Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
810
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
811
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
812
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
813
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
814
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
815
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
816
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
817
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
818
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
819
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
820
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
821
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
822
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
823
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
824
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
825
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
826
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
827
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
828
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
829
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
830
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
831
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
832
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
833
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
834
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
835
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
836
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
837
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
838
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
839
City of Richmond
Paratransit On-Call Services & Community Outreach, bidding on 05/11/2023 3:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 08/29/2023
PlanetBids
840
TOTAL RANKING SCORE FROM THE MAJORITY PANEL MEMBERS
Operation of Richmond Paratransit Services & Community Outreach Fiscal Year 2023/24
Rating Matrix FIRMS
EVALUATION CRITERIA
1 2
Bay Area Charters
Trans Metro
TOTAL SCORES FOR THREE (3) REVIEWERS TOTAL SCORES FOR THREE (3) REVIEWERS Technical capability and qualification of the firm, understanding of the project involved, technical approach, allocation of resources.(Max=25) 35 66 Professional background and technical expertise of the project team, specifically associated with the type of services and tasks described in the RFP (Max=25) 31 70
Ability to provide efficient and prompt service for the transportation industry and complete the necessary work related to the transit industry in a timely manner (Max=25)
25 70
Compliance with requirements and guidelines as defined in this RFP (Max=25) 40 70
Incentive Points (Local business) (1-10)
30 30
Total Score 161 306
Ranking 2 1
Incentive points are given to firms in accordance with Section 2.50.070, "Rating Incentive" of the Business Opportunity Ordinance. 841
September 12, 2023
Library and Community Services
DATE: September 12, 2023
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:
LaShonda White, Deputy City Manager–Community
Services
Ranjana Maharaj, Deputy Director, Community Services-
Recreation
Tetteh Kisseh, Recreation Supervisor
Subject:
Sports Officiating Services for Danny Walker
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funding for this contract is included within the Community Services-Recreation’s existing budget. An
overall $70,000 fiscal impact to the General Fund is
allocated in the below listed account numbers:
01253751-400222-40A01 for Youth Sports
01253751-400222-40B01 for Adult Sports
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
None
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
The Community Services-Recreation provides various
Sports programs for youth and adults. Recreation has
contracted with Danny Walker previously to officiate
sports programs. The Community Services-Recreation is
requesting approval of a contract with Danny Walker to
continue providing these services.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
APPROVE a contract with Danny Walker in an amount
not to exceed $70,000, beginning July 1, 2023, and
ending on June 30, 2025, to provide sports officiating
services – Community Services Department (Ranjana
Maharaj 510-620-6972/Tetteh Kisseh 510-620-6919).
AGENDA
REPORT
842
September 12, 2023
DISCUSSION:
Community Services - Recreation currently has a robust sports program schedule for Futsal Leagues, Candy Cane Classic Tournament, Volleyball, 8v8 Soccer Leagues, and Youth Basketball Leagues. To continue providing these programs, Recreation solicited bids for a provider through the BidsOnline system. Danny Walker was the only respondent to this bid request.
Danny Walker is a certified referee and has several years of experience teaching referees current trends in different sports. Danny Walker has provided referee services to Recreation’s youth basketball and Futsal programs in the past.
The diverse sports programs that Recreation provides are popular in the community.
School teams, clubs and independent teams look forward to participating in these programs. With the City’s focus on active living, health, fitness, and wellness, sports programs are instrumental in providing an avenue in reaching these goals. Contracting for this service will allow Recreation to expand the sports programs during evenings and weekends.
Recreation staff is seeking City Council approval for the contract with Danny Walker to provide referee services for Recreation’s sports programs.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Contract
Attachment 2 – Bid review summary package
843
CITY OF RICHMOND
STANDARD CONTRACT
Department: Project Manager:
Project Manager E-mail:
Project Manager Phone No:
PR No: Vendor No: P.O./Contract No:
Description of Services:
The parties to this STANDARD CONTRACT do mutually agree and promise as follows:
1. Parties. The parties to this Contract are the City of Richmond (herein referred to as the “City”) and the following named Contractor:
Company Name:
Street Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Contact Person:
Telephone: Email:
Business License No: / Expiration Date:
A California [ ] corporation, [ ] limited liability corporation [ ] general partnership, [ ] limited partnership, [ ] individual, [ ] non-profit corporation, [ ] individual dba as [specify:] , [ ] other [specify:]
2. Term. The effective date of this Contract is and it terminates unless terminated as provided herein.
3. Payment Limit. City’s total payments to Contractor under this Contract shall not exceed $ . City shall not pay for services that exceed the Contract Payment Limit unless a contract amendment has been approved by the City Council or City Manager.
4. Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor shall provide those services and carry out that work described in the Service Plan (Exhibit A) which is attached hereto and is incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
5. City's Obligations. City shall make to the Contractor those payments described in the Payment Provisions (Exhibit B) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
844
6. Authorized Representatives and Notices. This Contract is subject to the Authorized Representatives and Notices Provisions (Exhibit C) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference.
7. General Conditions. This Contract is subject to the General Conditions (Exhibit D) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein.
8. Special Conditions. This Contract is subject to the Special Conditions (Exhibit E) (if any) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference, subject to all the terms and conditions contained or incorporated herein. (Note:
other than Public Works contracts, the City will agree to Special Conditions only in unusual circumstances.)
9. Insurance Provisions. This Contract is subject to the Insurance Provisions (Exhibit F) which are attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference.
10. Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' Contract hereto:
CITY OF RICHMOND CONTRACTOR:
a municipal corporation
By:
(* The Corporation Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice President should sign below)
Title: By:
I hereby certify that this Contract Title:
has been approved by City Council.
Date Signed:
B y :
City Clerk
(* The Corporation Chief Financial Officer,
Secretary or Assistant Secretary should sign below)
Approved as to form:
B y :
B y : T i t l e :
City Attorney
Date Signed:
(NOTE: Pursuant to California Corporations
Code Section 313, if Contractor is a corporation
or nonprofit organization, this Contract (1) must
be signed by (a) the Chairperson of the Board,
President or Vice-President
and (b) the
Secretary any Assistant Secretary, the Chief
Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
Service Plan Exhibit A
Payment Provisions Exhibit B
Authorized Representatives and Notices Exhibit C
General Conditions Exhibit D
Special Conditions Exhibit E
Insurance Provisions Exhibit F
Standard Contract/EJ/TE 9-26-07
845
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT A
SERVICE PLAN
Contractor shall, to the satisfaction of the , perform the following services and be compensated as outlined below:
846
Quote Sheet-Danny Walker
Bids were posted on BidsOnline and only one vendor completed the application.
Danny Walker
2620 Adeline St
Oakland CA 94607
Name of Sports Program Rate Per Game Other Fees
Youth Futsal (Indoor) $70 for one referee/game
$65 each for 2 referees/game
$300 Assignor fee
Youth Soccer (8v8) Outdoors $65 per referee $300 Assignor fee Youth Basketball (2 referees
per game)
$120 per game $300 Assignor fee
Youth Candy Cane Basketball
Tournament (2 referees)
$120 per game $300 Assignor fee
Youth Flag Football (2
Umpires)
$120 per game $300 Assignor fee
Youth Volleyball (2 Umpires) $120 per game $300 Assignor fee Adult Soccer 8v8 No bid No Bid
Adult Softball No bid No Bid
Adult Volleyball No Bid No Bid
Golf Instructor No Bid No Bid
Danny Walker has agreed to maintain the above rates for 2years (2023 to 2025). Danny Walker has provided referee services for our programs previously. Since he is the only bidder, the contract was awarded to him.
847
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT PROVISIONS
{PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CITY OF RICHMOND SHALL NOT PAY FOR SERVICES
THAT EXCEED THE CONTRACT PA YMENT LIMIT UNLESS A CONTRACT
AMENDMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY MANAGER}
1. Provided Contractor is not in default under this Contract, Contractor shall be compensated as provided below.
2. Any and all payments made pursuant to this Contract shall be subject to the Contract Payment Limit. The Payment Limit includes expenses (phones, photo copying, meals and travel etc). Invoices, shall be adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up material upon request.
3. Contractor shall submit timely invoices to the following address:
Attention: City of Richmond, Finance Department - Accounts Payable Project Manager: Department:
PO Box 4046
Richmond, CA 94804-0046
4. All invoices that are submitted by Contra ctor shall be subject to the approval of the City’s Project Manager, before payments shall be authorized.
5. The City will pay invoice(s) within 45 days a fter completion of services to the City’s satisfaction. The City shall not pay late fees or interest.
6. A Richmond business license shall be obtained before any payment under this Contract shall be authorized and the business license must be kept current during the term of this Contract for payments to continue to be authorized.
7. All insurance coverage required by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor before this Contract shall be executed by the City. The insurance coverage must be kept current during the term of this Contract for payments to continue to be authorized. 848
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT C
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES
1. Notices
. All notices, demands, statements, or communications provided for by this Contract shall be in writing and may be delivered by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid. Notices to the City shall be addressed to the Department Head and (as delineated below in section 1.1) to the project manager responsible for the administration of or the supervision of the scope of work under this Contract. Notices to the Contractor shall be addressed to the party designated by Contractor (as delineated below in section 1.2). Notice shall be deemed delivered (a) upon personal delivery; (b) as of the fifth business day after mailing by United States certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the proper party; or (c) as of 12:00 p.m. on the second business day immediately after the day it is deposited with and accepted by Federal Express, or a similar overnight courier service, addressed to the proper party and marked for next business day morning delivery. For the purposes of this Contract, a "business day" means any day Monday through Friday that is not a holiday recognized by the federal government or the State of California.
1. 1 CITY hereby designates as its Authorized Representative the Project Manager whose name and address are as follows:
City of Richmond
Richmond, CA 94804-0046
1. 2 CONTRACTOR hereby designates as its Authorized Representative the Project Manager whose name and address are as follows:
849
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 1 of 13
EXHIBIT D
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Independent Contractor . Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor is not a regular or temporary employee, joint venturer or partner of the City, but rather an independent Contractor. This Contract shall not be construed to create an agency, servant, employee, partnership, or joint venture relationship. As an independent Contractor, Contractor shall have no authority to bind City to any obligation or to act as City's agent except as expressly provided herein. Due to the independent Contractor relationship created by this Contract, City shall not withhold state or federal income taxes, the reporting of which shall be Contractor's sole responsibility.
2. Brokers . Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor has not hired, retained or agreed to pay any entity or person any fee, commission, percentage, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Contract.
3. City Property . The rights to applicable plans, drawings, reports, calculations, data, specifications, videos, graphics or other materials prepared for or obtained pursuant to this Contract, which, upon request, are to be delivered to City within a reasonable time, shall be deemed assigned to City. If applicable, Contractor shall prepare check prints upon request. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to provide to City proprietary software or data which Contractor has developed or had developed for Contractor's own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Section 15 below, indemnify, defend and hold harmless City from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of such proprietary software or data.
4. Patents, Trademarks, C opyrights and Rights in Data
. Contractor shall not
publish or transfer any materials, discoveries, developments, concepts, designs, ideas, know how, improvements, inventions and/or original works of authorship resulting from activities supported by this Contract without the express prior written consent of the City Manager. If anything resulting from activities supported by this Contract is patentable, trademarkable, copyrightable or otherwise legally protectable, City reserves the exclusive right to seek such intellectual property rights. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor may, after receiving City's prior written consent, seek patent, trademark, copyright or other intellectual property rights on anything resulting from activities supported by this Contract. However, City reserves, and Contractor irrevocably grants, a nonexclusive, fully paid-up, royalty-free, assumable, perpetual, worldwide license, with the right to transfer, sublicense, practice and exploit said license and the right to make, have made, copy, modify, make derivative works of, use, sell, 850
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 2 of 13
import, and otherwise distribute under all applicable intellectual properties without restriction of any kind said license.
Contractor further agrees to assist City, at City's expense, in every proper way to secure the City’s rights in any patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property rights relating thereto, including the disclosure to City of all pertinent information and data with respect thereto. Contractor shall also assist City in the execution of all applications, specifications, oaths, assignments, recordations, and all other instruments which City shall deem necessary in order to apply for, obtain, maintain and transfer such rights, or if not transferable, to waive such rights. Contractor shall further assist City in the execution of all applications, specifications, oaths, assignments, recordations and all other instruments which City shall deem necessary in order to assign and convey to City, and any assigns and nominees the sole and exclusive right, title and interest in and to any patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property rights relating thereto. Contractor further agrees that its obligation to execute or cause to be executed, when it is in Contractor's power to do so, any such instruments or papers shall continue during and at all times after the end of Contractor's services and until the expiration of the last such intellectual property right. Contractor hereby irrevocably designates and appoints City, and its duly authorized officers, agents and servants, as its agent and attorney-in-fact, to act for and in its behalf and stead to execute and file any such applications and to do all other lawfully permitted acts to further the application for, prosecution, issuance, maintenance or transfer of letters of patents, copyright and other registrations. This power of attorney is coupled with an interest and shall not be affected by Contractor's subsequent incapacity.
5. Inspection
. Contractor's performance, place of business and records pertaining to this Contract are subject to monitoring, inspection, review and audit by authorized representatives of the CITY, the State of California, and the United States Government.
If the project or services set forth in Exhibit A shall be performed on City or other public property, City shall have the right to inspect such work without notice. If such project or services shall not be performed on City or other public property, City shall have the right to inspect such work upon reasonable notice.
6. Services
. The project or services set forth in Exhibit A shall be performed to the full satisfaction and approval of City. In the event that the project or services set forth in Exhibit A are also itemized by price, City, in its sole discretion, may, upon notice to Contractor, delete certain items or services set forth in Exhibit A, in which case there shall be a corresponding reduction in the amount of compensation paid to Contractor. 851
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 3 of 13
Contractor shall, at its own cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment necessary for Contractor to complete the project or perform the services required herein, unless otherwise provided in Exhibit A.
7. Records
. Contractor shall keep and make available for inspection and copying by authorized representatives of the City, the State of California, and the United States Government, the Contractor's regular business records and such additional records pertaining to this Contract as may be required by the City.
Contractor shall retain all documents pertaining to this Contract for a period of five (5) years after this C ontract's termination (or for any further period that is required by law) and until all Fede ral or State audits are complete and exceptions resolved for this contract's funding period. Upon request, CONTRACTOR shall make thes e records available to authorized representatives of the CITY, the State of California, and the United States Government.
Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts, maintain records, and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Contract. The Contractor’s accounting and control systems shall be satisfactory to City. Contractor's accounting systems shall conform to generally accepted accounting principles and all records shall provide a breakdown of total costs charged under this Contract, including properly executed payrolls, time records, utility bills, invoices and vouchers. The City shall be afforded prompt access to Contractor's records, books, and Contractor shall preserve such project records for a period of at least five (5 years after the termination of this Contract , or for such longer period as may be required by law.
Contractor shall permit City and its authorized representatives and accountants to inspect, examine and copy Contractor's books, records, accounts, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to the project or services set forth in Exhibit A, and any and all data relevant to this Contract at any reasonable time for the purpose of auditing and verifying statements, invoices, or bills submitted by Contractor pursuant to this Contract and shall provide such assistance as may be reasonably required in the course of such inspection. Contractor shall also allow City access to the record keeping and accounting personnel of Contractor.
City further reserves the right to examine and re-examine said books, records, accounts, and data during the five (5 year period following the termination of this Contract; and Contractor shall in no event dispose of, destroy, alter, or mutilate said books, records, accounts, and data in any manner whatever for five (5 years after the termination of this Contract. 852
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 4 of 13
Pursuant to California Government Code § 10527, the parties to this Contract shall be subject to the examination and audit of representatives of the Auditor General of the State of California for a period of three (3) years after final payment under this Contract. The examination and audit shall be confined to those matters connected with the performance of this Contract including, but not limited to, the cost of administering this Contract.
8. Changes and Extra Work . All changes and/or extra work under this Contract shall be performed and paid for in accordance with the following:
Only the City Council or the City Manager may authorize extra and/or changed work. Contractor expressly recognizes that other City personnel are without authorization to either order extra and/or changed work or waive contract requirements. Failure of Contractor to secure the authorization for such extra and/or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in contract price due to such unauthorized work and Contractor thereafter shall be entitled to no compensation whatsoever for performance of such extra and/or changed work.
If Contractor is of the opinion that any work which Contractor has been directed to perform is beyond the scope of this Contract and constitutes extra work, Contractor shall promptly notify City of the fact. The City shall make a determination as to whether or not such work is, in fact, beyond the scope of this Contract and constitutes extra work. In the event that City determines that such work does constitute extra work, City shall provide extra compensation to Contractor on a fair and equitable basis. A change order or Contract Amendment providing for such compensation for extra work shall be negotiated between City and Contractor and executed by Contractor and the appropriate City official.
In the event City determines that such work does not constitute extra work, Contractor shall not be paid extra compensation above that provided herein and if such determination is made by City staff, said determination may be appealed to the City Council; provided, however, a written appeal must be submitted to the City Manager within five (5) days after the staff's determination is sent to Contractor. Said written appeal shall include a description of each and every ground upon which Contractor challenges the staff's determination.
9. Additional Assistance
. If this Contract requires Contractor to prepare
plans and specifications, Contractor shall provide assistance as necessary to resolve any questions regarding such plans and specifications that may arise during the period of advertising for bids, and Contractor shall issue 853
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 5 of 13
any necessary addenda to the plans and specifications as requested. In the event Contractor is of the opinion that City's requests for addenda and assistance is outside the scope of normal services, the parties shall proceed in accordance with the changes and extra work provisions of Section 8 of these General Conditions.
10. Professional Ability. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor and its employees are skilled and able to competently provide the services hereunder, and possess all professional licenses, certifications, and approvals necessary to engage in their occupations.
City has relied upon the professional ability and training of Contractor as a material inducement to enter into this Contract. Contractor shall perform in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and standards of Contractor's profession. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, desires the removal of any person employed or retained by Contractor to perform services hereunder, such person shall be removed immediately upon receiving notice from City.
11. Business License
. Contractor shall obtain a Richmond Business License
before performing any services required under this Contract. The failure to so obtain such license shall be a material breach of this Contract and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however, that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual or extraordinary circumstances without necessitating any modification of this Contract to reflect such waiver.
12. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, City may, in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Contract at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder, immediately upon written notice to Contractor. Contractor may terminate this Contract at any time in its sole and absolute discretion and without cause upon 30 days' written notice to City. In the event of termination by either party, Contractor shall be compensated for: (1) all authorized work satisfactorily performed prior to the effective date of termination; (2) necessary materials or services of others ordered by Contractor for this Contract, prior to receipt of notice of termination, irrespective of whether such materials or services of others have actually been delivered, provided that Contractor is not able to cancel such orders. Compensation for Contractor in such event shall be determined by City in accordance with the percentage of the project or services completed by Contractor; and all of Contractor's finished or unfinished work product through the time of the City's last payment shall be transferred and assigned to City. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
854
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 6 of 13
13. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Contract, City may immediately terminate this Contract by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided in Section 12 of these General Conditions; provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damage, including attorney's fees, expert witness fees and costs, if any, sustained by City by virtue of Contractor's breach of this Contract. Additionally, in the event of such termination, the City may proceed with the work in any reasonable manner it chooses.
14. Conflict of Interest. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Contract. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that no City official or employee has any economic interest, as defined in Title 2, California Code of Regulations §§ 18703.1 through 18703.5, with Contractor that would invalidate this Contract. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Contract, all consideration received under this Contract shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Contract for one (1) year.
15. Indemnification.
(a) If this Contract is a contract for design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8(a) and Contractor is a design professional, as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(b)(2), Contractor shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, and expenses including attorneys’ fees arising out of, or pertaining to, or relating to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor, except where caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of the City. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall immediately defend and indemnify the City and its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all liabilities, regardless of nature or type, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor, or its employees, agents, or subcontractors.
Liabilities subject to the duties to defend and indemnify include, without limitation, any and all claims, losses, damages, penalties, fines, and judgments; associated investigation and administrative expenses; defense costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys’ fees; court costs; and costs of alternative dispute resolution. Contractor’s obligation to 855
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 7 of 13
indemnify applies unless it is finally adjudicated that the liability was caused by the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of an indemnified party.
(b) If this Contract is not a contract for design professional services subject to California Civil Code Section 2782.8(a) or Contractor is not a design professional as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(b)(2), Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers from any and all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind and description, brought forth on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property arising from or connected with the willful misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions, ultra-hazardous activities, activities giving rise to strict liability, or defects in design by Contractor or any person directly or indirectly employed by, or acting as, the agent for Contractor in the performance of this Contract, including the concurrent or successive passive negligence of the City, its officers, agents, employees or volunteers.
(c) It is understood that the duty of Contractor to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Contractor shall be obligated to defend, in all legal, equitable, administrative, or special proceedings, with counsel approved by the City, the City and its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, immediately upon tender to Contractor of the claim in any form or at any stage of an action or proceeding, whether or not liability is established. An allegation or determination that persons other than Contractor are responsible for the claim does not relieve Contractor from its separate and distinct obligation to defend under this Section 15. The obligation to defend extends through final judgment, including exhaustion of any appeals. The defense obligation includes an obligation to provide independent counsel if Contractor asserts that liability is caused in whole, or in part, by the negligence or willful misconduct of an indemnified party. (d) The review, acceptance or approval of the Contractor’s work or work product by any indemnified party shall not affect, relieve or reduce the Contractor’s indemnification or defense obligations. This Section 15 survives completion of the services or the termination of this Contract.
The provisions of this Section 15 are not limited by, and do not affect, the provisions of this Contract relating to insurance.
(e) Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Contract does not relieve Contractor from liability under this Section
15. This Section 15 shall apply whether or not such insurance policies are determined to be applicable to any such damages or claims for damages.
16. Safety
. Contractor acknowledges that the City is committed to the highest standards of workplace safety. Contractor shall perform all work hereunder in full compliance with applicable local, state and federal safety requirements including but not limited to Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements, and shall assume sole and complete 856
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 8 of 13
responsibility for the safety of Contractor's employees and any subContractor's employees. If a death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract, Contractor shall immediately notify the City by telephone.
17. Insurance. Insurance requirements are set forth in Exhibit F to this Contract. Contractor shall abide by the insurance requirements set forth in said Exhibit F.
18. Non-Liability of Officials and Employees of the City. No official or employee of the City shall be personally liable for any default or liability under this Contract.
19. Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations, and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies or tribunals, with respect to this Contract, including without limitation environmental laws, employment discrimination laws and prevailing wage laws. Compliance under this provision includes compliance with all provisions of the Richmond Municipal Code ("Municipal Code"), including Chapters 2.50, 2.52, 2.56, and 2.60, if applicable.
Contractor acknowledges that under § 2.60.070 of the Municipal Code ("Living Wage Ordinance"), Contractor shall promptly provide to City documents and information verifying its compliance with the Living Wage Ordinance. Also as prescribed in § 2.60.070, Contractor shall notify each of its affected employees with regards to the wages that are required to be paid pursuant to the Living Wage Ordinance.
Contractor shall comply with § 2.28.030 of the Municipal Code, obligating every Contractor or subcontractor under a contract or subcontract with the City for public work or for goods or for services to refrain from discriminatory employment or subcontracting practices on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, any applicant for employment or any potential subcontractor.
Contractor acknowledges that the City’s Drug Free Workplace Policy, Violence in the Workplace Policy and the Policy Against Workplace Harassment, are available on the City’s website at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/workplacepolicies
. Contractor agrees to
abide by the terms and conditions of said policies.
20. Limitations upon Subcontracting and Assignment. This Contract binds the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of Contractor. The Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for any work contemplated 857
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 9 of 13
under this Contract and shall not assign this Contract, nor any portion hereof or monies due or to become due, without the prior written consent of the City Council or its designee.
Contractor acknowledges that the services which Contractor shall provide under this Contract are unique, personal services which, except as otherwise provided herein, Contractor shall not assign or sublet to any other party without the prior written approval of City, which approval may be withheld in City's sole and absolute discretion. In the event that City, in writing, approves any assignment or subletting of this Contract or the retention of subcontractors by Contractor, Contractor shall provide to City upon request copies of each and every subcontract contract prior to the execution thereof by Contractor and subcontractor. Any assignment by Contractor of any or all of its rights under this Contract without first obtaining City's prior written consent shall be a default under this Contract.
The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor (if applicable), or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member if Contractor is a partnership or joint-venture or syndicate, which shall result in a change of control of Contractor, shall be deemed an assignment. For this purpose, control shall mean fifty percent or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture.
21. Integration
. This Contract constitutes the entire agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous oral or written agreement; provided, however, that correspondence or documents exchanged between Contractor and City may be used to assist in the interpretation of the Exhibits to this Contract.
22. Modifications and Amendments. This Contract may be modified or amended only by a change order or Contract Amendment executed by both parties and approved as to form by the City Attorney.
