America, is facing a growing set of challenges including population growth, the requirements of an aging population, economic viability, energy supply and security, and air quality and related environmental issues. All of these factors require a new, comprehensive approach to plan for a sustainable transportation future. 3.2 Recent demographic data in Larimer County reflect trends similar to that of many areas in the state and country. According to the American Community Survey, the County's median income has dropped over the past decade, while its median home values have increased by 16%. More than a quarter of its households have incomes below $30,000, while 93% of its residents have a high school education or higher (among the highest percentage in the state). Its population above 65 years of age is slightly higher than that of the state as a whole, and its population below 18 is significantly lower than the state. 3.3 With that growth and those demographic changes can come the long list of urban ills typically found in larger areas low -density development and its related high infrastructure costs, housing foreclosures, and longer commute times and few transportation choices other than the single -occupant auto. All of those issues - common to the Fort Collins region and many others in the US - have long-range implications for local economic growth and competitiveness, air quality, carbon footprints, and other issues related to sustainability. 3.4 One indicator of sustainability has been i measured by the Center for Neighborhood ■ Technology's Housing and Transportation Affordability Index. The graphic from the ■ index (at right) shows significant portions of Larimer County where households spend ■ more than 45% of their income on both ■ housing and transportation (shown in dark blue/green - the actual number is 50% ■ countywide, with some segments of the county spending up to 65% of their income ■ on housing and transportation) - a factor that can only continue to contribute to ■ economic instability, especially in an era ■ of increasing gasoline prices. As the population in outlying areas continues to grow, and as transportation costs continue to increase, this problem will only grow worse over time for local residents and employees. ■ = steer davles 9leave ill 0 steer davies gleave Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Proposal October 2011 Prepared for: City of Fort Collins 215 N Mason St, 2n1 Floor Fort Collins, CO 80524 Prepared by: Steer Davies Gleave 600 1711 Street, Suite 2800 South Denver CO 80202 303 2265869 In association with: Dowling Associates Infrastructure Management Group LSC Transportation Consultants Lonnie E Blaydes Consulting OV Consulting Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study 3.5 Larimer County's transportation trends are informative as well. While ridership on Transfort has increased recently, ridership on the Loveland COLT service has decreased. The number of local residents commuting more than an hour each way has increased over the past ten years. And the use of alternative modes for commuting has increased significantly in the last decade, with Fort Collins having the third -highest percentage of commuters using bicycles of any city in the country. 3.6 Within the last few years, the Fort Collins area has taken some initial steps to plan for its transportation future. It has an aggressive transit service philosophy spread among various jurisdictions that serves more than two million passengers a year. Transfort has built a new multimodal transit center and is moving toward implementation of the Mason Street MAX BRT system. 3.7 The region also has been engaged in a number of activities aimed at designing the area's transportation future: The 2006 North Front Range Transportation Summit was a citizen -based exercise that resulted in agreement on a number of policy directives, including agreement on a multi -modal and regional approach to solving the area's increasing transportation issues and consensus to move forward with the creation of a Regional Transportation Authority to provide sustainable funding for improvements. rr The 2009 Transfort Strategic Plan provides some good insight into local planning for the transit future in Fort Collins. It proposes a three-phase approach to transit expansion and can be a good model for providing regional connectivity to Loveland, Berthoud, and other portions of Larimer County. It also examined the potential of implementing a dedicated sales tax for transit in the region and recommended `further study of a regional transit provider' as a means for implementing improvements. 1 The recently completed Final Environmental Impact Statement for North 1-25 recommended a series of improvements to the 1-25 corridor between Fort Collins and Denver, including freeway widening and tolled express lanes, commuter rail from Fort Collins to the RTD North Metro corridor, and express bus service. 3.8 Based on these and other regional planning efforts, there is no lack of vision or support for transportation improvements and connectivity within the Fort Collins/Larimer County area and with surrounding areas. But how will that connectivity be provided? What governance structure is appropriate? What funding options exist to provide those connections? That is what we want to help you discover over the course of this project. We believe that transportation provision in the region must be taken to the next level and extend its reach. This expansion will change the public's perception of transit, and transit will become a mode 12 steer davies gWw ■ ■ ■ Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study ■ of choice - a lifestyle choice - for all sectors of society as opposed to it being primarily ■ focused on the transit dependent (while ensuring that those needs continue to be met). ■ 3.9 In this respect, this study is very timely, providing an opportunity to chart a new way forward for the Fort Collins/Larimer County area. That path, which follows on many achievements to date, needs to be pragmatic and to address a wide range of transit structural and delivery issues. 3.10 SDG's approach builds on the company's European pedigree, advocating Integrated Transit ■ Solutions that support livable communities, a sustainable environment, and a vibrant economy. In practice, this means linking transit investments and choices with complementary ■ land use decisions that produce sustainable environmental impacts, with supporting ■ transportation demand management and public information elements. 3.11 The study should provide a blueprint for the next quarter century, but it should not only be ■ about the end game: it should also provide a menu of practical, fundable, and deliverable actions that can be implemented over time. ■ ■ Guiding Principles of Our Approach 3.12 Transit and other forms of transportation are integral to the way in which an urban area ■ functions, and is at the heart of a region's economic vitality, livability, inclusivity, and ■ sustainability. Transit cannot be viewed in isolation, but is central to delivering a vision for the successful development of the region to deliver economic prosperity in a sustainable manner that meets the needs of all. ■ 3.13 The study must therefore start with a vision for the future development of transit in the region. Using previous studies as a guide, we will develop a strategic transit policy framework, guided by the need to understand how transportation policies and programs can be developed and funded to shape the development of the area over the next 25 years, to ■ achieve that vision. From this, a long-term transit implementation and funding strategy will be developed for Larimer County. ■ 3.14 We will develop a strategic evaluation framework that will form the basis for the assessment of potential transit funding governance structures. The framework will include key objectives ■ (such as supporting growth or enhancing mobility) for transit, and the assessment will provide evidence on the extent to which current policies and programs meet these objectives. The ■ assessment will also identify objectives that are not being met, and these gaps and needs will inform the development of new policies and programs. ■ 3.15 The end product will be a recommendation on an operational, administrative, and financing structure ■ that will be sustainable, affordable, and practical. ■ ■ = steel' "Aes *wje 13 F] Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Delivering the Plan 3.16 The overall objective of this study is to develop a Transit Master Plan for Larimer County that will set out transportation priorities, policies, programs and interventions that cover: A range of geographies: The Plan will focus on the existing the TMA service area, but may also examine issues and services in adjacent areas to the extent they represent connections to and from the service area. Timeframe: From the present to 2035. The Plan will make recommendations for the refining and optimization of transportation services and plans in the short term, and set out policies and strategies that underpin the successful future development of the region A full range of actions: The Plan will cover a range of innovative potential measures such as travel demand management, better use of technology, and broader land use and development policies, in addition to the traditional funding and governance structure models. An understanding of funding constraints and risks: The Plan must be more than a wish list, and must be deliverable if it is to succeed. This means that the plan must be developed in the context of the likely funding available, and that key elements of the plan are feasible and acceptable. 3.17 The development of the Plan needs to be far more than a `top -down' technical answer - it needs to be the People's Plan. To garner the buy -in and support to deliver the long-range plans, a significant and overarching effort will need to be made to involve various stakeholders and engage with the wider public to obtain their input. As part of this process, we will work with Fort Collins staff and local communities to develop an active and multi -faceted stakeholder engagement and outreach program that will provide community members multiple ways to participate in and provide input to this overall planning process. 14 = steer davies gleave 0 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Detailed Work Plan and Schedule 3.18 The graphic below illustrates our proposed work flow and schedule, and the sections that follow describe our work plan in detail. We anticipate a project timeline of approximately 12 months, subject to additional discussion with the PMT. Note that we have re -arranged some of the tasks as described in the RFP to facilitate the study process. M©©B©EN©UMM® 1. Project Management I■■■■■■■■.■■. 2. Data Collection a and Analysis INEEMENEENEEN 3. Community INM■■■■■■■■. Mobility Review 4. Service Models EVOMENEEMEN 5. Peer Analysis EMENEEMEMEN 6. Governance NEEMENEEMENModels 7. Financial Analysis NEEMENEEMEN S8. trategy MENEENEEMONFE 9. Final Report ■■■■■■■■■■ I steer davies gleave 15 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Task 1 - Project Management/Initiation (not listed in RFP) 3.19 This 'extra' task is important to ensure that the project proceeds expeditiously and cost- effectively. Our team is designed to facilitate a close working relationship with Fort Collins and other jurisdiction staff by focusing on comprehensive project communications and coordination, and meaningful interaction with stakeholders. We propose establishment of a Project Management Team (PMT) comprised of key consultant team task leaders and key staff from study area jurisdictions. Key elements of our overall approach include: 1 Development of a detailed project management plan to refine the scope and schedule and to delineate clear responsibilities, deadlines, and procedures. Establishment of a refined project Steering Committee. Building on the previous membership of the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC), we will work with the PMT to identify key participants (representatives of municipalities and agencies, key non-profit and community groups, and others throughout the study area who have been involved in the past and who will want to remain involved in the future) who will meet with the project team on a regular basis in workshops to review study products and recommendations. An initial meeting with FTA Regional staff and CDOT transit grant staff to keep them informed on the project and to ensure their continued involvement throughout. 1 A project team kick-off meeting to review key issues and brainstorm on potential alternatives. This kickoff meeting will: • Confirm the scope and methodology for undertaking the study. • Agree on a detailed work program specifying the key milestones, a critical path to complete the project on time, a schedule of meetings and a definition of deliverables. The work program will be a live and regularly updated document that will form a key constituent of client progress meetings. • Develop a detailed budget breakdown by task and agree procedures for monitoring project financial performance to enable corrective action to be taken as appropriate. • Establish lines of communication between the study team and the PMT. • Determine the membership of the key stakeholder group and establish exactly how and when they will be involved in the study. • Establish a study risk register, which highlights both internal and external risks to the study work program and/or timetable, and is linked to the critical path analysis identified above. • Understand and collate available data sources. N 16 steer davies gleave E u Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Task 2 - How the Region Lives and Moves (not listed in RFP) 3.20 This task, also added to our work scope, will document at a high level - the existing regional transportation policy framework in place in the local area and broader region. Data Needs 3.21 The SDG team will work with the PMT to determine the specific data needs required to develop a sustainable transportation strategy. The 2009 Transfort Strategic Plan and the NFRMPO Long -Range Plan provide good starting "snapshots" of the existing and planned system and its potential. We will work with the PMT in a workshop format to identify other high -priority transit programs and services in the region that should be included. Transit Audit 3.22 This process will establish a comprehensive database on existing transit services in the study area. The first tasks of the audit will be to establish the baseline in terms of: Understanding current patterns of employment, retail and leisure in the region, in order to understand the key sources of demand for travel in the areas. 1 Understanding the demographic profile within the region, to identify where there are areas of high/low car ownership and high levels of transit dependency. 1 Understanding and mapping the existing transit system to show the network coverage. Assembling evidence on the performance of the transportation network, such as congestion hot spots, or locating areas where public transportation services suffer problems of poor quality or reliability. ■ - steer davies gleave 17 ■ Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study 3.23 The baseline assessment would be supported by: Desktop Research, utilizing data and knowledge from the existing reports and datasets from Larimer County as well as other national, regional, and local sources including planners and operators. Geo-demographic analysis: We will use available information on the regional demographic patterns from the NFRMPO and other sources and complement this with additional data to map the demographic, economic and geographical features of the region. I Stakeholder input: We will capture the knowledge and insight obtained during the stakeholder engagement to supplement our understanding of transportation issues, needs, constraints and opportunities (see task 3). 3.24 The baseline analysis will enable an assessment of where the transportation network appears to be catering well and less well to the needs of the population, and therefore will identify where, and the extent to which, transportation objectives are being met. Policy Review 3.25 This process will distill the range of policy documents into a single summary, which will provide both the strategic contest for the development of the project, and understanding of key transportation issues and proposals. 3.26 It will provide the starting point for the development of the Plan's objectives, whereby the range of policy aims from the documents reviewed will need, in conjunction with stakeholders, to be articulated into a core set of clear objectives, against which transportation options can be assessed in an objective and measurable way. SWOC Analysis 3.27 As part of this process, our team will work with the PMT staff and the Steering Committee to conduct a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Challenges (SWOC) analysis to identify key issues facing the agency in pondering a regional authority. While many of these will be unique to the study area, in our experience working with over a dozen public transit and transportation authorities, these often draw out similar themes. These include: 1 Theme 1: Accessibility and integration, including improved access to services and activities, accessibility to and from the region and city center(s), and integration and transfers between and among existing modes of transportation. Theme 2: The role of transit and transportation in balanced economic development, including recognition of the economic development emphasis within the region, and the need for key infrastructure and services as a result; and accessibility of more remote areas and the need for balanced development. 18 = steer davies gleave F 0 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Theme 3: Safeguarding and developing existing lifeline services to ensure that the needs of the transit dependent are always met. Theme 4: The environment, including safeguarding the unique natural heritage of the region; conserving a valuable asset to the economy; and safeguarding the identity of the local communities. ■ 1 Theme 5: Delivery, including potential for maximizing resources and funding opportunities; the need for integrated investment and partnerships; and identification of ■ new sources of funding. High quality of life Strong universities and medical facilities attitudes Good existing coverage within Ann Arbor Recent ridership growth Recent performance improvement relative to peers Fleet / facilities TheRide's forward thinking attitude Improving coordination of major planning efforts across jurisdictions Contributing to quality of life through transportation choice Encouraging higher -density development Providing integrated transportation solutions Steering land use development and supporting transit - oriented / sustainable development Marketing services as a viable transportation choice Educating students (college and K-12) on benefits of transit Increasing commuter share ;; Adding key service outside of the County e.g. airport service and other connectors Finding unique funding sources r. Strengthening the hub and spoke urban bus network Preferential treatment of transit (e.g. signal priority, bus lanes) » Attracting more choice riders through means such as improved information quality Low density development on the urban fringes and in the rural areas » Less diverse economies outside Ann Arbor Limited service in Ypsilanti Many areas of the County and some major trip generators are unnerved Low service frequency on many routes Winter weather can deter choice riders Uncertain economic conditions Aging population Increasing congestion Lengthening commutes Mitigating environmental impacts of growth Nearly all population growth expected to take place in outside the core urban area of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti Maintaining and improving coordination with other transit operators Adapting the network structure to meet the changing transportation needs of Washtenaw County residents Expanding to County level while maintaining sufficient service in the urban area Providing transit for an increasingly dispersed region Providing service to areas of new population and employment growth Providing service to an increasing number of commuters from outside Ann Arbor High turnover of population and riders Finding the funding The output of the SWOC process will include summary tables designed to capture all the key issues in a format for discussion with stakeholders. A good example of the SWOC process was one we used in the Ann Arbor transit plan as shown in the table above. We will develop a similar analysis for the Fort Collins/Larimer County region to help understand the underlying issues related to linking land use and transportation. steer daviles gleaw 19 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Task 3 - Community Mobility Review/Stakeholder Interviews (listed as Task 2 in RFP) 3.28 In coordination with input from the PMT, the SDG Team will develop a list of key stakeholder groups to be communicated with throughout the project. The SDG Team will assist the PMT with identifying an appropriate number of stakeholder groups and members (including elected officials, major employers, and representatives of businesses, neighborhoods, and community groups). 3.29 We will meet with and collect data from key stakeholders in the region to get their own perspectives on future transit development and structural needs and trends. We think it is crucially important to include the views of local residents, employees, students, business owners, and decision -makers, as they will be able to provide good insight into development options above and beyond those reflected in the quantitative data sets. 3.30 This "community mobility review" will provide a snapshot of the community's existing types and levels of service and elements that are important to them. It will also help us identify additional important stakeholders who we may want to consider including in our discussions. 3.31 Our approach is to maximize our exposure to local citizens and draw out their ideas, concerns, and knowledge through this process. Multiple tasks will draw from this base of knowledge including: Completing interviews with local jurisdiction staff (one-on-one) to understand the local conditions, concerns, and knowledge. Completing interviews (one-on-one) with decision makers (politicians) to understand the political climate and constraints. Utilizing the project Steering Committee to the maximize benefit. This will include an initial group brainstorming session as an essential part of the Multiple Account Evaluation process (see Task 6). This exercise seeks to draw out critical information, as well as individual positions, concerns, and agendas among the team members. Utilizing new media methods such as web -based surveys, e-newsletters, Facebook updates, and Twitter communications to reach a broader public audience. Task 4 - Review and Analyze Service Models: What are the Options? (listed as Task 1 in the RFP) 3.32 As an outgrowth of the data collection effort in Task 2, the SDG Team will undertake a comprehensive review of service model options for the Fort Collins area to consider for its future transit governance structure. Our team members from Infrastructure Management Group (IMG) will lead this effort, assisted by LSC. Sasha Page of IMG has worked with a variety of state and local governments in developing funding and financing programs for transportation infrastructure of all types, including in Colorado. Lonnie Blaydes also will assist IMG on this task; Lonnie is a former General Counsel at Dallas Area Rapid Transit with 20 steer davies gleave a ■ ■ 3.33 • s Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study extensive experience in working with transit agencies around the country on their legal and regulatory issues. This effort will include: I A summary and history of applicable Colorado statutes and regulations governing transportation funding and implementation. This will include a summary of recent legislative actions related to transit and transportation funding and how individual regions in Colorado have responded to those actions. The table below, prepared by LSC, summarizes information on current (and proposed) Colorado RTAs and the issues they faced in becoming established. Gunnison Valley (funds allocated between air and bus service based on the decision of the Board of Directors annually) Southern Platte Valley (Transit only) Approximately One (Created in one year. 2002,reauthorized in 2008) Approximately One (Created in two years. 2007) ■ Roaring Fork (99% Approximately One (Created in ■ transit, 1%trails) two years. 1983) ■ ■ Pikes Peak (Roadway Approximately One (Created in construction 55%, two years. 2004) roadway maintenance • 35%, transit 10%) North Front Range A year before Two attempts failed • (originally proposed as first attempt in 45% roadways, 13% 2003, another transit, local option/ year before ■ shareback 42%) second attempt in 2007 Stable funding source for air Tax funded organization service, economic supporting private development program, open businesses (airlines) forum, ability to develop community partnerships Number of people served, None small amount of funding requested, promotion as a community asset Regional control of transit Higher taxes, up -valley services, dedicated revenue governments receiving stream, equitable more benefit than down - distribution of costs, valley improved transit on Highway 82, new service in 1-70, funding for Rio Grande trail, ability to obtain more federal funds Traffic congestion Tax -averse population, problems, environmental competition with Denver's benefits, multimodal FasTracks approach Multimodal approach, Major political issues, flexibility, environmental number of jurisdictions protection, economic involved viability, enhanced quality of life • 1 A summary of other states' legislative guidelines to transit governance and funding. A ■ wide variety of funding options exist in other states, ranging from general revenues to ■ dedicated sales taxes, business taxes, and auto registration taxes. We will utilize resources from organizations such as the National Conference on State Legislatures, the ■ Center for Transportation Excellence, and the Transit Cooperative Research Program to develop a comprehensive inventory of governance and funding models from around the ■ country. ■ ■ • ■ = steer davte5 gkow 21 ■ in ■ = steer davies gleave ■ ■ 600 17" Street, Suite 2800 South ■ Denver CO 80202 303 226 5869 ■ October 14, 2011 ■ Mr. Jim O'Neill, FNIGP, CPPO Director of Purchasing and Risk Management ■ City of Fort Collins 215 North Mason St., 2nd Floor ■ Fort Collins, CO 80524 ■ ■ Dear Mr. O'Neill and Members of the Selection Committee: In the late 1990s, I had the privilege of serving as Project Manager for the North Front Range ■ Transportation Alternatives Feasibility Study, one of the first regional planning efforts that ■ examined the potential to connect the Fort Collins area with other parts of the North Front Range. At that time, a regional transit service entity was seen as a logical next step, and while ■ previous attempts to form a regional authority have as yet been unsuccessful, now is the time to 'get to the finish line.' Not too long ago, I joined Steer Davies Gleave (SDG), one of the world's leading independent ■ transportation planning firms. Based in London, the firm's Denver office is home to the company's US multi -modal transportation planning practice. In addition to worldwide ■ experience in roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian planning and design, the firm's local staff is leading projects in the US and Canada on regional transit planning efforts and ■ integrating transportation solutions into urban environments. One project in particular is ■ worth noting for its relevance to this project: we have been working closely with the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority to help that agency with its path forward, including future governance and funding options. This experience and others combined with our team's rich history of system planning and transit organizational analysis in Colorado and around the ■ country - is the perfect combination of skills to help you with your transit service entity ■ project. In addition, we have asked a number of key local and national subconsultants (all of whom have ■ worked with me at one time or another) to help us with this project, including: LSC Transportation Consultants, one of Colorado's leading experts on transit operations and organizational analysis, whose staff has worked with transit systems of all sizes ■ throughout the region. ■ I Infrastructure Management Group, a full -service infrastructure consulting firm specializing in improving the finance, management, operations, and development of ■ infrastructure facilities, primarily in the transportation sector, with special expertise in ■ funding and financing analysis for public transit systems. ■ ■ ■ Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Task 5 - Peer System Analysis: How do Other Regions Work? (listed as Task 5 in the RFP) 3.34 This task is one of the most important activities of the entire project. The SDG Team will work with the PMT and Steering Committee to develop a list of appropriate peer transit systems to develop case studies and best practices on transit funding and governance. 