23. Conflicting Provisions. In the event of a conflict between these General Conditions and those of any Exhibit or attachment hereto, these General Conditions shall prevail; provided, however, that any Special Conditions as set forth in Exhibit E shall prevail over these General Conditions. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more Exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by City shall prevail over those prepared by the Contractor, and the terms and conditions preferred by the City shall prevail over those preferred by the Contractor.
24. Non-exclusivity. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the services provided by Contractor hereunder shall be non-exclusive, and 858
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 10 of 13
City reserves the right to employ other Contractors in connection with the project.
25. Exhibits. All Exhibits hereto are made a part hereof and incorporated herein by reference; provided, however, that any language in Exhibit A which does not pertain to the project description, proposal, scope of services, or method of compensation (as applicable) , or any corresponding responsibilities of City, shall be deemed extraneous to, and not a part of, this Contract.
26. Force Majeure. Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations hereunder to the extent that the performance of such an obligation is prevented or delayed by reason of acts of God, strikes, boycotts, lock-outs, inability to procure materials not related to the price thereof, failure of power, restrictive governmental laws and regulations enacted after the date of this Contract, riots, civil unrest, acts of terrorism, insurrection, war, declaration of a state or national emergency or other reasons of a like nature not within the reasonable control of such party.
27. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Contract. Contractor and City agree that any time period set forth in Exhibit A represents their best estimates with respect to completion dates and both Contractor and City acknowledge that departures from the schedule may occur.
Therefore, both Contractor and City will use reasonable efforts to notify one another of changes to the schedule. Contractor shall not be responsible for performance delays caused by others, or delays beyond Contractor's control, and such delays shall extend the times for performance of Contractor's work.
28. Confidentiality. Contractor agrees to comply with, and to require its employees, agents and partners to comply with, all applicable State or Federal statutes or regulations respecting confidentially, including but not limited to, the identity of persons served under this Contract, their records, or services provided them, and assures that:
All applications and records concerning any individual made or kept by Contractor or any public officer or agency in connection with the administration of or relating to services provided under this Contract will be confidential, and will not be open to examination for any purposes not directly connected with the administration of such service.
No person will publish or disclose or permit or cause to be published or disclosed, any list of persons receiving services, except as may be required in the administration of such service.
859
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 11 of 13
29. Third Parties. Nothing herein shall be interpreted as creating any rights or benefits in any third parties. For purposes hereof, transferees or assignees as permitted under this Contract shall not be considered "third parties."
30. Governing Law. This Contract shall be construed in accordance with the law of the State of California without regard to principles of conflicts of law.
This Contract is made in Contra Costa County, California, and any action relating to this Contract shall be instituted and prosecuted in the courts of Contra Costa County, California.
31. Nonrenewal. Contractor understands and agrees that there is no representation, implication, or understanding that the services provided by Contractor under this Contract will be purchased or renewed by the City under a new contract following expiration or termination of this Contract, and waives all rights or claims to notice or hearing respecting any failure by City to continue the purchase of all or any failure to continue purchase of all or any such services from Contractor.
32. Claims. Any claim by Contractor against City hereunder shall be subject to Government Code §§ 800 et seq. The claims presentation provisions of said Act are hereby modified such that the presentation of all claims hereunder to the City shall be waived if not made within six months after accrual of the cause of action.
33. Interpretation. This Contract shall be interpreted as if drafted by both parties.
34. Warranty. In the event that any product shall be provided to the City as part of this Contract, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the product and the right to transfer the product to City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the product meets any specifications contained herein; the product shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of one (1) year from the date of delivery; and the product shall be fit for its intended purpose(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, consumable and maintenance items (such as light bulbs and batteries) shall be warranted for a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of delivery. All repairs during the warranty period shall be promptly performed by Contractor, at Contractor's expense, including shipping.
35. Severability. In the event that any of the provisions or portions or applications thereof of this Contract are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, City and Contractor shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the Contract with a view 860
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 12 of 13
toward effecting the purpose of this Contract, and the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or applications thereof, shall not be affected thereby.
36. Authority. City warrants and represents that the signatory hereto (the Mayor of the City of Richmond or the City Manager) is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of City. The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor, and shall be personally liable to City if he or she is not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Contract on behalf of Contractor.
37. Waiver. The waiver by City of any breach of any term or provision of this Contract shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach.
Inspections or approvals, or statements by any officer, agent or employee of the City relating to the Contractor’s performance, or payments therefore, or any combination of these acts, shall not relieve the Contractor’s obligation to fulfill this Contract as prescribed; nor shall the City be thereby stopped from bringing any action for damages or enforcement arising from any failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this Contract.
38. Possessory Interest. If this Contract results in the Contractor having possession of, claim to or right to the possession of land or improvements, but does not vest ownership of the land or improvements in the same person, or if this Contract results in the placement of taxable improvements on tax exempt land (Revenue and Taxation Code 107), such interest or improvements may represent a possessory interest subject to property tax, and Contractor may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest.
39. Performance and Final Acceptance.
Contractor represents that it is experienced, qualified, registered, licensed, equipped, organized and financed to perform the services under this Contract.
Contractor shall perform the services under this Contract with that degree of skill and judgment normally exercised by professional firms performing services of a similar nature in the State of California, and shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy and coordination of the services it performs under this Contract. In addition to the other rights and remedies which City may have, Contractor shall, at its own expense, correct any services which fail to meet the above standard.
861
General Conditions/EJ/TE 01-19-11 13 of 13
City shall provide Contractor an opportunity to cure errors and omission which may be disclosed during the review of submittals, with no increase in the authorized Contract Payment Limit. Should Contractor fail to make necessary corrections in a timely manner, such corrections shall be made by the City and the cost thereof shall be charged to Contractor.
If warranted, City shall determine, and Contractor may request such determination, that Contractor has satisfactorily completed performance of this Contract. Upon such determination, City shall issue to Contractor a written Notice of Final Acceptance, after which Contractor shall not incur further costs under this Contract. Contractor shall respond to such Notice of Final Acceptance by executing and submitting to City a Release and Certificate of Final Payment.
40. Survival
. The rights and obligations of the parties which by their nature survive termination or completion of the services covered by this Contract shall remain in full force and effect after termination or completion. 862
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT E
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
The General Conditions are hereby amended to include the following modifications and/or provisions (if applicable):
863
864
865
866
CITY OF RICHMOND
Sanctuary City Compliance Statement
The undersigned, an authorized agent of (hereafter
"Contractor"), has had an opportunity to review the requirements of City of Richmond Ordinance 12 -18 (hereafter "Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance" or “SCCO”). Contractor understands and agrees that the City may choose with whom it will maintain business relations and may refrain from contracting with any person or entity that provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the United States Department of Homeland Security (“ICE”). Contractor understands the meaning of the following terms used in the SCCO:
a. "Data Broker” means either of the following:
i. The collection of information, including personal information about consumers, from a wide variety of sources for the purposes of reselling such information to their customers, which include both private-sector business and government agencies;
ii. The aggregation of data that was collected for another purpose from that for which it is ultimately used.
b. “Extreme Vetting” means data mining, threat modeling, predictive risk analysis, or other similar services."
Contractor understands that it is not eligible to receive or retain a City contract if at the time the Contract is executed, or at any time during the term of the Contract, it provides Data Broker or Extreme Vetting services to ICE.
Contractor further understands and agrees that Contractor's failure to comply with the SCCO shall constitute a material default of the Contract and the City Manager may terminate the Contract and bar Contractor from bidding on future contracts with the City for five (5) years from the effective date of the contract termination.
By executing this Statement, Contractor certifies that it complies with the requirements of the SCCO and that if at any time during the term of the Contract it ceases to comply, Contractor will promptly notify the City Manager in writing. Any person or entity who knowingly or willingly supplies false information in violation of the SCCO shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a $1,000 fine.
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this day of , 20 , at , California.
Printed Name: Title:
Signed: Date:
Business Entity:
Vendor SCCO Compliance Statement (Augt2020)
867
For the Contract between the City of
Richmond and
EXHIBIT F
INSURANCE PROVISIONS
During the entire term of this Contract and any extension or modification thereof, the CONTRACTOR shall keep in effect insurance policies meeting the insurance requirements specified in the insurance provisions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
868
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements - Type 2:
Professional Services
Type 2 – Page 1 of 3
Revised: September 2011
In all instances where CONTRACTOR or its representatives will provide professional services (architects, engineers, construction management, counselors, medical professionals, hospitals, clinics, attorneys, consultants, accountants, etc.) to the City of Richmond (City), the City requires the following MINIMUM insurance requirements and limits.
CONTRACTOR shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, agreement, or other order for work, services or supplies, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of that work by the CONTRACTOR, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Maintenance of proper insurance coverage is a material element of the contract. Failure to maintain or renew coverage or to provide evidence of renewal may be treated by the City as a material breach of contract.
CONTRACTOR agrees that in the event of loss due to any of the perils for which it has agreed to provide Commercial General Liability insurance, CONTRACTOR shall look solely to its insurance for recovery.
CONTRACTOR hereby grants to CITY, on behalf of any insurer providing Commercial General Liability insurance to either CONTRACTOR or CITY with respect to the services of CONSULTANT herein, a waiver of any right to subrogation which any such insurer of said CONTRACTOR may acquire against the CITY by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.
Original, signed certificates and original, separate policy endorsements, naming the City as an additional insured for general liability coverage, as well as a waiver of subrogation for Workers’ Compensation insurance, shall be received and approved by the City before any work may begin. However, failure to do so shall not operate as a waiver of these insurance requirements.
City reserves the right to modify or require additional coverages for specific risk exposures depending on scope of CONTRACTORS work.
Minimum coverage is detailed below. The policy limits of coverage shall be made available to the full limits of the policy. The minimum limits stated herein shall not serve to reduce the policy limits of coverage of CONTRACTOR.
Minimum Scope of Insurance – the following forms shall be provided and coverage shall be at least as broad as the following:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (ISO Occurrence Form CG 0001), and including coverage for bodily and personal injury, property damage, and products and completed operations (if applicable).
2. Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability coverage (ISO Form CA 0001, Code 1, Any Auto).
3. Original and Separate Additional Insured Endorsement for General Liability (ISO Form CG 20 10 11/85 or its equivalent) with primary and non-contributory language.
4. Workers’ Compensation Insurance as required by the State of California including Employer’s Liability coverage.
5. Original and Separate Waiver of Subrogation for Workers’ Compensation insurance.
6. Professional Liability or Errors & Omissions Liability Insurance appropriate to the CONTRACTOR’s profession (if required.)
Required Coverage Minimum Limits
Workers’ Compensation and
Employers’ Liability
Statutory limits as required by the State of California including $1 million Employers’ Liability per accident, per employee for bodily injury or disease.
If CONTRACTOR is self-insured, provide a certificate of Permission to Self- Insure, signed by the California Department of Industrial Relations and Self- Insurance. If contractor is a sole proprietor (has no employees) than contractor must sign “Contractor Release of Liability” found at:
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.
General Liability
(primary and excess limits
combined)
$2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If the policy includes a general aggregate, either the general aggregate shall apply separately to this project, service or location or the minimum required aggregate limit shall be twice the per occurrence limit ($4 million aggregate limit).
Policy shall be endorsed to name the City of Richmond as an additional insured per the conditions detailed below.
869
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements - Type 2:
Professional Services
Type 2 – Page 2 of 3
Revised: September 2011
Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage.
PROJECT COST R EQUIRED LIMIT
$0 - $1 million $1 million p/o
$1 million - $5 million $2 million p/o
Over $5 million $5 million p/o
Professional Liability or Errors &
Omissions Liability –
Required for all professionals
including architects, engineers,
consultants, construction
management, counselors, medical
professionals, hospitals, clinics,
attorneys and accountants, & other
consultants as may be required by
the City.
Required Policy Conditions
Additional Insured Endorsement
Applicable to General Liability coverage.
The City of Richmond, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be named as additional insureds for all liability arising out of the operations by or on behalf of the named insured including bodily injury, deaths and property damage or destruction arising in any respect directly or indirectly in the performance of this contract.
ISO form CG 20 10 (11/85) or its equivalent is required. If the Contractor is supplying their product or providing a service then the endorsement must not
exclude products and completed operations
coverage. If it does, then CG 20 37 (10/01) is also required.
SAMPLE Endorsements can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61
.
Primary and Noncontributory The contractor’s insurance coverage must be primary coverage as it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self insurance maintained by the City is wholly separate from the insurance of the contractor and in no way relieves the contractor from its responsibility to provide insurance.
Waiver of Subrogation
Endorsement Form
Contractor’s insurer will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for Workers’ Compensation Insurance during the life of this contract.
SAMPLE Endorsements can be found at
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=61.
Deductibles and Self-Insured
Retentions
Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retention as respects the City or the CONTRACTOR shall procure a financial guarantee in an amount equal to the deductible or self-insured retention guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.
Contractor is responsible for satisfaction of the deductible and/or self-insured retention for each loss.
A. M. Best Rating A:VII or Better. If the A.M. Best Rating falls below the required rating, CONTRACTOR must replace coverage immediately and provide notice to City.
Umbrella/Excess Liability Policies
If an Umbrella or Excess Liability Policy is used to meet the liability limits, coverage shall be as broad as specified for underlying coverage’s and cover those insured in the underlying policies.
870
___ Exhibit F
___ Section 8
City of Richmond - Insurance Requirements - Type 2:
Professional Services
Type 2 – Page 3 of 3
Revised: September 2011
Claims-Made Policies
If any insurance policy is written on a claims-made form: 1) the retroactive date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work. 2) Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work. 3) If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase an extended period coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.
Subcontractors
CONTRACTOR
shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall furnish to the City for review and approval, separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
CONTRACTOR agrees to defend and indemnify the City of Richmond for any damage resulting to it from failure of either CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor to take out or maintain the required insurance policies.
The fact that
insurance is obtained by CONTRACTOR, and/or CONTRACTOR’s subcontractors, will not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of CONTRACTOR, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this contract. Damages recoverable by CITY from CONTRACTOR or any third party will not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.
Verification of Coverage
All original certificates and endorsements shall be received and approved by the City before work may begin .
The City of Richmond reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies including endorsements affecting the coverage at any time.
Original insurance certificates and required policy endorsements shall be mailed or delivered to the Designated Project Manager for the City of Richmond.
Insurance certificates and endorsements may be faxed to the Designated Project Manger. However, CONTRACTOR must mail the original certificates and endorsements to Designated Project Manager once faxed.
Continuous Coverage
CONTRACTOR shall maintain the required insurance for the life of the contract. Should the CONTRACTOR cease to have insurance as required during this time, all work by the CONTRACTOR pursuant to this agreement shall cease until insurance acceptable to the City is provided. In the event that CONTRACTOR fails to comply with the City’s insurance requirements, the City may take such action as it deems necessary to protect the City’s interests. Such action may include but is not limited to termination of the contract, withholding of payments, or other actions as the City deems appropriate.
If services or the scope of work extend beyond the expiration dates of the required insurance policies initially approved by the City, CONTRACTOR must provide updated certificates and endorsements indicating that the required coverage, terms and conditions are still in place. Renewal certificates and updated endorsements shall be mailed to the Designated Project Manager.
Cancellation
CONTRACTOR shall ensure that coverage shall not be cancelled, reduced or otherwise materially changed except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice has been given to the City.
Reporting Requirements
Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
Consistent with Public Policy
The insuring provisions, insofar as they may be judged to be against public policy shall be void and unenforceable only to the minimum extent necessary so that the remaining terms and provisions herein may be consistent with public policy and thus enforceable.
871
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
872
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
873
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
874
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
875
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
876
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
877
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
878
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
879
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
880
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
881
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
882
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
883
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
884
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
885
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
886
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
887
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
888
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
889
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
890
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
891
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
892
City of Richmond
Sports Officials for Participants in Recreation Sports Programs, bidding on 05/26/2023 5:00 PM (PDT)
Printed 06/01/2023
PlanetBids, Inc.
893
September 12, 2023
Library and Community Services
DATE: September 12, 2023
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:
LaShonda White, Deputy City Manager-Community
Services
Ranjana Maharaj, Deputy Director, Community Services-
Recreation
Tetteh Kisseh, Recreation Supervisor
Subject:
Memorandum of Understanding with Youth Tennis
Advantage for Instructional Programs at Nicholl Park and Martin Luther King, Jr. Tennis Courts
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The annual net value of the Partner’s contribution in services towards the City of Richmond is equal to
$88,620 annually and $443,100 for a five-year period.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
None
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
Approve the Memorandum of Understanding between the
City of Richmond and Youth Tennis Advantage to provide
tennis instructions at Nicholl Park and Martin Luther King, Jr. (MLK) Tennis Courts at no cost to the participants and the City of Richmond.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
APPROVE the Memorandum of Understanding between
the City of Richmond and Youth Tennis Advantage, for a
term from July 1, 2023, to June 30, 2028, to provide
tennis instructions at Nicholl Park and Martin Luther King, Jr. tennis courts at no cost to the participants and the City of Richmond – Community Services Department
(Ranjana Maharaj 510-620-6972/ Tetteh Kisseh 510-620-
6919).
AGENDA
REPORT
894
September 12, 2023
DISCUSSION:
On July 19, 2022, the City Council approved the Fee Waiver and Partnership Policy (Policy) to allow for partnering with outside organizations that can provide services that benefit the Richmond community and to provide support to organizations that provide a community service through an equitable process. Based upon this policy, City staff is bringing forth a partnership application for Youth Tennis Advantage who is interested in providing youth tennis instructions at the following locations at no cost to the participants and the City of Richmond:
Recreation Complex-Nicholl Park Tennis Courts located at 32nd Street and Macdonald Avenue
MLK Jr. Park- Tennis Courts located at Harbour Way and Virgina Avenue
As per the below chart, Youth Tennis Advantage’s annual contribution towards this program amounts to $88,620 annually and $443,100 for a five-year period. This amount covers the cost of program materials and stipends for volunteers.
Youth Tennis Advantage Proposed Budget Estimate for the Tennis Instructions
SUMMER SESSION --
MLK and Nicholl Park
COMMODITY COST
Nicholl Park Summer 6-
week program, 2x days per
week
(program is 2 hours per
day)
Staff
Tennis Balls and equipment
Program T-Shirts
Staff Uniforms (Hat, T-shirt,
Jackets)
$4,320
$600
$175
$400
Total $5,495
MLK Summer
2.5-week program 5x days
per week (program is 2-
hours per day)
Staff
Tennis Balls and equipment
Program T-Shirts
Staff Uniforms (Hat, T-shirt,
Jackets)
$4,500
$600
$175
$400
Total $5,675
895
September 12, 2023
AFTER-SCHOOL
PROGRAM -- Nicholl
Park Tennis Courts
COMMODITY COST
Nicholl Park After-School
Program. Year-Round
except summer (see
above). Approx 40-weeks,
5x days per week (program
is 2 hours per day)
Staff
Tennis Balls and equipment
Program T-Shirts
Staff Uniforms (Hat, T-shirt,
Jackets)
$75,000
$1,250
$800
$400
Total $77,450
Estimated total cost for Youth
Tennis Advantage to provide
programming year-round
$88,620
The total proposed budget estimate for Youth Tennis Advantage to provide tennis instructions at Nicholl Park and MLK Jr. Park year-round is $88,620.
Since the Recreation Division is not offering and does not have the staff to teach this program to our community through its regular programs, Recreation is seeking a partnership opportunity with Youth Tennis Advantage to offer this program free of charge to our community.
City staff is seeking City Council approval of the partnership Memorandum of Understanding between Youth Tennis Advantage and the City of Richmond.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – Memorandum of Understanding with Youth Tennis Advantage
896
1 City of Richmond
Community Services -
Recreation
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
CITY OF RICHMOND
COMMUNITY SERVICES -RECREATION
&
Youth Tennis Advantage
1717 Powell St Ste 100
San Francisco CA 94133
897
2 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
This Memorandum of Understanding “MOU” effective as of July 1, 2023, is entered by the City of Richmond (“City”) and Youth Tennis Advantage. Collectively, City and Youth Tennis Advantage are referred to as the “Parties” and individually, as a “Party”.
RECITALS
Whereas, Youth Tennis Advantage, located in San Francisco, CA, reached out to City staff and informed staff that they are willing to start a Youth Tennis program at Nicholl Park (Afterschool) and Martin Luther King, Jr. (MLK) Park (Summer Sports Camp) at no cost to the City and participants.
Whereas, the Parties wish to set forth the terms and understanding between them with respect to a Tennis Program at the following locations;
Nicholl Park Tennis Courts, Recreation Complex, 3230 Macdonald Avenue, Richmond, CA MLK Tennis Courts, 360 Harbour Way South, Richmond, CA
Whereas, City staff shall provide supervision over this program; Whereas, City staff shall provide tennis courts, classroom space, tables and chairs for this program; Whereas, City staff will ensure that sign-in sheets are kept for each class session; Whereas, both Parties will assist with the supervision of the participants; Whereas, City staff will review and approve all promotional material prior to release and distribution where such materials include the City ’s name along with Youth Tennis Advantage; Whereas City staff will ensure that all instructors and volunteers complete and comply with the City’s Tuberculosis testing and fingerprinting protocol(s); Whereas, Youth Tennis Advantage staff and instructors will provide all equipment and supplies necessary to make this program possible and available at no cost to the City nor the participants; and Whereas, Youth Tennis Advantage will provide after-school classes to tennis participants
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, and for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
Purpose of MOU. This MOU sets forth the terms and understanding among the Parties and is intended to reflect the Parties’ commitment to cooperate and work together to support the success of the Tennis Program.
This MOU outlines the Parties’ collaboration and expectations. The Parties find and determine the foregoing recitals to be true and correct and incorporated herein by reference as it set forth in full. 898
3 Collaboration. The Parties hereby agree to undertake good-faith efforts to establish the Tennis Program such that instructions start and end on schedule and participants are enriched physically, academically, and culturally through Tennis.
Staffing. Each Party shall provide staff time to support the activities subject to this MOU, and each Party shall be responsible for ensuring that staffing positions remain sufficient to fulfill each Party’s obligations as set forth in this MOU. Current staffing list includes:
1. Staff person to be responsible for the day-to-day work of the Program:
a. City: Maurice Range
b. Youth Tennis Advantage - Shahand Esmaeili
2. High-level leader with authority to make decisions on behalf of each respective Party:
a. City: Tetteh Kisseh
b. Youth Tennis Advantage - Shahand Esmaeili
Notices. Any notices required or permitted to be given under or in this MOU shall be in writing, and shall be deemed to be effective upon delivery, including by email, unless such address is changed by written notice hereunder:
If to City’s Community Services-Recreation:
Tetteh Kisseh
3230 Macdonald Ave
Richmond, CA 94804
Email: [email protected]
If to Youth Tennis Advantage -
Shahand Esmaeili
1717 Powell St Ste 100
San Francisco CA 94133
Discretion. Each Party, including their respective employees, et al., shall exercise its sole discretion over all matters relating to the MOU and over each decision over which it bears responsibility.
No Joint Venture. Nothing in this MOU shall be construed as creating the right or ability of any Party to bind the other except as provided in this MOU. Nothing in this MOU shall be construed as creating a partnership, joint venture, employment or agency relationship between City, Community Services-Recreation, and Youth Tennis Advantage. Each Party shall conduct all of its activities under this MOU in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.
Public Records. City’s Community Services-Recreation and Youth Tennis Advantage acknowledge and agree that this MOU and communications and documents exchanged between the Parties are subject to the California Public Records Act and any locally applicable laws, and/or regulations.
Nondiscrimination. In the performance of its obligations and activities under this MOU, the Parties each agree not to discriminate against any of its employees or against any person on the basis of the fact or perception of a person’s race, color, creed, religion, national origin, ancestry, age, height, weight, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, domestic partner status, marital status, disability or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome or HIV status (AIDS/HIV status), or association with members of such protected classes, or in retaliation for opposition to discrimination against such classes.
Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Youth Tennis Advantage shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City and its officers, employees, elected and appointed officials, and volunteers (the 899
4 “Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, lawsuits (whether at law, equity or both), proceedings, liabilities, losses, damages, expenses, costs (including without limitation attorney’s fees and costs and expert witness fees), judgments, penalties, and liens of every nature resulting from injury to or death sustained by any person, or damage to property of any kind, or any other injury or damage whatsoever, which injury, death or damage arises out of or is in any way connected with Youth Tennis Advantage performance of work under this MOU, except that said indemnity shall not be applicable to injury, death or damage to property arising from the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of City, their officers, agents, or servants.
Insurance. Youth Tennis Advantage shall procure and maintain during the MOU’s term and shall obtain a policy endorsement naming City of Richmond, Community Services-Recreation as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies.
Amendment. This MOU may be amended only by a writing signed by all Parties.
Assignment. This MOU may not be assigned or delegated by any Party without the prior written approval of the other Party.
Effective Date and Termination. This MOU will be effective from July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2028. Either Party may terminate the MOU for any or no reason, with or without cause, with 14-days advance written notice.
Upon the termination of this MOU, all obligations and rights of the Parties shall cease and be of no further force or effect, provided, however, those rights and obligations that by their nature are intended to survive the termination of this MOU shall so survive.
Governing Law; Venue. This MOU and all disputes arising here from, whether in contract or in tort, shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties agree that the exclusive venue for the resolution of any dispute relating to the subject matter of this MOU shall be in Contra Costa County in California.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement through their duly authorized representatives effective as of _____________ ___, 2023.
900
5 CITY OF RICHMOND PARTNER: YOUTH TENNIS ADVANTAGE ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Mayor Michael Skinner, Executive Director
______________________________________ ______________________________________ Date: Date:
Approved as to form:
_____________________________________
City Attorney
Attest:
_____________________________________
City Clerk
901
September 12, 2023
Library and Community Services
DATE: September 12, 2023
TO: Mayor Martinez and Members of the City Council
FROM:
LaShonda White, Deputy City Manager
Denée Evans, Project Manager
Subject:
Clean Mobility Options Electric Shuttle Calstart Funding Agreement Amendment 1
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funding to cover the $450,000 Nomad Transit, LLC (dba Via Transportation, Inc.) contract will come from the
additional $500,000 awarded from the State of California Air Resources Board (CARB) Clean Mobility Options
Project Voucher Pilot Program. The remaining $50,000
from the CARB grant will support EV infrastructure.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL
ACTION:
July 6, 2021, April 5, 2022, and December 6, 2022
STATEMENT OF THE
ISSUE:
City staff is requesting City Council approval for the first amendment of the State of California Air Resources
Board Clean Mobility Options Project Voucher Pilot
Program funding agreement and a third contract
amendment between the City of Richmond and Via
Transportation, Inc.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
APPROVE a first amendment to the funding agreement
between the City of Richmond and the State of California Air Resources Board (CARB) Clean Mobility Options
Project Voucher Pilot Program to increase the funding
agreement by $500,000, for a total agreement amount
not to exceed $1,500,000, in support of the expansion of the Richmond Moves shuttle program; ACCEPT and
APPROPRIATE $500,000 from CARB; and APPROVE a
third contract amendment with Nomad Transit, LLC (dba
AGENDA
REPORT
902
September 12, 2023
Via Transportation, Inc.) adding an amount of $450,000, for a total amount not to exceed $2,100,731, to expand
the Richmond Moves shuttle operations through July 7,
2024 – Community Services Department, Transportation
Division (LaShonda White 510-620-6828/Denée Evans
510-621-1718).
DISCUSSION:
On July 6, 2021, the Richmond City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a funding agreement between the City of Richmond and the State of California Air Resources Board (CARB) Clean Mobility Options Mobility (CMO) Project Voucher Pilot Program for $1,000,000, and also approved a three-year service contract with Nomad Transit, LLC (dba Via Transportation, Inc.) in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000 to develop and operate the Richmond Moves shuttle service.
On June 15, 2023, Richmond Transportation staff received notification that CARB awarded the City an additional $500,000 in CMO funds to support the Richmond Moves service expansion plan. City staff plan to use $450,000 of the $500,000 CARB award to fund the Nomad Transit, LLC (dba Via Transportation, Inc.) contract amendment in support of the Richmond Moves expansion. The remaining $50,000 from the CARB grant will support EV infrastructure.
The CMO Voucher Program provides direct reimbursement for all eligible program costs (outreach to implementation) during the five-year funding term. CMO funded projects must be fully operating for at least four years from the date of Operation Launch with requirements for awardees to furnish plans to operate and financially sustain the program during years three and four of the agreement term.
To recap, the CMO Voucher Agreement Term is five years, which entails up to one year for project design, planning and construction, and a minimum of four years of service operation of which three of the four years allow grant reimbursements (see Figure 1 below). The Richmond Moves program is currently within the second year of project operation. Per the terms of the grant, Transportation staff continues to seek additional funds to sustain the Richmond Moves shuttle program beyond the CMO grant term.
903
September 12, 2023
On April 5, 2022, the Richmond City Council approved the first contract amendment with Via Transportation, Inc. to provide wheelchair accessible vehicle service to support the CMO project with a cash match in the amount of $338,231 for a total not to exceed amount of $1,338,231.
On December 6, 2022, the Richmond City Council authorized a resolution for staff to accept and appropriate $250,000 from the Federal Transit Administration Enhancing Mobility Innovation funds (FTA EMI) and the required ECIA grant match of $62,500.
The FTA funds would be used to allow the R-Transit program to use the Via software to improve ridership scheduling and to expand vehicle service hours that will allow local R-Transit riders to use the Richmond Moves shuttle for local trips. City Council also approved a second contract amendment with Via Transportation, Inc. to incorporate the $250,000 in FTA EMI funds, and the ECIA grant match of $62,500 which increased the contract (the second contract amendment) in the amount of $312,500 for a total not to exceed amount of $1,650,731 to comingle Via software and services to improve scheduling and ridership inefficiencies within the R-Transit program.
Since the April 2022 launch of the Richmond Moves shuttle program, both the ridership as well as community requests for expansion have significantly increased. As of March 2023, Richmond Moves had 314 unique riders per month and provided individuals with 2,571 rides. However, expansion has been previously limited due to the lack of funds needed to support additional operations.
In March 2023, CARB announced that the CMO Program Administration Team had set aside up to $500,000 in additional plus-up funding for the first round CMO awardees to support their projects. The Richmond Moves on demand shuttle project is a first round CMO program awardee and the first and only project that has been in operation over a year. Richmond Transportation submitted justification for expansion and an application for consideration to receive the full amount of plus up funds.
On June 15, 2023, Richmond Transportation staff received an email stating that CARB approved the City’s request to receive the full $500,000 in CMO plus up funds to support the Richmond Moves service expansion plan as illustrated in purple in Figure 2.
904
September 12, 2023
Figure 2. Richmond Moves Service Area and Expansion Plan
If approved by City Council, the receipt of the additional $500,000 in CMO funds will be used to add two shuttle vans, which includes $50,000 for electric vehicle charging service equipment and installation expenses that will enable the Richmond Transportation Department to expand rides outside of the existing Richmond Moves service area.
The proposed additional funds require increasing the funding agreement between the City of Richmond and CARB for a total not to exceed amount of $1,500,000, as well as require a third contract amendment between the City of Richmond and Via Inc. in the amount of $450,000 for a total amount not to exceed $2,100,731.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
Attachment 1 – CARB CMO Funding Agreement
Attachment 2 – CARB CMO Funding Agreement Amendment 1
Attachment 3 – Via Transportation, Inc. Contract & Amendments 1 and 2 Attachment 4 – Via Transportation, Inc. Contract Amendment 3
905
MOBILITY PROJECT VOUCHER
VOUCHER AGREEMENT
FOR
City of Richmond
FOR
Voucher Pilot Program
906
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond Table of Contents
Project Information: 3
Lead Applicant (Awardee) Information 3
Project Title 3
Project Summary 4
Budget (See Exhibit B) 4
Community Resource Contribution Items (See Exhibit D) 4 Project Milestone Schedule (See Exhibit C) 4
Community Outreach Plan (See Exhibit F) 4
Project Area Information 4
Supporting Public Agency Profile (If Applicable) 5
Motor Vehicle Owner Information (If Applicable) 5
Fleet Operator Information (If Available)* 5
Mobility Project Voucher Agreement Terms and Conditions: For Lead Applicant (Awardee): 6 Mobility Project Voucher Agreement Terms and Conditions: For the Program Administrator (CALSTART, Inc.): 11
Voucher Agreement Billings 13
Audits of Records and Site Visits 14
Termination 15
Authority: Attestation and Signature 16
Exhibits 16
Exhibit A: Notice of Proposed Award
Exhibit B: Approved Budget, as amended (as applicable)
Exhibit C: Project Milestone Schedule
Exhibit D: Community Resource Contributions
Exhibit E: Application Modifications and Clarifications Exhibit F: Application Submission and Attachments (Original) Exhibit G: Resolution/Project Approval
Exhibit H: Conflict of Interest Declaration
Exhibit I: Confidentiality Statement
907
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond
VOUCHER AGREEMENT
MOBILITY PROJECT VOUCHER
Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program
This Voucher Agreement reserves funds for the proposed plan outlined in Mobility Project Voucher Application #MP20W1A-11 submitted on 10/20/20 at 9:00:35, as amended by the Program Administrator. Any changes will not be authorized unless signed and approved in writing by the Program Administrator and signed by both parties.
VOUCHER NUMBER: MP20W1A-11
DATE OF EXECUTION: _________________
● VOUCHER AGREEMENT TERM: 5 YEARS FROM VOUCHER EXECUTION DATE:
_________________________
● VOUCHER FUNDING TERM: 3 YEARS FROM VOUCHER EXECUTION DATE:
_________________________
● TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED:
$1,000,000
1) Project Information:
1. Lead Applicant (Awardee) Information
Organization Name: City of Richmond
Organization Type: X Public Agency
Mailing address: 440 Civic Center Plaza, 2nd Floor
City: Richmond State: CA Zip Code: 94804
Project Lead Primary Contact: Denée Evans, Project Manager Phone: (510) 621-1718
Primary Email: [email protected]
2. Project Title: Richmond On-Demand
Sep 13 2021
September 13, 2026
September 13, 2024
908
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond
3. Project Summary: The City of Richmond will use the Clean Mobility Options Mobility Project Voucher to implement the city’s first citywide, on-demand shuttle program in collaboration with Via. The three shared, plug-in hybrid electric shuttles will provide a sustainable, demand-responsive, dynamically routed, microtransit service to bridge transportation gaps and provide connectivity between services and locations in underserved communities. This service will provide a new, innovative, affordable, and accessible transportation option for residents and visitors, reducing congestion and improving public health. The city’s Transportation Department will sponsor a community contest to name the new shuttle service.
4. Budget:
Total Budget $1,000,000 See Exhibit B for details.
Promise to Repay Approved Costs: This voucher represents a promise to repay for approved costs used to (check all that apply):
1. ___ Lease or take ownership of motor vehicle(s) (GVWR 2,000 lbs or more)
2. ___ Lease or take ownership of bicycles, scooters, or other vehicles (under 2,000 lbs GVWR)
3. X Installation of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE)
4. ___ Installation of other infrastructure
5. _X _ Other (Vehicle driver costs for operations are paid by CMO but no actual vehicles funded by CMO. Via is providing vehicles.)
5. Community Resource Contribution Items : See Exhibit D.
6. Project Milestone Schedule: See Exhibit C.
7. Community Outreach Plan: See Exhibit F (Questions 30 and 31 in Application).
8. Project Area Information:
● Location (City/Neighborhood):
City of Richmond
● Project Area Eligibility Basis:
X SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities, indicated by Census Tracts:
6013380000 6013382000 6013381000 6013379000 6013377000 6013376000
909
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond 2) Supporting Public Agency Profile (If Applicable):Must be completed only if the lead applicant is a nonprofit organization. See Letter of Commitment from Public Agency submitted with application.
X
Applicable
Not Applicable
3) Motor Vehicle Owner Information (If Applicable):Information about the party that will take ownership of motor vehicle(s) funded by CMO. May be the same or different party than the lead applicant. Must be completed if the project will take ownership of motor vehicles. Does not apply to vehicles that are not being directly purchased with CMO funds.
X
Applicable
Not Applicable
4) Fleet Operator Information (If Available)* May be the same or different party than the lead applicant and/or vehicle owner.
X Selected
Not Yet Selected
Organization Name: Nomad Transit, LLC (a subsidiary of Via Transportation, Inc.) Primary Contact Name: Garret Brinker, Partnerships Principal Mailing address: 10 Crosby Street, Floor 2
City: New York State: NY Zip Code: 10013
Phone: 574-286-4710 Primary Email: [email protected] * Note: Securement of Mobility Provider with contract is due by first payment request for any vehicle or infrastructure equipment, or within three months from the voucher agreement execution date, whichever is sooner.
910
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond 5) Mobility Project Voucher Agreement Terms and Conditions: For Lead Applicant (Awardee):
As a condition for participating in the State of California, Air Resources Board (CARB)Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program (CMO), implemented through the CMO Implementation Manual, the Lead Applicant, The City of Richmond hereafter referred to as “Awardee,” must comply with the requirements below:
General Requirements
1. CMO Program Compliance. Awardee has read, understands and agrees to all provisions, project criteria, and program requirements of the CMO Voucher Pilot Program, which are contained in the CMO Implementation Manual dated September, 10, 2020 (as well as any changes or updates to the CMO Implementation Manual, which can be found at:
https://www.cleanmobilityoptions.org/implementation-manual/, and the Application dated October 20 2020. The CMO Implementation Manual and subsequent amendments and Application described above constitute part of this agreement and are incorporated in full into this Agreement by reference;
2. Exhibits. Exhibits to this Voucher Agreement shall be construed with, and as an integral part of, this Agreement;
3. Order of Precedence. In case of conflict between or among the terms of this Agreement and the document(s) incorporated by reference, the provisions of the following documents shall take precedence in the following order: 1) California Air Resources Board Grant number G17-CMDC-01 terms and conditions, 2) this Agreement and future amendments thereto, 3) Exhibits to this Agreement;
4. Awardee Ensures Partner and Sub-Contractor’s CMO Program Compliance.Awardee agrees to ensure that all partners and subcontractors agree to all provisions of CMO, implemented through the CMO Implementation Manual, and to notify CARB and the Program Administrator immediately if Awardee becomes aware that partners or subcontractors are out of compliance;
5. Awardee must be in compliance and remain in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local rules and regulations;
6. Awardee understands that this CMO voucher is only valid for this specific use as prescribed in the application and this agreement, and that any voucher funds provided based on this voucher agreement will be null and void if the use identified herein changes prior to voucher redemption without approval from the Program Administrator or for noncompliance with applicable CMO Voucher Pilot Program requirements;
7. Community Resource Contributions. Awardee agrees to provide the community resource contributions listed in the voucher agreement to supplement voucher funding with community investments as specified in the application and this voucher agreement;
8. Community Outreach and Education. Awardee agrees to conduct community outreach and education events as specified in the application and this voucher agreement;
911
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond
9. Awardee understands and agrees to coordinate with other CARB Low Carbon Transportation Investment Projects, including the One-Stop-Shop Pilot Project, and the STEP as specified in the CMO Implementation Manual;
10. Branding and Communications. Awardee agrees to follow instructions outlined in the CMO
Awardee General Branding and Communications Toolkitwhen publicly communicating about the program, including to display both the Clean Mobility Options Pilot Program logo and the California Climate Investments logo on all outreach and education materials.
Awardee agrees to acknowledge the California Climate Investments program as a funding source from the CARB Low Carbon Transportation program whenever projects funded, in whole or in part by this agreement, are publicized in any news media, websites, brochures, publications, audiovisuals, or other types of promotional material. Awardee understands that the acknowledgment must read as follows: “
Richmond On Demandof the Clean
Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program is part of California Climate Investments, a statewide initiative that puts billions of Cap-and-Trade dollars to work reducing greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the economy, and improving public health and the environment — particularly in disadvantaged communities.” Guidelines for the usage of the CCI logo can be found at
http://www.caclimateinvestments.ca.gov/logo-graphics-request;
11. Outreach Material Approvals. Awardee understands and agrees that all outreach materials, project websites, press releases and press events must receive prior approval from the Program Administrator;
12. Awardee understands and agrees that the Program Administrator may use the Awardee organization name, Awardee partner organization names, and any descriptive language and/or branding and imagery used in the application and/or in the execution of the voucher during CMO program activities and events for use in educational or promotional materials in print, multimedia, or web form. Language, branding, imagery and/or photos and videos will only be used for purposes related to the CMO program.
13. Insurance. Awardee agrees to comply with all insurance requirements specified in the CMO Implementation Manual, which includes ensuring partners insurance compliance. Awardee agrees to submit any required insurance documents within 90 days of voucher execution, including submission of an annual proof of coverage to the Program Administrator during the Voucher Agreement Term.Awardee understands no work shall begin and no payments will be made under this voucher agreement until Awardee and partners insurance is deemed compliant with the program requirements by the Program Administrator;
14. CEQA Compliance and Permitting. Awardee agrees to fulfill any CEQA Compliance and Permitting Requirements specified in the CMO Implementation Manual; Awardee
912
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond understands no payment will be made under this voucher agreement until full compliance is met for all CEQA requirements as set forth in the CMO Implementation Manual.
15. Data Storage and Security.Awardee agrees to comply with data storage and security requirements specified in the CMO Implementation Manual;
16. Awardee agrees to comply with all requirements outlined in the Voucher Agreement General Provisions specified in the CMO Implementation Manual;
17. CMO Event Participation. Awardee understands and agrees to participate in events, training, and meetings as required by the Program Administrator or CARB;
18. In the event that CALSTART, Inc. is no longer a Program Administrator prior to the end of voucher agreement term, Awardee agrees to sign the amended voucher agreement with the new Program Administrator selected by CARB.
19. Awardee understands it is prohibited from using voucher funds to aid or support a sectarian or denominational school or any school not under the exclusive control of the officers of the public schools pursuant to California Constitution, article IX, section 8. CALSTART, Inc. and CARB reserve the right to obtain additional information from the Awardee to determine compliance with California Constitution, article XVI, section 5 and article IX, section 8.
Failure to provide any requested information may result in denial of voucher funding.
Vehicles: Applies to Motor Vehicles, Bicycles, and Scooters (as applicable to voucher)
20. Vehicle Acquisition. Awardee agrees that all vehicles obtained with CMO funds will meet the CMO program’s vehicle eligibility requirements and will comply with CMO voucher redemption requirements as stated in the CMO Implementation Manual;
21. Motor Vehicle Registration.Awardee agrees to register motor vehicles obtained with CMO funds in California with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Military vehicles are not subject to this requirement;
22. Awardee agrees to allow CARB, Program Administrator, or their designee to verify the vehicle registration with the DMV;
23. Insurance. Awardee agrees to maintain vehicle insurance as required by law and to the minimum requirements specified in the CMO Implementation Manual;
24. Controls and Systems. Awardee agrees to never modify the vehicle’s emission control system, engine, or engine software calibrations;
25. Charging. Awardee agrees to ensure plug-in vehicles purchased with a CMO voucher, including plug- in hybrid vehicles and plug-in electric vehicles, will be plugged in regularly as recommended by the vehicle manufacturer to ensure battery durability, efficiency, and reliability for community users;
26. Use. Awardee agrees to use all CMO project vehicles in accordance with the project plan and pursuant to CMO Implementation Manual requirements;
27. Operation. Awardee agrees to own/lease and operate voucher-funded vehicles consistent with the application project design and consistent with CMO Implementation Manual requirements for a minimum four-year of project operation period;
28. Non-CMO Funded Project Vehicles. Awardee agrees that project vehicles that are not funded by CMO but that are used and operated for the CMO project will be used and
913
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond operated consistent with CMO Implementation Manual requirements during the voucher agreement term;
29. Ownership. Awardee agrees to retain ownership/lease of the vehicle for a minimum 4-year of project operation period, unless given explicit prior written approval to sell the vehicle from CARB or its designee;
30. Records. Awardee agrees to keep written records of the vehicle purchase/lease for a minimum 4-year of project operation period and provide CARB or its designee with these records within 10 calendar days of their request. These records include but are not limited to the vehicle invoice, proof of purchase, DMV records, vehicle payment information and related bank records, and purchaser/lessee fleet information;
31. Emissions Reductions. Awardee agrees that the purchased/leased vehicle and emission reductions it generates shall not be used as emission reductions to comply with an enforcement obligation of any person or entity;
32. Quarterly Usage Survey and Questionnaire. Awardee agrees to complete the quarterly usage survey and questionnaire throughout the 5-year voucher agreement term as requested by CARB;
33. Telematics. Awardee agrees to equip all project vehicles with telematics hardware that allow for recording of usage data, consistent with data collection requirements specified in the CMO Implementation Manual;
34. In the event that installation of telematics hardware found to be infeasible, Awardee agrees to provide an alternative approach to collect necessary location and usage data with prior approval from the Program Administrator;
35. If prior to the end of the 5-year voucher agreement term the Project Lead is unable to continue operating the vehicle in accordance with the project plan, Awardee agrees to notify the Program Administrator immediately;
36. Ownership Transfer. If prior to the end of the 5-year voucher agreement term, Awardee is unable to continue operating the vehicle in accordance with the project plan, agrees to transfer ownership of the vehicle to a different party who will use the vehicle to provide community mobility services. The party and plan must be approved by the Program Administrator with consultation with CARB;
Infrastructure
37. Infrastructure Siting. Awardee agrees to ensure that infrastructure obtained with CMO funds is sited in locations(s) as specified by our project plan, as modified by the Program Administrator;
38. Awardee agrees to notify the Program Administrator immediately if the Project Lead is unable to site the infrastructure (obtained with CMO funds) in location(s) previously specified by the project plan, as modified by the Program Administrator. The new proposed location must be approved by the Program Administrator;
39. Infrastructure Permitting and Installation. Awardee agrees to ensure that infrastructure obtained with CMO funds meets infrastructure eligibility requirements listed in the CMO Implementation Manual, and is constructed by a qualified and licensed professional, to obtain and keep records for all required permits. CMO infrastructure installation must follow
914
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond CEQA Compliance and Permitting Requirements, as listed in CMO Implementation Manual and as stated in General Requirement #14 in this agreement;
40. EVITP Certification Required for Installation of Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure and Equipment On Or After January 1, 2022. Awardee agrees to comply with Assembly Bill 841 (Ting, 2020) and Public Utilities Code (PUC) section 740.20, which requires Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Training Program (EVITP) certification for installation of CMO-funded electric vehicle charging infrastructure and equipment for work performed on or after January 1, 2022, as applicable, subject to certain exceptions. All electric vehicle charging infrastructure and equipment funded by the CMO voucher program located on the customer side of the electrical meter shall be installed by a contractor with the appropriate license classification, as determined by the Contractors’ State License Board, and at least one electrician on each crew, at any given time, who holds an EVITP certification. Projects that include installation of a charging port supplying 25 kilowatts or more to a vehicle must have at least 25 percent of the total electricians working on the crew for the project, at any given time, who hold EVITP certification. One member of each crew may be both the contractor and an EVITP certified electrician. The requirements stated above do not apply to any of the following:
a. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure installed by employees of an electrical corporation or local publicly owned electric utility.
b. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure funded by moneys derived from credits generated from the Low Carbon Fuel Standard Program (Subarticle 7 (commencing with Section 95480) of Article 4 of Subchapter 10 of Chapter 1 of Division 3 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations).
c. Single-family home residential electric vehicle chargers that can use an existing 208/240-volt outlet.
41. Property Owner Approvals for Infrastructure Siting. Awardee agrees that if infrastructure obtained with CMO funds is not completely sited on the Project Lead’s owned property and unobtrusive to property not owned by the Project Lead, then Awardee will obtain and keep written approval from the property owner (including public agencies if relevant);
42. Infrastructure Maintenance: Awardee agrees to maintain infrastructure obtained with CMO funds in good repair and in accordance with manufacturer’s recommended use and maintenance through the minimum 4-year project operation period; Planning, Operations, and Maintenance
43. Cost-Reimbursement Program Compliance. Awardee agrees to ensure that all funds that the Awardee seeks reimbursement for are for actual costs incurred that are consistent with the project plan and in compliance with CMO program requirements as listed in the CMO Implementation Manual, including minimum and maximum allowed amounts, and that all reported costs are actual costs that are accurate and verifiable. See Section 7 (Voucher Agreement Billings) of this agreement and CMO Implementation Manual for voucher redemption requirements;
44. Quarterly Reporting. Awardee agrees to collect the project data and report to the Program Administrator on at least a quarterly basis throughout the 5-year voucher agreement term as specified in the CMO Implementation Manual;
915
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond
45. FInal Report. Awardee agrees to submit an end-of-project Final Report within 30 days before project completion or voucher agreement end date, whichever is sooner, pursuant to CMO Implementation Manual requirements;
46. Policies and Procedures Document. Awardee agrees to develop policies and procedure document that describes administrative actions for evaluation and processing participants, reservations, vehicle maintenance, and data gathering and reporting;
47. Safety and Accessibility. Awardee agrees to ensure services are delivered consistent with the safety and accessibility requirements specified in the CMO Implementation Manual;
48. Inspection. Awardee agrees to be available for a follow-up inspection by CARB, Program Administrator or their designee, if requested;
49. Awardee has the legal authority to apply for incentive funding for the purchasing entity described in this agreement;
50. Failure to Comply. Awardee agrees that failure to comply with the terms of this agreement may result in repayment to CARB or its designee of voucher funds received; and
51. Enforcement. Awardee understands that the Program Administrator and/or CARB reserves all rights and remedies available under the law to enforce the terms of this agreement.