3.35 Peer systems are defined as transit systems or agencies that roughly resemble the Fort Collins/Larimer County area in a number of areas, including: Similar population and population density; Similar service patterns, including commuting patterns to larger metropolitan areas; 1 Similar annual trip volumes; 1 Similar college/university populations; and Similar annual operating and maintenance costs. 3.36 For example, a quick survey of the FTA National Transit Database shows a number of systems throughout the country that may be candidates as peer systems for review in this project. Some of those systems are: Everett (WA) Transit Lowell (MA) Regional Transit Authority Kanawha Valley (WV) Regional Transit Agency Capital Area Transit, Harrisburg (PA) Ann Arbor (MI) Transportation Authority Knoxville (TN) Area Transit 1 Winston-Salem (NC) Transit Authority 1 Citibus, Lubbock (TX) Central Arkansas Transit Authority, Little Rock (AR) 1 Denton County (TX) Transportation Authority Wichita (KS) Transit Modesto (CA) Area Express Appleton (WI) Valley Transit Santa Rosa (CA) CityBus Logan (UT) Cache Valley Transit System 1 Sonoma County (CA) Transit ....,:, for t read Y Ge easier faste , service' A& , 22 = steer davies gleave Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study 3.37 The SDG Team will work with the PMT and the Steering Committee to develop and screen a long list of potential peer systems for inclusion in this analysis. The SDG Team will conduct detailed research on the final list, and will contact staff members from those agencies to determine a number of factors, including items such as: Governance and funding structure; Commuting patterns and service levels; An evaluation of the degree of success of the agency in serving community needs, goals, and vision; 1 Plans for expansion or revision, either in service levels or governance; and Words of advice for the Fort Collins/Larimer County area. 3.38 One key aspect of this task will be a 'peer system forum' of the leadership and key staff of the most appropriate peer systems. This forum will include both travel of those individuals to the Fort Collins area (where resources allow), or alternatively, a 'virtual forum' using a teleconference to allow wide-ranging participation of peer system representatives. This forum will allow the PMT and Steering Committee to understand key 'lessons learned' from those systems that can be valuable tools in helping them guide the development of the transit future in the Fort Collins/Larimer County area. 3.39 The final product of this effort will be a 'best practices' document summarizing the key aspects of governance and funding structures of other systems and how they can be applied in this project. Task 6 - Development of the Vision: Identify and Evaluate Governance Models (listed as Task 4 in the RFP) Developing the Vision 3.40 The vision for the transit strategy should describe what the client and key stakeholders would like the Fort Collins/Larimer County region to be in 2035. This should not be expressed just in terms of transit, but also should articulate wider outcomes for the area such as economic prosperity, sustainable development, and providing opportunities for all residents. We propose to establish the vision and its related goals and objectives by convening a Stakeholder workshop, to look first at the broader vision and objectives for the study area (many of which have already been defined by previous studies), and then to consider the role that transit should play in supporting these wider objectives. From this we will work with the Steering Committee to formulate transit - steer daivies Yec-w 23 0 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study specific goals and objectives that will inform the development of the evaluation framework and be the basis against which transportation funding and governance options and scenarios are assessed. Development of Options/Scenarios 3.41 Using information developed from our data and peer systems research, our stakeholder interviews, our peer system forum, and our visioning workshop, the SDG Team will develop a range of potential options for implementation to guide the development of a regional transit framework for the Fort Collins/Larimer County area. While not wanting to pre -judge any potential outcome, there are some obvious frameworks that the Team will explore, including ideas on: Governance: What type of governing structure is needed (including how local jurisdictions are represented such as through appointment or election), and what type of legal structure is involved in linking the jurisdictions? Funding: What type of funding mechanisms are available or recommended, including dedicated taxes, and how are those funding mechanisms approved by the community? Funding Equity: What service standards are appropriate to balance needs of all communities in the study area? How should services be distributed among local communities? Service Structure: What type of inter -related service structure is appropriate over the short term and the long run? Should all services be completely integrated and, if so, over what time period? What are the financial implications of service integration? What new services could be provided based on potential funding levels? Evaluation Framework and Criteria 3.42 The next step is to develop an evaluation framework that is capable of assessing the performance of options and scenarios in a robust and transparent manner. It is essential that there is buy -in to the framework as the basis for developing strategy options before its application, if the results (and therefore the overall strategy) are also to be accepted. The evaluation framework will consist of: Identified performance measures and metrics to be developed for each objective - these would include elements such as ridership, financial performances (costs and revenues), economic (cost -benefit) performance, and accessibility mapping. The development of an assessment scoring system. This will provide a summary of the performance of each option against each 24 steer davies gleave U ■ Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study transportation objective. The scoring could be either quantitative (cost -benefit performance, number of people benefiting) or qualitative (for example, strong, medium, or poor contribution) depending upon the level of detailed analysis that underpins the ■ assessment. ■ I A set of deliverability criteria to assess the feasibility, cost, and funding. ■ 1 An overall assessment of the program/policy performance against transportation objectives, public and political acceptability, and deliverability criteria informed by the ■ performance metrics above. 3.43 One tool we propose is the use of a Multiple Account Evaluation (MAE) process, a user- friendly method to organize data that provides decision -makers with systematic documentation that clearly demonstrates the trade-offs among often conflicting factors, such as financial, transportation user benefits, environmental, economic development, social ■ community, and urban development. This strategic analytical framework will give ■ the PMT the transparency needed to interpret the trade- offs within a consistent and coherent framework and make ■ an informed judgment about ■ the viability of local transit service options. ■ 3.44 We recently used the MAE ■ process in our projects in Ann Arbor and Sacramento to ■ evaluate the effectiveness of differing implementation and ■ funding scenarios. The ■ accompanying graphic shows the evaluation structure and . criteria we used in analyzing the community benefits of different scenarios in Sacramento. lard use in"raDon dontNkahon d J. actMtty center EMu IN the prop rl scenario served. e.g.. enornoa s both <unrnt and futiae lu demon aMacmn am qe am and 1 hospiuls It medical ante% sneers the re wrm b of 4analt W 1 w a)or retain sh provde a servKe to and from when, 1 Prmclpai odleges/unly m b People with to travel Igeograpl* nWir, g Emplgem, IM employees lraieportahon network Identlfkatdn of lull trip henOls die W Comderehcn of tha netwov, bereft Integration Intepatlan with Unimit tnnnfer center that can le achkved. IncW q both and uttncharg appmtudthm physical Integration M., good 1Mercha o portunf f )end Wy Integration (i.e. hmeleWmg comechrq wn&c , thntugh tkiehng) FwIty Catchment analph for s 1 gmps CaMWeration of those w may receive (househdds Im than Sygk) wthin grealesl berefit from the hamit walk" access 115 mlM ) to a stop Irwea6 he to cwrent banter W Moo and orpwtunrcles for them Sarery Dine" safety Impels de to the design k*nWicatlon of uMt, aspects a un, (i.e. pf""Ily segregand, running with good sMng and design stadands for geteral traffk. on sVr stops) dire" safety Impacts Indirect safety due W voi. d nde transfer W hash system health CnmpnehaMly. d pe a ton and Bereft from pronwtky physkal a ity (Promote physical a"Mty) cycling wlw k due W gmaher pede "n acros W Inane In average bicycle and Vamp and ITrm walla, and Cytlhlg pedestrian node shan, ■ Recommendations 3.45 Based on Steering Committee and Stakeholder guidance, the SDG Team will make a final ■ recommendation on a governance and funding structure for the Fort Collins/Larimer County area. ■ ■ ■ ■ = steer davies gleav)e zs ■ SOME SCENARIOS AND OPTIONS TO CONSIDER The SDG Team has conducted initial research into options for Fort Collins to consider as it begins focusing on a regional transit implementation scenario. Some of those options include: Board membership: Denver's RTD has an elected Board. One criticism of that approach is the ongoing controversy over funding equity, especially as FasTracks has run into funding issues, since each member has an elected constituency to respond to. Many regional systems in Texas such as Dallas Area Rapid Transit have appointed boards, which often respond directly to local government needs but often are subject to changing political leadership. Relationship to local governments: Regional transit agencies often have a variety of types of relationships to local entities. For example, Mountain Metro in Colorado Springs is a division of the City but currently receives no general City revenues (all local funding comes through a portion of sales taxes from the Pikes Peak RTA). Red Apple Transit in Farmington, NM, is also a City division but receives a majority of its funding from City revenues; it contracts with other jurisdictions for service outside the City. Valley Transit in Appleton, WI, is an independent department that uses the City as an administrative 'host;' its funding is negotiated annually with 20 other governmental entities. Non -transit responsibilities: Some transit agencies in Colorado have responsibility for more than local transit service. For example, the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority in Glenwood/Aspen has responsibility for local trails; Pikes Peak Area RTA in the Colorado Springs area covers rural transit and road funding; and the Gunnison Valley RTA administers both transit services and the local airport. Creative funding: A variety of non-traditional funding sources are often used to help pay for transit services in Colorado and other states, including fees on ski lift and concert tickets, hotel taxes, restaurant taxes, and impact fees. Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study i vs. the capital replacement and infrastructure needs of the existing system. Using existing documentation, the SDG team (led by its team member IMG) will review the potential different sources of funding and critically analyze them in terms of scale, restrictions and 1 probability in the short, medium and long term. 3.48 National, regional and local sources will be used to consider the feasibility of alternative or innovative funding arrangements. Potential capital and operating funding sources will be reviewed and critically analyzed in terms of the amount of funding and likelihood these f sources will remain in the short, medium, and long term. The funding sources reviewed will include a review of all potential local, state, and federal funding sources. 3.49 In two recent studies for Miami -Dade County's Citizen's Independent Transportation Trust, IMG surveyed alternative funding sources and financing methods that transit agencies are employing to maximize their use of scarce funding resources. This research covered both new taxes and fees such as motor vehicle registration fees, hotel taxes, and parking fees as well as new non -fare revenue sources such as naming rights, digital on -board advertising, and enhanced retail activities at transportation intermodal centers. In addition, IMG assessed recent experience with transit -oriented development, including for bus lines. 3.50 Furthermore, new financing techniques, such as the USDOT's TIFIA program, used recently for the US 36 Managed Lanes/Bus Rapid Transit project between Denver and Boulder, or new transit -oriented funding from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Housing and Urban Development need to be considered in framing the overall governance and funding structure. 3.51 As IMG found in its work assessing regional funding strategies for transit agencies in Northwestern ■ Chicago and in St. Louis, different jurisdictions in a region will have varying burdens in paying for transportation depending on the method of apportioning costs. IMG will advise on the method that is most defensible and most transparent in demonstrating funding burden for funding the current transportation system and the proposed . system. 3.52 The team will outline the steps required to establish those funding sources not already in ■ place and will highlight the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges of each approach. 3.53 SDG recently completed an analysis of funding options for the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. A copy of that report is included in the Appendix i ■ t = steer davies gleave ■ Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Task 8 - Communications Strategy; Sharing the Vision (listed as Task 6 in the RFP) 3.54 Communications Plan: The SDG Team will develop an initial Communications Plan that outlines activities, key participants, and a schedule for communicating with and educating the public about the recommended vision. The document will outline community involvement goals and objectives that will allow Larimer County communities to meaningfully participate in the process. The plan's goals will include: Generating awareness of the Plan and encourage feedback and participation throughout its implementation; Allowing for full public access to timely information and opportunities for engagement, particularly at key decision points; Providing a wide range of opportunities for the public to participate in the process, get answers to questions, and allow comments to be submitted in a timely fashion; Proactively involving those persons traditionally underserved by the decision -making process, such as minorities, low-income persons, and persons with disabilities; Ensuring opportunities to be involved in the process are extended to federal, state and regional agencies; Demonstrating how public input is being incorporated into the Plan; and Building public consensus and support for the implementation of the Plan. 3.55 Community outreach activities could include: Public Meetings: As the process moves forward, the project team will hold a round of public informational meetings at appropriate geographic locations in the study area to introduce the Plan to the community. The team plans a minimum of two public meetings (one for planning purposes and one when the plan is developed); if the budget allows, additional meetings can be scheduled. We also will work with the PMT to develop public meeting notices to be published in local news outlets, and to develop advertisements or notices to be placed in community newspapers. In addition, notices of meetings will be posted on the participating agency websites and sent to elected local and state officials, applicable regulatory agencies, representatives of organizations or groups with known interest, the various Chambers of Commerce, economic development organizations, educational institutions, and other key groups. 1 Outreach Tools: Depending on the available budget, the team may develop a mobile application to provide information on the project. Initially, this technology could be focused on the planning effort. 28 - steer davies gleave M ■ LESSONS LEARNED: Sacramento TransitAction Plan This project was aimed at establishing a vision for the Sacramento region over the next 25 years and included a comprehensive assessment of alternatives and an integrated package of transit investments designed to increase mode share in the area. It included three scenarios: Scenario A was the base case and assumed that transit remains `status quo' with overall service levels constrained by existing funding sources. Scenario B included the regional Blueprint Smart Growth assumptions for land use are in place and that the full 2035 transit network has been implemented. Scenario C was an integrated transit solution that assumes Scenario B links the 2035 assumptions with a fully integrated package of transit, TDM, and TOD policies and projects. Scenario C+ was added to the analysis to assess sensitivity to increased gasoline and parking prices and further land use changes to promote more growth near high capacity corridors. Using the MAE process, SDG determined that Scenario C+ has the highest farebox recovery ratio and provides the greatest travel time savings along with better job accessibility. The analysis showed that more intensive land use assumptions and variability in parking and energy costs has significant impact on long-term transit ridership. Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Task 9 - Final Report/Executive Summary (listed as Task 7 in the RFP) 3.57 This task will comprehensively address all planning elements necessary to develop the system's recommendations for short, mid, and long-range implementation. 3.58 The preparation, review, and agreement of the new transit strategy is the ultimate work product of this effort - in addition of course to the implementation plan. This pragmatic and visionary document will provide the region with the roadmap and region -wide guide to provide a transit planning policy, and financial and operational framework for developing and delivering transit projects and programs over the next 25 years. 3.59 The implementation plan will be comprised of: 1 A statement of the overall vision and objectives of the plan; A recommended strategy with a clear road map of policies and interventions that would be implemented over the implementation timeframe; and The specification of a monitoring and evaluation program that should be developed to assess the performance of the Plan over time, with the results from this process used to refine and optimize the plan. The SDG Team will propose a monitoring program for both the Plan Implementation and the operation of transit services to meet the desired goals. 3.60 The final report will provide clear and concise documentation of the project research, analysis, and agency/stakeholder engagement. The reports will clearly demonstrate our decision making process and support the final recommendations. Elements of this task include development of draft and final reports; presentation materials; and website materials, including a video version of the final report. o = steer davies gleave Li 0 ■ Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study �, L-1 Relevant Projects ■ The table below summarizes major relevant projects performed by members of the project ■ team. ■ ■ Washtenaw County ■ Transit Master Plan a Regional Transit Master Plan .......... : Regional High Capacity Transit System Plan Strategic Network Review Ann Arbor SDG is developing a Transit Master Plan for TheRide that includes Transportation a comprehensive review of existing policies, stakeholder Authority (TheRide) requirements, an assessment of transit needs, and an assessment Contact: Michael of how well the existing system meets those needs. The plan Benham, 734-794-1852 outlines three scenarios for future transit, depending on future mbenham@theride.ora funding and the political climate. The recommendations go beyond a standard transit plan by providing mechanisms to fully integrate the transit system into local communities. IMG is assisting SDG with the funding plan for the project. Sacramento Regional SDG was asked by Regional Transit to help develop a new 30-year Transit Transit Masterplan to shape a more sustainable urban structure Contact: Mike Wiley, by linking future transit investment with higher density, mixed- 916-321-2800, use development. The scope of SDG's involvement in this project mwiley@sacrt.com included: A 30-year Transit Master Plan Vision; Comprehensive funding options analysis; Design & branding for the project; Design & hosting of project website; Development of TOD guidelines and delivery plan; Design of web -based "willingness to pay" game; paratransit plan; and Development and assessment of bus, BRT, streetcar, European Street Tram and LRT options Portland Metro Metro, the MPO for the Greater Portland region, assigned a team Contact: Tony Mendoza, including SDG to develop the long-term network for the full high- 503-797-1700 capacity transit (HCT) network. SDG led the development of a multiple account evaluation framework that used a balanced approach to assess each of the potential corridors against one another. The results of the evaluation were then used to discuss options with the public, stakeholders and the Metro Board. The HCT Plan was subsequently completed and adopted by the Metro Board in 2009. TransLink, Vancouver, SDG was the Project Manager and Lead consultant responsible for BC the development of long term rapid transit network scenarios for Contact: Jeff Busby, the Vancouver region. Specific tasks for the Network Review 604-453-4673, include: Jeff rey.busby@translink. I Land use, transportation analysis and stakeholder analysis ca to determine potential high capacity transit corridors in the region 1 Evaluation and modelling to prioritize corridors and inform scenario development Development of 2041 Transit Plan long-term rapid transit scenarios to complement the new Metro Vancouver land use plan. ■ = steer davies gleave W ■ steer davies gleave OV Consulting, a leading local transportation planning and outreach firm with additional expertise in transit operations analysis and planning, who will lead the project's outreach component (assisted by Dowling Associates). I Blaydes Consulting, one of the country's leaders in transit organizational analysis, whose principal has worked with some of the largest transit systems in the country in their governance structures. We believe that our approach significantly differs from those developed by other firms proposing on this project. We offer a visionary, planning -based approach supplemented by solid technical support and expertise to help the Fort Collins area develop a transit governance structure that will serve the area for many decades. The region has made significant strides in planning for the future; our team wants to help you keep that vision moving forward for the benefit of you and your citizens. It's time for a fresh approach, and that is what you will get from the SDG team. We are excited at the prospect of bringing our team members back together and working with you again, and we hope you will contact me if you need additional information on our proposal. Sincerely, Tim Baldwin, AICP Steer Davies Gleave Project Manager 303 226 5869 Tim.baldwin@sdgwortd.net Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study TEX Rail Alternatives Analysis/Environmental mpact Statement FasTracks Alternatives Ana lysis/Environ menta I Analysis Loveland COLT Transit Plan Greater Roaring Fork Regional Transportation Authority Formation Study &A Fort Worth Tim Baldwin (with previous firm) was Project Manager for this Transportation AA/EIS for the 37-mile Southwest -to -Northeast rail corridor Authority project linking Fort Worth with Grapevine and DFW Airport. The Contact: Curvie project included federally sanctioned alternatives analysis, Hawkins, 817-215-8632, development of a draft EIS (final EIS being developed now), chawkins@the-t.com corridor TOD analysis, cost estimates, operations analysis, and complete New Starts analysis. Denver RTD Tim Baldwin and Chris Proud (with previous firms) led various Contact: Chris Quinn, aspects of major corridor analysis for Denver's FasTracks 303-299-2439, program, which is adding 122 miles of new rail corridors to the chris.guinn@rtd- region. Tim Baldwin was Project Manager and later Project fastracks.com Director for the Northwest Rail Alternatives Analysis and Environmental Assessment, with Chris Proud as Environmental Task Leader. Chris Proud was Deputy Project Manager for the Gold Line Corridor AA/DEIS, and Tim Baldwin was task leader for the Alternatives Analysis component of the project. City of Loveland The City of Loveland Transit (COLT) contracted with LSC to Contact: Marcy Abreo, prepare a Transit Business Plan. The Final Report included a 970-962-2700 description of the communities, a review of the COLT service, a transit needs assessment of the area, issues to be addressed in the study, preliminary survey data, community input, service alternatives, institutional and management alternatives, and the recommended service plan. The study focused on transportation issues within Loveland including transportation for the general public, elderly and disabled population, and for school children. General public transportation service in Loveland was currently being provided by the city. However, the existing service had low ridership, and this study focused on changing service to fit the community. Roaring Fork LSC was retained as a subconsultant to conduct the operational, Transportation capital, and financial analyses associated with the formation of a Authority Rural Transportation Authority encompassing Aspen, Snowmass Contact: Dan Village, Carbondale, Glenwood Springs, Rifle, Basalt Silt, and Blankenship, 970-920- Newcastle. The firm's tasks included: 1905 A detailed analysis of travel demand and associated transit ridership demand. • Evaluation of a wide range of service alternatives. • Assessment of capital requirements associated with various district options, including fleet requirements, improvements to maintenance facilities, and new passenger amenities. • Development of a region -wide methodology to allocation benefits of transit services. • Calculation of potential revenue generation associated with increases in vehicle registration or sales taxes. • Allocation of costs and financial responsibilities to the nine participating jurisdictions. • Assessment of ridership and environmental benefits associated with various service improvement plans, including impacts on traffic volumes and parking conditions. steer davies gleave a Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study 1-70 Coalition Land Use and Transit Study 1-70 Coalition/CDOT Beth Vogelsang was the Deputy Project Manager for the 1-70 Contact: Flo Raitano, Coalition's Transit and Land Use Study that included the agencies Former Executive from Golden west to Glenwood Springs and Grand Junction, and Director, 1-70 Coalition/ included Carbondale, Aspen, Roaring Fork Transportation Michael Penny, 1-70 