52. Termination of Agreement.In the case that the Awardee chooses to terminate the voucher agreement prior to voucher agreement term end date, after meeting with the Program Administrator, the Awardee must submit a formal request in writing to the Program Administrator.
If there are questions regarding the terms and conditions of this agreement, please contact:
CALSTART, Inc. [email protected]
(626) 744-5670
6) Mobility Project Voucher Agreement Terms and Conditions: For the Program Administrator (CALSTART, Inc.):
1. This voucher agreement signed by CALSTART, Inc. and the voucher awardee (“Awardee”) governs the Project.
2. CALSTART, Inc. and CARB have oversight responsibility for the Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program (CMO). As the administrator of CMO, CALSTART, Inc. acts as CARB’s designee.
3. CARB, as an intended third-party beneficiary, reserves the right to enforce the terms of CMO at any time during this voucher agreement term.
4. CALSTART, Inc. and CARB reserve the right to conduct a site visit(s), evaluation, review, or an audit of this Project over the term of this voucher agreement.
5. CALSTART, Inc., acting as CARB’s designee, is responsible for the following:
a. Assuring compliance with project eligibility criteria and the minimum requirements for Clean Mobility Options Projects using measures mutually agreed with CARB. b. Reviewing and approving necessary program elements provided by the Awardee, including but not limited to, needs assessment voucher application, voucher eligibility verification, voucher forms, financial documentation, and progress reports.
916
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond c. Participating in meetings, if necessary, with the Awardee to discuss project refinements and guide project implementation.
d. Review and approve all Voucher Payment Request Forms and distribute voucher funds to the Awardee within 30 days of Form approval.
e. Providing program oversight and accountability (in conjunction with the Awardee). f. Meeting applicable requirements of statutes, applicable State law, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18, FY 2018-19, and FY 2019-20 Funding Plan for Clean Transportation Incentives, the FY 2017-18 Clean Mobility Voucher Pilot Program Grant Solicitation, the governing Grant Agreement with CARB, and this voucher agreement with the Awardee. g. Ensuring that funds are spent consistent with the Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Implementation Manual (Implementation Manual) and this voucher agreement with the Awardee.
h. CALSTART, Inc. or its designee has primary responsibility for conducting project reviews and/or fiscal audits of this project’s administration and implementation. i. In the case of nonperformance, CALSTART, Inc., CARB, or its designee has the authority to recoup Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot funds which were received based upon misinformation or fraud, or for which the Awardee or its subcontractors, is in significant or continual non-compliance with the CMO Implementation Manual. CALSTART, Inc. also retains the authority to withhold future payments or prohibit any entity from participating in the Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot due to non-compliance with Project requirements.
917
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond 7) Voucher Agreement Billings
Payment of voucher agreement invoices will be contingent upon the availability of funds received from the California Air Resources Board (CARB). In the event funds are not available, CALSTART shall have no liability to pay any funds whatsoever to the Awardee or to furnish any other considerations under this agreement. Payments under this Voucher Agreement will be made only for actual verifiable costs incurred.
Cost-Reimbursements: Cost reimbursements made under this Voucher Agreement are subject to approval of status reports and verification of any milestones/deliverables and additional supporting and/or compliance documentation required. Invoices will be submitted no less than quarterly, but no more than monthly in a format consistent with Payment Request (Microsoft Excel file format) that will be furnished. Invoices submitted will clearly summarize total, actual project costs incurred in accordance with project budget and will include sufficient supporting relevant documentation substantiating costs billed. Each invoice must be signed and approved by the Awardee. Capital cost reimbursement requests will require submission of additional supporting documentation and/or compliance documentation along with Reimbursement Form that will be furnished. a. Awardee staff charges will be supported by a listing of each employee to include the name, title, number of hours worked, and hourly rate applied to the labor hours, all supported by time records/timesheets and some means of verifying actual, paid hourly labor rates to include, but not limited to, a paystub or payroll register.
b. Subcontractor staff charges will be supported by submitting subcontractor’s invoice to awardee; submission of subcontractor rates and timesheets are not required, c. Travel costs will be itemized on a listing providing information about the date traveled; origin and destination; individuals traveling; and purpose of business travel. All travel costs billed will be supported by itemized receipts and/or invoices with travel amounts reimbursed limited to published maximum per diem amounts per the California Department of Human Resources (CalHR) found at
http://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/pages/travel-reimbursements.aspx. d. All other direct costs will be listed and supported by documentation such as vendor invoices, receipts or other relevant documentation.
e. For Awardee only: Applicable non-labor rates used for billing purposes, to include, but not limited to fringe benefit, overhead and G&A rates, will be supported by the methodology in which the rates are derived and applied. An approved cost rate agreement negotiated with a Federal cognizant agency will suffice.
f. Ineligible Costs: Food and childcare are NOT eligible reimbursable costs for the CMO program. g. Capital Cost Reimbursements: Capital cost reimbursement requests must meet CMO vehicle and infrastructure eligibility requirements and CMO voucher redemption requirements as listed in the CMO Implementation Manual in order to be eligible for reimbursement. 50% Voucher Reimbursement: Before requesting any payment from the second half of awarded voucher funds, awardees must provide an attestation that the project has secured all needed permits, met required milestones, and the community resource contribution documents are current.
918
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond Each invoice must provide the CALSTART agreement number, period covered by invoice, and Awardee’s Employer Identification Number and submitted via email to [email protected]
or U.S. Postal Service using the following address:
Attention: Clean Mobility Options
CALSTART, Inc.
48 S Chester Avenue
Pasadena, CA 91106
Final Invoice: Upon completion or termination of the Agreement, the Awardee shall submit the final invoice (if any) no later than thirty (30) days after such completion or termination date. The invoice shall be clearly marked as “FINAL” and prepared as indicated above.
Payments:
1. Direct Payments:
a. Project Lead (Awardee): The Awardee must sign and approve each Invoice submitted to CALSTART, including invoices submitted for third-party capital reimbursement costs. b. Third-Party Direct Payment Assignment (for $10,000 or greater capital cost reimbursements ONLY).Third-party vendors with CMO-funded capital costs totalling $10,000 or greater must be pre-approved by the Awardee and must be registered as an approved CMO vendor (using a CMO Vendor Registration Form) in order to be eligible to receive direct payments. Direct third-party vendor payments are only allowed for capital costs totalling $10,000 or greater; no other cost-reimbursements are eligible for direct third-party payment.
2. Payment will be delayed if CALSTART deems that milestones/deliverables and additional supporting and/or compliance documentation have not been accomplished or sufficiently documented; that milestones/deliverables and additional supporting and/or compliance documentation are not in accordance with specifications; that claimed expenses are not reasonable or insufficiently documented or not valid per the budget; or noncompliance with other terms of this Agreement.
8) Audits of Records and Site Visits
All project records, including financial records, are subject to audit. The Awardee shall allow CALSTART, Inc. the California Air Resources Board (CARB, and/or any other agency of the State of California, or any of their duly authorized representatives, reasonable access to and the right of inspection of any and all of the Awardee’s books, documents, papers and records which are directly pertinent to the performance of this Voucher Agreement, for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts and transcriptions during the term of this Voucher Agreement and for a period of three (3) years thereafter, unless the CALSTART notifies Awardee prior to the expiration of such three-year period, that a longer period is necessary.
919
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond CALSTART, and/or CARB, and/or its designees have the right to make site visits at reasonable times to review project accomplishments and management control systems and to provide technical assistance, if required. The Awardee must provide and must require sub-awardees to provide reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of the government representatives in the performance of their duties. All site visits and evaluations must be performed in a manner that does not unduly interfere with or delay the work.
9) Termination
The performance of Services under this Agreement may be terminated by CALSTART for cause upon providing Awardee with five (5) calendar days advance notice. Upon receipt of termination notice, Awardee will use reasonable efforts to mitigate its expenses and obligations.
Termination “with cause” may include but is not limited to failure to comply with the terms of this voucher agreement or the CMO Implementation Manual.
920
CMO Mobility Project Voucher Agreement City of Richmond 10) Authority: Attestation and Signature
The signator hereto represents and warrants that he or she is authorized and empowered and has the legal capacity to execute this Voucher Agreement and to legally bind AWARDEE both in an operational and financial capacity and that the requirements and obligations under this Voucher Agreement are legally enforceable and binding on AWARDEE.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto executed this Voucher Agreement as of the date first written below.
City of Richmond CALSTART, Inc.
Tom Butt Date Piero Stillitano Date
Mayor of City of Richmond
[email protected]
510-620-6503
Chief Financial Officer
Awardee understands that this voucher agreement is not fully executed until after the CALSTART representative signs and dates (Execution date). No work done or vehicle and equipment purchased/leased prior to execution date will be funded through this voucher agreement. 11) Exhibits
Exhibit A: Notice of Proposed Award
Exhibit B: Approved Budget, as amended (as applicable)
Exhibit C: Project Milestone Schedule
Exhibit D: Community Resource Contributions
Exhibit E: Application Modifications and Clarifications Exhibit F: Application Submission and Attachments (Original) Exhibit G: Resolution/Project Approval
Exhibit H: Conflict of Interest Declaration
Exhibit I: Confidentiality Statement
Sep 12 2021 Sep 13 2021
921
Exhibit A: Notice of Proposed Award
922
April 23, 2021
NOTICE OF PROPOSED AWARD & VOUCHER EXECUTION CHECKLIST: MOBILITY PROJECT VOUCHER Dear Ms. Evans,
Congratulations! This email serves as your NOTICE OF PROPOSED AWARDfor your Mobility Project Voucher for the Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program.
Funding for your voucher has been reserved, as
referenced below:
Application # MP20W1A-11
Timestamp 10/20/2020 9:00:35
Project Title Richmond On-Demand
Lead Applicant City of Richmond
Sub-Applicant Via Transportation, Inc.
Funds Reserved $1,000,000
VOUCHER EXECUTION DEADLINE: Pursuant to CMO program guidelines, you have 90 days from the date of this Notice of Proposed Award, or until July 23, 2021, to execute your Voucher Agreement. In order to meet this deadline, please provide us with the documents listed in theVoucher Execution Checklist on the next page.
SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS: Please submit all required Voucher Execution Checklist documents to [email protected] or CALSTART, Attn: Clean Mobility Options, 48 So. Chester Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91106.
QUESTIONS: Grace Person from our TA team, cc’d on this message, will contact you within the next two weeks to schedule a meeting to assist you with gathering the Voucher Execution Checklist documents and run through the insurance requirements. In the meantime, if you have questions about the voucher execution process and this request, contact Lena Ketabgian at [email protected] or (626) 744-5644.
NEXT STEPS & VOUCHER EXECUTION: After the Program Administrator has received, reviewed, and approved your Voucher Execution Checklist documents, we will assemble your Voucher Agreement for your e-signature. Once your voucher agreement has been executed, we will schedule a Project Kick-off meeting with you, CARB, and the Program Administrator team before you start your project. IMPORTANT:The Voucher Agreement has to be executed (signed by both parties) AND your insurance has been DEEMED compliant for you to commence work that is reimbursable against your Mobility Project Voucher.
Again, congratulations on your award! We are excited to work with you on your Community Mobility Project! Sincerely,
Clean Mobility Options Program Administrator
Attachments:
1. MPV Insurance Requirements (pdf)
2. Project Milestone Schedule TEMPLATE (Word)
923
VOUCHER EXECUTION CHECKLIST
City of Richmond
Please Submit These Required Documents PRIOR TO VOUCHER EXECUTION or ASAP to [email protected]
# REQUIRED
DOCUMENT
DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENT
1 CERTIFICATES
OF INSURANCE
Please submit Certificates of Insurance for the Project Lead and all sub-applicants, sub-contractors, and partner entities who will be working on the project in a paid, non-paid, volunteer or community resource contribution (donated services) capacity pursuant to CMO Insurance Requirements outlined in the Implementation Manual (Sections Z.1.n.i and Z.1.n.ii). Seeattached Insurance Requirements.
Sample Certificates of Insurance are available upon request and will be covered in the information session provided by Grace Person.
2 BOARD
RESOLUTION
Please provide an approved board resolution or documentation of approval of the project from the governing board that commits the lead agency to the following:
(1) to comply with the requirements of the program;
(2) to accept the voucher funds; and
(3) to allocate any funding that the awardee has committed to be part of a project application, including any Community Resource Contributions.
Sample resolutions are available upon request and will be covered in the information session provided by Grace Person.
3 PROJECT
MILESTONE
SCHEDULE
Please complete and submit a draft Project Milestone Schedule using the attached TEMPLATE.The schedule will be used to help you meet CMO program milestones to help you think about the timing and sequence of the project milestones needed for a successful project. The Schedule is like a Scope of Work and will be included in your voucher agreement to track progress. Modify the template as needed.
Grace Person will go over your draft Project Milestone Schedule with you in the information session and assist you with refining the Project Milestone Schedule to include in your voucher agreement.
Submission Format: Word or Excel preferred.
4 MOBILITY
PROVIDER
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Be prepared to provide the organization name, primary contact name, phone number, and mailing address for the mobility provider during the information session with Grace or email the information to [email protected]
924
5 OTHER
DOCUMENTS
(As Applicable)
Other documents and additional information may be requested, as applicable to your application prior to voucher execution.
925
7/22/2021 Mail - Lena Ketabgian - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/sentitems/id/AAQkADk0YjFiYWE2LWU0N2EtNDE0NS1hNWExLWJlNzc5MjNjMGZmMgAQAE7pTBEhvEORqbN%2B2cxHIlc… 1/2 R E : R E R i c h m o n d A - 1 1 - R e q u e s t f o r v o u c h e r e x e c u t i o n d e a d l i n e e x t e n s i o n L e n a K e t a b g i a n < l k e t a b g i a n @ c a l s t a r t . o r g > T h u 7 /22/2021 4 52 PM
T o : D e n ee E v a ns < de n ee . e v a ns @ ci . r ich mon d . ca . us >; L a ur a _ M a r qu e z @ ci . r ich mon d . ca . us < L a ur a _ M a r qu e z @ ci . r ich mon d . ca . us > C c : A d m i n @ clea nmo bili ty opt i ons . or g < A d m i n @ clea nmo bili ty opt i ons . or g > Hi Denee, Thank you for your email. City of Richmond’s request for voucher execution deadline extension for their CMO Mobility Project Voucher has been approved. Your new voucher execution deadline has been extended by 3 months and the new deadline for voucher execution (signed by both parties) is 10/23/2021.
Thank you,
Lena Ketabgian
Project Manager, Innovative Mobility | CALSTART
626.744.5644
www.cleanmobilityoptions.org
From: Clean Mobility Options <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2021 2:46 PM
To: Lena Ketabgian <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: RE Richmond A-11-Request for voucher execution deadline extension
From: Denee Evans <
[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2021 2:46:20 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: Clean Mobility Options <[email protected]> Cc: Laura Marquez <[email protected]>
Subject: RE Richmond A-11-Request for voucher execution deadline extension Good Afternoon CMO Administration,
I am writing to request a voucher execution deadline extension for the City of Richmond On-Demand Shuttle project. We are working on updating our insurance provisions to meet the program requirements.
Thank you,
Denée
926
7/22/2021 Mail - Lena Ketabgian - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/sentitems/id/AAQkADk0YjFiYWE2LWU0N2EtNDE0NS1hNWExLWJlNzc5MjNjMGZmMgAQAE7pTBEhvEORqbN%2B2cxHIlc… 2/2
Denée Evans, MA, CPM
Richmond Transportation Department
440 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
[email protected]
(510) 621-1718
927
Exhibit B: Approved Budget
928
ATTACHMENT 1: MOBILITY PROJECT VOUCHER BUDGET WORKSHEET V.1.031220 1 8/5/2021
Mobility Project Voucher Budget Worksheet
Instructions: Enter data in
blue cells. Do not enter data in grey or white cells. Add rows as necessary. The entire sheet is "unlocked" and it is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that subtotals and calculations are accurate. Voucher amounts and category totals must comply with allowable voucher amounts in the Implementation Manual. It is recommended that applicants additionally complete the optional "Category Eligibility Check Worksheet" in the table below to ensure that they meet eligibility requirements for categories that have minimum and maximum requirements.
Section 1. Project Components Section 2. Voucher Budget Section 3. Other Funds
Budget
Description of Voucher Request Annual Budget Breakdown for Voucher Funding Term (3 Years Total)
Annual Budget Breakdown for
Expenses Needed to Operate
During Years 3-4 of
Operations (2 Years Total)
(a)
Expense Category
(b)
Item description
(c)
Voucher amount
requested per unit
or hour ($)
(d)
Number of
units or hours
requested
(e)
Total voucher
amount by
item ($)
(f)
Project Launch
(Up to 1 Year)
($)
(g)
Year 1 of
Operations
($)
(h)
Year 2 of
Operations
($)
(i)
Year 3 of
Operations
($)
(j)
Year 4 of
Operations
($)
Motor Vehicles and Associated Hardware n/a n/a
n/a n/a
Bicycles and Scooters n/a n/a
n/a n/a
Charging/Fueling Equipment and Installation Electric Charging Station $15,000) 1 $15,000 ) $15,000) n/a n/a n/a n/a
Bicycle/Scooter Infrastructure and Installation
(Maximum 300% of amount of electric bicycle/scooter
or 200% of non-electric bicycles/scooter amount)
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
Planning Costs Pre-Launch Planning Cost $5,000 ) 1 $5,000 ) $5,000) n/a n/a n/a n/a
Outreach and Marketing Costs
(Minimum $25,000 or 10% of total voucher, whichever
is more; maxium of 30% of total voucher)
Vehicle Magnets $100 / magnet 4 $400 ) $400) $0) $0) $0) $0) Driver Acquisition $3.27 / hr 13,395 $43,802 ) $0) $21,901) $21,901) $21,901) $21,901) Launch Rider Marketing $7,500 ) 1 $7,500 ) $7,500) $0) $0) $0) $0) Ongoing Rider Marketing $3.67 / hr 13,395 $49,160 ) $0) $24,580) $24,580) $24,580) $24,580) Operations and Maintenance Costs
Driver Costs $50.98 / hr 13,395 $682,877 ) $0) $341,439) $341,439) $341,439) $341,439) Customer Support $4.07 / hr 13,395 $54,518 ) $0) $27,259) $27,259) $27,259) $27,259) Insurance $1.55 / hr 13,395 $20,762 ) $0) $10,381) $10,381) $10,381) $10,381) COVID Partition Cost $85 / partition 4 $340 ) $340) $0) $0) $0) $0) COVID Disinfectant Wipes $17.75 / cannister 60 $1,065 ) $1,065) $0) $0) $0) $0) COVID Masks $5 / mask 32 $160 ) $160) $0) $0) $0) $0)
Direct Software Costs $4.95 / hr 13,395 $66,305 ) $0) $33,153) $33,153) $33,153) $33,153) Tech Support Labor $2.75 / hr 13,395 $36,836 ) $0) $18,418) $18,418) $18,418) $18,418) Voucher Adminstration Costs
(Maximum 15% of total voucher)
Ongoing Admin Support $0.92 / hr 13,400 $12,328 ) $0) $6,164) $6,164) $6,164) $6,164) Regulatory Fees $0.10 / ride 28,040 $2,804 ) $0) $1,402) $1,402) $1,402) $1,402) Additional Transportation Enhancements
(Maximum 10% of total voucher)
Grand Total
Grand Total - Voucher Funding Term (Voucher Funds) n/a n/a $998,857) $29,465) $484,696) $484,696) n/a n/a
Grand Total - Other Funds Budget (Non-CMO Funds) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $484,696) $484,696) Optional: Category Eligibility Check Worksheet
Instructions: Calculate sums in "Category Total" and "Applicable Demonimator" Column. User may need to adjust example formula if rows were inserted above.
Cost Category Elibility Requirement Summary
(See Implementation Manual for Details)
Category
Total
Applicable
Denominator Percentage Conforms to Elibility Requirement? Outreach and Marketing Costs Minimum $25,000 or 10% of total voucher, whichever is more; maximum of 30% of total voucher
$100,861) $998,857) 10.1% Yes. More than $25,000 and between 10% and 30% of total voucher request.
Voucher Administration Costs Maximum of 15% of total voucher amount $15,132) $998,857) 1.5% Yes. Less than 15% of total voucher request.
Bicycle/Scooter Infrastructure and Installation Maximum of 300% of amount of electric bicycle/scooter vehicles or 200% of amount of non-electric bicycle/scooter vehicles amount
$0) $0) n/a
Yes. Less than 300% of requested voucher
funds for electric bikes/scooters (nothing in this
category requested).
Additional Transportation Enhancements Maximum of 10% of total voucher amount n/a Yes. Less than 10% of total voucher request (nothing in this category requested).
Notes: Via's cost model is primarily based on the number of vehicle hours provided over the project's duration. The majority of costs are incurred and tracked on an hourly basis. Therefore, the preferred method of voucher reimbursement is payment based on vehicle hours incurred per month of service. 929
Exhibit C: Project Milestone Schedule
930
CMO PROJECT MILESTONE SCHEDULE
PURPOSE: The Project Milestone Schedule is a tool to help you know when you need to meet CMO program milestones and to think about the timing and sequence of the project milestones your project needs to have in place to have your project be successful. This template will be included in your voucher agreement and will help to track progress towards your project plan. Your project milestone schedule can be modified and updated over the voucher agreement term.
INSTRUCTIONS: To complete your Project Milestone Schedule, fill out the template below. Items marked RED are requirements, and items color-coded BLUE are for you to modify:
1. Mark the milestone number (Column A) , description of the milestone to achieve (Column B), and the month number (Column C) in which you plan to achieve the milestone over the 5-year voucher agreement term , starting with Voucher Execution (0 month). Please leave Calendar Date (Column D) blank. You can insert actual calendar dates (Column D) after your voucher has been executed.
2. Add in milestones and details for your project that are other additional steps critical to achieving launch within 1 year of voucher execution.
3. Add/modify rows to this template, as appropriate, based on your project plan. At a minimum, you may use this template as your project milestone schedule, but you are encouraged to modify this template to suit your project.
4. Include work start dates as individual milestones for sub-contractors and other partners.
NOTE 1: Key CMO Program Requirements with deadlines are already in the template ; you may meet these deadlines sooner than listed, but no later than those listed in order for you to meet the project launch deadline of within 1 year of voucher execution.
NOTE 2: Quarterly status reporting and payment reimbursements templates will be distributed to awardees at a later date, and are intended as opportunities to reflect the progress made on each of the project milestones.
DEADLINE: Submit your completed Project Milestone Schedule to: [email protected] in Word or Excel Format PRIOR TO VOUCHER EXECUTION in order to include in your voucher agreement. 4/15/21 Page 1 of 3
City of Richmond
PROJECT MILESTONE SCHEDULE
OVER 5-YEAR MOBILITY PROJECT VOUCHER TERM
A.
MILESTONE
NUMBER
B.
DESCRIPTION OF MILESTONE TO BE ACHIEVED
C.
MONTH
NUMBER
ACHIEVED
D.
CALENDAR DATE
[ ADD AFTER
VOUCHER
EXECUTION ]
1st Funding Year - PLANNING (0 - 4 months) ( Launch is required by 12th month ) 1 Voucher agreement executed and project
insurance is in compliance.
0 months
2 Secure contract with a Mobility Provider.
Provide proof of contract to the Program
1 month
931
CMO PROJECT MILESTONE SCHEDULE
4/15/21 Page 2 of 3
Administrator that a mobility provider is secured and under contract.
Finalized project scope.
Establish service parameters.
Define marketing plan.
3 Secure project vehicles.
Localized software suite.
Quality assurance and internal system testing completed.
2 months
4 Complete final installation of all planned CMO-funded infrastructure and submit for
reimbursement.
Pre-launch driver training completed.
The app is available for download.
All training workshops for Richmond staff
conducted.
All drivers trained and approved for live service.
Fleet ready for service.
Live field testing completed.
All pre-launch marketing completed.
3 months
5 Launch mobility service. Intended users of the service start using the service (if services have not already been launched).
Feedback gathered from initial users.
Post-launch marketings and promotion plan
initiated.
Ongoing optimizations of day-to-day operations. 4 months
2nd Funding Year - OPERATION YEAR 1
6 Continue operating mobility service in
compliance with CMO T&Cs.
5-17 months
(Program
Requirement)
3rd Funding Year - OPERATION YEAR 2
7 Continue operating mobility service in
compliance with CMO T&Cs
18-29 months
(Program
Requirement)
4th Voucher Year ( No CMO Funding ) - OPERATION YEAR 3 8 Continue operating mobility service in 30-41 months 932
CMO PROJECT MILESTONE SCHEDULE
4/15/21 Page 3 of 3
compliance with CMO T&Cs. (Program
Requirement)
9 Source additional grant funding and/or other revenue sources from local businesses,
advertising, and/or public entities to sustain operations of service.