Authority (RFTA), Garfield County, and Pitkin County. Coalition Board Beth worked with representatives of each agency to examine - President, 970.688- land use patterns and unique characteristics of the mountain °sL� ONLY 5376, communities, and to evaluate potential high speed rail service michaelp@townoffrisco. and future station locations within the communities. She worked Cornextensively on the assessment of connecting transit circulator P _ systems in each community, especially those in which high speed rail stations were less likely. — Beth managed an extensive agency input process and addressed local and regional mobility needs through the development of community action plans that integrated local transit circulator services, land use and urban design strategies and bike and pedestrian connectivity. All recommendations in the study were carried forward to the 1-70 Coalition and its partner, the Colorado Department of Transportation, as well as the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority and the 1-70 Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) team. City of Golden Transit City of Golden Beth Vogelsang managed a feasibility assessment that began with Feasibility Study Contact: Steve Glueck, the identification of the community vision for transit and long - Director of Planning, term sustainability and included the technical feasibility o303-384-8095, evaluation of potential routing, ridership markets and sQlueck@cityofgolden. projections, service operations planning, fleet requirements and net the identification of multi -modal connections for bicycle, pedestrian, circulator and light rail service throughout the city. Beth worked extensively with numerous community groups to '`` establish local service needs and to assess the feasibility of a circulator to efficiently meet those needs. Beth managed an active public participation program including a community web - based survey, direct communication with local schools and the Colorado School of Mines students, targeted focus groups and public open houses. GroupInfras &cture Management Colorado Springs ■ Streetcar Feasibility Study Mountain Metro IMG was part of a team (led by Tim Baldwin) that was retained Contact: Bill Bottini, by the City of Colorado Springs to perform a feasibility Project Manager, 719- assessment of the P3 and innovative finance options available to 385-7459, fund a $100-200 M streetcar transit system in Colorado Springs, billbottini@springsgov. CO. The City of Colorado Springs wanted to develop a new type Com of service that is cost effective and employs innovative funding and financing techniques. The streetcar was expected to eventually run over 10 miles, serving in some ways as a modified Light rail project, with a total cost of up to $200 M. The project included examining the City'sfunding sources, possible new fees to support the development and long term operations of a street car system, federal funding, and transit -oriented development (TOD) and benefit assessment districts (BADS) as key funding sources and developing a financial model that covers the life cycle of the asset including an analysis of potential P3 funding. steer davies gleave 33 N Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Puerto Rico Light Rail Municipality of San The Municipality of San Juan sought to develop a transit solution Financial Feasibility Juan to relieve intense traffic conditions and limited public transit Study and Financial Contact: Lourdes Rovira, alternatives. As part of its planning process for development of Advisory Services 787-748-2166 a light rail system, the Municipality engaged IMG to provide lrovira@prtc.net financial and structuring advice on the development of the system examining both public funding options as well as a P3 approach. IMG's key tasks were to examine the funding sources and financing mechanisms available to the Municipality or to private partners to develop the system. These included traditional sources such as federal grant funding and municipal revenues, as well as revenues that could be generated from real estate development in areas affected by the proposed system. IMG developed a financial model assessing public vs. private funding in order to evaluate the ability of both traditional and non-traditional funding sources to support initial project development as well as projected operating expenses. This tool enables IMG to provide critical advice to the Municipality on the financial feasibility of the project and, if feasible, how to combine these various sources and package the opportunity to attract a private sector partner. IMG worked in collaboration with the project team and reviewed estimates for the operating plan, capital requirements and costs, and ridership projections. IMG continues to work with this client through the Small Starts/New Starts alternatives analysis process. steer davies gleave 0 steer davies gkme 4 Cost Proposal PPPP 14av ni� 4 •�w.. r r 'f4, �� r� � .h'.. it � .r- .,, '.r ?♦ Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study 4 Cost Proposal The table below shows our cost proposal for this project. This cost proposal is subject to change based on discussions with the City of Fort Collins on specific scope and schedule issues. Note that our DBE participation equals approximately 15.1 % of our total budget through the use of OV Consulting and Dowling Associates. Fort Collins Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Steer Davies Cleave Draft Cost Proposal - October 2011 Draft - s tn*ct to chanoo bash on contlmmriO dis ssmns on scow and scllsdum wIM Cim of Fort Collins Steer Davis. Glsave - Mpao U Pei.nnel .,.it I." 13escd ion Bu,Jensd Truk t Task 2 lask 3 leak l I asA S ;'k a leak 1 Ts4 8 1 aM 9 door, 1-.Upc1 Oaa Communrp Ser,. "r.1 ,_. .� icAI mmry �o,•uu!. Imes loml m Peanrxl Re a M nayemwn "1I 11on M lay Realw M.,1, .nalysn .!odels Anal; sis DPW., Hepan Ibun Idal Cost 7-B., -.•:T Manger SZ30 16 8 16 1 6 2e 1-.0 5322V I�dscs-OAjOc sm I 8 8 16 $3.200 Clms F.ow. pl,,," Anatyas S-80 .. 2A LS S24 i30 Antkw Dismiss, - tab Asmlysm Sim 40 ee $6.000 JULeT F_dmpnla CWwxtorts Planning S'40 1 24 S3 nC thick DAu-OpLtepps Pllasy 2165 16 8 24 114.410 Chadpde spx[e Ooxxlms Renew S'40 _ 20 S2 00C Atrelkbvillis, THIS 16 16 51520 ,tM SIa7 Suppdn _, 40 s0 55 OUC local Task Mons 32 lia All 32 W 3b 32 24 96 456 TOTAL SOGTASXtABOR COSTS S5.2W sic.)m SITOW $6.S6n SIT '20 SI ADD $6.560 S4.770 $16 AJO S83.000 PaN1E CONSULTANT Dlre[tl Ralmbursabls En n Reimbursable LxP rates Task 1 I.k 2 Tesk 3 leaks Isak 5 IW 6 T W 8 I W 8 Issa9 Taal Cost Prpla[t Data Command, Sem[e Pew GU.emmce Fninwi Comlwmcmons final Managemant Collectwn lApOddy Ra.1en lAodel, Analyua fAIdela Ana!yva Gbxeg, Repod PoomPlDsmmss 5250 6250 SSW 1pC:n`g F•:mng 52000 S2 OW Dal6l S260111 S2.500 S.00 S200 S20c $200 520D zoo zoo S200 520c Si roe AAwwLanemmkAmnpsnnss Sim S750 5250 5600 Stab SSW 5250 SSW SSW S3.500 TOT4. SDG REIWLWSA(1lE r%VFb)E1 S850 SaSo Ua $too S/450 STICK) SAID Sim S2.o50 510.200 SUBCONSULTANTS - Tsk Beam Ave.age TM 1 Twit 2 T.k 3 1" a T.k 5 Task 6 Ink 7 Task 8 TsAA 9 fSurdetwd PmKI Data COminuno, Se,," Per Goernance Financial Cpmrtvncxwm Fna. Tnml Taal Con Team kaember Xoary I.!magemea C.11c1lpn IMNIAy Rm.e.s Mo6e15 Analysis 6lode15 Ana;yan Sexa,, Re,,t Hours Ilncl..,.T DstiNYAssdc+ls I S110 8 16 B 8 8 S6 A 76 S8.360 EIN.m. 5200 SIM SAOo It16aMmaun Mmxemem %nap SP' A A 8 16 24 40 8 1!2 S26 Ile 6x^ses S2 000 S2 000 C-M" I JIM 8 20 8 20 A 60 511.1W a m LSC Ttanseo!xwn Cmsunil 5125 8 40 24 21 16 40 16 16 8 52 S2400 E+pe<aes OV consossg I Stab I 8 SM0 16 51UD 24 5200 8 $100 8 51W 8 8 Sloo as 8 112 S690 S16240 E+Pa-xa 5200 $100 11no 52W S2W S200 Sim 512" Taal Task Hours 40 FA 64 68 56 IN W 64 32 552 Tema Ssis.lma Lwbur Cato ♦N.W H.7110 Y.2 0 SIo.6N 19.200 516.300 50.120 $51 MATED Toml Sukconmltanl Espnwes So SAID Woo Sa00 Sim SIW S2.W0 SSW Sim Y1.400 TOTAL SUBCONSULTANT COSTS S6.800 $9.600 S8.680 $11,020 $16,680 $200 S86W S5 $77A60 Iesk1 1aek2 task Task Teaks IaA6 1ed1 Task8 Task TOTAL COST SUNAIARY Ftopc! Data Commanny Semee Fee, G.ins..e F,nancal CanlminaNlona Final Management COAec!lan Mo619y Renew Idedeb Analysis MUddl Analyss Sbxegy Report Iaal MOurs Ioml Cost TOW 5DG Lab. $5100 $10.7a 3111,000 36.60 311.320 $7.480 56.560 114,720 1161440 456 M.OW tdnI SOG Reimbaraable Fapnnwr SE") Wo Wto Stoo S2910 S100 Wo S700 $19-0 5102nn TOW Stlhcallsuesnl Coe 66.400 119.600 $8.610 511,020 11111.610 f16,680 $2.000 U.620 56.32) ST 860 SDG SubconsuOant Metk,,P 12. 5'.1 $160 $240 S216 $26 S240 San St0 $216 SIJJ S1 D47 SDG Divisor Esponso Norkap lr4 513 SA 1123 S36 se"a $35 $23 $35 5148 S.10 GRAND TOTAL S11.653 $21033 S23, 119 S16,591 S24.211 $25, 317 S9.003 S14)41 f24."l tOUa 1113.517 TOTAL TRIMS BY TASK 12 128 144 1011 1if, 136 % RO 128 steer (avles Jleaw 35 No Text Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Appendices Lobbying certification Resumes Excerpts from Ann Arbor Transportation Authority Transit Master Plan = steer davies gleave 37 APPENDIX A, 49 CFR PART 20—CERTIFICATION REGARDING LOBBYING Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and Cooperative Agreements ■ (To be submitted with each bid or offer exceeding $100,000) ■ The undersigned [Contractor] certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: (1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of an agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any . Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, . grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. ■ (2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for making lobbying contacts to an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of . Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned ■ shall complete and submit Standard Form—LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions [as amended by "Government wide Guidance for New Restrictions on Lobbying,"'61 Fed. Reg. 1413 (1/19/96). Note: Language in paragraph (2) herein has been modified in accordance with Section 10 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 ■ (P.L. 104-65, to be codified at 2 U.S.C. 1601, et seq.)] (3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under ■ grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by 31, U.S.C. § 1352 (as amended by the . Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995). Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of. not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. ■ [Note: Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 1352(c)(1)-(2)(A), any person who makes a prohibited expenditure or fails to file or amend a required certification or disclosure form shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,001) and not more than $100,000 for each such expenditure or failure.] The Contractorteer, Davies Gle,—, certifies or affirms the truthfulness and accuracy of each statement of its certification and disclosure, if any. In addition, the Contractor understands and agrees that the provisions of 31 U.S.C. A 3801, et seq., apply to this certification and discl sure, if Signature of Contractor's Authorized Official Tim Baldwin Name and Title of Contractor's Authorized Official October 13, 2011 Date 8 ■ ■ Tim Baldwin, AICP Associate Education MA/Public Administration/1977/ University of North Texas BA/Political Science/1974/ University of North Texas Years of Experience 16 Public Sector 19 Consultancy American Institute of Certified Planners Urban Land Institute Congress for the New Urbanism Tim Baldwin, AICP, is a senior member of Steer Davies Gleave's North American team. He has more than 35 years of experience in transit and transportation planning, government relations, and public policy analysis in both the public and private sectors. His experience includes running a consultancy transit planning and urban design studio, an executive role at Dallas Area Rapid Transit and an assistant to a U.S. Congressman. He specialises in managing complex interdisciplinary multi -modal transportation projects and is also adept in transportation -related public policy development and local and regional transportation planning. His areas of expertise include corridor studies and alternatives analyses; local and regional circulator planning; local, regional, and statewide transit systems planning; intermodal facilities planning; streetcar system planning; and transit -oriented development and transit -related urban design projects. Relevant Skills Project Direction l3 Management Tim has worked on transit and urban design projects of all sizes and complexities, ranging from small neighborhood circulator and transit -oriented development studies to multi -corridor alternatives analyses and regional system plans. He specializes in the efficient management of large consulting teams working in collaboration with clients through effective and ongoing communications and team -based decision - making. Systems Planning Tim helped develop the original Dallas Area Rapid Transit system plan and has subsequently worked on multi -modal transit system planning projects in Colorado, California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, Arkansas, Nevada, and Oklahoma. He has a special focus on leading multi - modal alternatives development and evaluation for corridor and system splans. Transit Oriented Development/Urban Design Tim has led TOD planning projects in Colorado and Texas focused on integrating commuter rail, light rail, and streetcar investments with sustainable local community development. He is on the National Steering Committee for Rail -Volution, the premier conference on linking land use and transportation and is a member of the Urban Land Institute and the Congress for New Urbanism. Rail -Volution National Circulator/Streetcar Planning Tim has had a recent focus on streetcar systems ■ Steering Committee concept planning, having led projects in Denver, Colorado Springs, and Austin. He developed the plan for the streetcar system in Little Rock and is adept at ■ alternatives analysis, conceptual cost and ridership forecasts, and implementation planning for streetcar systems. ■ Corridor/Environmental Studies Tim has led several recent federally sanctioned alternatives analysis and environmental studies for major transit ■ investment projects in Colorado and Texas. He specializes in leading complex FTA alternatives analyses, New Starts processes, NEPA coordination and ■ documentation, and public involvement associated with major transit investments. ■ Intermodal Facilities Planning Tim has led intermodal facilities planning projects in Texas, Colorado, Arizona, California, Oklahoma, and North Carolina, ■ with a special emphasis on transit facilities location and operational analysis and integration into neighborhoods. ■ ■ TIM BALDWIN = stw daves gleaw ■ CV 1 or 9 Projects Summary Project Client Year/Location Role Transit Oriented Richland Hills THE Station City of Richland Hills, Development/Urban TOD Plan North Central Texas 2009, Texas Project Director Design Council of Governments Longmont Station/TOD City of Longmont/ Analysis Regional Transportation 2005, Colorado Project Manager District Southwest -to -Northeast Fort Worth Transportation 2008-2009, Texas Project Manager Corridor TOD Planning Authority Gold Line AA/DEIS Regional Transportation District 2008, Colorado Project Director Station Urban Design Regional Transportation 2008, Colorado Project Director Templates District North Main St ape and Development Plan Plan City of Fort Worth 1996-1997, Texas Project Planner Economic and Land Use Development Plan City of Dallas 1991-1992, Texas Project Planner Circulator/Streetcar Colorado Springs Streetcar City of Colorado 2009-2010, Project Manager Planning Feasibility Study Springs/Mountain Metro Colorado East Colfax Streetcar City of Denver 2009-2010, Subconsultant Feasibility Study Colorado Project Manager City of Austin Urban Rail Alternatives Analysis City of Austin 2009-2010, Texas Project Manager River Rail Streetcar Planning and Environmental Central Arkansas Transit 1997-1998, Project Manager Assessment Authority Arkansas Shuttle Feasibility Study City of Englewood 1998-2000, Colorado Project Manager Historic Streetcar Pikes Peak Historic Street 1995-1996, Project Manager Feasibility Study Railway Foundation Colorado Downtown Vintage Trolley City of Indianapolis 1996Indiana Deputy Project Conceptual Design Study , Manager Streetcar Feasibility Study City of Wilmington 1997, Delaware Project Planner Streetcar Feasibitity and Design Study City of El Paso 1995, Texas Project Planner Texas Medical Center Circulation Study City of Houston 1995, Texas Project Planner Las Colinas Circulation Study City of Irving/Las Colinas 1998, Texas Project Planner Corridor/Environmental Southwest -to -Northeast Studies Environmental Impact Fort Worth Transportation 2007-2010, Texas Project Manager Statement/Basic Authority Northwest Rail Corridor Environmental Regional Transportation 2007-2010, Project Director Evaluation/Preliminary District Colorado Engineering US 36 Corridor Colorado Department of Environmentat Impact Transportation/Regional 2003-2009, Deputy Project Statement/Basic Transportation District Colorado Manager Engineering Project Gold Line AA/DEIS Regional Transportation 2007-2009, Subconsultant District Colorado Project Manager DCTA Commuter Rail Denton County Environmental Impact Transportation Authority 2004-2006, Texas Project Manager Statement Longmont Corridor Rail Regional Transportation 2004-2006, Project Manager Feasibility Studv and District Colorado TIM BALDWIN = stew daviesgleem CV2OF9 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study CONTENTS 1 FIRM EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS........................................................... 1 Introduction. . . ... .............................................................................................. 1 Steer Davies Gleave......................................................................................... 2 Other Team Members ....................................................................................... 3 Key Factors of our Proposal.............................................................................. 4 Whythe SDG Team?......................................................................................... 5 2 QUALIFICATIONS OF KEY PERSONNEL.............................................................. 7 TeamOrganization........................................................................................... 7 ProjectManager.............................................................................................. 8 OtherKey Team Members................................................................................ 9 3 PROJECT APPROACH AND RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE.................................11 Approach and Understanding...........................................................................11 Guiding Principles of Our Approach..................................................................13 Deliveringthe Plan.......................................................................................... 14 Detailed Work Plan and Schedule.....................................................................15 RelevantProjects............................................................................................31 4 COST PROPOSAL........................................................................................3 5 APPENDICES.....................................................................................................3 7 steer davies gleave Contents Projects Summary Environmental Evaluation Colorado Springs Transit City of Colorado Center Environmental Springs/Mountain Metro 2006-2009 Project Manager Assessment Albuquerque -Santa Fe Mid -Region Council of 2006, New Corridor Alternatives Governments Mexico Project Manager Analysis Cotton Belt Rail Feasibility City of Addison 2001, Texas Project Manager Study LAX/South High Speed Southern CaliforniaAssociation 2001-2004, Ground Access Study of California project Manager Governments North Front Range Colorado Department of 1997-1999, Transportation Alternatives Transportation Colorado Project Manager Feasibility Study East Corridor Major Denver Regional Council 1996-1998, Deputy Project Investment Study of Governments Colorado Manager Arizona Passenger Rail Arizona Department of 1996, Arizona Project Planner Feasibility Study Transportation Systems Planning Dallas Area Rapid Transit Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) System Plan (as employee) 1988-1991, Texas Project Planner Commuter Rail System Maricopa Association of 2008-2010, Project Manager Study, Phoenix Governments Arizona Regional Commuter Rail North Central Texas 2001-2004, Texas Project Manager Planning Project Council of Governments DCTA Service Plan Denton County 2001-2002, Texas Project Manager Transportation Authority Lewisville Transit Needs City of Lewisville 2000-2001, Texas Project Manager Assessment Study Central Arkansas Regional Central Arkansas Transit 1997-1998, Project Manager Rail Project Authority Arkansas Colorado Passenger Rail Colorado Department of 1996-1997 Project Manager Study Transportation Tulsa Regional Mobility Plan and Downtown Tulsa Transit 1993, Oklahoma Project Planner Mobility Plan Intermodal Facilities Downtown Colorado Springs City of Colorado 2001-2002, Planning Transit Center Feasibility Springs/Mountain Metro Colorado Project Manager Study Station Location and Denton County Development Guidebook Transportation Authority 2004, Texas Project Manager Station Location and Fort Worth Development Guidebook Transportation Authority 2007, Texas Project Manager Los Angeles Union Southern California Passenger Terminal Long- Range Capacity and Access Association of 1998, California Project Planner Study Governments Tulsa Downtown Transit Center Tulsa Transit 1996, Oklahoma Project Planner Yuma Multi -Modal Transportation Center City of Yuma 1999, Arizona Project Planner Raleigh Downtown Triangle Transit Authority 1997, North project Planner Intermodal Transfer Center Carolina North Charleston City of North Charleston 1996, South project Planner Intermodal Center Carolina TIM BALDWIN = sLmydavWsgleave CV3OF9 Selected Projects Transit Oriented Development/Urban Design Richland Hills THE Station TOD Planning Client City of Richland Hills/North Central Texas Council of Governments Year/Location 2009, Texas Position Held Project Director Project Director for preparation of a transit -oriented development plan for an existing Trinity Railway Express commuter rail station. Developed both physical redevelopment plans and a market analysis to determine the true potential for residential and commercial development on the site. The project included an opportunities and constraints analysis, economic and market analysis, alternative development scenarios, and extensive public involvement (including community roundtables), concluding with a developer workshop to review and critique the proposed plans (led by Reconnecting America). Longmont Station/TOD Analysis Client Regional Transportation District/City of Longmont Year/Location 2005, Colorado Position Held Project Manager As part of the Longmont Corridor Rail Feasibility Study, worked with the City of Longmont to conduct Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) analysis for stations and station areas in that city. The project included extensive public involvement, station area planning, economic and development potential analysis, and development of TOD plans and concepts for three potential commuter rail stations in Longmont. Southwest -to -Northeast Corridor TOD Planning Client Fort Worth Transportation Authority Year/Location 2007-2009 Position Held Project Manager Project Manager for environmental and design work for the 37-mile Southwest -to -Northeast commuter rail corridor for the Fort Worth Transportation Authority. Project included station design and station area planning for up to 14 commuter rail stations, along with TOD analysis for 9 stations. The project also included two regional TOD forums and the development of a TOD implementation guidebook for use by local jurisdictions in TOD planning. As part of that process, URS conducted a TOD workshop for the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce in coordination with Reconnecting America and its Center for Transit Oriented Development and used Reconnecting America for review of TOD plans and a follow-up implementation and financing workshop. Those findings and recommendations were incorporated into an "Implementation Tools and Funding Sources Guide" for local jurisdictions that outlined issues related to TOD implementation and economics, zoning, parking, TOD roles and responsibilities, and barriers to TOD, along with a catalog of TOD implementation tools and funding sources. This TOD implementation guide was made available to all jurisdictions in the project corridor to assist with their future TOD implementation efforts. Gold Line AA/DEIS Client Regional Transportation District Year/Location 2008 Position Held Subconsultant Project Manager Subconsultant Project Manager for alternatives analysis and environmental work on the 12-mile Gold Line corridor for the Denver RTD. Project included station design and integration with station area planning and TOD planning for commuter rail and streetcar alignments in the corridor. Station Urban Design Templates Client Regional Transportation District Year/Location 2008 Position Held Project Manager Oversaw development of templates for station elements for all four RTD commuter rail corridors. Project provided a methodology for allowing a blending of elements that are standard throughout the system, unique to a corridor, and in some cases, unique to a station; established a default design direction for each corridor and parameters for customization at appropriate stations; established a base line for costing station improvements; provided a basis for determining the amount of additional funding required when a local jurisdiction requires improvements whose costs exceed the base cost; and identified elements of station design and placement of amenities. TIM BALDWIN = stwdavies gleave CV40F9 a ■ Selected Projects ■ Circulator/Streetcar Planning Colorado Springs Streetcar Feasibility Study Client City of Colorado Springs/Mountain Metro Year/Location 2009-2010,Colorado . Position Held Project Manager Project Manager for feasibility study for the potential implementation of a streetcar system in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The project includes development of alignment and vehicle options and recommendations, capital and operating cost estimates, and ■ economic analysis to determine development and funding potential. East Colfax Streetcar Feasibility Study Client City of Denver Year/Location 2009-2010, Colorado Position Held Subconsultant Project Manager Subconsultant Project Manager (as subconsultant) for the development of a feasibility study for a ■ potential streetcar alignment on East Colfax Ave. in Denver, CO. Tasks include alternatives analysis and vehicle evaluation and assisting with development of operating plan, cost estimates, ■ and ridership and development forecasts for the system. City of Austin Urban Rail Alternatives Analysis Client City of Austin Year/Location 2009-2010,Texas . Position Held Project Manager Developed alignment recommendations for initial starter segment and longer -term extensions for Austin's Urban Rail/streetcar network to link Lady Bird Lake with the downtown core, the State Capitol, and the University of Texas campus. Project included development of capital cost estimates, operating plans, and operating and maintenance cost estimates, along with siting of a ■ maintenance facility. River Rail Streetcar Project Client Central Arkansas Transit Authority Year/Location 1997-1998,Arkansas Position Held Project Manager Project Manager for the first two phases of this project (feasibility study and preliminary ■ engineering), which developed a Local circulator system using a vintage streetcar for the riverfront area of Little Rock and North Little Rock, Arkansas. The project included an extensive public involvement process that helped determine exact alignments and vehicle preferences. The project is now in operation. ■ Additional circulator projects include: • Englewood Shuttle Feasibility Study, CO; Project Manager. .0 Milwaukee Downtown Transit Connector Study, WI; Project Manager. • Colorado Springs Historic Streetcar Feasibility