30-41 months
5th Voucher Year ( No CMO Funding ) - OPERATION YEAR 4 10 Continue operating mobility service in
compliance with CMO T&Cs.
42-53 months
(Program
Requirement)
11 Source additional grant funding and/or other revenue sources from local businesses,
advertising, and/or public entities to sustain operations of service.
42-53 months
12 Voucher Agreement Term Ends. 60 months
933
Exhibit D: Community Resource Contributions
934
City of Richmond Community Resource Contribution (CRC)
1. Relationships with project relevant CBO’s:
From application:
● Friends of Richmond
● Richmond Police Activities League
● Men and Women of Valor
● Richmond Community Foundation
Verified with information from the attached Appendix 2 Letter of Support Community Resource Contribution #1 Richmond Friends.
2. Project related labor costs during Voucher fundin g term that are not reimbursed through voucher funds:
From application:
● The City of Richmond will contribute labor costs related to the administration of the Voucher Program.
From letter of support:
● The City of Richmond intends to designate Denée Evans, Transportation Project Manager, as the Project Manager for “Richmond On-Demand.” As the primary point of contact, Denée has the responsibility and authority for project delivery. Up to 15% of Denée’s time will be allocated to this project.
Verified with information from the attached Letter of Support Community Resource Contribution #2 Labor Costs.
3. Project related materials already owned by partic ipants and/or donated to the project:
From application:
● The City of Richmond intends to provide additional commun ity outreach support in excess of the required minimum voucher allotment. This will include:
● Convening community stakeholders to learn about and mar ket the project ● Providing marketing materials and digital and social media su pport through official channels
Verified with information from the attached Appendix 4 Letter of Support Community Resource Contribution #3 Materials.
4. Technology and Equipment already owned by project participant and/or donated to the project:
From application:
● The City of Richmond owns eight charging stations around the city, with six pending installations in the coming months. These public charging stations can be utilized for the 935
charging needs of the Richmond On-Demand vehicles.
Verified with information from the attached Appendix 5 Letter of Support Community Resource Contribution #4 Tech & Equipment.
5. Energy or Fuel Costs during the Voucher Funding term:
From application:
● 100% of energy costs for this project will be provided by the city.
Verified with information from the attached Appendix 6 Letter of Support Community Resource Contribution #5 Energy Costs.
Donated Land:
● 6 13th Street, is the site of the city’s Corp Yard and land that will be provided to install one level II charger with two ports charging infrastructure.
Verified with information from the attached Appendix 7 Letter of Support Community Resource Contribution #6 Land.
Information regarding PHEVS:
● VIA will work with leasing partner to acquire and customize PHEVs. 936
Exhibit E: Application Modifications and
Clarifications
937
8/16/21
Exhibit E - Summary of Minor Clarifications/Revisions City of Richmond
1. Modified budget, adding in EVSE charger/station cost, as was previously unclear. a. 2/18/21 EVSE CARB determination approved to allow for EVSE reimbursement when no cars purchased (driver costs are in operations in Via model, deemed okay)
b. Email Response from Lead confirming adding EVSE charger into budget. (Email 1 of 2_City of Richmond MINOR CLARIFICATIONS .pdf)
938
2/18/2021 Mail - Lena Ketabgian - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADk0YjFiYWE2LWU0N2EtNDE0NS1hNWExLWJlNzc5MjNjMGZmMgAQAPImmWy1kkxcur6wjJqRVMM%3D 1/2 R E : C A R B D e t e r m i n a t i o n R e q u e s t f o r E V S E C o s t w h e n F u n d i n g E V S e r v i c e i n l i e u o f E V C a p i t a l C o s t ( R i c h m o n d O n - D e m a n d ) Y a g h o o b i r a d , A v a @ A R B < A v a . Y a g h o o b i r a d @ a r b . c a . g o v > T h u 2/18/2021 12 10 PM
T o : L e n a K e t abgia n < lk e t abgia n @ cal st a r t . or g > C c : R y a n S ch u cha r d < r s ch u cha r d @ cal st a r t . or g >; G r eg or , S a m @ ARB < s a m . g r eg or @ a r b . ca . g o v > Hi Lena,
According to Section E.2 of the IM, projects may include infrastructure improvements only when they directly support, and are
essential to, the core project models. Via is deploying a microtransit project model that clearly requires the EVSE to support it, therefore we agree with your recommendation to approve funding request for the EV charger.
Thanks,
Ava
From: Lena Ketabgian <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 8:00 PM
To: Yaghoobirad, Ava@ARB <[email protected]>; Gregor, Sam@ARB <[email protected]>
Cc: Ryan Schuchard <[email protected]>
Subject: CARB Determination Request for EVSE Cost when Funding EV Service in lieu of EV Capital Cost (Richmond On-Demand)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi CARB, Please review our below request for a CARB determination to allow EVSE cost (1 charger at $15,000) for EV service operated by Via in lieu of EV capital cost.
Applicant: City of Richmond
Sub-Applicant: Via
Project: Richmond on Demand
IM: P. 30 of IM Section H(1)(i)(6): “The CMO voucher program will reimburse the cost of only one dual port level 2 EVSE unit (or two level 2 EVSE units with single port/dispenser) per funded vehicle.”
EVSE REQUEST: Allow funding of 1 EVSE charger @$15,000 for City of Richmond because CMO is funding of EV “service” of Via driver operating EVs in lieu of capital EV costs.
CONTRIBUTIONS:
Via is contributing 3 six-passenger PHEVs for use in the project.
CMO is funding the ‘service” for the EVs - paying for Via drivers to operate the electric vehicles instead of capital EV costs. The services are based on Via’s cost model of # of vehicle driver hours on a per driver basis (hourly basis per month of service) instead of capital costs. The City of Richmond proposal does not request EV capital costs in their budget but DOES have driver/vehicle operations costs requested for the EV service. So, we are requesting CARB’s approval to allow the City of Richmond to request funding for 1 EVSE (funding request of a single charger @$15,000) in their budget.
Please let us know your thoughts and if you have any questions.
Have a great holiday weekend. Wanted to get this out before I forgot! Thank you.
Best Regards,
Lena Ketabgian
939
2/18/2021 Mail - Lena Ketabgian - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADk0YjFiYWE2LWU0N2EtNDE0NS1hNWExLWJlNzc5MjNjMGZmMgAQAPImmWy1kkxcur6wjJqRVMM%3D 2/2 Project Manager, Innovative Mobility | CALSTART
626.744.5644
www.cleanmobilityoptions.org
940
From: Denee Evans [email protected]
Subject: RE: City of Richmond: MINOR CLARIFICATIONS REQUIRED on CMO Mobility Project Voucher Application Date: February 10, 2021 at 9:30 AM
To: Lena Ketabgian [email protected]
Cc: Lori Reese-Brown [email protected], Denee Evans [email protected] Good Morning Lena,
Attached is the updated project budget to reflect that we are requesting funding for the EVSE. I've designated a specific line item for electric charging infrastructure. Also, I am willing to work with the Program Administrator to make necessary modifications.
Thank you for the consideration,
Denée
Denée Evans, MA, CPM
City of Richmond
Transportation Services Division
440 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 621-1718
[email protected]
Subscribe to receive updates: http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/list.aspx?ListID=374
From: Lena Ketabgian [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2021 1:33 PM
To: Denee Evans
Subject: City of Richmond: MINOR CLARIFICATIONS REQUIRED on CMO Mobility Project Voucher Application
February 9, 2021
Timestamp 10/20/2020 9:00:35
Project Title Richmond On-Demand
Lead Applicant City of Richmond
Sub-Applicant Via Transportation, Inc.
Dear Ms. Evans,
The Clean Mobility Options Program Administrator has reviewed the City of Richmond’s Mobility Project V oucher application and has determined that your application requires MINOR CLARIFICATIONS or CORRECTIONS before an eligibility determination can be made. Please provide your response to these minor
clarifications and corrections by 02/15/2021 at 5:00 PM (e.g. within 5 days in accordance with Section K(1)(e) of the Implementation Manual). Please email your response to [email protected] by the deadline listed above in order for your application to remain under consideration. No late submissions will be accepted.
PLEASE RESPOND TO THE FOLLOWING MINOR CLARIFICATIONS/CORRECTIONS:
1. 2. EVSE
3. Clarification: Your Budget (Attachment 1) shows no CMO funding requested
4. for the new EVSE Level II charger for your Richmond On-Demand project, and your Community Resource Contribution Letter #6 (Donated Land) from the City of Richmond says the City will be installing this new charger. However, in Attachment 2 (Q. 2) you checked
5. EVSE Level II under categories of infrastructure that your application requests CMO funding for. While this may have been a clerical error, please answer the following question:
6. ·
· Please
· confirm/clarify whether you are seeking CMO funding for EVSE Level II infrastructure equipment. · And if so, please provide a modified budget to include that funding. However if you are NOT requesting CMO funding for the new EVSE charger, then no budget modification is needed.
·
2. 3. The
4. Program Administrator may require minor budget modifications within the existing total budget to comply with the requirements of the program, and which may include aspects of the following: Costs for required vehicle telematics, costs for required organizational
5. certificates of insurance (including cyber liability), costs for CMO voucher administration (including attendance of CMO network meetings), methods in place to protect/remove personal identity information from data collection/reporting (CMO data is public
6. record), other relevant or project-specific operations and maintenance considerations, and other budget or planning modifications consistent with the proposed overall project strategy and approach.
7. Please confirm that if you are approved for a
8. voucher you will agree to work with the Program Administrator to make any necessary modifications as directed by the Program Administrator prior to voucher execution.
9. RESPONSE FORMAT: You may provide your response in the form of an email or via an attachment (word, excel, pdf), as applicable to the request. You may only make changes that are requested in the above Minor Clarification request.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: If you would like to receive guidance on making the necessary corrections please reply to this email, and I will connect you as soon as 941
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: If you would like to receive guidance on making the necessary corrections please reply to this email, and I will connect you as soon as possible with technical assistance.
NEXT STEPS: The Program Administrator will review your response to Minor Clarifications and will come to an eligibility determination on your application. The Implementation Manual in place at the time of a signed application submission will determine an applicant’s eligibility for the Clean Mobility Options V oucher Pilot Program. We will contact applicants individually once we have reached a status determination on your application.
Thank you for your time and investment in the Clean Mobility Options program! Sincerely,
Clean Mobility Options Program Administrator
Lena Ketabgian
Project Manager, Innovative Mobility - CALSTART
626.744.5644
Attachment
1_Budg…te.xlsx
942
Exhibit F: Application Submission and Attachments (Original) 943
Table of Contents
City of Richmond
Application for Clean Mobility Options Program
Mobility Project Voucher Application
City of Richmond_Richmond_CMO Application:
Meets the application requirement of
providing a completed application form.
Application Worksheets
City of Richmond_Richmond_Attachments 1-3:
Meets the application requirement of
providing the following completed attachments:
1. Attachment 1_Budget Worksheet
2. Attachment 2_Infrastructure Sites and Needs Profile Worksheet
3. Attachment 3_Team Profile Worksheet
Additional Attachments
City of Richmond_Richmond_Appendices 1-13:
Meets the application requirement of
providing the following information and documentation:
1. Appendix 1_LetterofCommitment_SubApplicant_Via: Meets the application requirement of showing support from a sub-applicant
2. Appendix 2_LetterofSupport_Community Resource Contribution #1_RichmondFriends:
Meets the application requirement, within the Community Resource Contributions section, of showing support from a community-based organization (CBO), the Richmond Friends of Recreation.
3. Appendix 3_LetterofSupport_Community Resource Contribution #2_LaborCosts:
Meets the application requirement, within the Community Resource Contributions section, of showing the Lead Applicant’s commitment to dedicating labor costs during the Voucher Funding Term.
4. Appendix 4_LetterofSupport_Community Resource Contribution #3_Materials:
Meets the application requirement, within the Community Resource Contributions section, of showing the Lead Applicant’s commitment to dedicating project-related materials or assets already owned by the Lead Applicant that will be used during the Project Voucher Funding Term.
5. Appendix 5_LetterofSupport_Community Resource Contribution #4_Tech&Equipment:
Meets the application requirement, within the Community Resource Contributions section, of showing the Lead Applicant’s commitment contributing technology and equipment, such as public charging stations already owned by the City.
6. Appendix 6_Letter of Support_Community Resource Contribution #5_EnergyCosts:
Meets the application requirement, within the Community Resource Contributions section, of showing the Lead Applicant’s commitment contributing 100% of the energy costs for the project.
944
7. Appendix 7_Letter of Support_Community Resource Contribution #6_Land : Meets the application requirement, within the Community Resource Contributions section, of showing the Lead Applicant’s commitment installing a charging station on City-owned land.
8. Appendix 8_NeedsAssessmentSurvey #1:
Meets the application requirement of
providing a needs assessment survey.
9. Appendix 9_NeedsAssessmentReport #1: Meets the application requirement of providing a needs assessment report.
10. Appendix 10_NeedsAssessmentSurvey #2: An additional needs assessment survey used to analyze transportation gaps and needs in Richmond.
11. Appendix 11_NeedsAssessmentReport #2: An additional needs assessment report used to analyze transportation gaps and needs in Richmond.
12. Appendix 12_Letter of Support #1_CBO_RPAL: Meets the application requirement of providing a letter of support from a CBO.
13. Appendix 13_Documentation: Meets the application requirement to provide California Secretary of State-issued Certificate of Status and Statement of Information, as well as Articles of Incorporation, for Nomad Transit LLC (a subsidiary of Via Transportation, Inc., “Via”)
945
02BI/I7< 352-EC7 928CHE5b
A33/ICA7I21bb
b
b
F25 7HEbb
C/EA1 02BI/I7< 928CHE5 3I/27 352G5A0b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
946
MOBILIT. PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
b
7DEOH RI CRQWHQWVb
b
02BI/I7< 352-EC7 928CHE5 A33/ICA7I21b
bb
F25 7HEbb
C/EA1 02BI/I7< 928CHE5 3I/27 352G5A0b
b
b
352-EC7 7EA0 352FI/E 4
352-EC7 1A55A7I9E 7
C20081I7< 75A163257A7I21 1EED6 A66E660E17 11
352-EC7 A5EA 352FI/E 15
352326ED B8DGE7 A1D 3/A1 F25 FI1A1CIA/ 6867AI1ABI/I7< 17 C20081I7< 5E6285CE C2175IB87I21 19
C20081I7< 2875EACH 3/A1 20
A77E67A7I216 A1D 6IG1A785E 21
b
A77ACH0E17 1. 0RELOLW\ 3URMHFW 9RXFKHU BXGJHW :RUNVKHHWb A77ACH0E17 2. IQIUDVWUXFWXUH 6LWH DQG 1HHGV 3URILOH :RUNVKHHWb A77ACH0E17 3. 7HDP 3URILOH :RUNVKHHWb
b b
Ã
947
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
02BI/I7< 352-EC7 928CHE5 A33/ICA7I21b
TR aSSO\ fRU a MRbiOiW\ PURjecW VRXcheU, SOeaVe cRPSOeWe WhiV aSSOicaWiRQ b\ aQVZeUiQg b b b b b b b b b b b b b aOO UeTXiUed TXeVWiRQV iQ Whe bR[eV, SURYide aOO UeOeYaQW dRcXPeQWaWiRQ aQd VigQaWXUeV, b b b b b b b b b b b b aQd VXbPiW Whe aSSOicaWiRQ WR Whe PURgUaP AdPiQiVWUaWRU iQ accRUdaQce ZiWh Whe b b b b b b b b b b b b eOigibiOiW\ WeUPV aQd RWheU UeTXiUePeQWV VeW fRUWh iQ Whe CMO IPSOePeQWaWiRQ MaQXaO.b b b b b b b b b b b b
AQVZeUV WR Whe aSSOicaWiRQ TXeVWiRQV ZiOO be eYaOXaWed aQd deWeUPiQed WR PeeW RU QRW b b b b b b b b b b b b b b PeeW Whe PiQiPXP eOigibiOiW\ cUiWeUia VeW fRUWh iQ Whe CMO IPSOePeQWaWiRQ MaQXaO.b b b b b b b b b b b b
AQVZeUV aUe QRW VcRUed XViQg a SRiQWV-baVed V\VWeP.bb
AOO fieOdV ZiWh QXPbeUed TXeVWiRQV aUe UeTXiUed. QXeVWiRQV OeWWeUed aQd iQ EOXH fRQWb b b b b b b b b b b b b
aUe cRQdiWiRQaO TXeVWiRQV WhaW Pa\ be UeTXiUed baVed RQ ceUWaiQ SUeYiRXV UeVSRQVeV. b b b b b b b b b b b b TheUe iV QR PiQiPXP RU Pa[iPXP ZRUd cRXQW fRU iQdiYidXaO TXeVWiRQV RU Whe b b b b b b b b b b b b b aSSOicaWiRQ aV a ZhROe. AOO aSSOicaWiRQV PXVW iQcOXde Whe fROORZiQg aWWachPeQWV ZiWh b b b b b b b b b b b b WheiU aSSOicaWiRQ XViQg VaPSOe ZRUNVheeWV SURYided heUeiQ. The eOecWURQic cRSieV aUe b b b b b b b b b b b aYaiOabOe RQ Whe CMO ZebViWe aW
ZZZ.cOeaQPRbiOiW\RSWiRQV.RUg.bb
AWWDFKPHQW 1. MRbiOiW\ PURjecW VRXcheU BXdgeW WRUNVheeWbb AWWDFKPHQW 2. IQfUaVWUXcWXUe SiWeV aQd NeedV PURfiOe WRUNVheeWb AWWDFKPHQW 3. TeaP PURfiOe WRUNVheeWb
IQ RUGHU WR EH HYDOXDWHG, WKH HQWLUH DSSOLFDWLRQ PXVW EH FRPSOHWHG DQG VXEPLWWHG DV b b b b b b b b b b b b b b
RQH SDFNDJH, LQFOXGLQJ DOO UHTXLUHG DWWDFKPHQWV
; iQcRPSOeWe aSSOicaWiRQV Pa\ QRW beb b b b b b b b b b b cRQVideUed. ASSOicaWiRQV VXbPiWWed RXWVide Rf Whe aSSOicaWiRQ VXbPiVViRQ ZiQdRZ ZiOO b b b b b b b b b b aOVR QRW be cRQVideUed.b b
AOO iQfRUPaWiRQ aQd daWa VXbPiWWed iQ WhiV aSSOicaWiRQ aUe Whe SURSeUW\ Rf CARB aQd ZiOO b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b becRPe a SXbOic UecRUd XQdeU Whe PXbOic RecRUdV AcW (CaOifRUQia GRYeUQPeQW CRde b b b b b b b b b b b b SecWiRQ 6254 eW VeT.) RQce Whe aSSOicaQW haV VXbPiWWed Whe aSSOicaWiRQ. DR QRW iQcOXde b b b b b b b b b b b b b b aQ\ SeUVRQaOO\ ideQWifiabOe iQfRUPaWiRQ VXch aV SURjecW VWaff hRPe addUeVVeV, SeUVRQaO b b b b b b b b b b b ShRQe QXPbeUV, RU SeUVRQaO ePaiO addUeVVeV. The PURgUaP AdPiQiVWUaWRU Pa\ UeTXiUe b b b b b b b b b b b addiWiRQaO dRcXPeQWaWiRQ RU cOaUificaWiRQ if Qeeded.b
If \RX Qeed WhiV dRcXPeQW iQ aQ aOWeUQaWe fRUPaW RU OaQgXage RU WR UeTXeVW RWheU b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b aVViVWaQce ZiWh VXbPiWWiQg Whe aSSOicaWiRQ, cRQWacW CALSTART aW 626-744-5670 RU b\ b b b b b b b b b b b ePaiO aW
iQfR@cOeaQPRbiOiW\RSWiRQV.RUg. II DGGLWLRQDO VSDFH LV QHHGHG LQ DQ\ VHFWLRQb b b b b b b b b b b RI WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ, SOHDVH DWWDFK D VHSDUDWH VKHHW.bb
b
b
Ä
948
949
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
2. 3OHDVH VHOHFW \RXU RUJDQL]DWLRQłV W\SH:bb
(VeOecW RQe)b
☒ 3XEOLF DJHQF\.