Study, CO; Project Manager. • Indianapolis Downtown Vintage Trolley Conceptual Design Study, IN; Deputy Project Manager Wilmington Streetcar Feasibility Study, DE; Project Planner. • El Paso Streetcar Feasibility Study Et Advanced Planning/Preliminary Engineering Project, TX; Project Planner. • Downtown Dallas Transportation Plan, TX; Project Manager. • Texas Medical Center Circulator Study in Houston, TX; Principal Planner. ■0 Las Colinas Circulator Assessment Study, Irving, TX; Principal Planner. Killington Circulator Study, VT; Principal Planner. TIM BALDWIN - stew dav 5 gleaw CV5OF9 Selected Projects Corridor/Environmental Studies Southwest -to -Northeast Rail Corridor Environmental Impact Statement/Basic Engineering Client Fort Worth Transportation Authority Year/Location 2007-2010, Texas Position Held Project Manager Project Manager for an FTA-sanctioned environmental impact study and preliminary engineering for the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T) for the 37-mile Southwest -to -Northeast commuter rail corridor. The corridor includes Southwest Fort Worth, the TCU and Medical Center areas, downtown Fort Worth, and the rapidly growing suburban areas of Northeast Tarrant County (including Grapevine), with the aim of joining a regional intermodal hub on the north side of Dallas -Fort Worth International Airport. Project has completed the Draft EIS stage and is nearing completion of an FEIS and a New Starts application. Northwest Rail Corridor Environmental Evaluation/Preliminary Engineering Client Regional Transportation District Year/Location 2007-2010,Colorado Position Held Project Director Project Director for environmental and design work for the 41-mile Northwest Rail Corridor. The commuter rail corridor, which extends from downtown Denver through Boulder to Longmont, includes ten stations to be served by commuter rail on an existing BNSF freight line. The project includes completion of an Environmental Assessment under the auspices of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ridership modelling and station design, and preliminary design of alignment, stations, and structures. US 36 Corridor Environmental Impact Statement/Basic Engineering Project Client Colorado Department of Transportation/Regional Transportation District Year/Location 2003-2009, Colorado Position Held Deputy Project Manager Deputy Project Manager on an EIS that examined Bus Rapid Transit technology and construction options in a 20-mile corridor between Denver and Boulder, CO. Basic Engineering and Environmental Impact Services for the Denver -Boulder corridor along US 36. The $15 million project included environmental and design services for a 20-mile Bus Rapid Transit/High- Occupancy Vehicle network between Denver and Downtown Boulder (including additional general purpose lanes for part of that segment). Gold Line AA/DEIS Client Regional Transportation District Year/Location 2007-2009, Colorado Position Held Subconsultant Project Manager Subconsultant Project Manager for alternatives analysis for the 13-mile RTD Gold Line corridor examining alternative light rail and commuter rail alignments for the corridor and leading the three -step evaluation process for all alternatives. DCTA Commuter Rail Environmental Impact Statement Client Denton County Transportation Authority Year/Location 2004-2006, Texas Position Held Project Manager Initial Project Manager for the EIS and PE work being conducted for the Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) on its 21-mile commuter rail line linking downtown Denton, TX, with Carrollton and the DART light rail system. Led a multi -disciplinary team through basic design, environmental analysis, station design, ridership forecasting, and preliminary design. Previously led development of the DCTA Service Plan and Alternatives Analysis. Longmont Corridor Rail Feasibility Study and Environmental Evaluation Client Regional Transportation District Year/Location 2004-2006,Colorado Position Held Project Manager Project Manager for a feasibility study for implementing commuter rail service from Boulder to Longmont, CO. The 13-mile corridor was examined for inter -regional connections to the US 36 corridor and to the North Front Range corridor. The study developed detailed cost and ridership estimates for the system, in addition to examining station locations and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) opportunities. TIM BALDWIN = steer davies gleave CV60F9 ■ ■ Selected Projects ■ ■ Albuquerque -Santa Fe Corridor Alternatives Analysis Client Mid -Region Council of Governnments ■ Year/Location 2006, New Mexico Position Held Project Manager ■ Project Manager for an alternatives analysis for a portion of the Albuquerque -Santa Fe corridor, focusing on the segment between Bernalillo and Santa Fe, as a potential extension of a planned commuter rail system from Belen to Bernalillo. Led an extensive data collection effort on the ■ highway and railroad alignments in the corridor; examined alternative transportation modes; performed station location analysis; and assisted with public involvement for the project. ■ LAX/South High Speed Ground Access Study ■ Client Southern California Association of Governments Year/Location 2001-2004 Position Held Project Manager ■ Project Manager for study that examined viable alignments and vehicle technologies for the 50- mile corridor between Los Angeles International Airport and the southern Orange County area near ■ John Wayne Airport. The project included development of alignment alternatives, station locations and station areas, environmental analysis, and capital and operating cost estimating, as well as development of short-term incremental improvements. The project was designed to ■ improve mobility in the Southern California area as well as provide high-speed linkages between and among LAX, Long Beach Airport, and John Wayne Airport. ■ North Front Range Transportation Alternatives Feasibility Study ■ Client Colorado Department of Transportation Year/Location 1996-1997,Colorado Position Held Project Manager ■ Project Manager for this Major Investment Study, which covered the 60-mile corridor between Denver and Fort Collins, Colorado. The study, conducted with Federal new start criteria including ■ land use impacts, recommended a multi -modal solution for the 1-25 corridor through the year 2020. The project's $1.2 billion Vision Plan included a 26-mile combination general purpose/bus-HOV lane, a 63-mile commuter rail system using DMU technology, a regional bus network, and numerous ■ TDM/TSM improvements. The study was a ground -breaking inter -regional cooperative effort involving four public agencies in the northern Colorado area, including the Colorado Department of ■ Transportation and the MPOs for the Denver and Fort Collins areas. East Corridor Major Investment Study ■ Client Denver Regional Council of Governments Year/Location 1996-1998,Colorado ■ Position Held Deputy Project Manager Deputy Project Manager for this study, which investigated mobility solutions for the 26-mile-long corridor between downtown Denver and Denver International Airport. The study's ■ recommendations included a DMU commuter rail line using both existing railroad right-of-way and new right-of-way in Pena Boulevard near DIA, highway widening on 1-70 between 1-270 and 1-225, ■ and a complete restructuring of local bus routes to feed the recommended rail system. Other corridor study projects include: ■0 Tulsa Commuter Rail Feasibility Study, Tulsa, OK; Deputy Project Manager. • North Central Alternatives Analysis/Environmental Impact Statement, Dallas, TX; Project Planner. • Arizona High -Speed Rail Feasibility Study, AZ; Project Planner. .0 Fayetteville Long -Range Corridor Study, NC; Project Planner. ■ Systems Planning ■ Commuter Rail System Study Client Maricopa Association of Governments ■ Year/Location 2008-2010,Arizona Position Held Project Manager Project Manager for study that is evaluating commuter rail options for the Phoenix region and the ■ potential connecting routes immediately adjacent to the region. The study will establish priorities for implementing commuter rail service through an evaluation of ridership potential, operating ■ strategies, and associated capital and operating costs. Key issues include ridership forecasting, railroad coordination, cost estimating, and corridor prioritization, along with recommendations on governance, financing, and implementation. ■ TIM BALDWIN _ stewdayjes gleaw ■ CV70F9 Selected Projects Regional Commuter Rail Planning Project Client North Central Texas Council of Governments Year/Location 2001-2004, Texas Position Held Project Manager Led two projects with the North Central Texas Council of Governments, the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Dallas -Fort Worth area. For the Regional Rail Corridor Study, URS conducted corridor analysis, cost estimating, operations planning, and station location analysis in addition to assisting with implementation and funding feasibility planning. This project was designed to prioritize commuter rail corridors throughout the region for potential integration with DART, The T, Denton County Transportation Authority, and other regional transit authorities. This project led to the Regional Rail Initiative, which is working with the state legislature to implement a funding and implementation strategy for commuter rail services in the future for the region. For the Commuter Rail Design project, URS was responsible for recommending design upgrades and improvements to track and structures on existing and proposed commuter rail lines throughout the region. Denton County Transportation Authority Service Plan Client Denton County Transportation Authority Year/Location 2001-2002,Texas Position Held Project Manager Led development of a comprehensive tong -range transit service plan for the proposed Denton County Transportation Authority. The Authority worked with all communities in the county to develop a multi -modal plan to deal with short- and long-term growth and mobility issues. Potential solutions ranged from light rail or commuter rail to local and regional bus service, with connections to other regional transit systems such as Dallas Area Rapid Transit and The T in Fort Worth. This effort culminated in a financial plan and a successful vote by local citizens on a dedicated sales tax to fund transit operations. Lewisville Transit Needs Assessment Study Client City of Lewisville Year/Location 2001-2002,Texas Position Held Project Manager Led project that developed a range of transit options for this Dallas suburb located adjacent to the Dallas Area Rapid Transit service area. The project included an intensive population and employment growth analysis and travel study to determine major origins and destinations for Lewisville -area residents. Options examined included light rail and commuter rail, neighborhood bus circulator service, city-wide fixed -route service, and bus feeder service into the DART light rail and park -and -ride system. The project also included a long-range financial pro forma based on a variety of sales tax and dedicated funding options. Colorado Passenger Rail System Study Client Colorado Department of Transportation Year/Location 1996-1997,Colorado Position Held Project Manager Project Manager for this statewide study of Colorado's rail corridors to determine the feasibility of a passenger rail network. The study examined 18 rail corridors serving numerous population centers and destinations throughout the state, and it used detailed evaluation criteria to develop packages of alternatives and prioritize corridors. The outgrowth of this study included the initiation of Major Investment Studies in the Denver -Fort Collins, Denver -Colorado Springs, and Aspen areas. Central Arkansas Regional Rail Study Client Central Arkanasas Transit Authority Year/Location 1997-1998, Arkansas Position Held Project Manager Project Manager for this regional rail study in the Little Rock, Arkansas, metropolitan area. The project's aim was to analyze and recommend corridors for potential future Major Investment Studies. The study developed a number of candidate technologies for the area's major travel corridors and established recommendations on priorities for further studies. Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) System Plan Client Dallas Area Rapid Transit (as employee) Year/Location 1988-1991, Texas Position Held Project Planner TIM BALDWIN = steer davies gleave Cv8OF9 ■ ■ Selected Projects ■ In his role as Assistant to the Executive Director and later Planning Special Projects Manager at ■ Dallas Area Rapid Transit, helped develop the DART System Plan, including a 20-mile LRT starter system that opened in 1996, a number of HOV lanes, and a commuter rail line to South Irving and Fort Worth that also opened in 1996. ■ Other projects include: ■0 Dallas Area Rapid Transit System Plan Update, TX • Englewood Transportation Visioning Study, CO ■0 Nevada Public Transportation Management Systems Study, NV • Arizona Intermodal Management Systems Study, AZ North Front Range Transportation Funding Feasibility Study, Fort Collins, CO ■0 Arizona Passenger Rail Feasibility Study, AZ • Tulsa Regional Mobility Plan and Downtown Mobility Plan, Tulsa, OK ■0 Fort Bend County Mobility Plan, TX ■ Intermodal Facilities Planning ■ Downtown Colorado Springs Transit Center Study ■ Client City of Colorado Springs/Mountain Metro Year/Location 2001-2002,Colorado ■ Position Held Project Manager Project Manager for study to help determine new downtown bus circulation and the location of a new downtown transit center to replace its outdated facility. The project team worked with a ■ downtown steering committee to analyze sites for short-term and long-term bus operations, and the project also examined a downtown circulator and transit corridors as possible means to ■ improve transit service in downtown and throughout Colorado Springs. The study made a final recommendation on a preferred site that is being integrated into an overall redevelopment plan for downtown. Also led an Environmental Assessment on two recommended sites. ■ ■ Station Location and Development Guidebooks Client Denton County Transportation Authority/Fort Worth Transportation Authority ■ Year/Location 2004-2007,Texas Position Held Project Manager ■ As part of ongoing alternatives analysis, environmental impact statement, and preliminary engineering activities for DCTA and Fort Worth commuter rail corridors, led development of station location and development guidebooks for use by the agencies and participating jurisdictions. ■ These guidebooks outlined criteria to be used in station location and design and assisted with the decisions by local jurisdictions on transit facility investments. ■ Los Angeles Union Passenger Terminal Long -Range Capacity and Access ■ Study Client Southern California Association of Governments Year/Location 1998, California ■ Position Held Principal Planner Project Planner for this study, which examined internal and external options for improving ■ capacity at the Los Angeles Union Passenger Terminal. The study examined external rail line capacity and the potential for interconnectivity with the area's light rail, heavy rail, commuter rail, intercity rail, local and intercity bus, and private ground transportation modes. The study ■ also examined internal passenger flow and circulation using a simulation model. ■ Other projects include: • Downtown Oklahoma Transit Center Study, OK ■ • Tulsa Downtown Transit Center Study, OK Yuma Multi -Modal Transportation Center Study, AZ ■ • Raleigh Downtown Intermodal Transfer Center Study, NC North Charleston Intermodal Center Study, SC • Stapleton Intermodal Center Study, CO ■ Dallas Area Rapid Transit Design Policy Manual, TX ■ ■ TIM BALDWIN = steer davies gleave IN CV9oF9 Tangerine Almeida TRANSPORTATION Page 1 CONSULTANTS, INC. Experience Transportation Planner — LSC Transportation Consultants (2004 - present) ► Transportation Intern — Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (2004) ► Urban Planning Research Aide, University at Buffalo (2003-2004) Transit Operations Plans < Breckenridge, CO Transit Operating Plan Conducted an onboard survey and analyzed boarding and alighting data for the current route structure to determine how to improve efficiencies with the service. Analyzed various transit service alternatives to effectively serve peak winter ski season and summer tourist season. The recommendations for the new route system were accepted by City Council and put into service. < Grand Valley Operational, Route, and Schedule Analysis, CO Conducted an onboard survey, and examined the current system for services efficiencies and deficiencies. Worked on the schedules for the new route structure. The goals of creating the new route structures were to serve the greatest number of users and have the greatest end benefit for the area. < Billings MET Route and Schedule Analysis, MT This study was a thorough evaluation of the existing routes and schedules to see if there were improvements which could be made to the service and to incorporate 15-minute breaks for drivers for each four-hour work period. Evaluated the MET system including individual and systemwide route productivity, costs, and on -time performance based on through boarding and alighting counts, onboard surveys, and available data collected by the transit agency. < Carroll County, NH Transit Operations Expansion Analyzed demographic conditions, peer community analysis, and quantified unmet trans- portation needs for the Carroll County area. There were no general public transportation services in the Carroll County area except for limited taxi services, volunteer agencies, private providers, and an intercity route to Boston. This project developed a service plan in which transportation services in adjoining Coos County could be expanded to the Carroll County area. Coordination opportunities were also identified. Transit Facilities < Billings, Montana MET Transit Transfer Center Assisted in site selection process for a transfer center in downtown Billings, Montana. Involved with creating various conceptual drawings for the various sites selected for the proposed MET Transit Center. This information formed part of the necessary documen- tation which was sent to the State of Montana and the Federal Transit Administration for an environmental review. Tangerine Almeida I,V IVJV LIHIV IJ, IIV V. Page 2— < Grand Junction, Mesa County Facility Study Assisted in conducting a site selection study to determine the most suitable location for a new downtown transfer facility in Grand Junction, Colorado. Involved with creating conceptual drawings of bus layouts and routing. This project was funded through Senate Bill 1. Transit Planning < Senior Services of Snohomish County, WA Served as project planner for service expansion planning and technology recommendations for the Transportation Assistance Program (TAP) provided by the Senior Services of Snohomish County. The plan also identified opportunities for better coordination with Com- munity Transit and the DART program (the paratransit service) to provide seamless trans- portation services within Snohomish County. < MET Transit Lockwood Service Plan, MT Developed new transit service alternatives for MET Transit to expand services to Lockwood or to be operated by the Lockwood community. This project specifically focused on providing transit service alternatives to the Lockwood area, with each alternative having estimated operating costs, ridership, performance measures, and necessary implementation steps. Presentation and Recognitions ► 85th Annual TRB Conference: Impact of Proximity to Light Rail Rapid Transit on Station - Area Property Values in Buffalo (2006) ► Received the 2005 American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Student Project Award for the best example of planning regarding contemporary issues in the Food for Growth: A Community Food System Plan for Buffalo's West Side, graduate planning studio (2005). Also, received an award at the New York Upstate Chapter and at the Western New York Section of the American Planning Association (APA) as the "2004 Outstanding Student Project Award" (2004). Education < Master of Urban and Regional Planning — State University of New York at Buffalo 2004 < Bachelor of Architecture — University at Bombay, India 2000 Professional Registration/Memberships < American Planning Association (APA) < APA Colorado < Colorado Association of Transit Agencies (CASTA) < Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA) • LONNIE E. BLAYDES, JR. ■ S PERSONAL Address: 3106 Weems Way Rowlett, TX 75088 E-Mail: LEBa} des(a,AOL.com Telephone: 214-924-4632 S EXPERIENCE • January 2002- present Lonnie E. Blaydes Consulting Independent consultant on a wide range of transportation and railroad issues, focusing on commuter rail, freight rail interface with transit, railroad negotiations ■ and Federal Railway Administration regulation. Recent clients include: • Triangle Transit Authority, North Carolina: Negotiation and representation of TTA with CSX and Norfolk Southern Railroads. • Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District (Tri-Met): Commuter rail operations and cost review for Washington Co. commuter rail project. ■ • VIATrans of Boise, Idaho: Legal review, corridor valuation, and negotiation strategy for preservation of area rail lines. • Sonoma -Mann Co. Area Rail Transit Commission: Operations and maintenance cost review of proposed commuter rail service plan. ■ October 1994 -2002: Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) Vice President, Commuter Rail and Railroad Management June 1997 -2002: Regional Rail Right -of -Way Corporation (RRROW) President 1991 -2002: Railroad Acquisition and Operation Consultant June 1993 - May 1994: Interim General Counsel, Dallas Area Rapid Transit September 1985 - Assistant General Counsel, Dallas Area Rapid Transit October 1994: Interstate Commerce Commission, Washington, DC 1979 - 1985: Attorney, Office of Special Counsel 1977 - 1978: Attorney Advisor, Interstate Commerce Commission, Office of Proceedings, Washington, D.C. EDUCATION . University of Texas School of Law, Austin, Texas - J.D., May 1977. North Texas State University, Denton, Texas - B.A., May 1974. Cum Laude graduate, double major in Political Science and History. steer davies gleave 1 Firm Experience and Qualifications rya `cy 14% .M C: - a 5 ALIGN DEPOT ■ ■ PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES ■ ■ Member, Board of Directors, Operation Lifesaver, Inc., Arlington, Virginia-2001; Chair, American Public Transit Association (APTA) Commuter Rail Committee - 1998- / 2000; ■ Chair, APTA Commuter Rail CEO Committee - 1998-2000; Invited Attendee, FTA/FRA German Track Sharing Fact-finding Trip led by FTA / Administrator Nuria Fernandez - April 2000; Study Mission Leader, Eno Foundation Spring European Track Sharing Mission to / Germany, France and Luxemburg-- June 2000; / Keynote speaker, Kansas City Regional Transit Alliance Annual Meeting - May 2001; Speaker or panel moderator, APTA Commuter Rail Conference - 1995-2001; / Speaker, APTA Legal Affairs Seminar - 1992, 1996, 1999; Speaker or panel moderator, APTA Rail Conference - 1989, 1996, 1999; ■ Speaker, Passenger Trains on Freight Corridors - 1996, 1999, 2001; Recipient, Outstanding Performance Award, Interstate Commerce Commission - 1981. ■ ■ Dick Dapre Associate I have over 30 years' experience in transport consultancy, mostly in railways, light rapid transit and buses. My skills are broadly based, from demand modelling and business case assessment to engineering and operational feasibility. Recently I have specialised in the supply side of the planning process, but I am equally at home with issues such as model parameters, mode choice, highway layouts, vehicle specifications, service planning and railway capacity. Whether as project leader or specialist Advisor, I can therefore bridge the diverse areas of multi -disciplinary projects and supply a coordinating and sense -checking role as well as working within my own areas of specialisation. ■ Relevant Skills Qualifications MSc (Eng.) Transport ■ Imperial College London Railway Planning Ft Operations As project manager or specialist 1977 technical advisor, Dick has worked on numerous projects involving the ■ BSc (Eng.) Civil Engineering planning of rail systems, the establishment of new services, or the Imperial College London introduction of different modes of operation such as light rail. He has ■ 1976 extensive knowledge of railway systems and can 'speak the language' in Member specialist areas such as signalling and permanent way engineering. ■ Institution of Civil Recently he has been managing the service planning and timetable Engineers development process for a major project appraising the business case for ■ Member new rolling stock. In the same period he has also been responsible for Institute of Logistics Ft the operating and timetabling inputs to several other major rail projects. ■ Transport His experience also includes managing a number of projects to provide advice to the promoters of, or objectors to, new stations. In these, he Years of Experience focused closely on the railway feasibility issues, and importantly to ■ 32 Consultancy promoting understanding between Steer Davies Gleave's clients and the railway industry. ■ Publications Co-author The Baghdad ■ Transportation Study Light Rail Et Bus Transit Planning Dick is the 'owner' of various Traffic Engineering i3 Control, September 1987 operational tools within Steer Davies Gleave, including models for ■ estimating stop -to -stop run times for rapid transit (and heavy rail) systems and for estimating operating costs based on a service ■ description, operator structure and vehicle characteristics. He has been a key team member supplying advice and forecasts in these areas for many of the firm's projects, including Edinburgh Tram Line 1, ■ Merseytram, Gateshead Centrelink, various light rail and bus transit projects in London and the Evergreen LRT scheme in Vancouver. In Edinburgh, he was responsible for all the operational planning for the detailed STAG2 appraisal, including advising on local route options and ■ bus network changes. During the Consideration Stage in the Scottish Parliament, he appeared before the Bill Committee to present evidence ■ on a number of detailed issues including tram speeds and safety, segregated versus mixed operation and single-track options. For ■ Merseytram he was responsible for the complete timetable plan and operating costs as well as contributing to the engineering design process. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ DICK DAPRE steer davie59le-rye Dick Dapre Associate Relevant Skills (cont'd) Scheme Definition 8 Service Planning Whatever the means used to plan, finance, procure, and construct a transport system, it is at the point of delivery that it achieves, or fails to achieve, its transport objectives. This means ensuring a high level of user comprehension, partly through good publicity and marketing but also through the design of the service itself. Dick understands public transport at the point of delivery and from the user's perspective, and is very aware of the need to make it easy to use. He is, however, also aware of the constraints that apply to levels and standards of provision from the operator's and funding authority's viewpoints. A sustainable service will be one that satisfies the requirements of all parties. Dick has experience of planning infrastructure, services and timetables in several contexts: for appraisal purposes, to demonstrate feasibility and for implementation. (In particular, he cites a bus route that he specified as part of a project to plan a local authority -supported network in 1993, which remains in virtually its original form in 2010.) Business Case Appraisal Dick's understanding of both the supply and demand side of transport systems gives him the ability to recognise and deal with the interaction between the operational characteristics of a transport system and the way these are treated in demand modelling and scheme appraisal. He is often called upon to develop and specify options for testing in business case appraisals and places great importance on the need for understanding the 'real life' physical characteristics of a scheme and not just the numbers that describe it in a model. As an example, this means that he is able to advise on whether a model of a scheme can realistically be used to assess design choices such as stop locations or alignments, or whether such decisions are better based on detailed urban design considerations. DICK DA P R E = steer davies gleave Projects Summary Project Railway Planning @ InterCity Express Operations Programme Tren Express Guanajuato Preliminary Electrification Study Network Modelling Framework (NMF) - Thameslink Inputs Proposed Railfreight Terminal East-West Rail Various new stations Client Year/Location Role Department for Transport 2006-ongoing, UK Specialist Advisor Guanajuato Government 2010, Mexico Specialist Advisor Department for Transport 2008, UK Specialist Advisor Department for Transport 2007, UK Specialist Advisor Developer 2001-2002, Somerset, UK project Manager The East-West Rail 2000-2001, 2006- Specialist Consortium (of Local 2008,2009- current, Southern Advisor/Pro ject Authorities) UK Manager Project Mgr / Various developers 1999-2005, UK Specialist Advisor A27 Worthing/ Lancing Department for Transport 2000-2001, West Specialist Integrated Transport Study (DfT) Sussex, UK Advisor New Marston Parkway Developer 2000-2001, Swindon, UK Project Manager Swanage Railway Rail Passenger Partnership Bid Purbeck Rail Partnership 2000, Dorset, UK Specialist Advisor New Stations in Hastings East Sussex County Council 2000, East Sussex, Specialist Area UK Advisor Essex Branch Lines Study Essex County Council 2000, Essex, UK Specialist Advisor New Settlement at Fradley Consortium of Developers 2000, WestMidlands, UK Project Manager Light Rail 8: Bus Hamilton Rapid Transit Transit Planning Bristol TIF - Scoping of Public Transport Options Evergreen LRT West London Tram - Trolleybus Alternatives Edinburgh Tram Line 1 Merseytram East London Transit Blackwater Valley Mass Transit Study Gateshead Centrelink City of Hamilton 2010-ongoing, Specialist Ontario, Canada Advisor Bath 13 NE Somerset, Bristol City, North Somerset Et 2006, Greater Specialist South Gloucestershire Bristol, UK Advisor Councils TransLink 2006, Vancouver, Specialist Canada Advisor Transport for London (TfL) 2005, London, UK Project Manager Transport Initiatives 2003-2005, Specialist Edinburgh (tie) Edinburgh, UK Advisor Merseytravel 2001-2005, Specialist Merseyside, UK Advisor Transport for London (TfL) 2001-2002, UK Project Manager Hampshire, Surrey It 2001-2002, UK Specialist Bracknell Forest councils Advisor Gateshead Council 1999-2000 Tyneside, UK project Manager DICK DAPRE steer daivies gleave Projects Summary Project Client Year/Location Role Scheme Definition ft Caribbean National Forest 'El Yunque' Mass Puerto Rico Highways It 2005-2006, Puerto Specialist Service Planning Transportation System Transportation Authority Rico Advisor Blackpool Tramway Blackpool Borough Council 2003-2005, Specialist Upgrade Blackpool, UK Advisor Merseytram Merseytravel 2001-2005, Specialist Merseyside, UK Advisor Guildford Strategic Transport Assessment Surrey County Council 2001, Surrey, UK Specialist Advisor Alcester Bus Services Developer 2000, Warwickshire, UK Specialist Advisor Pomona Docks Access Developer 2000, Greater Project Manager Strategy Manchester, UK Evergreen LRT Ridership Business Case Study & Essential Elements TransLink 2006, Vancouver, Specialist Appraisal Review Canada Advisor Merseyside Bus Quality Merseytravel 2005, Merseyside, Project Manager Contract Scheme UK Edinburgh Tram Line 1 Transport Initiatives 2003-2005, Specialist Edinburgh (tie) Edinburgh, UK Advisor Glasgow Waterfront Glasgow Harbour Ltd 2001-2003, Project Manager Transit Glasgow, UK Romsey-Eastleigh Hampshire County Council 1999, Hampshire, Project Manager Reappraisal UK DICK DAPRE = steer davies gleave Selected Projects Light Rail Et Bus Transit Planning Hamilton Rapid Transit Client City of Hamilton Year/Location 2010-ongoing, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Position Held Specialist Advisor The City of Hamilton, Ontario, is proposing to develop a 5-line rapid transit network within the framework of the Regional Transport Plan (RTP) for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. In May 2010 the City appointed Steer Davies Gleave as lead consultant of a team tasked with "taking the project to a maximum state of implementation readiness". The project, lasting just over a year, covers engineering and public realm design, network planning and operations, demand modelling, traffic microsimulation, consultation, land use and economic impacts. Dick is leading the operational workstream covering the planning of the rapid transit network and services, the operational design of the system, the strategy for changes to the accompanying bus network and technical inputs to the modelling. Bristol TIF - Scoping of Public Transport Options Client Bath Et NE Somerset, Bristol City, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire Councils Year/Location 2006, Greater Bristol, UK Position Held Specialist Advisor Several schemes for a 'second generation' public transport system for the Greater Bristol area have been studies over the years, including the now -abandoned light rail plan for North Bristol and, more recently, a series of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors identified in the Greater Bristol Strategic Transport Study. The four local authorities covering the area commissioned Steer Davies Gleave to define, assess and prioritise these corridors to support a prospective bid for funding under the Government's Transport Innovation Fund (TIF). He was responsible for a review of the transport networks in each sector of the city, the definition of options for modelling and advising on operational/design issues. Evergreen LRT Client TransLink Year/Location 2006, Vancouver, Canada Position Held Specialist Advisor The Evergreen LRT scheme is an 11 km light rail line planned to link the city of Coquitlam to the Vancouver Skytrain network. The commission included ridership projections using an EMME/2 regional transport model and a review of the 'Essential Elements' scheme defined in earlier studies. He was 'Essential Elements Advisor' to the project team, responsible for preparing a review of the proposed scheme and providing analysis of the effects on LRT operations of design options, including alignments, stop locations and traffic interfaces. He also reviewed the proposals for integration with the rest of the transit network. West London Tram - Trolleybus Alternatives Client Transport for London (TfL) Year/Location 2005, London, UK Position Held Project Manager Responsible for preparing a technical report for Transport for London on the potential for trolleybuses as an alternative to trams, in general terms but also with specific reference to the West London Tram (WLT) scheme. The work first involved a consideration of the factors differentiating trolleybuses from buses, before moving on to an assessment of the suitability of trolleybuses for the WLT corridor, taking account of capacity, traffic interactions, quality attributes and accessibility. DICK DAPRE steer davies gleave Selected Projects Edinburgh Tram Line 1 Client Transport Initiatives Edinburgh (tie) Year/Location 2003-2005,Edinburgh, UK Position Held Specialist Advisor This project was commissioned by tie (Transport Initiatives Edinburgh, owned by Edinburgh City Council), to develop the case for Line 1 using the Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG) framework. Following the initial review stage (STAG1), public consultation and further option sifting, a final scheme was taken forward into detailed appraisal (STAG2), which was submitted to the Scottish Executive in late 2003. Parliamentary Bills were lodged concurrently. As well as being responsible for the operational and service planning elements of the appraisal (see under Business Case Appraisal), he appeared as an Expert Witness before the Bill Committee during the Consideration Stage in the Scottish Parliament to present evidence on a number of issues including tram speeds and safety, segregated versus mixed operation and single track options. Merseytram Client Merseytravel Year/Location 2001-2005, Merseyside, UK Position Held Specialist Advisor A key member of the consultancy team developing the three -line Merseytram network, from its beginnings within the Local Transport Plan process, through the successful application for in -principle funding approval for Line 1 from central Government, to the granting of the Line 1 Transport Et Works Order and selection of private sector partners, before withdrawal of central Government support in 2005. As well as being responsible for operational planning (see under Scheme Definition and Service Planning), he was also involved in the definition and design of all three lines, specification of options for modelling and appraisal, and discussions with contractors and operators. East London Transit Client Transport for London (TfL) Year/Location 2001-2002, UK Position Held Project Manager Project manager for a commission to provide advice on the further development and implementation of the bus -based East London Transit scheme, one of the four new transit schemes given the go-ahead by the Mayor of London in May 2002. The work involved consultation with local authorities and other interested parties and the evaluation of a phased approach to implementation. Also project manager of an earlier study for London Transport, in partnership with the London Boroughs of Barking 6 Dagenham, Havering, Newham and Redbridge, of the alignment and layout for the scheme, then known as the Barking and Romford Intermediate Mode Project. The study covered a total of about 40 route kilometres and comprised two phases: to develop a strategy and outline proposals to achieve the maximum priority for public transport within the constraints imposed by the existing highways and, following consultation with local authorities, to develop the proposals through to layout design and costing. Blackwater Valley Mass Transit Study Client Hampshire, Surrey Ft Bracknell Forest councils Year/Location 2001-2002, UK Position Held Specialist Advisor Advisor on scheme definition/development, engineering and costs for this study of long term options for rail or bus -based rapid transit in the Blackwater Valley area on the borders of Hampshire, Surrey and Bracknell Forest. He carried out a detailed assessment of the physical feasibility of alternative networks of routes using railway, on -street light rail or busway technology, developed cost estimates and also advised on the forecasting of demand. DICK DA P R E - steer davies gleave Selected Projects Scheme Definition Ft Service Planning Caribbean National Forest 'El Yunque' Mass Transportation System Client Puerto Rico Highways 8 Transportation Authority Year/Location 2005-2006, Puerto Rico Position Held Specialist Advisor Steer Davies Gleave was appointed by the Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority (PRHTA) to review and evaluate the options for a mass transportation system to serve the Caribbean National Forest area in eastern Puerto Rico. The forest is a major natural resource and an important leisure destination, with capacity for large numbers of visitors but not their vehicles. He was responsible for a review of the available vehicle types with a view to their suitability for use in the severely constrained forest environment, and for identifying service options to meet the different needs of visitors arriving by car and by tour bus. Blackpool Tramway Upgrade Client Blackpool Borough Council Year/Location 2003-2005, Blackpool, UK Position Held Specialist Advisor Operational advice on options for future tram services associated with the proposed upgrade of the historic Blackpool Tramway (the only surviving 'first generation' urban tramway in the UK) to light rail standards to deliver, inter alia, full accessibility and improved journey times. Merseytram Client Merseytravel Year/Location 2001-2005, Merseyside, UK Position Held Specialist Advisor Responsible for the operational planning of the tram services for Lines 1 and 2 as part of the appraisal process and during discussions with Merseytravel's operating partners. This included run times, operating costs, interactions with other road users, full daily service planning and fleet utilisation. He also identified infrastructure requirements for future expansion of the system. On Line 3 he led the scheme identification process examining a number of alternative routes using different types of operation including on -street and railway alignments. Guildford Strategic Transport Assessment Client Surrey County Council Year/Location 2001, Surrey, UK Position Held Specialist Advisor Amid concern at increasing traffic as a result of strong economic growth and population increases, Surrey County Council commissioned this study of possible intervention in the form of high quality transit schemes using the road and rail networks. He provided technical advice to the project team on feasibility and scheme definition in the context of a very constrained urban form. Alcester Bus Services Client Developer Year/Location 2000, Warwickshire, UK Position Held Specialist Advisor Provided advice on the development of a bus strategy in association with a proposed residential development. ZRIVIETIM-1 sleet- davies gleaue Selected Projects Business Case Appraisal Evergreen LRT Ridership Study ft Essential Elements Review Client TransLink Year/Location 2006, Vancouver, Canada Position Held Specialist Advisor As well as providing advice on the planning of the scheme (see under Light Rail and Bus Transit Planning), he was responsible for run time forecasts and other operational inputs to the business case demand modelling. Merseyside Bus Quality Contract Scheme Client Merseytravel Year/Location 2005, Merseyside, UK Position Held Project Manager Merseytravel wished to explore the options for a bus Quality Contract Scheme (QCS), as one of the possible routes towards achieving the objectives of the Merseyside Bus Strategy. He was Project Manager of this study commissioned to assess what form the QCS should take if it were to be pursued, the contractual arrangements that would be required to support it, and the next steps required to take it forward. Particular issues included the treatment of cross -boundary services, transition arrangements (at the start and end of the scheme) and revenue risk. An outline appraisal of the QCS was also carried out, including an operational appraisal in two sample corridors, a simulation model of the network (Sambas) to measure bus patronage and economic effects, and a financial model to assess the effects on the public sector and the operators. Edinburgh Tram Line 1 Client Transport Initiatives Edinburgh (tie) Year/Location 2003-2005,Edinburgh, UK Position Held Specialist Advisor Throughout the STAG process he was responsible for the definition of service options for modelling, the preparation of operating cost estimates and the assessment of the operational implications of local route options. Glasgow Waterfront Transit Client Glasgow Harbour Ltd Year/Location 2001-2003, Glasgow, UK Position Held Project Manager Glasgow Harbour is a major element of the regeneration of the Clyde Waterfront areas to the west of Glasgow City Centre. A mixed use development of residential, office, retail and leisure facilities is proposed, of a scale and density commensurate with the provision of a high quality transit system. A key requirement was the provision of links with Glasgow's two main railway stations to maximise the public transport catchment. Following some earlier pre -feasibility work, he was Project Manager of a study for the site promoter to examine, among other things, the selection of an appropriate technology, route feasibility, business case assessment and an implementation strategy. Romsey-Eastleigh Reappraisal Client Hampshire County Council Year/Location 1999, Hampshire, UK Position Held Project Manager Project Manager of a study to update the previous forecasts of demand and revenue for a proposed new passenger service on the railway line through Chandlers Ford. DICK DA P R E = steer davies gleave ■ ■ Andrew Desautels Senior Consultant I have broad experience in transport policy, demand modeling, forecasting, and the design, administration, and evaluation of primary I{ market research across a variety of transport modes. I enjoy working in ! transport because it is so closely intertwined with every aspect of our lives, and I am particularly interested in the increasing use of market pricing in transport and in the use of technology to help solve many of today's transport problems. I bring top-notch analytical and communication skills and the ability to think critically and creatively to each of my projects. — Background Qualifications Andrew joined Steer Davies Gleave in January 2009, as part of the Master of Science in acquisition of CRA International's transportation planning group. At Transportation, CRA, Andrew played significant roles in projects in the aviation, highway, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2006 trucking, and passenger rail sectors, working on policy and planning projects for public sector clients and business strategy engagements for Bachelor of Science in Civil private sector clients. Prior to joining CRA, Andrew was a research Engineering, University of Arizona, 2004 assistant in the Civil Engineering Department at MIT, where he researched and modeled methods for improving intermodal transfer connectivity in Engineer -in -Training large public transport systems. Languages English Native Relevant Skills French Basic Transport Policy Andrew has experience assisting local and federal government agencies in the development of new policies and in the Years of Experience 2.5 consultancy evaluation of current and proposed policies. Andrew's policy experience includes work in both aviation and surface transportation. Demand Modeling Andrew has significant experience, both professional and educational, in the area of travel demand modeling. White most of his demand modeling experience is in the context of multi -modal regional network models, Andrew has also been involved in the development of new models used in less standard applications. Andrew's demand modeling experience includes extensive use of the TransCAD, and Cube/TP+ transportation planning software packages. Forecasting Andrew has experience developing forecasts of future traffic for both new and existing facilities. In many projects where ■ Andrew has developed forecasts, he has also been involved in the development of the proprietary forecasting toots used. Market Analysis Andrew has experience in the design, administration, and evaluation of primary market research (including surveys, focus ■ groups, and personal interviews). At CRA, Andrew had the opportunity to learn from a top survey expert, and he has been able to use what he Learned in recent market research projects. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ANDREw DESAUTELS _ steer davies gleave 1.1 1.2 1.3 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Firm Experience and Qualifications Introduction Steer Davies Gleave (SDG) may be a new name SDG Brings "Fresh and Compelling" Ideas for many at the City of Fort Collins, but with a to Ann Arbor's Transit Master Plan local staff with two decades of transit system planning in the North Front Range, we offer a County's current transit situation was fresh new approach to the development a regional , governance structure for the Fort Collins area. technical knowledge, combined with their With more than 300 employees and 16 offices enthusiasm and commitment to producing understooda plan that can be easily by the around the world, we offer a contemporary entire approach to working in partnership with our - clients to develop and deliver Integrated Transit Michael Ford, CEO Solutions. Our US transit planning practice is Ann Arbor based in Denver, and our corporate headquarters are in London. The company was established in 1978, and we now have offices in Vancouver, Boston, Paris, Madrid, Rome, San Juan, Bogota, Santiago, Mexico City, Sao Paulo, and Abu Dhabi. Our approach to developing Integrated Transit Solutions has already been deployed on a wide range of North American projects. These are covered in more detail in this document, but in summary they include: Sacramento Regional Transit Master Plan. Ann Arbor Regional Transit Master Plan. 1 Long Term Public Transportation Strategy, City of Edmonton, Alberta. Edmonton LRT Expansion Plan and Quality Bus Network. 1 Portland High Capacity Transit project (long term plan for BRT, streetcar, LRT and commuter rail), Portland Metro, Oregon. Strategic Rapid Transit Network Review, TransLink, Vancouver, British Columbia. In addition, our proposed Project Manager, Tim Baldwin, has been involved in many significant regional transit planning projects in Colorado and around the country, including: Leading the North Front Range Transportation Alternatives Feasibility Study, which was the first joint transit planning effort of the Fort Collins -Greeley -Denver region. 1 Leading alternatives analyses and environmental studies for a number of RTD FasTracks corridors and projects. 1 Working with the City of Colorado Springs and Mountain Metro on its downtown transit feasibility study and streetcar feasibility study. steer cWvi@s *aw t Projects Summary Project Client Year/Location Role Demand Management San Francisco 2007-2009, San Transport Policy Analysis International Airport Francisco, CA, Lead Analyst USA CVISN Benefit -Cost Analysis Federal Motor Carrier 2007-2008, USA Lead Analyst Safety Administration Update of Delay Reduction San Francisco San Fran Study International Airport Francisco, CA, Analyst USA Demand Modeling Comprehensive Transportation Plan City of Atlanta 2008, Atlanta, GA, USA Lead Analyst On -time Performance Study Amtrak 2007-2008, USA Analyst Comprehensive Cherokee County 2007, Atlanta, Lead Analyst Transportation Plan GA, USA Comprehensive Cobb County 2007, Atlanta, Lead Analyst Transportation Plan GA, USA Southern Regional Atlanta Regional 2006-2007, Lead Analyst Accessibility Study Commission Atlanta, GA, USA Forecasting Traffic Et Revenue Study Chesapeake Expressway 2008-2009, Chesapeake, VA, Lead Analyst USA 2007-2008, Atlanta -Chattanooga High- Georgia Department Atlanta, Analyst Speed Rail Study of Transportation GA/Chattanooga, TN, USA Asset Monetization Study New Jersey Department of 2007, New Jersey, Analyst Treasury USA Sales Forecast/Evaluation of Major Aerospace 2006-2007, USA Analyst Business Plan Manufacturer Market Analysis Logan Airport Departing Air Massachusetts Port 2007, Boston, MA, Lead Analyst Y o rre er C... " A�.fh. rir., rAdecc rr i icn Market Assessment Major Aerospace 2007, USA Lead Analyst Manufacturer ANDREw DESAUTELS = steer davies gleave Selected Projects Transport Policy a Demand Management Analysis Client San Francisco International Airport Year/Location 2007-2009, San Francisco, CA, USA Position Held Lead Analyst As part of the CRA team that modeled the effectiveness of various demand management measures on delay at the San Francisco International Airport, Andrew's responsibilities included the development of new models and modification of existing models used to perform as -needed analyses of various demand ' management strategies and the production of reports and presentations used in communicating results of analyses to the client. ■ CVISN Benefit -Cost Analysis Client Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Year/Location 2007-2008, USA (nationwide) Position Held Lead Analyst As part of a benefit -cost analysis of nationwide Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) deployment for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Andrew developed an original Excel/VBA-based tool to estimate the financial impacts of the implementation of CVISN based on a number of user inputs. In addition, Andrew authored the documentation for the Excel -based tool, led S research to increase the project team's familiarity with specific CVISN systems, and played a significant role in writing CRA's portion of the final report. eClient Update of Delay Reduction Study San Francisco International Airport Year/Location 2006, San Francisco, CA, USA . Position Held Analyst CRA updated a prior study of possible methods for reducing weather -related delays and cancellations at the San Francisco International Airport. Andrew was responsible for using existing models to perform the analysis necessary to complete ■ the update. Demand Modeling Comprehensive Transportation Plans Client City of Atlanta, Cherokee County, Cobb County Year/Location 2007-2008, Atlanta, GA, USA Position Held Lead Analyst In a number of CTP projects in the Atlanta area, Andrew has been responsible for using Cube/TP+ and TransCAD to model highway and transit network improvements. He was also responsible for the processing of model results, the computation and documentation of region -wide, study area, and project -specific performance measures for both highway and transit projects, and for performing as -needed analysis of model outputs as requested by clients. On -time Performance Study . Client Office of the Inspector General, US Department of Transportation Year/Location 2007-2008, USA (nationwide) S Position Held Analyst As a member of the team working on CRA's recent study that estimated the lost revenues to Amtrak as a result of the poor on -time performance of Amtrak, Andrew assisted in performing econometric analysis. ' ANDREw DESAUTELS steer_davies gleave Selected Projects Demand Modeling Southern Regional Accessibility Study Client Atlanta Regional Commission Year/Location 2006-2007, Atlanta, GA, USA Position Held Lead Analyst In a study for the Atlanta Regional Commission of a six -county sub -area in the Atlanta metropolitan region, Andrew contributed to the modeling of the impacts of future roadway and transit improvements on the subarea's transportation network. He was responsible for using Cube to model highway and transit network improvements, and for developing a system to merge various categories of improvements (system management, widening, new facilities, transit). Additional responsibilities included the processing of model results, which entailed modifying and creating TP+ scripts, a small amount of SAS programming, and extensive use of TransCAD. Forecasting Traffic Et Revenue Study Client Chesapeake Expressway Year/Location 2008-2009, Chesapeake, VA, USA Position Held Lead Analyst Andrew is primarily responsible for the research and model development for this project, which will help the Chesapeake Expressway determine its future toll rate schedule. In this role, Andrew conducted a thorough analysis of travel patterns on the Chesapeake Expressway and in the Hampton Roads region and developed the diversion model that is being used to analyze future traffic levels at varying toll Levels. He also played an important role in the creation of project deliverables, which include a written final report and a presentation to the client. Atlanta -Chattanooga High -Speed Rail Study Client Georgia Department of Transportation Year/Location 2007-2008,Atlanta, GA/Chattanooga, TN, USA Position Held Analyst As part of the CRA team developing a forecasting model for a proposed high-speed ground transportation service between Atlanta and Chattanooga, Andrew played a key role in the development of the air passenger choice model used to estimate the number of passengers diverted from air carriers to the proposed high-speed service. Asset Monetization Study Client New Jersey Department of Treasury Year/Location 2007, New Jersey, USA Position Held Analyst As a member of the SDG/CRA team that developed traffic and revenue forecasts for multiple New Jersey toll roads, Andrew was responsible for leading the effort to create an updated statewide highway network model from three smaller (and in some cases outdated) regional models. This involved developing a method for combining and updating the existing network models, and coordinating with colleagues to perform these operations, which involved extensive use of modeling software. Sales Forecast/Evaluation of Business Plan Client Major US Aerospace Manufacturer (confidential) Year/Location 2006-2007, USA Position Held Analyst As a member of the CRA team working for a major US aerospace manufacturer, Andrew assisted in the development of a sales forecast for a new aircraft model being brought to market by the client. Once the forecast was developed, Andrew was a key member of the team that used the CRA forecast as a framework to evaluate the client's business plan for the new aircraft. ANDREw DESAUTELS = steer davlesgleave ■ ■ Saundra Dowling, AICP S Planning Consultant • YEARS OF EXPERIENCE • 12 + years ■ EDUCATION ' • BA, Journalism, University of Northern Colorado • Masters in Urban and Regional . Planning, University of Colorado at Denver EXPERTISE • NEPA Compliance/Documentation • Public Involvement & Outreach • Project Management PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS • American Planning Association • Women's Transportation Seminar of Colorado • Board Member, Lafayette Historic Preservation Board • Board Member, Boulder County Historic Preservation Advisory Board RELATIVE EXPERIENCE & SELECTED PROJECTS • North Metro Corridor EIS & BE RTD-FasTracks Transit Program • Gold Line Corridor EIS & BE RTD-FasTracks Transit Program • Northwest Rail Corridor EE & BE RTD-FasTracks Transit Program • Colfax Streetcar Feasibility Study - City and County of Denver • Colorado Springs Streetcar Feasibility Study - City of Colorado Springs • Colorado Springs Downtown Transportation Station EA - City of Colorado Springs • Longmont Diagonal Rail EE - City of Longmont • W. I I th Street Bridge Replacement CE - City of Pueblo/CDOT • Long Range Transportation Plan, Intermountain Region - National Park Service Saundra Dowling, AICP, is a certified planner with expertise in transportation and environmental planning. She has experience with a variety of public projects requiring NEPA compliance and documentation. Clients include the Regional Transportation District, Federal Transit Administration, Colorado Department of Transportation, National Park Service, City of Colorado Springs, and the Montana Department of Transportation. She most recently has participated in EIS and EA documents required for commuter rail and streetcar planning projects. Additionally, for state departments of transportation, she has linked the planning and environmental processes for mobility studies, corridor studies, major investment studies, multimodal transportation studies, and environmental and land -use studies. Saundra also has a communications background, which has been instrumental in researching, documenting and editing information required by her planning assignments. TRANSPORTATION PROJECT EXPERIENCE: • North Metro Corridor Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Basic Engineering - RTD-FasTracks Program. Deputy Project Manager. As part of RTD's voter -approved $4.7 billion FasTracks program to expand rail and bus service throughout the RTD service area over the next 12 years, the North Metro Corridor is a proposed 18-mile rail transit corridor that is anticipated to run from Denver Union Station to the vicinity of 162nd Avenue, passing through the cities of Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and unincorporated Adams County. As an employee at URS Corporation, Saundra was deputy project manager of the EIS for this transit project to ensure North Metro would be in compliance with NEPA stipulations. This complex EIS required intensive public involvement strategies with citizen and policy advisory committees to determine commuter rail alignments, vehicle technology, and multiple station options. As deputy PM, Saundra was responsible for alternatives analysis - particularly for station options - editing project reports, co -managing the EIS, coordinating with FTA, and participating in public meetings. • Colfax Streetcar Feasibility Study - City and County of Denver. Project Planner. As an employee of URS Corporation, Saundra was one of the project planners for this streetcar feasibility study. She provided technical editing and quality assurance. • Gold Line Corridor Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - RTD-FasTracks Program. Alternatives Analysis Task Lead. The Gold Line commuter rail corridor Saundra Dowling, AICP - Page 1 Saundra Dowling, AiCP Planning Consultant is another part of RTD's voter -approved $4.7 billion FasTracks program. As an employee of URS Corporation, Saundra was part of the Alternatives Analysis team with CH2M Hill. She was URS' task lead, which required participation in all levels of evaluation for the various commuter rail and streetcar alignments and their station options. Station options were developed in Denver at the 381h Avenue and Fox Street area, Pecos Street near 1-76 in Adams County, several locations in Arvada, including Old Towne, and the last station site at Ward Road in Wheat Ridge. • Northwest Rail Corridor Environmental Evaluation (EE) - RTD-FasTracks Program. Alternatives Analysis and Technical Editing. The Northwest Rail commuter rail corridor is another part of RTD's voter - approved $4.7 billion FasTracks program and was conducted in conjunction with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as the lead federal agency. As an employee of URS Corporation, Saundra was part of the Alternatives Analysis and technical editing team to perform quality assurance duties. This EE used U.S. Army Corps of Engineers guidelines. • Colorado Springs Streetcar Feasibility Study - City of Colorado Springs. Primary Project Planner. As an employee of URS Corporation, Saundra was the primary project planner for the Feasibility Study exploring the potential implementation of a new streetcar system in Colorado Springs. The team considered potential alignments, including system build -out. The study analyzed and determined which alignments would have the best potential regarding economic development, ridership, and funding options. The study concluded that a "starter system" in the urban core area is immediately feasible and would serve as a catalyst for continuing redevelopment of downtown. Several extensions to the north were proposed in phased development, with additional lines to the west, south, and east also possible over the long term. • Colorado Springs Downtown Transportation Station EA - City of Colorado Springs. Project Manager. As an employee of URS Corporation, Saundra was the project manager for the DTS EA. This project identified a multimodal transportation station site and concept plan to accommodate the City's Mountain Metropolitan Transit service and the Front Range Express (FREX) service operating between Colorado Springs and Denver. The station location will also provide connections for a future rapid transit system and intercity passenger rail service. It is a key intermodal connection for the downtown shuttle, future streetcar service, bike and pedestrian connections, and private transportation service providers. The EA, completed and approved by FTA with a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) within 180 days, provided the fast track analysis required to make the project eligible for economic stimulus funds made available under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. • Longmont Diagonal Rail Environmental Evaluation - City of Longmont. Deputy Project Manager. As an employee of URS Corporation, Saundra helped conduct an environmental analysis of the 13- mile Longmont rail corridor, which included development and analysis of at least six potential train station sites. This corridor is between Boulder and Longmont and is the final leg of the Northwest Rail Corridor project for the RTD-FasTracks Program. At the time of this analysis in 2005, Saundra guided an interdisciplinary team to conduct the environmental evaluation (with the potential to be an EA) using FTA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers guidelines and standards. • W. 11 fh Street Bridge Replacement Categorical Exclusion - City of Pueblo/CDOT. Project Planner. As an employee of URS Corporation, Saundra was one of the project planners responsible for the planning and environmental linkage in the CE for this bridge project. She wrote the socioeconomic and parks and open space sections and also provided technical edits. • Long Range Transportation Plan, Intermountain Region - National Park Service. Deputy Project Manager. As an employee of URS Corporation, Saundra led the development of the baseline conditions portion for the pilot multimodal Long Range Transportation Plan under development for the eight states and 91 parks within the NPS Intermountain Region Saundra Dowling, AICP - Page 2 a • Ian Druce Associate As an experienced project manager, I have a proven track record in developing and delivering major transportation projects and strategies. I have managed multi -disciplinary teams for rail, light transit, highway, bus - rapid transit and port projects. I have an ability to effectively distil key issues from complex technical drawings and reports. Through my involvement in infrastructure projects in both Europe and North America I have gained extensive experience in the development and delivery of stakeholder and public consultation. Relevant Skills Education Project & Program Management From local plans to major infrastructure Bachelor of Commerce a projects, effective project management is essential to driving projects Business Administration forward. With experience across all transport modes Ian brings a unique range (Transportation Ft Logistics P P � g q g Management), university of skills - integrating strategic thinking and structured processes with technical of British Columbia, 1997 expertise and industry understanding. Professional Qualifications Member, Association for Project Management (MAPM) Languages English Fluent . French Advanced Spanish Intermediate i Years of Experience 4 Client side 8 Consultancy Publications Cross River Tram: Linking key development, transportation and . regeneration sites through the historical heart of London - Rail -Volution Conference, Miami, November 2007 Testing the public's Willingness -to -Pay for transit investment as part of the development of Sacramento's Transit . Master Plan- Rail -Volution Conference, San Francisco, � J October2008 Stakeholder Engagement & Management Building support and consensus from stakeholders and the public are critical to the success of any project, no matter how big or small. Ian has developed and implemented consultation processes for public and private sector clients in both Europe and North America and has specialist skills in: • facilitating public meetings and small group workshops; • creating information brochures, Q&A documents and leaflets; and developing feedback questionnaires and online surveys. Project Development Et Evaluation As the gap between available funding and infrastructure requirements continues to grow, the need to demonstrate that a project provides 'value for money' is becoming increasingly important. Ian's ability to listen to clients and enhance their ideas means he can assess the practicalities and build up the case for financial support. Ian frequently provides his expertise in business case and project appraisal as part of 'building the case' for his clients' projects. Transportation Strategy Development With growing global concerns about rising energy prices, the onset of 'peak oil' and the continued pressure on public financing, more and more agencies are focusing on long-term transportation and land -use planning. Ian has led the development of long- range plans in a growing number of cities focusing on providing plans that are both visionary yet deliverable. IAN DRUCE sheer davies gleam CV 1 or 7 Projects Summary Project Client Project Management UBC Line Rapid Transit TransLink Study Edmonton Light Rail City of Edmonton Expansion Program Cross River Tram Transport for London (TfL) Wixams / Elstow Station JJ Gallagher East London Transit Transport for London (TfL) Fastrack Kent Thameside / Kent CC London Underground Clear Channel UK Stakeholder Engagement & Cross River Tram Management Merseytram Line 2 Project Development & Assessment Golden Ears Bridge Year/Location Role 2009-ongoing, Vancouver, BC 2008-ongoing, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada 2005-2007, London, UK 2005-2006, Elstow Village, Bedfordshire, UK 2004-2006, London, UK 2005, Kent, UK 2005, London, UK Transport for 2005-2006, London (TfL) London, UK Merseytravel 2004-2005, Liverpool, UK TransLink/Greater 2002-2003, Vancouver Vancouver, BC Transport Authority Project Manager Project Manager Commission Manager Project Manager Project Manager Deputy Project Manager Bid Director Stakeholder Manager Stakeholder Engagement Advisor Stakeholder Relations & Consultation Manager Portland MAX -Light Rail City of Portland 2008-ongoing, Portland, Oregon, Project Manager Station Area Planning USA Edmonton Long -Term 2007-ongoing, Fare & Ticketing Public Transportation Cit of Edmonton Edmonton, Advisor Plan Alberta, Canada Greenwich Waterfront Transport for 2004-2006, Business Case & Transit London (TfL) London, UK Appraisal Manager East-West Rail 2004-2005, Milton Business Case East-West Rail Consortium Keynes, UK Development Manager Transportation Rapid Transit Strategic Strategy TransLink 2009-ongoing Project Manager Network Review Development Portland High Capacity Metro 2008-2009, Portland, Oregon, Project Manager Transit USA Waterfront Hub Station TransLink 2008-ongoing Project Manager Concept Plan Vancouver, Canada Sacramento Regional Sacramento Regional Transit 2007-ongoing, Project Manager Transit Master Plan District Sacramento, USA IAN DRUCE = steer davies glec- e CV20F7 Selected Projects Project Management UBC Line Rapid Transit Study - Client South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority (TransLink) Year/Location 2009-ongoing, Vancouver, BC, Canada . Position Held Project Manager A rapid transit line connecting Broadway -Commercial Drive Station to the Central Broadway business district and to the University of British Columbia (UBC), has been in plans dating back 20 years or more. This is a corridor that is served today by TransLink's a highly successful 'B'-Line express bus service, but this line is reaching its capacity. Because the corridor traverses a part of Vancouver that services major medical complexes, UBC and the vibrant Central Broadway area this is an important corridor for improvement. In this assignment, the Steer Davies Gleave team led by Ian has been examining a broad range of transit options including bus rapid transit (BRT), surface - running modern light rail (LRT), as well as a westward extension of the existing SkyTrain system. The study is covering alignment, technology and phasing alternatives and will conclude with the selection of a single preferred option early in 2010. �. Edmonton Light Rail Expansion Program Client City of Edmonton e• Year/Location 2008-ongoing, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Position Held Project Manager The City of Edmonton is currently developing an ambitious five -line light rail transit (LRT) expansion plan to build on its existing system which opened in the late 1970s. The . plan includes concurrent planning and development of extensions and new routes in the south, the northeast, the southeast, the north and the west. Steer Davies Gleave, with Ian as the project manager, has been retained by the City of Edmonton to provide an overall coordination role and to ensure that the projects are integrated together. This includes developing a network -wide specification (to ensure that the system is interoperable), network -wide operations planning (to ensure that it can be operated on a day-to-day basis), LRT and urban design guides (to provide direction to the engineers and designers on the specification and 'look and feel' of the system) as well as developing multiple account business case assessment of each route and the overall network to help the City in making the case for the expansion plan and to help decision - makers in prioritizing projects. Cross River Tram Client Transport for London (TfL) Year/Location 2005-2007, London, UK IN Held Commission Manager Cross Cross River Tram is an LRT scheme that was being developed by TfL to operate between Camden Town and Kings Cross in the north, through central London to Waterloo Station with southern branches serving Brixton and Peckham. A consortium of Steer Davies Gleave, Mott Macdonald, TTK, Gillespies and Ardent was retained by TfL to progress the scheme to a Transport and Works Act order application. Ian was the Commission S Manager for the project and, together with the project director, was responsible for managing an annual project budget in excess of $6 million, ten project workstreams including over 100 consultants and staff. si ■ IAN DRUCE = Aw daAes gleaw CV3oF7 Selected Projects Project Management Wixams/Elstow Station Client JJ Gallagher Year/Location 2005-2006, Bedfordshire, UK Position Held Project Manager JJ Gallagher is planning a large new housing development called the Wixams (south of Bedford). As part of the development of the Wixams, a new four -platform rail station has been proposed that will enable local residents to travel directly to Luton, Bedford and London. As the project manager, Ian was responsible for managing a team of consultants undertaking a series of technical studies to enable the project to pass through Network Rail's GRIP gateway review processes. East London Transit Client Transport for London (TfL) Year/Location 2004-2006, London, UK Position Held Project Manager East London Transit is a planned bus transit network in London's Thames Gateway region. The network is being developed in multiple phases with routes connecting Ilford to Dagenham Dock (Phase 1), Barking to the Thames Gateway Bridge (Phase 2) and Dagenham Dock to Rainham (Phase 3). Leading a multi -disciplinary team, Ian managed the development and approval of Phases 1 and 2 of the network through TfL's complex approvals process. London Underground Commercial Advertising Tender Client Clear Channel UK (CCUK) Year/Location 2005, London, UK Position Held Bid Director CCUK is one of the UK's market leaders in outdoor advertising, providing more than 60,000 outdoor advertising opportunities across its three brands: Clear Channel Billboards, Adshel and Taxi Media. As part of its ongoing business development and growth strategy, CCUK bid to take over managing the entire Landon Underground, Docklands Light Railway and Victoria Coach Station advertising estate - an estate with over 135,000 sites in London. Ian was seconded to CCUK to undertake the role of Bid Director. This role included developing a bid programme, managing CCUK staff and subcontractors and coordinating the preparation of the tender documents over an eleven -week period. Stakeholder Engagement Et Management Merseytram Line 2 Client Merseytravel Year/Location 2004-2005, Liverpool, UK Position Held Stakeholder Engagement Advisor Merseytram is a planned three -line tram network planned for the greater Liverpool region. As part of the development of Line 2 of the network, Ian provided expert advice on stakeholder engagement and consultation. This included advice on website design and content as well as methods and techniques for engaging with the local community. IAN DRUCE steel' da/les 9leave CV4OF7 a Selected Projects a Stakeholder Engagement a Management IN Golden Ears Bridge i Client TransLink/Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Year/Location 2002-2003,Vancouver, Canada . Position Held Stakeholder Relations Et Consultation Manager The Golden Ears Bridge is a new crossing of the Fraser River planned for the Greater S Vancouver area. It will link Pitt Meadows and Maple Ridge to the north of the river with Surrey and Langley to the south provided much needed congestion relief to the Albion - Ferry. Working for Vancouver -based Context Research, Ian provided public and stakeholder consultation services to Translink, advised on techniques for engaging with the community and developed the initial project website. Project Development 8 Assessment Rapid Transit Strategic Network Review Client South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority (TransLink) Year/Location 2009-ongoing, Vancouver, BC, Canada ■ Position Held Project Manager TransLink has spent a great deal of time and effort planning for significant rapid transit . up to 2020 with a number of rail and bus rapid transit corridors now either in the planning or design stages. The Steer Davies Cleave team led by Ian has been retained to w undertake the next stage of network planning through the Strategic Network Review to identify what system expansion will be required beyond 2020 to 2040 and to help S TransLink plan the sequencing and phasing of those projects. This process includes the development of the modelling and evaluation tools - including a multiple account t' evaluation process (see article on page 4)- as well as a number of related deliverables including an assessment of the City of Vancouver's Streetcar Project. Portland MAX LRT Station Area Study Client City of Portland Year/Location 2008-2009, Portland, OR, USA Position Held Project Manager Tri-Met and the City of Portland have recently opened the 'Green -Line' - the fourth line in Portland's MAX-LRT system. As the lead planning authority, the City of Portland retained Steer Davies Gleave to provide advice on how to maximize ridership and development opportunities at two of the stations on the extension. The recommendations developed included short, medium and longer -term options including specific actions for the City and included transit network operations, local land -use and zoning issues as well as physical infrastructure improvements around the station areas. As project manager, Ian was responsible for providing strategic oversight and guidance to the project as well as providing expert advice on restructuring transit services to increase the ridership potential of the stations. • Edmonton Long -Range Transportation Plan Client City of Edmonton Year/Location 2007-2008, Edmonton, AB, Canada rSteer Position Held Fare f& Ticketing Advisor Davies Gleave provided support to the City of Edmonton in developing an integrated land -use and transportation policy framework around its existing and proposed light rail stations and its high -frequency bus transit corridors. Ian provided advice to the City on how different fare levels and ticketing options can influence ridership and its ability to meet its strategic vision and objectives for transit in the City. IANDRUCE = Amdaviesgleave CV50F7 Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Assisting in the development of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) system plan in the late 1980s and early 1990s, which culminated in the successful system opening in 1996 and subsequent expansions. 1.4 Our approach to this project is strategically different from those you will see from other firms. We focus on the needs of the rider and develop transit systems and governance structures around the unique needs of the communities where we work. Additional details are provided in the approach and work plan. Steer Davies Gleave 1.5 Founded in 1978, Steer Davies Gleave has grown to become one of the world's leading independent transportation consulting firms. SDG is a firm focused on the planning and development of public transit projects. We do not "experiment" in public transit like many multi -purpose planning and design firms. Transit is the core of SDG's business, and transit is the passion of our employees. 1.6 z Our approach to transit projects is guided by the principle of "putting the passenger first." People are the link between transit facilities and communities, where high quality design considers the "whole trip" (mobility, information, ticketing, safety, convenience, ease of access, quality of service) that leads to transit, walking, and cycling being the easiest way for people to travel. Consequently, transit becomes a lifestyle choice, and the multiple benefits gained include health, sustainability, and efficient transit operation, among others. Our team has extensive experience conducting transit feasibility studies, planning, engineering/design, operations analysis, organizational analysis, and stakeholder management in communities around the world. Further details about us can be found on our website at www.na.steerdaviespleave.com. ■ = steer davies *mte ■ ■ Selected Projects Project Development & Assessment Greenwich Waterfront Transit Client Transport for London (TfL) Year/Location 2004-2006, London, UK Position Held Business Case 3 Appraisal Manager Greenwich Waterfront Transit is a bus transit system being developed in southeast London to serve key regeneration areas between Greenwich and Abbey Wood. Ian provided business case and scheme development consultancy services to TfL over a two year period. During this time, the first phase of the system was approved for implementation and the next phases are progressing quickly through TfUs project development life cycle. Transportation Strategy Development Sacramento Regional Transit - Transit Masterplan Client Sacramento Regional Transit District Year/Location 2007-2009, Sacramento, California, USA Position Held Project Manager Steer Davies Gleave was appointed by Sacramento's Regional Transit agency to develop a 35-year Transit Masterplan (TMP). The TMP examined all public transportation modes including existing paratransit, neighbourhood shuttle services, the bus network and light rail system; reviewed current plans for LRT extensions, BRT and Streetcar schemes; and developed a revised plan for Sacramento. With a major focus on public outreach and inputs from technical, mobility, and financial advisory committees, the commission provided an opportunity to undertake a comprehensive review to ensure that the TMP is consistent with wider regional initiatives including the 50-year land -use Blueprint that was developed to encourage higher -density, mixed -use development in a region anticipating an additional 1 million inhabitants, 400,000 new households and 450,000 new jobs over the next 20-30 years. As project manager, Ian was responsible for integrating all of the project development work across eleven workstreams as well as leading on the development of the integrated transit scenarios, an international peer review and best practices study and was also providing strategic advice on the extensive public outreach processes being led by the client. Portland High Capacity Transit Client METRO Year/Location 2008-2009, Portland, Oregon, USA Position Held Project Manager METRO, the land -use planning body for the City of Portland, retained a team, including Steer Davies Gleave, to develop a long-range strategy to support its 2040 growth plan. The plan identified and assessed a range of 'High Capacity Transit' corridors and included an examination of the long-term impacts that these corridors will have on local land use, projected transit demand and the overall impact on vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In addition to providing advice on the selection of routes and corridors, Ian led on the development of an assessment and evaluation process that ultimately led to the adoption and prioritization of the HCT options. IAN DRUCE steer davies gleave CV60F7 Juliet Edmondson Senior Consultant s n Since joining Steer Davies Gleave 1 have had the opportunity to broaden my skills and gain experience managing large and complex projects. I particularly enjoy problem solving and applying my skills to find solutions which suit the local circumstances, the client and stakeholders. I have found my background in public transport to be an asset and I am pleased to apply my knowledge and experience to development and public transport projects. I am a capable project manager with proven communication and analytical skills. Above all, I achieve results and I am unfailingly cheerful. Qualifications Background MSc Transport, Imperial College 2005 Before joining Steer Davies Gleave, Juliet worked for Transport for London as a Senior Transport Planner. She delivered demand and financial BA Hons Geography, oxford forecasts for TfL's five-year business plan, the Comprehensive Spending University, 2002 Review 2007 and the Transport 2025 strategic study. She also worked with Member of the Institute of Surface public transport modes to develop strategic plans for the revision Highways Et Transportation of the Mayor's Transport Strategy and co-ordinated surface transport Languages liaison with London Rail. Prior to this, Juliet gained experience English Native throughout TfL as a graduate transport planner. This included working on French Basic bus service planning, bus priority, multi -modal strategies, and on multi - stakeholder projects such as Exhibition Road. Spanish Basic Years of Experience Relevant