FRU e[aPSOe, CiW\, CRXQW\, MeWURSROiWaQ POaQQiQg OUgaQi]aWiRQ,b CRXQciO Rf GRYeUQPeQW, ORcaO RU UegiRQaO WUaQViW ageQc\, ORcaO aiU TXaOiW\b PaQagePeQW diVWUicW, aiU SROOXWiRQ cRQWURO diVWUicW, SXbOic VchRRO diVWUicW.b ☐ CDOLIRUQLD 1DWLYH APHULFDQ 7ULEH. A FedeUaOO\ RecRgQi]ed TUibe iQ CaOifRUQiab OiVWed RQ Whe PRVW UeceQW QRWice Rf Whe FedeUaO RegiVWeU aQd RWheU QRQ-fedeUaOO\b UecRgQi]ed CaOifRUQia WUibaO gRYeUQPeQWV, iQcOXdiQg WhRVe OiVWed RQ Whe CaOifRUQiab TUibaO CRQVXOWaWiRQ LiVW PaiQWaiQed b\ Whe CaOifRUQia NaWiYe APeUicaQ HeUiWageb CRPPiVViRQb
☐ 1RQ-SURILW RUJDQL]DWLRQ . The QRQ-SURfiW RUgaQi]aWiRQ haYe beeQ iQcRUSRUaWed fRUb aW OeaVW RQe \eaU SUiRU WR Whe WiPe Rf YRXcheU aSSOicaWiRQ VXbPiWWaO aQd ZiWh aW OeaVWb RQe fXOO-WiPe VWaff SeUVRQ baVed iQ CaOifRUQiab
3. 3OHDVH GHVFULEH \RXU RUJDQL]DWLRQłV EDFNJURXQG DQG TXDOLILFDWLRQV, VXFK DV KLVWRU\b RI ORFDO HQJDJHPHQW, NH\ DUHDV RI H[SHUWLVH, DQG \RXU H[SHULHQFH ZRUNLQJ ZLWKb GLVDGYDQWDJHG DQG ORZ-LQFRPH FRPPXQLWLHV RU WULEHV. 3OHDVH LGHQWLI\ KRZ WKLVb EDFNJURXQG HQDEOHV \RX WR HIILFLHQWO\ DQG HIIHFWLYHO\ LPSOHPHQW WKLV SURMHFW.b The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd iV ORcaWed iQ WeVWeUQ CRQWUa CRVWa CRXQW\, CaOifRUQia aQdb ZaV iQcRUSRUaWed RQ AXgXVW 7, 1905. IW RSeUaWeV XQdeU a cRXQciO-PaQageU fRUPb Rf gRYeUQPeQW ZiWh VeYeQ PePbeUV WhaW iQcOXde Whe Pa\RU aQd Yice Pa\RU. AVb Rf Whe 2010 U.S. CeQVXV, Whe ciW\łV SRSXOaWiRQ ZaV 103,710.b b
The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd iV cRPPiWWed WR iPSOePeQWiQg cOeaQ WUaQVSRUWaWiRQb VWUaWegieV aQd iQcUeaViQg WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ eTXiW\ iQ RichPRQdłV SB 535b deVigQaWed DiVadYaQWaged CRPPXQiWieV (DAC)
. We aUe fXOO\ aOigQed ZiWh Wheb
COeaQ MRbiOiW\ VRXcheU PiORW PURgUaPłV PiVViRQ WR addUeVV cRPPXQiW\b UeVideQWVł WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV, iQcUeaVe UeVideQWVł acceVV WR Ne\ deVWiQaWiRQV,b aQd UedXce gUeeQhRXVe gaV (GHG) ePiVViRQV.b
bb
The CiW\ iV cRPPiWWed WR iPSURYiQg VafeW\, VXVWaiQabiOiW\ aQd heaOWh fRU aOO RichPRQdb UeVideQWV, aQd UecRgQi]eV WhaW Whe eQYiURQPeQW iV aQ iPSRUWaQW deWeUPiQaQW Rfb cRPPXQiW\ heaOWh. The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd iQcOXdeV a VigQificaQW QXPbeU Rf ceQVXVb WUacWV WhaW aUe deVigQaWed aV DiVadYaQWaged CRPPXQiWieV (DAC) baVed RQ Whe 75Whb SeUceQWiOe CaOEQYiURScUeeQ deVigQaWiRQ. The Ba\ AUea UegiRQ beQefiWV fURPb RichPRQdłV VigQificaQW eQYiURQPeQWaO bXUdeQ aV ORcaO UeVideQWV aUeb diVSURSRUWiRQaWeO\ affecWed b\ a YaUieW\ Rf heaOWh aQd ecRQRPic diVSaUiWieV.b RichPRQd hRVWV RQe Rf Whe OaUgeVW RiO UefiQeUieV iQ CaOifRUQia, QXPeURXV chePicaO aQdb iQdXVWUiaO PaQXfacWXUeUV, a UegiRQaO VROid ZaVWe faciOiW\, iQdXVWUiaO Uec\cOiQg faciOiWieV, ab Æ
950
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
PajRU SRUW, PajRU UaiOZa\V, IQWeUVWaWeV 580 aQd 80, aQd Whe RichPRQd-SaQ RafaeOb BUidge WROO SOa]a, aOO Rf Zhich cRQWUibXWe WR Whe high SROOXWiRQ bXUdeQ RQ UeVideQWV.b b RichPRQd haV Whe VecRQd ORZeVW PediaQ iQcRPe iQ Whe eQWiUe QiQe cRXQW\ Ba\ AUea,b ZiWh Whe CiW\ Rf SaQ PabOR, a VPaOO QeighbRUiQg cRPPXQiW\ cRPSOeWeO\ VXUURXQdedb b\ Whe CiW\ Rf RichPRQd, RQO\ VOighWO\ ORZeU. NeaUO\ 82 SeUceQW Rf RichPRQdłVb 110,175 UeVideQWV ideQWif\ aV SeRSOe Rf cRORU, a PajRUiW\ Rf ZhRP VXffeU fURP heaOWhb diVSaUiWieV caXVed b\ Whe P\Uiad Rf eQYiURQPeQWaO bXUdeQV SUeYaOeQW WhURXghRXW RXUb cRPPXQiW\.b b
b
ThiV SURjecW fiWV SeUfecWO\ ZiWhiQ RichPRQdłV VXVWaiQabiOiW\, heaOWh eTXiW\, aQd UaciaOb eTXiW\ gRaOV. RichPRQd eQYiViRQV a ciW\ ZheUe Oife e[SecWaQcieV aUe QRW \eaUV ORZeUb WhaQ WhRVe Rf VXUURXQdiQg cRPPXQiWieV, ZheUe WheUe iV eTXiWabOe acceVV WR UeVRXUceVb aQd RSSRUWXQiWieV. The CiW\łV GeQeUaO POaQ 2030, adRSWed iQ 2012, iQcOXded RQe Rfb Whe fiUVW VWaQdaORQe CRPPXQiW\ HeaOWh aQd WeOOQeVV EOePeQW aQd EQeUg\ aQdb COiPaWe ChaQge EOePeQW iQ Whe SWaWe. The CiW\ haV fXUWheUed iWV OeadeUVhiS iQb addUeVViQg eTXiW\ aQd VXVWaiQabiOiW\ b\ adRSWiQg a HeaOWh iQ AOO PROicieV OUdiQaQceb aQd SWUaWeg\ aQd COiPaWe AcWiRQ POaQ. IQ 2016, Whe CiW\ Rf RichPRQd jRiQed Wheb GRYeUQPeQW AOOiaQce RQ RaciaO ETXiW\ (GARE) cRhRUW aQd Whe CiW\ CRXQciO adRSWedb ReVROXWiRQ QR 93-18 iQ 2018 iQ VXSSRUW Rf V\VWePaWicaOO\ aSSO\iQg a UaciaO eTXiW\ OeQVb iQ deciViRQ-PaNiQg. The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd haV a dUafW CRPPXQiW\ EQgagePeQWb TRRONiW aQd dUafW RaciaO ETXiW\ POaQ WR gXide VWaff aQd CRPPXQiW\ PaUWQeUV dXUiQgb gUaQW iPSOePeQWaWiRQ. DeYeORSPeQW Rf Whe dUafW SOaQV iQcOXded e[WeQViYe cRPPXQiW\b eQgagePeQW, feedbacN aQd UeYieZ WR eQVXUe Whe fiQaO SOaQV aQd VWUaWegieV UefOecW Wheb gRaOV aQd aVSiUaWiRQV Rf Whe cRPPXQiW\ WR addUeVV eTXiWabOe acceVV.b b
The CiW\łV adRSWed COiPaWe AcWiRQ POaQ (CAP) iQcOXdeV a cR-beQefiWV fUaPeZRUNb aiPiQg WR UedXce GHG ePiVViRQV, iQcUeaVe VXVWaiQabOe WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ, aQd iPSURYeb cRPPXQiW\ heaOWh. The CAP bXiOdV RQ Whe adRSWed gRaOV aQd SROicieV iQ Whe CiW\łVb GeQeUaO POaQ 2030, HeaOWh iQ AOO PROicieV SWUaWeg\, Bic\cOe MaVWeU POaQ, aQd Wheb RichPRQd PedeVWUiaQ POaQ WR adYaQce Whe CiW\łV effRUWV WR bXiOd heaOWh eTXiW\b WhURXgh Whe UedXcWiRQ Rf ORcaO GHGV, cUiWeUia aiU SROOXWaQWV, aQd WR[ic aiUb cRQWaPiQaQWV.b b
b
AOO Rf Whe ciW\ SOaQV iQcOXded e[WeQViYe cRPPXQiW\ eQgagePeQW, feedbacN, aQdb UeYieZ WR eQVXUe Whe fiQaO SOaQV aQd VWUaWegieV UefOecWed Whe gRaOV aQd aVSiUaWiRQV Rfb Whe cRPPXQiW\.bb
b
We haYe VeOecWed Via aV a VXb-aSSOicaQW fRU WheiU e[SeUieQce RSeUaWiQg RQ-dePaQdb VeUYiceV, aQd aOVR fRU WheiU WUacN UecRUd Rf deOiYeUiQg SXbOic WUaQViW VeUYiceV VSecificaOO\b Ç
951
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
WR diVadYaQWaged cRPPXQiWieV. ViałV CRPPXQiW\ OXWUeach WeaP iV aOVR e[SeUieQcedb ZRUNiQg ZiWh aQd XQdeUVWaQdiQg Whe QeedV Rf cRPPXQiW\ PePbeUV, aQd Ze aUeb cRQfideQW RXU WZR RUgaQi]aWiRQV caQ ZRUN cORVeO\ WRgeWheU WR aWWUacW aQd UeWaiQb UideUVhiS.b
4. DRHV \RXU DSSOLFDWLRQ LQFOXGH D VXE-DSSOLFDQW(V)?b
(VeOecW RQe)b
☒ <HV b
☐ 1R b
NRWe: SXb-aSSOicaQWV aUe eQWiWieV RWheU WhaQ Whe Oead aSSOicaQW ZhR eQWeU iQWR a b b b b b b b b b b b b b SaUWQeUVhiS ZiWh RWheU eOigibOe RUgaQi]aWiRQV WR aSSO\ fRU YRXcheU fXQdV. b b b b b b b b b b SXb-aSSOicaQWV Pa\ iQcOXde bXW aUe QRW OiPiWed WR RUgaQi]aWiRQV WhaW SURYide cOeaQ b b b b b b b b b b b b PRbiOiW\ VeUYiceV, EVSE aQd RWheU UeOaWed iQfUaVWUXcWXUe, cRPPXQiW\ RXWUeach VeUYiceV, b b b b b b b b b b aQd WechQicaO aVViVWaQce. SXb-aSSOicaQWV Pa\ be SXbOic, SUiYaWe, RU QRQ-SURfiW b b b b b b b b b b RUgaQi]aWiRQV RU WUibeV. A ViQgOe eQWiW\ Pa\ SaUWiciSaWe aV VXb-aSSOicaQW iQ PXOWiSOe b b b b b b b b b b b b aSSOicaWiRQV.b
CRQGLWLRQDO (4D):b
D. II \RXU DSSOLFDWLRQ LQFOXGHV VXE-DSSOLFDQWV, SOHDVH DWWDFK D 7HDP 3URILOH :RUNVKHHWb (AWWDFKPHQW 3) DQG ZULWH, ŃDWWDFKHGń LQ WKH ER[ EHORZ ZLWK DQ\ FRPPHQWV.b AWWachPeQW 3_TeaP PURfiOe WRUNVheeW, aWWachedb
b
NRWe: If aSSOicabOe, \RX PXVW iQcOXde a deVcUiSWiRQ Rf Whe WeaPłV TXaOificaWiRQV, VXch aVb hiVWRU\ Rf ORcaO eQgagePeQW, Ne\ aUeaV Rf e[SeUWiVe, RU cRQcUeWe e[aPSOeV Rf aSSOicaQWb UeSUeVeQWiQg RU adYRcaWiQg iQ aQd fRU WheiU cRPPXQiW\.b
5. :KDW LV WKH QDPH RI DQ RUJDQL]DWLRQ RQ \RXU WHDP ZLWK DW OHDVW RQH \HDU RIb H[SHULHQFH RSHUDWLQJ PRELOLW\ VHUYLFHV (H[SHULHQFHG SDUWQHU), DQG ZKDW UROH WKH\b SOD\?b
3URYLGH WKH QDPH, WLWOH, DQG FRQWDFW LQIRUPDWLRQ RI WKH LQGLYLGXDO, WKHLUb DIILOLDWLRQ/RUJDQL]DWLRQ:b
b
GaUUeWW BUiQNeUb
PaUWQeUVhiSV PUiQciSaOb
NRPad TUaQViW, LLC (a VXbVidiaU\ Rf Via TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ, IQc.)b M: +1 574-286-4710b
[email protected]
b
È
952
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
(VeOecW RQe)b
☒ 6HOIb
☒ 6XE-DSSOLFDQWb
☐ DRQłW NQRZ \HW; ZLOO VHOHFW IURP WKH 0RELOLW\ 3URYLGHU DLUHFWRU\, RU DQbb HQWLW\ ZKR PHHWV WKH PLQLPXP TXDOLILFDWLRQ FULWHULD, DQG FRQWUDFW ZLWKLQb b 3 PRQWKV RI WKH YRXFKHU DJUHHPHQW H[HFXWLRQ GDWH.b
NRWe: Each WeaP PXVW iQcOXde aQ RUgaQi]aWiRQ ZiWh aW OeaVW RQe \eaU Rf e[SeUieQce b b b b b b b b b b b b b b RSeUaWiQg PRbiOiW\ VeUYiceV.b ThiV RUgaQi]aWiRQ Pa\ be Whe eQWiW\ RSeUaWiQg Whe b b b b b b b b b b b SURSRVed VeUYice, RU iW Pa\ VeUYe iQ aQRWheU caSaciW\ VXch aV SURjecW WechQicaO adYiVRU.b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b If Whe e[SeUieQced SaUWQeU iV QRW iQcOXded RQ Whe SURjecW WeaP aV Oead aSSOicaQW RU b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b VXb-aSSOicaQW aW Whe WiPe Rf aSSOicaWiRQ, Whe Oead aSSOicaQW PXVW cRPPiW WR cRQWUacW b b b b b b b b b b b b b ZiWh eiWheU aQ eQWiW\ OiVWed iQ Whe COeaQ MRbiOiW\ PURYideU DiUecWRU\ RU aQ eQWiW\ ZhR b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b PeeWV Whe PiQiPXP TXaOificaWiRQ cUiWeUia WR be RQ Whe DiUecWRU\ bXW QRW cXUUeQWO\ OiVWed, b b b b b b b b b b b b b b ZiWhiQ 3 PRQWhV Rf Whe YRXcheU agUeePeQW e[ecXWiRQ daWe.b AOO PRbiOiW\ SURYideUV OiVWed b b b b b b b b b b b b b iQ Whe DiUecWRU\ haYe beeQ VcUeeQed WR eQVXUe Whe\ PeeW Whe PiQiPXP OeYeO Rf b b b b b b b b b b b b b b e[SeUieQce WR VaWiVf\ WhiV UeTXiUePeQW.bb
CRQGLWLRQDO (5D):b
D. II \RX KDYH DQ ŃH[SHULHQFHG SDUWQHUń RU D PRELOLW\ VHUYLFH SURYLGHU RQ \RXU WHDP,b SOHDVH RXWOLQH WKHLU H[SHULHQFH RSHUDWLQJ PRELOLW\ VHUYLFHV IRU DW OHDVW RQH \HDU,b LQFOXGLQJ ORFDWLRQ DQG W\SH RI VHUYLFH. Ń)b
NRPad TUaQViW, LLC iV a VXbVidiaU\ Rf Via TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ, IQc. (ŃVia), Whe ZRUOdłVb OeadiQg deYeORSeU Rf VRfWZaUe fRU RQ-dePaQd aQd d\QaPic WUaQViW V\VWePV. ViałVb highO\ cRQfigXUabOe WechQRORg\ haV beeQ VXcceVVfXOO\ adaSWed WR PeeW Whe QeedV Rfb cRPPXQiWieV Rf aOO Vi]eV, deQViWieV, aQd dePRgUaShicV.bb WiWh ViałV WechQRORg\, RichPRQd ZiOO beQefiW fURP RXWVWaQdiQg WechQRORg\,b VeaPOeVVO\ iQWegUaWed ZiWh iQWegUaWed WUaQViW VeUYiceV. Via cRPbiQeV Whe WechQRORgicaOb iQQRYaWiRQ Rf a VRfWZaUe OeadeU, Whe e[SeUWiVe Rf aQ e[SeUieQced WUaQViW SURYideU, aQdb Whe VeUYice deVigQ caSabiOiWieV Rf a ZRUOd-cOaVV WUaQViW SOaQQiQg cRQVXOWaQc\. WiWhb VRShiVWicaWed WUiS VchedXOiQg, SaVVeQgeU aggUegaWiRQ, aQd d\QaPic URXWiQgb aOgRUiWhPV, Via RffeUV Whe ZRUOdłV PRVW SRZeUfXO WechQRORg\ fRU SRROiQg UideUV iQWRb efficieQW VhaUed UideV, SURYidiQg Whe cRQYeQieQce Rf a SUiYaWe Uide aW Whe VaPe SUiceb aV a bXV Uide. Via ZiOO bUiQg a SURYeQ SOa\bRRN fRU cRRUdiQaWiQg aQd iQWegUaWiQg dUiYeUb PaQagePeQW, YehicOe PaiQWeQaQce, aQd cXVWRPeU VXSSRUW WhaW haV beeQ UefiQed iQb RYeU 100 VeUYiceV acURVV Whe gORbe, iQcOXdiQg:b
● 0D[LPXP VHUYLFH HIILFLHQF\
. BeVW-iQ-cOaVV aOgRUiWhPV fRU SaVVeQgeUb
aggUegaWiRQ aQd d\QaPic URXWiQg ZiOO eQabOe RichPRQd WR PaNe Whe PRVWb efficieQW XVe Rf e[iVWiQg UeVRXUceV ZhiOe gURZiQg WUaQViW UideUVhiS.b É
953
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
● 3RZHUIXO VHUYLFH PDQDJHPHQW WRROV. AXWRPaWed PaQagePeQW WRROV OiPiW Wheb QXPbeU Rf SeRSOe Qeeded WR RYeUVee Whe VeUYice iQ UeaO WiPe, aQd PaNe iWb eaV\ fRU WheP WR SURYide high-WRXch VXSSRUW fRU SaVVeQgeUV aQd YehicOeb RSeUaWRUV ZhR dR UeTXiUe aVViVWaQce.b
● 8VHU-IULHQGO\, UHOLDEOH VHUYLFH IRU DOO ULGHUV
. ViałV SOaWfRUP iV deVigQed WR beb
iQWXiWiYe aQd acceVVibOe WR aOO UideUV; iW iQcOXdeV VXSSRUW fRU UideUV ZiWhb diVabiOiWieV aQd fRU WhRVe ZiWhRXW VPaUWShRQeV, cUediW caUdV, RU baQN accRXQWV.b The RideU ASS aOORZV cXVWRPeUV WR bRRN UideV, WUacN YehicOeV iQ UeaO-WiPe, Sa\b fRU WUiSV, aQd WURXbOeVhRRW aQ\ iVVXeV.b
● 9HKLFOH RSHUDWRU DSS EXLOW IRU VDIH GULYLQJ
. WiWh VSRNeQ diUecWiRQV aQd a cOeaUb
iQWeUface UeTXiUiQg PiQiPaO iQWeUacWiRQ, Whe DUiYeU ASS iV deVigQed WRb Pa[iPi]e YehicOe RSeUaWRUVł fRcXV RQ Whe URad, ZhiOe VWiOO RffeUiQg WRROV WRb eaViO\ cRQQecW WR VXSSRUW VWaff ZheQ Qeeded.b
● DHWDLOHG DQDO\WLFV DQG UHSRUWLQJ
. CRPSUeheQViYe aQd eaV\-WR-Uead UeSRUWV ZiOOb
heOS RichPRQd WUacN SURgUeVV WRZaUdV VeUYice SeUfRUPaQce gRaOV aQd heOSb iQfRUP bURadeU WUaQViW SOaQQiQg iQ Whe CiW\.b
Via haV iQcRUSRUaWed Whe ZRUOdłV PRVW adYaQced WechQRORgieV iQWR iWV RQ-dePaQdb WUaQViWbSOaWfRUP aQd iV e[SeUieQced iQ deSOR\iQg VRShiVWicaWed iQWegUaWiRQ feaWXUeVb aQd eOecWUic YehicOe (EV) WechQRORgieV:b
b
AGYDQFHG LQWHJUDWLRQ FDSDELOLWLHVb
LeYeUagiQg SURdXcWiRQ-gUade APIV, Via haV eQabOed iQWegUaWed faUe Sa\PeQW aQdb PXOWiPRdaO WUiS SOaQQiQg fRU SaUWQeU VeUYiceV Ō iQcOXdiQg deSOR\PeQWV ZiWh KiQgb CRXQW\ MeWUR, Whe OUaQge CRXQW\ TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ AXWhRUiW\, aQd TUaQVSRUW fRU NeZb SRXWh WaOeV (S\dQe\, AXVWUaOia), ZheUe UideUV caQ Sa\ fRU Via VeUYiceV XViQg Whe VaPeb Sa\PeQW caUd Whe\ XVe fRU RWheU ORcaO WUaQViW PRdeV. ViałV V\VWeP iV aOVR eTXiSSed WRb eQabOe WUiS SOaQQiQg acURVV PRdeV. FRU iQVWaQce, aW Whe cRUSRUaWe headTXaUWeUV Rfb gORbaO chePicaO cRPSaQ\ BASF, Via SURYideV aQ iQWegUaWed SOaWfRUP fRU YieZiQgb UeaO-WiPe VchedXOe iQfRUPaWiRQ abRXW PXOWiSOe PRdeV Ō iQcOXdiQg aQ RQ-UeTXeVWb VhXWWOe VeUYice aQd a fi[ed-URXWe bXV Ō diUecWiQg UideUV WRZaUd Whe faVWeVW, PRVWb efficieQW PRde. FRU RichPRQdłV VeUYice, Whe Via SOaWfRUP caQ VeUYe aV a digiWaOb RQe-VWRS-VhRS fRU SOaQQiQg, bRRNiQg, aQd Sa\iQg fRU WUiSV acURVV PRdeV.b b
E9 IOHHW RSWLPL]DWLRQb
Via SURYideV SXUSRVe-bXiOW WRROV fRU PaQagiQg RQ-UeTXeVW EV fOeeWV. Via haV WeVWed,b UefiQed, aQd SURYeQ WheVe WRROV iQ PXOWiSOe cRQWe[WV. FRU WheiU SaUWQeUVhiS ZiWhb BeUOiQeU VeUNehUVbeWUiebe (BVG) iQ BeUOiQ ŋ Rf Zhich 50% Rf a 168-YehicOe fOeeW iVb eOecWUicbŋ Whe\ deYeORSed aQ EV FOeeW OSWiPi]aWiRQ POaWfRUP, Zhich WUacNV YehicOeb Ê
954
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
chaUge-OeYeOV aQd URXWeV dUiYeUV WR chaUgiQg VWaWiRQV iQ RUdeU WR RSWiPi]e Wheb geR-VSaWiaO diVWUibXWiRQ Rf chaUge acURVV Whe eQWiUe fOeeW. SiPiOaUO\, iQ NeZ ZeaOaQd,b Via deSOR\ed Whe cRXQWU\łV fiUVW RQ-dePaQdbVeUYice XViQg a fXOO\ eOecWUic fOeeW iQb SaUWQeUVhiS ZiWh AXcNOaQd TUaQVSRUW. Via ORRNV fRUZaUd WR cROOabRUaWiQg ZiWhb RichPRQdbRQ VWUaWegieV fRU iQcUeaViQg Whe SUeVeQce Rf EVV iQ RichPRQd, fURPb cUeaWiYe fiQaQciQg WR RffVeW XSfURQW EV cRVWV, WR Whe deYeORSPeQW Rf URbXVW EVb chaUgiQg iQfUaVWUXcWXUe.b
b
FXQGLQJ 6XSSRUWb
Via ZiOO VXSSRUW RichPRQd ZiWh fXQdiQg adYiViQg aQd VXSSRUW. ViałV SaUWQeUV haYeb VXcceVVfXOO\ VecXUed gUaQWV WR fXQd aQd gURZ PicURWUaQViW VeUYiceV. MePbeUV Rf Wheb Via WeaP haYe e[WeQViYe e[SeUieQce QegRWiaWiQg Whe fedeUaO, VWaWe, aQd ShiOaQWhURSicb gUaQW VSace, aQd ZiOO cRQWiQXe WR VhaUe WheiU e[SeUWiVe ZiWh RichPRQd WR VXSSOePeQWb Whe CMO fXQdiQg iQ RUdeU WR VXVWaiQ Ō aQd eYeQ aXgPeQW Ō Whe PicURWUaQViWb VeUYice. ViałV WUaQViW VROXWiRQV Ō Zhich UeTXiUe OiWWOe-WR-QR e[SeQViYe iQfUaVWUXcWXUeb iQYeVWPeQW Ō aUe aSSeaOiQg WR ageQcieV ORRNiQg WR fXQd QeZ PRbiOiW\ PRdeV aWb ORZeU cRVW aQd UiVN. WiWhiQ Whe SaVW WZR \eaUV aORQe, Via haV heOSed SaUWQeUV VecXUeb VXbVWaQWiaO cRPSeWiWiYe VWaWe, fedeUaO, aQd fRXQdaWiRQ gUaQWV.b b