Skills 4 Client side a Consultancy Development Planning, Masterplanning and Travel Planning Juliet has led and participated in multi -disciplined teams to provide transport planning for many different types of development at different stages of the planning process. Juliet applies her common sense, education and experience to develop plans that work and pays due attention to the potential behaviour of users and the context of the site. She also has a good knowledge of the planning system and the skills to employ best practice methods accurately and effectively. Bus Network Planning Juliet gained experience and understanding of planning bus services whilst at Transport for London. She has strengthened these skills at Steer Davies Gleave assessing and planning local networks for redevelopment projects. Juliet has recently worked on bus network proposals for Leeds, UK and Washtenaw County, Michigan. Policy Et Strategy In her previous role at Transport for London Juliet gained experience of developing strategic plans for surface public transport modes. She also carried out research projects to inform policy decisions on different aspects of the bus network, including fares, ticketing, fraud, the fleet, performance and operations. Juliet recently managed a joint project with KPMG to undertake a strategic review of London Bus Service Limited for The Mayor and Transport for London. Public consultation and Stakeholder Engagement Juliet has led and supported public consultation programmes for transport and development projects and is effective at communicating with stakeholders and helping them to understand the proposals. She recently R led a review of London Buses' consultation process and engaged in discussions with numerous stakeholders to inform the strategic review. Project Management Juliet is an effective project manager who demonstrates a clear understanding of the importance of listening to and understanding the objectives of clients. She is able to communicate this s to her team in order to deliver high -quality results to clients. a JULIET EDMONDSON = steerdavjes gleave Selected Projects Project Client Year/Location Role Development Cavendish Hotel SJS Properties 2008-2011, project Manager Planning, London, UK Masterplanning & Arundel Great 2008-2010, Project Management Court Land Securities London, UK Project Manager London Cycle Land Securities 2010, Project Manager Hire Scheme London, UK Olympic Route Land Securities 2010, Project Manager Network Study London, UK 50 Eastbourne Westlink Global 2010, Senior Consultant Terrace Investments Limited London, UK 50 Ludgate Hill Land Securities 2010' London, UK Project Manager Ashdown House Land Securities 2010' London, UK Project Manager The Ritz - SJS Property 2010, Project Manager Transport Issues Management London, UK Grainger Road Inner London Group 2009-2010, Essex, UK Project Manager Centre Point Targetfollow Group 2009, Senior Consultant London, UK Wellington House Land Securities 2008-2009, Project Manager London, UK 2007-2009 Selborne House Land Securities London, UK Project Manager Upper Thames Thames Water and 2008-2009, Project Manager Reservoir Cascade Consulting Oxfordshire, UK 45-53 Putney Threadneedle High Street and Investments and 2008-2009, project Manager 329-339 Putney Princes Securities London, UK Bridge Road Limited 268-276 Vauxhall Grosvenor Securities 2008-2009, Project Manager Bridge Road Limited London, UK Battersea Power RED (Power Station) 2009, London, UK Senior Consultant Station Limited Emirates Stadium Arsenal Football Club 2008, London, UK Senior Consultant Monitoring 201 Bishopsgate / 201 Bishopsgate 2008, London, UK Project Manager Broadgate Limited / British Land Wellington Wellington Hospital 2007-2008, Project Manager Hospital London, UK Victoria Transport Transport for London 2007-2008, Senior Consultant Interchange fi Land Securities London, UK Broadgate British Land 2007-2008, London, UK Project Manager Riverside South Canary Wharf Ltd. 2007, London, UK Senior Consultant Heron Quays Canary Wharf Ltd. 2007, London, UK Senior Consultant West JULIET EDMONDSON = steer davies gleave ■ Selected Projects ■ Public Transport Transit Master Ann Arbor Planning, Plan for Transportation 2010-2011, Project Manager Stakeholder Washtenaw Authority Michigan, USA Engagement and County, MI Policy & Strategy London Buses Development Strategic Review Transport for London 2009, London, UK Project Manager Transport for Leeds, Bus Networks and Metro 2009, Leeds, UK Project Manager Interchange Black Country 2010, Birmingham Access Business Centro and Dudley, UK Project Manager Cases # Metrolink Extensions GMPTE 2010, Manchester, Senior Consultant Business Cases UK Park and Ride Merseytravel 2009, Liverpool, Senior Consultant Feasibility Study UK ■ Evergreen 3 Chiltern Railways 0x0fordshire, UK Senior Consultant # High Speed Rail Northern Way 2009, North of Senior Consultant Study England, UK ■ Sleaford Parking North Kesteven 2009, Lincolnshire, Senior Consultant Study District Council UK Canary Wharf Bus Canary Wharf Group 2007, London, UK Senior Consultant Study Limited BroadgStation St Bus Station Study British Land 2007, London, UK Senior Consultant ■ r S t ■ ■ D JULIET EDMONDSON _steer es gleave Selected Projects Bus Planning, Transport Planning, Stakeholder Engagement and Policy lY Strategy Development Transit Master Plan for Washtenaw County Client Ann Arbor Transportation Authority Year/Location 2010-2011, Michigan, USA Position Held Project Manager Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (TheRide) adopted a new mission in 2009 to expand their service area from the urbanised areas of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti to the whole of Washtenaw County. To achieve this aim, TheRide commissioned Steer Davies Gleave to develop a Transit Master Plan for the County. We have so far undertaken an audit of the current transit network and an assessment of current and future needs, developed a vision for the County, and prepared and evaluated three alternative plans. These tasks have been informed by an extensive program of public outreach and stakeholder engagement. Juliet is currently managing the project, leading the outreach program and contributing technical expertise to each of the tasks. London Buses Review Client Transport for London Year/Location 2009, London, UK Position Held Project Manager In his document "Way to Go!" the Mayor set out the case for a strategic review of the provision of London bus services in order to try to "improve the efficiency of buses, without reducing valuable services." Steer Davies Cleave teamed with KPMG to deliver this review and led an assessment of the planning and stakeholder engagement processes, the appraisal and decision making processes and a number of other aspects of London Bus Service Limited's operation and planning. Juliet managed Steer Davies Gleave's review and led the assessment of the stakeholder engagement process. Transport for Leeds: Bus Networks and Interchanges Client West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, Metro Year/Location 2009, Leeds, UK Position Held Senior Consultant Metro is considering the future of the whole transport network in Leeds and has commissioned Steer Davies Gleave to assess a number of aspects of the system and provide options for future development. Juliet is using her bus network planning skills to analyse the existing network and develop robust proposals for change. Regular and Event Park and Ride (Feasibility Study) Client Merseytravel Year/Location 2009, Liverpool, UK Position Held Senior Consultant Merseytravel instructed Steer Davies Gleave to assess the possibilities for developing a Park and Ride service and facility serving central Liverpool from close to junction five of the M57. The team developed strategic business cases for a number of regular Park and Ride service options as well as a football Park and Ride serving both Liverpool Football Club and Everton games. Juliet prepared estimates of the bus service capacity requirements, the service designs and the associated costs to support the business cases. She also provided advice on the operations of the different types of service. Black Country Access Transit Schemes Client Centro, West Midlands Integrated Transport Authority Year/Location 2010, West Midlands, UK Position Held Project Manager Steer Davies Gleave was commissioned by Centro as their primary transport planning advisors to identify of the best solutions within public transport corridors across the West Midlands. Juliet is currently working with the team to develop and assess options for extensions to the initial proposals within the Black Country. At present she is leading a study to develop Tram -Train and Busway proposals to support further sustainable land use developments and she is contributing transit planning and business case development skills to the team. JULIET EDMONDSON = steer davies gleave a Robert P. Jones, AICP TRANSPORTATION Resume CONSULTANTS, INC. Experience Transportation Planner — LSC Transportation Consultants (2008 - present) ► Teaching Assistant — University of Buffalo (2007-2008 academic year) ► Transportation Intern — Summer Transportation Internship Program for Diverse Groups (STIPDG) — Federal Highway Administration (2007) ► Intern — Urban Design Project (2006) Project Experience < Dubuque KeyLine COA (IA) Analyzed current ridership patterns, route structures, and passenger amenities to aid in the ■ development of service alternatives. Developed a preferred service, operations, and imple- mentation plan. < Valley Transit Operations Analysis (WI) Managed temporary workers performing bus counts and surveys. Performed an analysis of transfer activity by route and location. Examined the demographic and economic charac- teristics of the Fox Valley region. < Breckenridge 2008 Transit Plan (CO) Assisted in the analysis of ridership trends, including determining the areas with the greatest number of boardings and alightings. These patterns were then mapped to determine the most frequent destinations and origins for users of the transit system. < Mountain Metro Transit 2010 Data Collection (CO) Aided in the organization and management of counts and surveys for the Colorado Springs area. Analyzed survey data related to demographics, economic conditions, ridership trends, and service perception. Recognitions and Awards L . Received the 2008 American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Planning Excellence Award which is given to the graduating Master's of Urban Planning candidate who is deemed as having the most professional promise. This award is given annually by the Western New York American Planning Association in conjunction with the University at Buffalo. ll Education < Master of Urban and Regional Planning (specializing in environmental and physical planning) State University of New York at Buffalo 2008 < Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Design State University of New York at Buffalo 2006 i L_A ■ L David C. Krutsinger, AICP h:� TRANSPORTATION Page 1 CONSULTANTS, INC. 6, Experience S Over 18 years in multimodal transportation planning, including transit, bicycles, and TDM LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. (1994-1996, 2009-present) Senior Transportation Planner Regional Transportation District (RTD) (2000-2009) i Manager of Modeling & Operational Analysis BRW/URS (1996-2000), Transportation Planner II Community Planning Workshop/Transportation Research Assistant (1990-1994) Long -Range and Corridor Transit Plans < 1-225 Environmental Evaluation/Environmental Assessment (Aurora, CO) This corridor study analyzed the extension of light rail from an existing terminus through the City of Aurora. This 10.5-mile corridor is the first suburban, circumferential light rail extension planned in the metropolitan Denver region. Mr. Krutsinger served as the Deputy Project Manager - Planning for the study and led efforts to reconfigure bus services, estimate and ' negotiate parking investments, review associated traffic impact analyses, and to coordinate with locally initiated station area/land-use planning efforts. < East Corridor Transit Operations Plan (Denver, CO) w Managed the development of a transit service plan to implement a coordinated bus and rail transit system including park -and -ride facility planning. The project included a detailed inven- tory of existing services, an assessment of transportation needs, a service plan to meet the needs of the community, technology -specific operating expectations, and O&M cost esti- mates for service funding. The effort included preparation of Rail and Bus Fleet Management Plans in accordance with New Starts planning requirements. The service is part of the Denver region's FasTracks Program and is currently an applicant for federal funding under the New Starts Program. < West Corridor Environmental Impact Statement (Lakewood, CO) Mr. Krutsinger was the project planner for this study (2001-2003), performing the travel all demand forecasts and coordinating the bus service planning process. This study initially compared the pros and cons of bus rapid transit (BRT) and light rail, choosing light rail as ■ the preferred alternative. The travel forecasts were used to determine the sizes of park - and -rides and perform related traffic impact studies. Mr. Krutsinger continued with this project through 2007, overseeing the preparation of bus and rail fleet management plans C for federal funding purposes. This project successfully made it through the New Starts process and was awarded a $300 million Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) by the Federal Transit Administration in early 2009. S < FasTracks Service Development Program This planning document explained the multi -year process used to move large corridor capital investment projects from planning, through environmental clearances (NEPA), and into implementation. The plan provided local government stakeholders a predictable process framework for participation and input throughout the program, explaining the various tools and performance criteria to be used. s ■ David C. Krutsinger, AICP TRANSPORTATION Page 2 CONSULTANTS, INC. < North Metro MIS (Commerce City, Thornton, and Northglenn, CO) This corridor study covered a broad geographic area looking at rapid transit investments in the northeast quadrant of the Denver metropolitan area. Ultimately, the study recommended phased implementation of bus/HOV lanes with BRT-style service along the north 1-25 corridor and passenger rail in a corridor further east, along a low -utilization freight corridor. Mr. Krutsinger's primary effort was to analyze local bus routes, including feeder/circulator services, and make logical connections to both BRT and rail regional line -haul services. Mr. Krutsinger served as the project planner for this effort. < Northwest Major Investment Study (Dallas, TX) On the Northwest MIS in Dallas, Mr. Krutsinger participated in the development of the enhanced travel demand management (TDM) and enhanced bus alternatives. These alter- natives were compared against rail passenger alternatives. < 1-15 Major Investment Study (Salt Lake City, UT) This project evaluated light rail, bus/HOV lanes, highway improvement alternatives, and travel demand management alternatives. Mr. Krutsinger was responsible for developing bus/HOV and travel demand managements, inclusive of operating plans. This study com- pleted successfully and moved into a full Environmental Impact Statement process. Short -Range Transit Planning Experience < DuPage Area Local Circulator Study (Oak Brook, IL) Mr. Krutsinger prepared a transit planning Guidebook to consolidate demographic, land use, transit forecasting, alternatives analysis, implementation plan, and marketing plan efforts in a single reference document. The study looked at 13 communities within DuPage County interested in starting local circulator services. The study prioritized four commu- nities for implementation, with the remaining communities using the Guidebook to pursue implementation when their public support and financial objectives could be met. < Headwaters/Forest, Oneida, and Vilas Counties Transit Coordination Plan (WI) Using provider survey information, worked to develop service alternatives among the three - county area's largest communities. The purpose of this effort was to realize cost savings from coordination; improve service to existing senior, veteran, and disabled populations; and, where possible, to open the service to general public transportation. The study explored centralized dispatching, coordinated marketing, vehicle sharing, and joint grant writing opportunities. < Conway Transit Feasibility Plan (Conway, AR) Conducted key person interviews of existing paratransit and university campus transit providers to understand gaps in current service and opportunities for new service strategies. Analyzed service alternatives from start-up options to build -out scenarios. Analysis of existing and potential revenue streams was completed to identify realistic funding options for the new service strategies. David C. Krutsinger, AICP TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. Page 3 < Mountain Metropolitan Transit Ute Pass Express Analysis (Colorado Springs, CO) S Managed parallel onboard and community surveys to assess the performance of this region -serving route. The onboard survey assessed customer satisfaction of regular transit users. The community survey assessed the satisfaction and perceptions of infrequent users and non -users. Common themes for service improvement were identified. Scheduling changes were recommended and implemented. ■ < Transit Cooperative Research Program B-36 (Nationwide) Reviewer of recent research in the area of rural passenger demand estimation, including ,- program (sponsored) trips by developmental services, group homes, mental health centers, nursing homes, and senior nutrition programs. This recent research updated methods pre- viously developed in TCRP B-3 by LSC and SGA (now VHB). < Logan Short -Range Transit Plan (Logan, UT) . Mr. Krutsinger assisted on this study which looked at expansion of fixed -route services within Logan, analyzed alternatives to extend commuter service to outlying communities, ■ and improved social service transportation coordination. The plan also looked at infrastruc- ture improvements from bus stop improvements, to transfer facilities, to a new maintenance facility. Presentations ■ Montana Transit Management Training: Performance Measures APTA Bus and Paratransit Conference: Mobile Workshop on Light Rail & Bicycle Integration ■ Colorado Model Users Group (COMUG): West Corridor EIS Travel Demand Forecasting APA National Conference: Mobile Workshop on Denver Union Station Bike Station ■ APA Colorado/Four Corners Conference: GIS in Transportation Analysis and Intermodal Facility Planning - Education ■ Master of City Planning — Georgia Institute of Technology 1994 Master of Science, Transportation Engineering — Georgia Institute of Technology 1994 - Bachelor of Science, Political Science, Magna Cum Laude — University of Oregon 1990 Professional Memberships i � American Institute of Certified Planners (since 1996) American Planning Association (since 1992) ■ ■ \,' Infrastructure Management 1��. Group, Inc. RANGE OF EXPERIENCE Mr. Page has over twenty years of experience in finance, project development, and public -private partnerships (P3) for rail, transit, toll roads, and airports. He has advised on financings for projects in the U.S. and internationally and leads IMG's finance group EDUCATION S Harvard University; Master of Public Policy, 1988. Business and Government focus. S Regional Planning Institute, Technical University Berlin; German Government Fellowship (DAAD), a♦ 1985. Yale University, Bachelor of Arts, cum laude, 1984. PROFESSIONAL HISTORY Adjunct Professor; George Mason University, VA, Dept. of Civil Engineering, teaching masters course "Infrastructure Finance." Infrastructure Management Group, Inc.; Vice President, Finance and Transportation practices, 1998 to present. Deutsche Morgan Grenfell/Deutsche Bank; Senior - Associate Director, Project Finance Group, 1995 to 1998 CS First Boston (New York); Vice President, Public Finance Department, 1993 to 1995. Arthur D. Little (Cambridge, MA and Berlin, Germany), Consultant, Economics and Development Group, 1988 to 1992. SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE TRANSIT, RAIL, PORTS, MARITIME I Sasha N. Page Vice President, Finance US 36 Managed Lanes/Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Advised TIFIA program on financing of $300 M electronic toll road and BRT from Denver to Boulder. Miami Transportation Trust Oversight Financial advisor to sales tax commission on $10 B transit program. Evaluating innovative finance sources to fund $2 B new rail lines. California High -Speed Rail Authority Financial advisor to state authority developing $42 B, 400-mile dedicated rail line. St. Louis Metro Transit Audit Conducting audit of revenue, operating cost and maintenance issues related to light rail, bus and paratransit services. Chicago Transit Agencies Audit Conducted performance audit of CTA (transit, bus), Pace (bus), Metra (commuter rail) and RTA (oversight) for Illinois Office of Auditor General, receiving 2008 National Association of State Auditors award. See: www.auditor.illinois.gov, Warwick Intermodal Center TIFIA Loan Advised USDOT on $200 M rental car, garage, commuter rail station at Providence, RI airport. South Coast Rail, MBTA Prepared white paper on innovative finance options for this $1 B commuter rail facility from Boston south. San Juan Light Rail Advised Municipality of San Juan on financing of $200 M light rail system. Cotton Belt Passenger Rail, Dallas Fort Worth Advised Dallas Area Rapid Transit on innovative and availability payment finance of $1.5 B commuter line. Honolulu Light Rail Audit Conducted audit of the proposed $5 B Honolulu light rail project for Hawaii DOT. Colorado Springs Streetcar Provided financing options to fund new downtown $100M street car project. Regional Transit Service Entity Feasibility Study Other Team Members 1.7 Since transit planning is such an important part of this project, we have asked LSC Transportation Consultants to assist us with all aspects of technical planning related to operations, implementation, and funding. LSC has extensive experience in working with Colorado transit systems in cities of all sizes and has been instrumental in the development and evaluation of transit services throughout the West. In particular, LSC has led TRANSPORTATION the development of the Loveland -COLT Transit Plan, the RFTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Formation Study in the Roaring Fork Valley, the Regional Transit Element of the North Front Range Long Range Transportation Plan, and the Colorado Springs Innovative Transit System Study. LSC worked with Tim Baldwin on operational and ridership analysis for the Colorado Springs Streetcar Feasibility Study. 1.8 We also have teamed up with Infrastructure I, Infrastructure ■ Management Group, Inc. (IMG). IMG is a full service infrastructure consulting firm Management specializing in improving the finance, Mir,, Group, Inc. management, operations, and development of infrastructure facilities, primarily in the transportation sector. IMG's mission is to help its clients bridge the gap between their infrastructure needs and financial resources by focusing on P3s, innovative capital financing, project delivery strategies, efficient management, and ■ performance. IMG staff members have advised on transit and commuter rail financings and financial issues in Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Miami, and San Juan. In Colorado, IMG staff members worked with Tim Baldwin and other members of the team to assess the feasibility of a new streetcar line in Colorado Springs. This year, IMG advised the US DOT TIFIA program on the financial feasibility of the US 36 Managed Lanes/Bus Rapid Transit project between Boulder and Denver. IMG also worked with Colorado DOT on the assessment of its public - private partnership program. 1.9 Recognizing the importance of outreach and the need for local a understanding, we have included OV Consulting, a DBE firm that will lead the local outreach effort. Beth Vogelsang brings ■ a wealth of experience in managing successful transit planning and community outreach programs. She is a transit and transportation planner with 17 years of experience and a or growing practice in public involvement and jurisdictional CONSULTING coordination. Because she understands the planning and design process, Ms. Vogelsang has a ■ unique ability to effectively coordinate technical project needs with local community concerns. She recognizes the critical need for participation throughout the project and the . efficiency of creating the means for that input early on. Ms. Vogelsang has worked extensively with local jurisdictions to design and implement effective public involvement programs, manage community outreach and media, coordinate focus groups and stakeholder committees. and work extensively with agencies and jurisdictions. She is experienced in public meeting organization, website design, online survey and data collection, social media, steer "des gleavle 3 0 Transit P3 Financial Advisory Advised construction firm fill $600 M funding gap for light rail line with innovative finance. North -South Rail Link, Boston Developed funding plan for $7 B rail tunnel linking Boston's North and South Stations. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Transit Facilities Revenue Bonds, NY Underwrote $218 M bonds backed by farebox revenues, grants, and tolls. Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority Revenue Bonds, NY Underwrote $200 M toll revenue bonds. Honolulu Elevated Transit Turnkey Bid Devised competitive financing for rail bid. 42nd Street Light Rail Bid, New York City Advised consortium seeking $150 M DBFO. Port of Long Beach/LA Container Movement As part of USC team, evaluated financeability of zero container emissions movement systems. Canadian Port Review, Transport Canada Evaluated port expansion plan. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION FHWA Highway P3s State of Practice Report Writing state of practice report on U.S. highway P3s. FHWA Highway Concession Valuation Guide Updating concession valuation guide and model. FHWA Value for Money (VfM) Report Co-authored report on international and U.S. VfM approaches in P3s, recommending new guidelines. South Bay Expressway, San Diego, CA Assessing USDOT TIFIA program on credit issues of this $600 M toll road P3 before bankruptcy. Sasha N. Page Vice President, Finance NTTA SH-161 Toll Road, Dallas Advising the USDOT TIFIA program on a proposed $390M loan for this all -electronic toll road. LBJ Freeway Private Activity Bonds (PABs), Advised TX PABs Corporation on $600M senior debt financing for Dallas $2.7 B PABs, TIFIA, P3 toll road. TxDOT P3 Obligations Review Assessed how TxDOT districts meet obligations for $1.4 B SH-130, $2.5 B NTE, $2.7 B LBJ, $1.0 DFW Connector P3 toll roads in DFW and Austin areas. Alligator Alley, Florida Conducted assumptions to determine best value to FDOT in P3 monetization of 78-mile toll road. Texas DOT Equity -Based Forecasting Provided traffic forecast and pro formas for new toll projects, incorporating private finance. Capital Beltway Express Lanes, DC Advised on $500 M USDOT TIFIA loan as part of $1.8 billion (B) financing of managed toll lanes, which won 2008 Project Finance Bond Deal of the Year. First Coast Outer Beltway, FL Financial advisor on P3 procurements for $2 B First Coast Outer Beltway, Jacksonville, FL for FDOT. Valuation of SR-125 tollroad, San Diego Valued private toll franchise for potential acquisition. Evaluated contracts and cash flows. Florida's Turnpike Financial Review Examined financing alternatives, including private sale. Legislature approved more independent "Florida's Turnpike Enterprise." Colorado Public -Private Partnerships Devised options to improve PPP program. Wrote "Innovative Finance Handbook." See:www.dot.state.co.us/publications/ researchreports.htm Arkansas 1-49 Road Development Advised coalition on financing $1 B road, using tolls, GARVEEs and innovative finance. I Infrastructure Management 1�.. Group, Inc. VA ■ Cross Israel Highway, Israel Advisor to winning consortium on US$1 B toll road. ■' Negotiated with lenders. Road completed and ■ recognized as "Deal of the Year' by both Project Finance magazine and Project Finance International. M31M30 and M7 Toll Roads, Hungary Advised Hungry on private financing and tendering process for highway concessions. North American Toll Roads ■ Advisor and/or underwriter on toll road financings: SR-57, CA; SR-18, WA; Conway Expressway, SC; NY Thruway and Ohio Turnpike. `. Sydney Eastern Distributor, Australia Supported US$200 M toll road equity raise. ■ ■ AIRPORTS AND AVIATION ■ Worcester Regional Airport ■ Advising City of Worcester on future airport . governance and air service marketing; successfully attracted new carrier. ■ Greenfield Panama City Airport, FL ■ Advised on financing of $312 M new airport, incorporating: FAA and FDOT grants, land sale, $60 M commercial paper facility and $45 M state infrastructure bank sources; closed Dec., 2007. Orlando Sanford Airport New Terminal Advised on construction of $25 M private terminal and assisted developer negotiation. Greenfield Chicago Third Airport Advisory Serve as financial advisor for $500 M airport. ■ Howard Air Base Development, Panama Advised Panama and IFC on sale former U.S. air ■ base to private developer for $400 M in 2007. ■ Berlin Airport Privatization Bid, Germany ■ Advised winning consortium on purchasing airport and constructing new US$5 B airport. Negotiated ■ US$1 B loan term sheet. Infrastructure Management m. Group, Inc. Sasha N. Page Vice President, Finance Athens International Airport, Greece Loan officer in funding US$2 B build -operate -transfer airport that was opened in 2003. LECTURES, PRESENTATIONS and PUBLICATIONS "Where Does the Money Come From: Fares and Tolls?" APTA Annual Meting, 10/4/11, New Orleans "Top 10 Ways to Leverage Public -Private Partnerships (and Innovative Finance)," American Road and Transportation Builders Association Southeast Meeting, 12/02/10 "The Evolution of Equity in Transportation Finance," 4th International Conference on Financing Surface Transportation in the United States, Transportation Research Board, New Orleans, 05/20/10 Session moderator of: "Maximum Available Budget, Minimum Subsidies, Availability Payments and Other Forms of "Mini" P3s" with Dr. Bill Ankner, John Munoz and Chris Kane, American Road and Transportation Builders Association Public -Private Ventures Workshop, 09/24/09, Washington, D.C. "Seven Steps to Ensure Shovel -Ready P3 RFPs," presented at the Implementation of PPPs For Transit, sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration, Chicago Regional Transit Authority, and the National Council for Public -Private Partnerships, Chicago, IL, 05/21 /09 "The Rewards and Risks of Private Equity in Infrastructure," co-authored with Dr. William Ankner, Louisiana Department of Transportation, Cheryl Jones, USDOT TIFIA JPO and Rob Fetterman, IMG; presentation at Keston Institute for Public Finance and Infrastructure Policy, University of Southern CA 3/27/008; and published in Journal of Public Works Management & Policy, 10/08. 3 ■ ■ Chris Proud AICP Associate 0 i I am a senior transportation planner with more than 15 years in the - industry. My career is focused on developing sustainable public transportation projects. As a skilled facilitator, I enjoy the challenge of leading diverse stakeholders through transit alternatives analysis, planning studies, and environmental analysis. My proven project track record includes delivering complex multi -modal transportation projects in cities throughout the US and Canada. My skill set is a unique blend of transit planning knowledge and consensus building expertise. Relevant Skills Education Project Direction It Management Chris has successfully led multi -modal Master of Community a Regional transportation planning and environmental studies in Colorado, California, and Planning, 1995 Alberta with budgets exceeding $2.5 million (USD). He has been responsible for University of New Mexico client relationships and management of large and complex multi -disciplinary Bachelor of Arts in teams. Chris is skilled as a public and agency process facilitator for public International Relations, 1993 transit alternatives analysis, public consensus building, and citizen involvement University of Delaware strategies. Alternatives Analyses Chris served as the Deputy Project Manager for the Years of Experience Regional Transportation District's Gold Line Alternatives 5 Public Sector Analysis/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Chris was instrumental in the 10 consultancy accelerated (3-year) delivery of the project, which was the first Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Outstanding Achievement Award for Excellence in Environmental Document Preparation award winner. Professional Affiliations Chris was also responsible for developing and implementing an alternatives American Institute of Certified Planners -Certificate 013172 analysis and screening process for multiple LRT corridors in the City of Edmonton. This process was subsequently adopted by City Council for all future Co-chair, 2012 WTS International LRT expansion projects. Conference Environmental Studies Chris is an expert in the regulations and requirements of the US National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act (SAFETEA-LU), and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Chris has extensive experience managing the regulatory processes and permit requirements for projects led by the FTA and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Chris has provided his expertise to multiple environmental projects including his leadership role on the Regional Transportation District's Northwest Rail Environmental Evaluation. Stakeholder (Agency Et Public ) Involvement Chris brings extensive experience implementing public and agency stakeholder consultation programs for multi -modal transportation projects. Combining his knowledge of transportation planning and stakeholder outreach methods, Chris is able to convey technical issues in a clear and direct manner. This approach has served to successfully build stakeholder confidence, as well as obtain public input positively shaping the outcome of projects. Land Use/Development Studies Chris is an accomplished land use planner, skilled at analyzing the critical connections between long-term land use development and transit access. As a component of the alternatives analysis processes, Chris conducted the analysis of land use and transit -oriented development potential along the Regional Transportation District's Gold Line . corridor and the City of Edmonton's Southeast Light Rail Transit (LRT) corridor. CHRISTOPHER PROUD = StwdaVjeSglecTI@ CV 1 or 8 Selected Projects Project Client Year/Location Role Alternatives Analyses Southeast LRT Extension City of Edmonton Edmonto9 Edmonton, AB Alternatives Analysis Leader Gold Line Alternatives Regional Transportation 2007-2009 Deputy Project Analysis/EIS District Denver, CO Manager Northwest LRT Extension City of Edmonton 2009-2010 Edmonton, AB Alternatives Analysis Leader 2009 West LRT Extension City of Edmonton Edmonton, AB Edmonton, Transit Planner 2006 South Metro Accessibility City of Colorado Springs Colorado Springs, Alternatives Study C Analysis Leader Environmental Studies Northwest Rail Regional Transportation 2007-2010 Sub -consultant Environmental Evaluation District Denver, CO Project Manager Downtown- N atom as -Airport Altematives Analysis/Draft Sacramento Regional 2007 Environmental EIS/Environmental Impact Transit Sacramento, CA Planner Report (EIR) Commuter Rail Regional Transportation 2008-2009 Environmental Maintenance Facility District Denver, CO Leader Environmental Assessment Regional Transportation US 36 Environmental District/Colorado 2006 Environmental Impact Statement Department of Denver, CO Leader Transportation Colorado Springs Airport 2005 Environmental Business Park Colorado Springs Airport Colorado Springs, Planner Environmental Assessment CO Transportation Corridor 2010-Present Et System Studies Downtown LRT Connector City of Edmonton Edmonton, AB Transit Planner San Francisco Bay Area Transit Planner Et Water Transit Authority San Francisco Bay Area 2001-2004 Program System Planning Water Transit Authority San Francisco, CA Management Support 1-80 High Occupancy Caltrans 2003 Public Involvement Vehicle Lane Project San Francisco, CA Lead San Francisco -Oakland Bay Bridge (Bicycle, Pedestrian, Caltrans 2001 Public Involvement Maintenance Path) San Francisco, CA Specialist Feasibility Study Santa Clara Valley Santa Clara Valley 2001-2002 Public Involvement Transportation Authority Transportation Authority San Jose, CA Specialist Measures A Et B Program 1-580 Freeway Extension Nevada Department of 2002-2006 Public Involvement Project Transportation Reno, NV Specialist Land Use/Development 1" Ft Main Transit and City of Longmont 2011-present Planning Leader Studies Revitalization Plan Land Use Planning Ft Town of Castle Rock 2004-2007 Project Manager & Development Services Castle Rock, CO Land Use Planner Longmont Diagonal Rail Regional Transportation 2006 Environnemental District Longmont, CO Land Use Planner Evaluation Jefferson County Airport Jefferson County eff Jefferson Land Use Planner Non -aviation Market Study County, Colorado Eagle County Private Ski Confidential 2007 Land Use Planner Resort Development Minturn, CO CHRISTOPHER PROUD = sWerdavim gleam CV20F6 a ■ Selected Projects 0 Alternatives Analysis City of Edmonton - Southeast LRT (Downtown to Mill Woods) Corridor Planning Client City of Edmonton ■ Year/Location 2008-2009, Edmonton, Alberta - Canada Position Held Alternatives Analysis Leader ■ Chris designed and implemented an alternatives development, screening, and analysis process to select a preferred corridor for a new Light Rail Transit (LRT) extension from downtown to southeastern Edmonton (11 kilometers). He facilitated a team of planners and engineers representing a wide cross-section of internal City departments and stakeholders through a series of successful decision -making workshops. The collaborative approach created by Chris differed from past corridor studies conducted by the City. Chris trained the team in the approach, building trust and support among . the City staff and stakeholders. This alternatives analysis process has been adopted as the City's preferred method to determine all new LRT transit corridors City-wide. The process mirrors key elements of the FTA alternatives analysis process followed in the United States. Chris was directly involved in all levels of the analysis including land use/transit-oriented development analysis, environmental documentation, travel S demand ridership, public consultation, and government relations. The preferred corridor for the Southeast LRT was adopted by the Edmonton City Council into the ■ Transportation System Bylaw in December, 2009. This action legally defines the corridor and allows the team to begin subsequent levels of design. ■ Gold Line Alternatives Analysis/Environmental Impact Statement 0 Client Regional Transportation District, FasTracks Program Year/Location 2006-2009, Denver, Colorado - United States Position Held Deputy Project Manager/Regulatory Manager As Deputy Project Manager, Chris was a key leader of the Gold Line project. The Gold Line project is an FTA New Starts corridor proposing fixed guideway transit from Denver ■ to Wheat Ridge, Colorado (11 miles). Chris actively led a team of transit specialists in the development of the FTA's alternatives analysis, draft EIS, final EIS, and record of . decision (ROD). Additionally, Chris was directly responsible for environmental analysis of multiple natural and socio-economic resources including land use, property acquisition and relocation, and cultural resources. He successfully implemented the Section 106 consultation and development of the project's Memorandum of Agreement between FTA and the Colorado State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Chris IN coordinated the 404(b)(1) wetlands consultation ultimately leading to approval of the project's wetlands impacts under a nationwide permit. The Gold Line Draft EIS ■ document was selected for the FTA's Outstanding Achievement Award for Excellence in Environmental Document Preparation in 2008. The Record of Decision (ROD) for this project was approved and signed by FTA in November, 2009, successfully completing the NEPA environmental process. The Gold Line EIS process was completed in approximately three years. Completing an EIS in three years is rare. The US General Accounting Office research estimates a typical EIS takes a minimum of 5.6 years to complete. With the ROD in place, the Gold Line received FTA approval to enter the ■ subsequent levels of engineering. The Gold Line received its Full Funding Grant Agreement from FTA in September, 2011 ($1.1 billion). CHRISTOPHER PROUD = SLewdayjescjeave CV3OF8 Selected Projects City of Edmonton - Northwest LRT (Downtown to St. Albert) Corridor Planning Client City of Edmonton Year/Location 2009-2010, Edmonton, Alberta - Canada Position Held Alternatives Analysis Leader Chris implemented the alternatives analysis approach designed under the Southeast LRT project for a new LRT corridor extending from Edmonton's downtown to the northwest city limits (7 kilometers). Chris facilitated the stakeholders (including staff from the City of St. Albert) through the process in a series of successful team workshops. The project includes many unique challenges; such as a major crossing of the Canadian National Railway yards. The project also includes determining an LRT crossing for the Edmonton City Centre Airport lands that are planned as a major residential and commercial redevelopment project. Through Chris's guidance, the project team has successfully completed the alternatives analysis screening. The recommended corridor was reviewed and approved by City Council in June, 2010. City of Edmonton - West LRT (Downtown to Lewis Estates) Corridor Planning Client City of Edmonton Year/Location 2008-2009, Edmonton, Alberta - Canada Position Held Transit Planner Chris successfully supported the transit planning and alternatives development, screening, and analysis process to select a preferred route for a new Light Rail Transit (LRT) extension from downtown to Lewis Estates (10 kilometers). Chris provided technical transit planning guidance to a team of planners and engineers. This project was originally managed by another consultant team; however, they were unable to reach public consensus on a recommended corridor. It was at that time the City of Edmonton requested the alternatives analysis process developed by Chris be applied to the West LRT. The preferred West corridor for the Southeast LRT was adopted by the Edmonton City Council into the Transportation Bylaw in December, 2009. South Metro Accessibility Study Client City of Colorado Springs Year/Location 2006, Colorado Springs, Colorado - United States Position Held Alternatives Analysis Leader Environmental Studies Chris designed and implemented an alternatives development, screening, and analysis process to select a preferred corridor alternative meeting the goals and objects of this route study project. He facilitated and coordinated the project team, including the City of Colorado Springs, El Paso County, the Colorado Springs Airport, Springs Transit, and the Colorado Department of Transportation, through a series of successful consensus building workshops. Northwest Commuter Rail Environmental Evaluation Client The Regional Transportation District, FasTracks Program Year/Location 2007-2010, Denver, Colorado - United States Position Held Sub -consultant Project Manager/Environmental Leader Chris successfully led a team of environmental specialists analyzing the comparative impacts of various transit corridor alignments. The project was locally funded and followed FTA environmental guidance. The environmental team identified the impacts and benefits on the natural and social environment of this 40-mile commuter rail (combination Diesel Multiple Unit/Electric Multiple Unit) corridor. The project followed the existing Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Company alignment and required sharing of track with BNSF freight operations. The project corridor included a combination of dense urban areas and rural agricultural communities. Chris was responsible for all aspects of the environmental evaluation including property acquisition and relocation, environmental justice analysis, and natural resources analysis. Chris directly coordinated the cultural resources consultation process with the Colorado SHPO as well as multiple natural resource permitting processes. The draft and final environmental documents were finalized in spring, 2010. This environmental analysis resulted in a preferred alignment for continued design and construction. This project is on a rapid schedule, with operations planned to begin in 2016. CHRISTOPHER PROUD = sheer dc-mes gleave CV4OF8 ■ ■ Selected Projects ■ ■ Downtown -Natomas-Airport (DNA) Alternatives Analysis/Draft EIS/EIR Client Sacramento Regional Transit ■ Year/Location 2007-2010, Sacramento, California - United States Position Held Environmental Planner Chris served as an environmental planner and quality oversight planner for the ■ development of the DNA Draft EIS/EIR. This project involved the evaluation of 10 build alternatives and 52 design options on three corridors serving the link between ■ downtown Sacramento and the Sacramento International Airport. The alternatives included LRT, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), and Transportation System Management ■ alternatives. Chris provided quality oversight and analysis of land use and induced growth issues, parks/recreation, and social and community facilities. FTA was the lead ■ agency for this assignment. Commuter Rail Maintenance Facility Supplemental Environmental ■ Assessment (SEA) Client The Regional Transportation District, FasTracks Program ■ Year/Location 2008-2009, Denver, Colorado - United States Position Held Environmental Leader ■ Chris served a critical role as the environmental lead for this SEA project for FTA analysis of the FasTracks commuter rail maintenance facility. The commuter rail ■ maintenance facility is an essential element of the FasTracks expansion program. Successful completion of this SEA was necessary for all rail corridors planned under the FasTracks Program to advance. Chris led a team of environmental planners examining ■ the impacts and benefits of locating the commuter rail maintenance facility adjacent to the BNSF rail corridor in Denver. Chris was directly responsible for the alternatives ■ analysis, environmental justice, property acquisition analysis, land use, social environment, parklands, and cultural resources analysis. Chris provided direction and ■ quality review to ensure appropriate FTA procedures for the entire environmental analysis. Chris worked directly with impacted stakeholders on this highly controversial ■ project. Chris's environmental analysis resulted in design adjustments to further avoid and minimize impacts. Under Chris's direction the SEA was successfully completed and the results incorporated into the East Corridor Draft EIS and Gold Line Draft EIS. ■ US 36 Environmental Impact Statement ■ Client The Regional Transportation District Year/Location 2006, Denver, Colorado - United States ■ Position Held Environmental Leader Chris served as the environmental lead for this project in 2006 during the development ■ of the Draft EIS. The joint FTA and FHWA project evaluated multiple build 'packages' on a corridor linking downtown Denver and Boulder, Colorado (28 miles). The alternatives included a mix of highway improvements and transit improvements, ■ including BRT. Chris was responsible for managing all aspects of the environmental analysis and conducting specific analysis on land use, property acquisition, park/open ■ space resources, and environmental justice. The lead agency role for this assignment is split between FHWA and FTA. ■ Colorado Springs Airport Business Park Environmental Assessment ■ Client City of Colorado Springs Year/Location 2005, Colorado Springs, Colorado - United States Position Held Environmental Planner ■ Chris provided environmental analysis and quality control oversight for a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) led Environmental Assessment. The project included the ■ potential development of approximately 1,500 acres of vacant surplus land at the Colorado Springs Airport. Chris completed a detailed analysis of land use, historical ■ planning documentation, and zoning requirements for the proposed project. Chris provided senior review of the entire document to ensure compliance with all FAA ■ requirements. IN ■ CHRISTOPHER PROUD =SLWw davjes($eaw ■ CV5OF8 Selected Projects Transportation Corridor Et System Studies Downtown LRT Connector Concept Design Client City of Edmonton Year/Location 2010-present, Edmonton, Alberta - Canada Position Held Transit Planner/Facilitator Chris is currently providing transit planning expertise and stakeholder facilitation Leadership to the Downtown LRT Connector project in Edmonton, Alberta. This project is focused on developing LRT concept design for the selected corridor through the urban core of Edmonton's downtown. Chris is providing his planning insight on incorporating low -floor LRT seamlessly into the urban environment. Chris also leads public outreach sessions and has successfully facilitated decision making processes with diverse communities along the corridor. San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority System Planning Client San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority Year/Location 2001-2003, San Francisco, California - United States Position Held Transit Planner/Program Management Support Chris provided direct support to the WTA, Manager of Planning during the development of the programmatic EIR, Implementation and Operations Plan, and transit ridership modeling efforts. Chris worked directly with WTA staff to coordinate a team of multiple consulting firms for the alternatives analysis, environmental planning, travel demand modeling, and engineering efforts. This project successfully determined the feasibility and opportunities for expansion of water transit on San Francisco Bay as an alternate transit option. The project continues to advance with the ongoing design and construction of new ferry terminals and vessels. (As of 2007, the WTA organization was converted to the Water Emergency Transportation Authority.) 1-80 HOV Gap Closure Project Client Caltrans Year/Location 2003, San Francisco, California - United States Position Held Public Involvement Specialist Chris served as the public involvement leader for the successful outreach campaign. Chris tailored a unique public involvement program for this Biological Assessment to construct High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes on a segment of 1-80. Construction of these lanes resulted in uninterrupted HOV lanes from the Carquinez Bridge to San Francisco. Chris was directly responsible for developing and implementing this high - profile public involvement campaign to effectively communicate the project and potential impacts to the local communities. Chris organized and conducted public open houses, website updates, and the design and creation of the project public outreach materials. Chris managed the development of multiple visual simulations for this project. Chris represented the client with project stakeholders directly impacted by the project through acquisition of their homes. San Francisco -Oakland Bay Bridge (Bicycle/Pedestrian/Maintenance Path) Feasibility Study Client Caltrans Year/Location 2001, San Francisco, California - United States Position Held Public Involvement Specialist Chris supported the public involvement and outreach programs of the planning and feasibility study to add a pathway to the west span of the San Francisco -Oakland Bay Bridge from Yerba Buena Island to San Francisco. In conjunction with the new east span of the Bay Bridge, the project would result in a direct pedestrian and bicycle connection between San Francisco and East Bay communities. Chris worked directly with project stakeholders, facilitating small group workshops. He was responsible for developing and implementing strategies to solicit input from project stakeholders to shape the project design. CHRISTOPHER PROUD = steer davies gleave CV60F8 Gordon R. Shaw, P.E., AICP TRANSPORTATION Page 1 CONSULTANTS, INC. Experience < Principal, LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. (1993 - present) < Senior Transportation Engineer, LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. (1989-1993) < Transportation Engineer, Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. (now LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.) (1983-1989) < Engineer, PRC Voorhees, Inc. (1982-1983) < Field Engineer, Burlington Northern Railroad (1979) Mr. Shaw has over 25 years of professional experience in all aspects of transportation planning and engineering. In his capacity as Principal with the firm, his duties run the gamut from large- scale urban transit and transportation planning to site -specific preliminary engineering design and traffic analysis. A strong focus of his work history is resort areas, developing transportation plans for environmentally sensitive areas that can efficiently accommodate large variations in travel demands. He has also conducted transportation modeling efforts for roadway design studies associated with numerous large developments throughout California, Nevada, and Colorado. ■ Transportation Planning Studies ■ < Long-range transportation plan for Park City, Utah < Comprehensive transportation planning study of the Lake Tahoe Basin ■ < Transportation alternatives and environmental assessment for Yosemite National Park < Assessments of need and location for potential freeway improvements in the Denver ■ metropolitan area < Traffic/transit/pedestrian study for the City of Aspen and Pitkin County, Colorado ■ < A traffic calming study for Park City, Utah ■ < Community -wide transportation study for Murphys, California < Circulation study for Weaverville, California ■ Public Lands Transportation Planning ■ < Developed transit planning techniques for application in National Park Service, US Forest ■ Service, and National Wildlife Refuge site, including operational and capital requirement, and assisted in development of transit ridership estimation techniques. ■ < Conducted transportation analysis for potential employee housing areas in Yosemite National Park as part of the Park's Master Plan update, including development of potential ■ employee transit shuttle services. < Evaluated transportation strategies for public access to Nevada's ake Tahoe State Park, ■ including parking improvements, parking regulation, and transit shuttle services. < Evaluated service alternatives for Maroon Bells shuttle service operated for the White ■ River National Forest. < Evaluated transit service options for Grand Teton National Park. ■ < Conducted traffic and parking analysis for US Forest Service Visitors Center in South Lake ■ Tahoe, California. ■ Gordon R. Shaw, P.E., AICP TRANSPORTATION Page 2 CONSULTANTS, INC. Transit Planning Studies: Resort Communities < Aspen , Colorado < Durango, Colorado < Leadville, Colorado < Jackson, Wyoming < Mammoth Lakes, California Parking Studies < Aspen, Colorado (developed award -winning pad parking program) < The University of Colorado Health Sciences Center in Denver < Placer County, California < Snowmass Village, Colorado < South Lake Tahoe, California < Steamboat Springs, Colorado < Summit County, Colorado < Tahoe Basin, California/Nevada < Virginia City, Nevada < The East Shore of Lake Tahoe, Nevada < Canyon Forest Village/Grand Canyon National Park Intercept Parking Facility, Arizona Environmental Impact Statements/Environmental Impact Reports < Logan, Utah < South Lake Tahoe, California < Truckee, California < Tahoe City, California < Park City, Utah < Washoe County, Nevada < Placer County, California < Yosemite National Park, California Education Engineer's Degree in Civil Engineering — Stanford University 1982 Master of Science in Infrastructure Planning — Stanford University 1981 Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering — Purdue University 1980 Professional Registration/Memberships Registered Professional Engineer in California, Colorado, Nevada, and Utah American Institute of Certified Planners Institute of Transportation Engineers American Planning Association