6. DR DOO SDUWQHUV LQFOXGHG LQ \RXU DSSOLFDWLRQ WHDP KDYH IXOO VXSSRUW DQG DSSURYDOb IURP GHFLVLRQ-PDNHUV LQ WKHLU RUJDQL]DWLRQ (H.J. BRDUG RI DLUHFWRUV, CLW\ CRXQFLO,b 7ULEDO CRXQFLO, RU RWKHU JRYHUQLQJ ERG\, HWF.) WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH SURMHFW DVb SURSRVHG?b
(VeOecW RQe)b
☒ <HV b
☐ 1R b
NRWe: ASSOicaWiRQV Pa\ be SURceVVed SeQdiQg fiQaO aSSURYaO fURP iQWeUQaO b b b b b b b b b b deciViRQ-PaNeUV; hRZeYeU, SURRf Rf aSSURYaO iV UeTXiUed SUiRU WR VigQiQg Whe YRXcheU b b b b b b b b b b b b agUeePeQW.b
CRQGLWLRQDO (6D):b
D. II DQ\ DSSOLFDWLRQ WHDP PHPEHUV VWLOO UHTXLUH DSSURYDOV WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH SURMHFW,b SOHDVH VWDWH ZKLFK PHPEHU(V), ZKR KDV WKH DXWKRULW\ WR DSSURYH, WKH SURFHVV IRUb DSSURYDO, DQG DQWLFLSDWHG DSSURYDO WLPHOLQHV.b
(ZUiWe iQ)bb
b
ÂÁ
955
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
352-EC7 1A55A7I9Eb
ThiV VecWiRQ cROOecWV iQfRUPaWiRQ abRXW Whe SURjecW SURSRVaO. The SURjecW VhRXOd aiP WR b b b b b b b b b b b b b eTXiWabO\ iPSURYe cRPPXQiWieVł acceVV WR cOeaQ PRbiOiW\ RSWiRQV WhaW aUe Vafe, UeOiabOe, b b b b b b b b b b b b cRQYeQieQW, aQd/RU affRUdabOe ZhiOe UedXciQg gUeeQhRXVe gaV ePiVViRQV aQd aiU b b b b b b b b b b SROOXWiRQ. The SURjecW PXVW be baVed RQ ideQWified cRPPXQiW\ WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ aQd b b b b b b b b b b b PRbiOiW\ QeedV. ASSOicaQWV PXVW deVcUibe Whe acWiYiWieV WhaW ZeUe WaNeQ WR aVVeVV b b b b b b b b b b b b cRPPXQiW\ WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV iQ a VXbVeTXeQW VecWiRQ.b
7. 3OHDVH GHVFULEH WKH SURMHFW SURSRVDO.bb
3URMHFWb
CRPSRQHQWb
DHVFULSWLRQb
PURjecW NaPeb RichPRQd OQ-DePaQdb
PURjecW gRaOV aQdb
PaiQ RbjecWiYeVb
The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd haV a URbXVW VeW Rf UegiRQaO PXOWiPRdaOb RSWiRQV UXQQiQg WhURXgh iW, iQcOXdiQg BART, APWUaN, AC TUaQViWb fi[ed URXWe bXVeV, aQd a QeZ feUU\ VeUYice WR SaQ FUaQciVcR.b HRZeYeU, WheUe aUe OiPiWed effecWiYe fiUVW-PiOe / OaVW-PiOeb cRQQecWiRQV WR WheVe UegiRQaO WUaQViW VeUYiceV. FXUWheU,b UeVideQWV, ZRUNeUV, aQd WRXUiVWV haYe difficXOW\ PRYiQg aURXQdb RichPRQd b\ SXbOic WUaQViW becaXVe iQWUa-RichPRQd WUaQViWb VeUYiceV aUe YeU\ OiPiWed. SRPe ORZeU-iQcRPe QeighbRUhRRdVb dR QRW SRVVeVV adeTXaWe WUaQViW aW aOO, VXch aV N\VWURP ViOOage,b OeadiQg WR WUaQViW deVeUWV. ThiV PicURWUaQViW VeUYice ZRXOdb iPSURYe fiUVW-PiOe / OaVW-PiOe cRQQecWiRQV aQd fiOO iQ WUaQViWb deVeUWV, gUeaWO\ iPSURYiQg PRbiOiW\ fRU UeVideQWV Rf RichPRQd.b T\SeV Rf PRbiOiW\b
VeUYiceV RUb
WechQRORgieV WR beb
ePSOR\edb
RichPRQd OQ-DePaQd ZiOO be a dePaQd-UeVSRQViYe,b
d\QaPicaOO\ URXWed PicURWUaQViW VeUYice ZiWh SOXg-iQ h\bUidb eOecWUic YehicOeV (PHEV) WR bUidge WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ gaSV aQdb SURYide cRQQecWiYiW\ beWZeeQ VeUYiceV aQd ORcaWiRQVb
WhURXghRXW PXch Rf Whe CiW\ Rf RichPRQd. CRYeUiQg 5.6 VTXaUeb PiOeV (cRPSOeWeO\ ZiWhiQ 535 ]RQeV), Whe VeUYice ZiOO feaWXUe:b ● WhUee 6-SaVVeQgeU PHEVV;b
● a cXVWRP-bUaQded SaVVeQgeU aSSOicaWiRQ fRU aSS-baVedb Uide haiOiQg;b
● dUiYeUV, YehicOeV, aQd fXOO RSeUaWiRQV, iQcOXdiQg cXVWRPeUb VeUYice;b
● RQe addiWiRQaO LeYeO 2 chaUgeU, iQ addiWiRQaO WR OeYeUageb RWheU LeYeO 2 chaUgeUV aOUead\ iQVWaOOed acURVV RichPRQdb b
ÂÂ
956
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
BaVed RQ ViałV ViPXOaWiRQ WRROV, SRSXOaWiRQ, aQd WUaYeO daWa, Zeb caQ SUedicW Whe fROORZiQg TXaOiW\ Rf VeUYice:b
● 12 hRXUV Rf VeUYice, 5 da\V / ZeeNb
● UWiOi]aWiRQ: 4-5 UideV SeU YehicOe hRXUb
● CaSaciW\: 12-15 WRWaO UideV SeU hRXUb
● AYeUage ZaiW WiPe: 9-11 PiQXWeVb
● AYeUage ZaONiQg diVWaQce: 200-300 PeWeUVb
● AYeUage Uide dXUaWiRQ: 12-14 PiQXWeVb
If \RX VeeN fXQdiQgb
fRU e[SaQdiQg aQb
e[iVWiQg PRbiOiW\b
VeUYice, deVcUibeb
hRZ \RXU SURSRVaOb
ZiOO UeVXOW iQb
iQcUeaViQg UideUVhiSb
RU XVe Rf aQb
e[iVWiQg PRbiOiW\b
VeUYice.b b
N/Ab
WhR aUe Wheb
iQWeQdedb
XVeUV/UideUV?b
The fROORZiQg UideUV aUe Whe WaUgeWed XVeUV fRU WhiV VeUYice:b ● PXbOic WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ cRPPXWeUV ZhR cRQQecW WRb
UegiRQaO WUaQViWb
● The ORcaO ZRUNfRUce ZhR Qeed WR acceVV ePSOR\PeQWb
ZiWhiQ RichPRQdb
● SeQiRUV aQd Whe eOdeUO\ ZhR Qeed acceVVibOe RSWiRQV fRUb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQbb
● LRZ-iQcRPe aQd diVadYaQWaged cRPPXQiWieV ZhR Qeedb
PRUe affRUdabOe aQd acceVVibOe WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ RSWiRQVb
IV WheUe aQ\b
addiWiRQaOb
WUaQVSRUWaWiRQb
eQhaQcePeQWb
beVide Whe cRUeb
SURjecW PRdeO?b
E[SOaiQ.b
IQWegUaWed DigiWaO Pa\PeQW: Via'V VRfWZaUe SOaWfRUP caQ beb cRQfigXUed WR aSSO\ diffeUeQW faUe VWUXcWXUeV VXch aV WUaQVfeUVb aQd cRQceVViRQ faUeV. DiffeUeQWiaWed faUeV baVed RQ SicNXS aQdb dURS-Rff ORcaWiRQV, Whe WiPe Rf da\, Whe OeYeO Rf VeUYiceb SURYided, RU SeUVRQaO facWRUV, VXch aV age caQ beb
iPSOePeQWed. Via haV URbXVW APIV aQd a WaOeQWed WechQRORg\b WeaP ZhR caQ ZRUN RQ iQWegUaWiRQV WR eQabOe adYaQced faUeb aQd WUaQVfeU feaWXUeV, eQVXUiQg aQ iQWXiWiYe aQd VeaPOeVVb cXVWRPeU e[SeUieQce.bb
● B\ PaVVeQgeU T\Se - Via caQ chaUge diffeUeQW faUeV fRUb diffeUeQW W\SeV Rf cXVWRPeUV, VXch aV VWXdeQWV RU VWaff.b ThiV caQ be dRQe WhURXgh RffeUiQg cXVWRPeU cRdeV RUb
VXbVcUiSWiRQ SaVVeV.bb
ÂÃ
957
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
● B\ GeRgUaSh\ - Via caQ aOVR chaUge diffeUeQW UaWeV b\b geRgUaSh\. TheVe faUe VWUXcWXUeV aUe aXWRPaWicaOO\b
aVVeVVed baVed RQ Whe aWWUibXWeV Rf Whe WUiS, aQd UeTXiUeb QR acWiRQ fURP Whe UideU, dUiYeU, RU diVSaWcheU. Via caQb aVVeVV diffeUeQW faUe VWUXcWXUeV fRU WUiSV WhaW aUe beWWeUb VeUYed b\ a fi[ed-URXWe bXV, iQ RUdeU WR iQceQWiYi]e UideUVb WR XVe e[iVWiQg WUaQViW VeUYiceV ZheUe aYaiOabOe.bb
● B\ AOgRUiWhP - Via aOVR haV aQ adYaQced SUiciQg eQgiQeb WhaW iV XWiOi]ed WR cRPSeWiWiYeO\ aQd aWWUacWiYeO\ SUiceb UideV iQ cRQVXPeU PaUNeWV. IQ ViałV VeUYice iQ NeZ YRUN,b fRU e[aPSOe, WhiV faUe caQ YaU\ baVed RQ WiPe Rf da\, da\b Rf Whe ZeeN, diVWaQce aQd ORcaWiRQ, aQd RYeUaOO PaUNeWb dePaQd (cXUUeQW aQd SUedicWed) Ō Zhich aOO ZRUN iQb
cRQceUW WR NeeS dUiYeU VXSSO\ aQd UideU dePaQd iQb
aSSURSUiaWe baOaQce.b
b
FiUVW- aQd LaVW-MiOe: IQ PaQ\ Rf ViałV SaUWQeUVhiSV, SURYidiQgb cRQQecWiRQV WR fi[ed-URXWe WUaQViW iV Whe SUiPaU\ XVe-caVe. ViałVb SOaWfRUP iV ZeOO-VXiWed WR SURYide cRQQecWiRQV WR RWheU WUaQViWb PRdeV becaXVe Rf iWV fOe[ibiOiW\ fRU bRWh cXVWRPeUV aQdb SaUWQeUV. ViałV V\VWeP bUiQgV a WUaQViW Uide WR cXVWRPeUV ZiWhiQb PiQXWeV Rf a UeTXeVW, aOORZiQg WheP WR WUaYeO aQ\ZheUe ZiWhiQ ab SUedefiQed ]RQe. ZRQaOO\-baVed UaWheU WhaQ OiQeaUO\ baVedb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ iV a VXSeUb Za\ WR VeUYe aUeaV WhaW aUe QRWb ZeOO-VeUYed b\ fi[ed URXWeV. FRU RichPRQd, ViałV WechQRORg\ ZiOOb iQceQWiYi]e PXOWiPRdaO WUaYeO WhURXgh a YaUieW\ Rf VRfWZaUeb cXVWRPi]aWiRQV aQd iQWegUaWe ZiWh WhiUd-SaUW\ faUe cROOecWiRQb V\VWePV.bb
b
EV FOeeW OSWiPi]aWiRQ POaWfRUP: EOecWUic YehicOeV iQWURdXce QeZb cRPSOe[iWieV WR fOeeW PaQagePeQW WhaW Via iV XQiTXeO\b
SRViWiRQed WR addUeVV. TheVe cRPSOe[iWieV gURZ eVSeciaOO\ aVb Whe QXPbeU Rf EVV iQ Whe fOeeW iQcUeaVeV RYeU WiPe. Viab deYeORSed aQ EV FOeeW OSWiPi]aWiRQ POaWfRUP, Zhich iQWegUaWeVb baWWeU\-PRQiWRUiQg WechQRORg\ ZiWh iWV URXWiQg aOgRUiWhP. ThiVb iQWegUaWiRQ iQcOXdeV:b
● DHGLFDWHG E9 IOHHW PDQDJHPHQW DQG URXWLQJ WRROV.b
DUiYeUV beQefiW fURP Whe Via EV POaWfRUPłVb
ÂÄ
958
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
chaUge-WUacNiQg ORgic, diUecWiQg WheP WR UeWXUQ WheiUb
YehicOe WR a chaUgiQg VWaWiRQ ZheQ Qeeded, Zhich adaSWVb iQ UeaO-WiPe WR RSWiPi]e Whe geRVSaWiaO diVWUibXWiRQ Rfb chaUge acURVV Whe eQWiUe fOeeW.bb
● EQHUJ\ XVH RSWLPL]DWLRQ IRU GULYHUV.
ThiV feaWXUe eQVXUeVb
dUiYeUV RSeUaWe iQ a Za\ WhaW Pa[iPi]eV YehicOe baWWeU\b WiPe b\ UedXciQg acWiRQV VXch aV haUd bUaNiQg aQd faVW,b VXddeQ acceOeUaWiRQ. The Via EV POaWfRUP aXWRPaWicaOO\b caOcXOaWeV aQ EcRScRUe aW Whe eQd Rf each WUiS, heOSiQgb dUiYeUV beWWeU XQdeUVWaQd Whe behaYiRUV WhaW SURPRWeb
efficieQW EV XVe.b
ThiV SOaWfRUP RSWiPi]eV Whe baWWeU\ Oife Rf EVV, Pa[iPi]iQgb VeUYice hRXUV aQd cRVW-effecWiYeQeVV ZhiOe PiQiPi]iQg Whe Qeedb WR XVe QRQ-EVV. ThiV EV OSWiPi]aWiRQ POaWfRUP caQ SOa\ ab VigQificaQW UROe iQ achieYiQg WhiV gRaO ZhiOe Pa[iPi]iQgb RSeUaWiRQaO efficieQc\.bb
WheUe ZiOOb
VeUYice(V) beb
SURYided?b b
RichPRQd, CaOifRUQiab
WhaW W\SeV Rf WUiSVb
RU deVWiQaWiRQV ZiOOb
be VeUYed?b
ReVideQWV Rf RichPRQd ZRXOd XVe WhiV PicURWUaQViW VeUYice fRUb fiUVW-PiOe / OaVW-PiOe WUiSV WR geW WR aQd fURP SOaceV OiNe Wheb RichPRQd aQd EO CeUUiWR BART VWaWiRQV, APWUaN, UegiRQaO ACb TUaQViW VeUYice, aQd Whe RichPRQd FeUU\ TeUPiQaO. AddiWiRQaOb SRiQWV Rf iQWeUeVW iQcOXde CiYic CeQWeU POa]a, PXOWiSOe PedicaOb faciOiWieV, gURceUieV VWRUeV, VhRSSiQg ceQWeUV, ShaUPacieV, aQdb ORcaO SaUNV.b
b
WhaW eTXiSPeQW RUb
iQfUaVWUXcWXUe ZiOOb
be deSOR\ed?b
● ThUee PHEVV ZiWh a 6-SaVVeQgeU caSaciW\b
● OQe addiWiRQaO chaUgiQg VWaWiRQ ŋ Vee iQfUaVWUXcWXUeb QeedV ZRUNVheeW fRU PRUe iQfRUPaWiRQb
TeaP PePbeUb
cRQWUibXWiRQVb
RicPRQd ZiOO be UeVSRQVibOe fRU:bb
● ShaSiQg Whe Ne\ SaUaPeWeUV Rf Whe SiORW, ZRUNiQg cORVeO\b ZiWh Via dXUiQg Whe SOaQQiQg aQd OaXQch ShaVeV WRb
deWeUPiQe iWePV OiNe fiQaO ]RQe SaUaPeWeUV, faUeV, aQdb VSecific PaUNeWiQg URadPaS.b
ÂÅ
959
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
● ReYieZiQg highO\-deWaiOed daWa abRXW Whe SeUfRUPaQceb Rf Whe VeUYice iQ RUdeU WR UecRPPeQd adjXVWPeQWV RUb
UefiQePeQWV WR beWWeU PeeW iWV gRaOV RYeU WiPe.b
b
Via ZiOO be UeVSRQVibOe fRU cRRUdiQaWiQg aQd deOiYeUiQg Wheb fROORZiQg VeUYiceV:b
● DULYHU 0DQDJHPHQW:
Via ZiOO YeW, RQbRaUd, aQdb
cRRUdiQaWe WUaiQiQg fRU a ZRUNfRUce Rf TXaOified dUiYeUV.b OQce dUiYeUV aUe RQbRaUded, Via SURYideV WheP ZiWhb
UeaO-WiPe VXSSRUW, ZhiOe cRQWiQXRXVO\ PRQiWRUiQg dUiYeUb SeUfRUPaQce WR eQVXUe high-TXaOiW\ VeUYice SURYiViRQ fRUb UideUV.b
● FOHHW 0DLQWHQDQFH:
Via ZiOO ZRUN cORVeO\ ZiWh a OeaViQgb
SaUWQeU WR SURcXUe YehicOeV aQd PaiQWaiQ Whe fOeeW.b
● CXVWRPHU 6XSSRUW: DXUiQg aOO VeUYice hRXUV, ViałVb
e[SeUWO\ WUaiQed VXSSRUW ageQWV ZiOO UeVSRQd WR UideU aQdb dUiYeU iQTXiUieV b\ ShRQe aQd We[W. TheVe diVSaWcheUV Ōb WUaiQed iQ SURYidiQg VXSSRUW fRU UideUV aOO RYeU Whe ZRUOdb Ō ZiOO SURacWiYeO\ PRQiWRU Whe VeUYice aQd iQWeUYeQe iQb UeVSRQVe WR aQRPaOieV, VXch aV XQe[SecWed WUaffic aQdb
YehicOe bUeaNdRZQV. The\ ZiOO aOVR haQdOe aOO WUiSb
UeVeUYaWiRQV bRRNed b\ ShRQe.b
● 6XSSO\ 3ODQQLQJ:
LeYeUagiQg bacN-eQd VeUYiceb
PaQagePeQW WRROV, Via diVSaWcheUV ZiOO aQaO\]e dePaQdb
SaWWeUQV aQd PaQage da\-WR-da\ VXSSO\ SOaQQiQg WRb
eQVXUe WhaW VXfficieQW YehicOeV aUe diVSaWched WR PeeWb UideU dePaQd.b
ThURXgh Whe 4-\eaU SaUWQeUVhiS, ViałV PURjecW SXcceVV TeaPb ZiOO aOVR SURYide RichPRQd ZiWh aQaO\WicaO, cRQVXOWaWiYe, aQdb WechQicaO VXSSRUW.bb
b
POeaVe UefeU WR SecWiRQ 11, beORZ, fRU Whe OaXQch WiPeOiQe aQdb bUeaNdRZQ Rf acWiYiWieV beWZeeQ RichPRQd aQd Via, aQdb
AWWachPeQW 3_TeaP PURfiOe WRUNVheeW fRU fXUWheU deWaiOV.bb b
NRWe: The UeVSRQVe PXVW addUeVV aOO Rf Whe fROORZiQg:b ● PURjecW QaPeb
● DefiQe SURjecW gRaOV aQd PaiQ RbjecWiYeV.b
ÂÆ
960
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
● WhaW W\SeV Rf PRbiOiW\ VeUYiceV RU WechQRORgieV ZiOO be ePSOR\ed?bb ● If \RX VeeN fXQdiQg fRU e[SaQdiQg aQ e[iVWiQg PRbiOiW\ VeUYice, deVcUibe hRZb \RXU SURSRVaO ZiOO UeVXOW iQ iQcUeaViQg UideUVhiS RU XVe Rf aQ e[iVWiQg PRbiOiW\b VeUYice.b b
● WhR aUe Whe iQWeQded XVeUV/UideUV?b
● IV WheUe aQ\ addiWiRQaO WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ eQhaQcePeQW beVide Whe cRUe SURjecWb PRdeO? E[SOaiQ.b
● WheUe ZiOO VeUYice(V) be SURYided?b b
● WhaW W\SeV Rf WUiSV RU deVWiQaWiRQV ZiOO be VeUYed?b
● WhaW eTXiSPeQW RU iQfUaVWUXcWXUe ZiOO be deSOR\ed?b
● HRZ ZiOO each WeaP PePbeU cRQWUibXWe WR YaUiRXV eOePeQWV Rf Whe SURjecW?b b
8. :KDW DUH WKH FRUH SURMHFW PRGHO(V) LQFOXGHG LQ \RXU SURMHFW? (II DSSOLFDEOH, HQWHUb SHUFHQWDJH DPRXQW RI YRXFKHU IXQGV DOORFDWHG WR HDFK PRGHO):
b
(VeOecW aW OeaVW RQe aQd aOO WhaW aSSO\)b
_____ CaUVhaUiQgb
_____ BiNe RU ScRRWeU-VhaUiQgb
_____ CaUSRROiQgb
_____ VaQSRROiQgb
__X__ IQQRYaWiYe WUaQViW VeUYiceVb
__X__ OWheU Uide RQ-dePaQd VeUYiceVb
b b
NRWe: PURjecWV VXSSRUW b\ CMO YRXcheU fXQdV PXVW be baVed RQ RQe RU PRUe cRUeb SURjecW PRdeOV OiVWed heUe. POeaVe Vee SecWiRQ E. PURjecW EOigibiOiW\ iQ Whe CMOb IPSOePeQWaWiRQ MaQXaO fRU defiQiWiRQV aQd eOigibiOiW\ cUiWeUia.b
9. :KLFK RI WKH IROORZLQJ FDWHJRULHV RI LQIUDVWUXFWXUH GRHV \RXU SURSRVDO LQFOXGH?b b (VeOecW aOO WhaW aSSO\)b
☒ LeYeO 2 EOecWUic VehicOe SXSSO\ ETXiSPeQW (EVSE)b ☐ DC FaVW ChaUgiQg ETXiSPeQWb
☐ Bic\cOe aQd ScRRWeU IQfUaVWUXcWXUeb
☐ SROaU PhRWRYROWaic (PV)b
☐ H\dURgeQ RefXeOiQg SWaWiRQbb
☐ NRQeb
ÂÇ
961
MOBILIT. PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
CondiWional (9a):b
a. FoU each caWegoU\ liVWed aboYe (e[cepW Ńnoneń), pleaVe compleWe and aWWach Wheb InfUaVWUXcWXUe SiWe and NeedV PUofile WoUkVheeW (AWWachmenW 2) foU all WhaW appl\b and ZUiWe in ŃaWWachedń in Whe bo[ along ZiWh an\ commenWV.bb AWWachPeQW 2_IQfUaVWUXcWXUe SiWeV aQd NeedV PURfiOe WRUNVheeW, aWWachedb
10.DoeV \oXU pUojecW inclXde an\ addiWional WUanVpoUWaWion enhancemenWV WhaW aUe noWb liVWed in SecWion E.3 of Whe PUogUam ImplemenWaWion ManXal?b (VeOecW RQe)b
☐ YeV, and I heUeb\ UeTXeVW an appUoYal.b
☒ No, oXU pUojecW inclXdeV a pUopoVed addiWional WUanVpoUWaWion enhancemenWb WhaW iV liVWed in Whe ImplemenWaWion ManXal.b
CondiWional (10a):b
a. If \eV, pleaVe e[plain Whe pUopoVed WUanVpoUWaWion enhancemenW.b (ZUiWe iQ)bb
b
NRWe: AddiWiRQaO WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ eQhaQcePeQWV aUe iQWeQded WR be VXSSOePeQWaO aQdb QRW eVVeQWiaO WR Whe cRUe SURjecW PRdeO. If \RXU eQhaQcePeQW iV QRW aSSURYed, Wheb SURjecW VhRXOd VWiOO be abOe WR RSeUaWe effecWiYeO\. The PURgUaP AdPiQiVWUaWRU Pa\b UeTXiUe addiWiRQaO iQfRUPaWiRQ aQd daWa WR eYaOXaWe \RXU UeTXeVW.b
11.PleaVe deVcUibe Whe ke\ acWiYiWieV \oX Zill condXcW foU pUojecW deYelopmenW andb opeUaWionV, pUojecW mileVWoneV and Whe Wimeline needed Wo VXcceVVfXll\ laXnch Wheb pUojecW and opeUaWe Whe VeUYice foU aW leaVW 4 \eaUV.b
b
BeORZ, SOeaVe fiQd RichPRQd aQd ViałV jRiQWO\-deYeORSed SOaQ fRU OaXQchiQg Wheb RQ-dePaQd PicURWUaQViW VeUYice ZiWh PHEVV iQ RichPRQd, CaOifRUQia, iQcOXdiQg ab deWaiOed bUeaNdRZQ Rf each OaXQch VWage. The WiPiQg UeSUeVeQWed heUe ŋ 12 ZeeNVb fURP NicNRff WR OaXQch ŋ iV W\SicaO Rf ViPiOaU deSOR\PeQWV Via haV VXcceVVfXOO\ OaXQchedb ZiWh RYeU 100 RWheU WUaQViW ageQc\ SaUWQeUV. POeaVe QRWe WhaW VRPe OaXQch VWageV ZiOOb RYeUOaS, RccXUUiQg cRQcXUUeQWO\.bb
b
LAUNCHb
STAGEb CORE ACTIVITIESb RICHMOND TASKSb VIA TASKSb
ÂÈ
962
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
67AGE 1b
SeUYiceb
POaQQiQg &b
DeVigQb
b
(WeeNV 1-5)b
KicNRff Whe SURjecW ZiWh Wheb
RichPRQd aQd Via WeaPV.b
RefiQe aQd fiQaOi]e Whe VeUYiceb
VcRSe, iQcOXdiQg Ne\ VeUYiceb
URXWiQg aOgRUiWhP SaUaPeWeUVb
(e.g. Pa[iPXP ZaON WiPe,b
Pa[iPXP ZaiW WiPe, eWc.) WRb
beVW PeeW Whe gRaOV Rf Wheb
PicURWUaQViW VeUYice. IdeQWif\b
WechQicaO UeTXiUePeQWV aQdb
fiQaOi]e aQ\ XQiTXe SURdXcWb
QeedV dXUiQg Whe KicNRff aQdb
DeVigQ ReYieZ PeeWiQgV.b
CRPSOeWe RXWVWaQdiQgb
SeUPiWWiQg UeTXiUePeQWV.b
FiQaOi]e Whe PaUNeWiQg VWUaWeg\.b
b
6WDJH 1 PLOHVWRQHV
:b
● FiQaOi]ed SURjecW VcRSebb
● EVWabOiVhed VeUYiceb
SaUaPeWeUVb
● FiQaOi]ed daWa VhaUiQg SOaQbb
● DefiQed PaUNeWiQg SOaQbb
● PURYide VeUYiceb
bUaQdiQg aVVeWVb
● CRPPXQicaWeb
PaUNeWiQg gRaOVb
● PURYide daWa WR iQfRUPb
VeUYice ViPXOaWiRQVb
● CRPSOeWe aQ\b
RXWVWaQdiQg SeUPiWb
UeTXiUePeQWVb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
: RichPRQdb
PURjecW MaQageUb
● CRQfigXUe ]RQeb
geRgUaShieV, VeUYiceb
hRXUV, aQd VeUYiceb
PRdeVb
● CRQfigXUe PaSSiQgb
aQd URXWiQg iQSXWVb
● CRQfiUP daWa-VhaUiQgb
SOaQb
● EVWabOiVh PaUNeWiQgb
SOaQb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
: Via PURjecWb
TeaPbb
67AGE 2b
DeYeORSPeQWb
& IQWeUQaOb
TeVWiQgb
b
(WeeNV 2-9)b
CRQfigXUe Whe UideU-faciQgb
aSSOicaWiRQ, dUiYeU aSSOicaWiRQ,b
aQd VXSSRUWiQg diVSaWch aQdb
adPiQiVWUaWRU daVhbRaUdV.b
IQVWaOO chaUgiQg iQfUaVWUXcWXUe.b
LRcaOi]e Whe VeUYice WRb
RichPRQd aQd begiQ V\VWePb
WeVWiQg.b
b
6WDJH 2 PLOHVWRQHV
:b
● LRcaOi]ed VRfWZaUe VXiWebb
● QXaOiW\ aVVXUaQce aQdb
iQWeUQaO V\VWeP WeVWiQgb
cRPSOeWedb
● CRQWiQXe WR SURYideb
iQSXW RQ deViUedb
VeUYice chaUacWeUiVWicVb
(e.g., cRQWeQW fRU UideUb
PeVVageV)b
● FaciOiWaWe Wheb
iQVWaOOaWiRQ Rf chaUgiQgb
iQfUaVWUXcWXUeb
● DeYeORS PaUNeWiQgb
PaWeUiaOVb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
:bb
RichPRQd PURjecWb
MaQageUb
● LRcaOi]e bacN-eQd aQdb
fURQW-eQd eQYiURQPeQWb
● PeUfRUP iQWeUQaOb
V\VWeP WeVWVb
● DeWeUPiQe ViUWXaO BXVb
SWRSVbb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
:bb
Via PURjecW TeaP aQdb
PURdXcW TeaPbb
ÂÉ
963
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
67AGE 3b
TeVWiQg &b
TUaiQiQgb
b
(WeeNV 7-10)b
TeVW Whe VeUYice ZiWh UeaO UideUVb
aQd dUiYeUV Ō UeYieZiQgb
URXWiQg, UideU PeVVagiQg, aQdb
RWheU fXQcWiRQaOiWieV WR eQVXUeb
Whe e[SeUieQce aOigQV ZiWhb
RichPRQdłV SURjecW YiViRQ.b
CRQdXcW WUaiQiQg ZRUNVhRSVb
ZiWh dUiYeUV aQd RichPRQdb
VWaff, aV Qeeded.b
b
6WDJH 3 PLOHVWRQHV
:bb
● PUe-OaXQch dUiYeU WUaiQiQgb
cRPSOeWedb
● ASSV (fRU UideUV aQd dUiYeUV)b
aYaiOabOe fRU dRZQORadb
● AOO UeTXeVWed WUaiQiQgb
ZRUNVhRSV fRU RichPRQdb
VWaff cRQdXcWedbb
● AOO dUiYeUV WUaiQed aQdb
aSSURYed fRU OiYe VeUYiceb
● AWWeQd UeOeYaQWb
WUaiQiQg ZRUNVhRSVb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
: RichPRQdb
PURjecW MaQageU aQd VWaffb
PePbeUV iQWeUeVWed iQb
WUaiQiQg ZRUNVhRSVb
● CRQdXcW fiQaO WUaiQiQgb
ZRUNVhRSVb
● CRQdXcW iQWeUQaO fieOdb
WeVWV ZiWh OiYe UideUVb
aQd dUiYeUV iQ Wheb
VeUYice ]RQeb
● PeUfRUP a fiQaO fieOdb
WeVW Rf Whe V\VWeP WRb
WeVW iWV UeadiQeVVb
● PUeSaUe fRU VeUYiceb
gR-OiYeb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
:bb
Via PURjecW TeaPbb
b
67AGE 4b
FOeeWb
PUeSaUaWiRQ &b
MaUNeWiQgb
E[ecXWiRQb
b
(WeeNV 10-12)b
FiQaOi]e Whe fOeeW PaQagePeQWb
SOaQ. CaUU\ RXW aOO acWiYiWieVb
ZiWhiQ Whe SUe-OaXQch PaUNeWiQgb
aQd SURPRWiRQV SOaQ.b
b
6WDJH 4 PLOHVWRQHV
:b
● FOeeW Uead\ fRU OiYe VeUYiceb
● LiYe fieOd WeVWiQg cRPSOeWedbb
● AOO SUe-OaXQch PaUNeWiQgb
cRPSOeWedb
● SigQ Rff RQ fOeeWb
PaQagePeQW SOaQb
● AWWeQd Ne\ PaUNeWiQgb
eYeQWV (e.g., gR-OiYeb
NicNRff eYeQW)b
● IPSOePeQW PaUNeWiQgb
aQd SURPRWiRQV SOaQb
(e.g., SUeVV UeOeaVeV)bb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
:bb
RichPRQd PURjecWb
MaQageUb
● WRUN ZiWh OeaViQgb
SaUWQeU WR acTXiUe aQdb
cXVWRPi]e fOeeWbb
● SeW XS PHEVV iQ ViałVb
EV POaWfRUPb
● ShaUe e[SecWaWiRQV fRUb
fOeeW PaiQWeQaQcebb
● IQVSecW aQd aSSURYeb
aOO YehicOeVbb
● RecUXiW, RQbRaUd, aQdb
cRRUdiQaWe WUaiQiQg fRUb
dUiYeUV fRU Whe VeUYiceb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
:bb
Via PURjecW TeaP (Oed b\b
ViałV E[SaQViRQ WeaP)b
ÂÊ
964
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
67AGE 5b
SeUYiceb
LaXQch &b
OSWiPi]aWiRQb
b
(WeeNV 13+)b
LaXQch aQd cRQWiQXRXVO\b
iPSURYe Whe VeUYice iQ UeVSRQVeb
WR SeUfRUPaQce aVVeVVPeQWVb
aQd feedbacN.b
b
6WDJH 5 PLOHVWRQHV
:b
● SeUYice gR-OiYeb
● FeedbacN gaWheUed fURPb
iQiWiaO XVeUVb
● PRVW-OaXQch PaUNeWiQg aQdb
SURPRWiRQV SOaQ iQiWiaWedb
● OQgRiQg RSWiPi]aWiRQ Rfb
da\-WR-da\ RSeUaWiRQVb
● ReYieZ daWa UeSRUWVb
● PURYide feedbacN RQb
VeUYice SeUfRUPaQceb
● AWWeQd Ne\ PaUNeWiQgb
eYeQWVbb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
:bb
RichPRQd PURjecWb
MaQageUb
● ShaUe VeUYice daWa aQdb
beQchPaUNb
SeUfRUPaQce agaiQVWb
KPIV SURYided b\b
RichPRQdb
● MaNe iWeUaWiYeb
iPSURYePeQWV baVedb
RQ feedbacN fURPb
UideUV, dUiYeUV, aQdb
RichPRQdbb
● IPSOePeQW SRVW-OaXQchb
PaUNeWiQg VWUaWeg\ WRb
aWWUacW QeZ UideUVb
b
.H\ SHUVRQQHO
:bb
Via PURjecW TeaPbb
b
Be\RQd OaXQch, Via ZiOO cRQWiQXe WR VXSSRUW RichPRQd, iQcOXdiQg:bb b
2SHUDWLRQV VXSSRUW DQG FRRUGLQDWLRQ WKURXJKRXW WKH OLIHWLPH RI WKH GHSOR\PHQW.b IQ addiWiRQ WR iQdXVWU\-OeadiQg WechQRORg\, 9LDłV 7DD6 VROXWLRQ SURYideV eYeU\WhiQgb
Qeeded WR PaQage dUiYeUV, PaiQWaiQ YehicOeV, aQd RffeU e[ceSWiRQaO cXVWRPeU VXSSRUW.b FURP cRRUdiQaWiQg da\-WR-da\ RSeUaWiRQV Rf RYeU 100 VeUYiceV acURVV Whe gORbe, Viab XQdeUVWaQdV Whe cUiWicaO UROe Rf Whe RSeUaWRU iQ aQ\ WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VeUYice. FRU SXbOicb VecWRU cXVWRPeUV, high-TXaOiW\ YehicOeV, SURfeVViRQaO dUiYeUV, aQd high-WRXch cXVWRPeUb VeUYice caQ UedefiQe cRQceSWiRQV Rf ZhaW a WUaQViW jRXUQe\ caQ be. ViałV VROXWiRQ ZiOOb SURYide highO\ efficieQW RSeUaWiRQV, cRRUdiQaWed VeaPOeVVO\ ZiWh Whe VRfWZaUe SOaWfRUPb RYeU Whe OifeWiPe Rf Whe deSOR\PeQW.b
bb
Via ZiOO eQVXUe Whe deOiYeU\ Rf Whe fROORZiQg VeUYiceV fRU RichPRQd:b
1. DULYHU 0DQDJHPHQW:
Via ZiOO YeW, RQbRaUd, aQd cRRUdiQaWe WUaiQiQg fRU ab ZRUNfRUce Rf TXaOified dUiYeUV. OQce dUiYeUV aUe RQbRaUded, Via ZiOO SURYideb WheP ZiWh UeaO-WiPe VXSSRUW, ZhiOe cRQWiQXRXVO\ PRQiWRUiQg dUiYeU SeUfRUPaQceb WR eQVXUe high-TXaOiW\ VeUYice SURYiViRQ fRU UideUV.b
2. FOHHW 0DLQWHQDQFH:
Via ZiOO ZRUN cORVeO\ ZiWh a OeaViQg SaUWQeU WR SURcXUeb YehicOeV aQd PaiQWaiQ Whe fOeeW.b
3. CXVWRPHU 6XSSRUW: DXUiQg aOO VeUYice hRXUV, ViałV e[SeUWO\ WUaiQed VXSSRUWb ageQWV ZiOO UeVSRQd WR UideU aQd dUiYeU iQTXiUieV b\ ShRQe aQd We[W. TheVeb diVSaWcheUV Ō WUaiQed iQ SURYidiQg VXSSRUW fRU UideUV aOO RYeU Whe ZRUOd Ō ZiOOb SURacWiYeO\ PRQiWRU Whe VeUYice aQd iQWeUYeQe iQ UeVSRQVe WR aQRPaOieV, VXch aVb ÃÁ
965
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
XQe[SecWed WUaffic aQd YehicOe bUeaNdRZQV. The\ ZiOO aOVR haQdOe aOO WUiSb UeVeUYaWiRQV bRRNed b\ ShRQe.b
. 6XSSO\ 3ODQQLQJ:
LeYeUagiQg bacN-eQd VeUYice PaQagePeQW WRROV, Viab
diVSaWcheUV ZiOO aQaO\]e dePaQd SaWWeUQV aQd cRRUdiQaWe da\-WR-da\ VXSSO\b SOaQQiQg WR eQVXUe WhaW VXfficieQW YehicOeV aUe diVSaWched WR PeeW UideU dePaQd. b b
FRU Whe Oife Rf Whe SaUWQeUVhiS, ViałV 3DUWQHU 6XFFHVV 7HDP ZiOO aOVR SURYide RichPRQdb
ZiWh aQaO\WicaO, cRQVXOWaWiYe, aQd WechQicaO VXSSRUW. DXUiQg Whe OaXQch ShaVe,b RichPRQd ZiOO be aVVigQed a PaUWQeU SXcceVV MaQageU.b
bb
The PaiQ fXQcWiRQV Rf Whe PaUWQeU SXcceVV MaQageU iQcOXde:b ● CRQVLVWHQW DQG UHOLDEOH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ
. The PaUWQeU SXcceVV MaQageU ZiOOb
RUgaQi]e aQd Oead UegXOaU checN-iQV ZiWh RichPRQd WR UeYieZ SeUfRUPaQce aQdb ZiOO WUaYeO WR RichPRQd UegXOaUO\ fRU fRUPaO UeYieZV aQd iQfRUPaO ZRUNVhRSV (RUb cRQdXcW PeeWiQgV b\ YideR dXUiQg Whe SaQdePic).b
● 2QJRLQJ VHUYLFH PRQLWRULQJ.
The PaUWQeU SXcceVV MaQageU ZiOO PRQiWRU aQdb
aQaO\]e VeUYice SeUfRUPaQce daWa RQ aQ RQgRiQg baViV, SURYidiQg adYice aQdb gXidaQce WR RichPRQd RQ hRZ WR iPSURYe VeUYice TXaOiW\ aQd VSXU UideUVhiSb gURZWh.b
● 7HFKQLFDO VXSSRUW.
The PaUWQeU SXcceVV MaQageU ZiOO be Whe PaiQ SRiQW Rfb cRQWacW fRU WechQicaO VXSSRUW, ZRUNiQg ZiWh ViałV WechQicaO WeaPV WR eVcaOaWeb XUgeQW iVVXeV. RichPRQd ZiOO be abOe WR cRQWacW iWV PaUWQeU SXcceVV MaQageUb dXUiQg ZRUNiQg hRXUV; aW aOO RWheU WiPeV, aQ e[SeUieQced WechQicaO PaQageU ZiOOb be RQ caOO aQd aYaiOabOe WR RichPRQd.bb
● 3URGXFW XSGDWHV DQG EHVSRNH IHDWXUHV.
The PaUWQeU SXcceVV MaQageU ZiOOb
SURYide QRWificaWiRQV aQd WUaiQiQg (if Qeeded) RQ QeZ SURdXcW feaWXUeV, aQdb PaQage aQ\ UeTXeVWV fRU eQhaQcePeQWV VSecific WR RichPRQdłV VeUYiceb eQYiURQPeQW.b
● 6HUYLFH JURZWK DQG H[SDQVLRQV.
The PaUWQeU SXcceVV MaQageU ZiOO cRRUdiQaWeb
iQWeUQaO Via UeVRXUceV Qeeded WR e[SaQd VeUYice aQd OaXQch QeZ VeUYice ]RQeV.b ViałV deSOR\PeQW e[SeUWV ZiOO ZRUN ZiWh RichPRQd WR XQdeUVWaQd YehicOeb UeTXiUePeQWV fRU iQcUeaVed dePaQd, ZhiOe iQ-hRXVe cRQVXOWiQg WeaP caQ heOSb RichPRQd ideQWif\ Whe VeUYice aUeaV WhaW aUe PRVW UiSe fRU e[SaQViRQ. b b
C20081I7< 75A163257A7I21 1EED6 A66E660E17b
ThiV VecWiRQ cROOecWV iQfRUPaWiRQ abRXW Whe aSSOicaQWłV acWiYiWieV WR XQdeUVWaQd Whe b b b b b b b b b b b WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV Rf UeVideQWV iQ Whe aUea cRQViVWeQW ZiWh Whe SURgUaP UeTXiUePeQWV b b b b b b b b b b b b ÃÂ
966
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
VeW fRUWh iQ WheCMO IPSOePeQWaWiRQ MaQXaO. ASSOicaQWV PXVW dePRQVWUaWe WhaW Wheb b b b b b b b b b b b SURSRVed SURjecW iV UeVSRQViYe WR WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV aQd cRPPXQiW\ SUefeUeQceV fRU b b b b b b b b b b b Whe WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VROXWiRQV ideQWified WhURXgh PeaQiQgfXO, bURad-baVed eQgagePeQW. b b b b b b b b The cRPPXQiW\ WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV aVVeVVPeQW PXVW be cRPSOeWed b\ Whe WiPe Rf b b b b b b b b b b b b aSSOicaWiRQ VXbPiVViRQ aQd be a baViV fRU Whe SURjecW idea. ASSOicaQWV Pa\ UeO\ RQ b b b b b b b b b b b b b b e[iVWiQg aVVeVVPeQWV aQd acWiYiWieV dRQe iQ SaVW 4 \eaUV if Whe\ aUe cRQViVWeQW ZiWh Whe b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b UeTXiUePeQWV aQd cRQdiWiRQV aV defiQed.7KH HQWLUH SURMHFW DUHD PXVW EH UHSUHVHQWHGb b b b b b b b b b b b LQ WKH CRPPXQLW\ 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ 1HHGV AVVHVVPHQW.b
12.:KDW GDWD VRXUFHV DQG LQGLFDWRUV KDYH \RX XVHG WR GHYHORS D 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQb AFFHVV DDWD AQDO\VLV? 3OHDVH DWWDFK D FRS\ RI WKH UHVLGHQW VXUYH\ XVHG LQ \RXUb DQDO\VLV.b
b
The ŃRichPRQd FiUVW MiOe/LaVW MiOe TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SWUaWegic POaQń aQd Whe ŃN\VWURPb NeighbRUhRRd TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SXUYe\ń ZeUe Whe WZR QeedV aVVeVVPeQWV aQdb SXbOiVhed UeSRUWV WhaW ZeUe XVed WR deWeUPiQe RichPRQdłV WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV aQdb deYeORS iPSacWfXO WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VROXWiRQV. Via ZRUNed cORVeO\ ZiWh Whe CiW\ RichPRQdb WR beWWeU XQdeUVWaQd Whe VWUaWegieV aQd PeWhRdRORgieV XQdeUWaNeQ WR beVW aVVeVV Wheb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV Rf UeVideQWV Rf RichPRQd.b
b
AddiWiRQaO daWa VRXUceV aQd acceVVibiOiW\ iQdicaWRUV WhaW ZeUe XWiOi]ed iQcOXde:b ● VehicOe RZQeUVhiS SeU hRXVehROd (fURP CeQVXV APeUicaQ CRPPXQiW\ SXUYe\)b ● CRVW Rf e[iVWiQg WUaQViW aQd aYeUage cRVW SeU ZeeN fRU fXeOiQg caUb ● MediaQ hRXVehROd iQcRPeb
● AcceVV WR jRb RSSRUWXQiWieV (fURP LEHD-LODE)b
NRWe: The UeVSRQVe VhRXOd OiVW daWa VRXUceV aQd/RU acceVVibiOiW\ iQdicaWRUV (D UHVLGHQWb VXUYH\ LV UHTXLUHG, LQ DGGLWLRQ WR D PLQLPXP RI WKUHH GDWD VRXUFHV RU LQGLFDWRUV fURPb VecWiRQ b beORZ). DaWa VRXUceV aQd acceVVibiOiW\ iQdicaWRUV iQcOXde bXW aUe QRW OiPiWedb WR:bb
a. SXUYe\V Rf UeVideQWV UegaUdiQg e[iVWiQg WUaYeO behaYiRU. SXUYe\V Pa\ beb adPiQiVWeUed WhURXgh iQ-SeUVRQ iQWeUYieZV, SaSeU RU RQOiQe TXeVWiRQQaiUeV, aQdb RSWiRQV PXVW be SURYided fRU UeVideQWV WhaW dR QRW haYe acceVV WR a cRPSXWeU RUb Whe iQWeUQeW.bb
b. AcceVVibiOiW\ iQdicaWRUV:b
i. U.S. EPA WaONabiOiW\ IQde[b
ii. VehicOe RZQeUVhiS SeU hRXVehROd (fURP CeQVXV APeUicaQ CRPPXQiW\ SXUYe\)b iii. CRVW Rf e[iVWiQg WUaQViW aQd aYeUage cRVW SeU ZeeN fRU fXeOiQg caUb ÃÃ
967
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
iY. MediaQ hRXVehROd iQcRPeb
Y. AcceVV WR jRb RSSRUWXQiWieV (fURP LEHD-LODE)b
Yi. LiVW aQ\ e[iVWiQg VhaUed cOeaQ PRbiOiW\ SURjecWV iQ Whe cRPPXQiW\ (e[.b biNeVhaUe, eOecWUic VhXWWOe RU bXVeV, eOecWUic caUVhaUe, eWc.); e[iVWiQg SXbOicb WUaQViW VWRSV; aQd/RU e[iVWiQg bic\cOe URXWeV. bb
A cRPSOeWe OiVW Rf aOO iQdicaWRUV aQd hRZ WR acceVV WheP iV aYaiOabOe RQ Whe CMOb ZebViWe aW hWWSV://ZZZ.cOeaQPRbiOiW\RSWiRQV.RUg/SURjecW-deYeORSPeQW-WRROV/ b
13.BDVHG RQ \RXU 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ DDWD AQDO\VLV, ZKDW DUH WKH FRPPXQLW\łV PDLQ WUDYHOb SDWWHUQV DQG WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ JDSV?b
The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd haV a URbXVW VeW Rf UegiRQaO PXOWiPRdaO RSWiRQV UXQQiQg WhURXghb iW, iQcOXdiQg BART, APWUaN, AC TUaQViW fi[ed URXWe bXVeV, aQd a QeZ feUU\ VeUYice WRb SaQ FUaQciVcR. HRZeYeU, WheUe aUe OiPiWed effecWiYe fiUVW-PiOe / OaVW-PiOe cRQQecWiRQV WRb WheVe UegiRQaO WUaQViW VeUYiceV. FXUWheU, UeVideQWV, ZRUNeUV, aQd WRXUiVWV haYe difficXOW\b PRYiQg aURXQd RichPRQd b\ SXbOic WUaQViW becaXVe iQWUa-RichPRQd WUaQViW VeUYiceV aUeb YeU\ OiPiWed. SRPe ORZeU-iQcRPe QeighbRUhRRdV dR QRW SRVVeVV adeTXaWe WUaQViW aWb aOO, VXch aV N\VWURP ViOOage, OeadiQg WR WUaQViW deVeUWV. ThiV haV beeQ fXUWheUb e[aceUbaWed b\ Whe SaQdePic, aQd XQceUWaiQW\ aURXQd WUaQViW fXQdiQg, Zhich ZiOO OiNeO\b caXVe UegiRQaO WUaQViW VeUYiceV OiNe AC TUaQViW WR eiWheU UedXce RU eOiPiQaWe eQWiUeO\b VeYeUaO fi[ed URXWe bXV OiQeV WhaW UXQ WhURXgh RichPRQd, aW OeaVW WhURXgh SXPPeUb 2021.bb
b
SeYeUaO acceVVibiOiW\ iQdicaWRUV aOVR VhRZ WhaW RichPRQd iV VWiOO WUaQViW deSeQdeQW aQdb ZRXOd gUeaWO\ beQefiW fURP iQcUeaVed WUaQViW acceVVibiOiW\ aQd affRUdabiOiW\. AcURVV Wheb ciW\, 9.4% Rf hRXVehROdV dR QRW RZQ a caU. The aYeUage cRVW Rf a gaOORQ Rf gaVROiQe iQb CRQWUa CRVWa CRXQW\ iV $3.29, abRYe Whe CaOifRUQia SWaWe aYeUage Rf $3.21 aQd PXchb higheU WhaQ Whe QaWiRQaO aYeUage Rf $2.19. ThiV iV cRPSaUed WR a caVh faUe fRU ACb TUaQViW bXV VeUYice, Zhich iV $2.35. ReVideQWV Rf RichPRQd aOVR e[SeUieQce ORQgb cRPPXWeV, RfWeQ dXe WR cRQgeVWiRQ RU iQefficieQW cRQQecWiRQV WR UegiRQaO WUaQViW. Theb PeaQ WUaYeO WiPe WR ZRUN iV 34.8 PiQXWeV, aV cRPSaUed WR Whe QaWiRQaO aYeUage Rf 26.6b PiQXWeV. AQd ZhiOe Whe PediaQ hRXVehROd iQcRPe iQ RichPRQd aSSeaUV UeOaWiYeO\b high aW $64,575, iQfOaWed OiYiQg cRVWV iQ Whe Ba\ AUea VWiOO PeaQ WhaW 15.4% Rf UeVideQWVb OiYe beORZ Whe SRYeUW\ OiQe. ThiV aPSOifieV Whe Qeed fRU PRUe affRUdabOe WUaQVSRUWaWiRQb RSWiRQV.bb
ÃÄ
968
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
AccRUdiQg WR daWa fURP Whe LRQgiWXdiQaO-EPSOR\eU HRXVehROd D\QaPicV WRROb PaiQWaiQed b\ Whe US CeQVXV, 85.0% Rf SeRSOe ZhR ZRUN iQ RichPRQd OiYe RXWVideb Whe ciW\, ZhiOe 90.4% Rf SeRSOe OiYiQg ZiWhiQ RichPRQd ZRUN RXWVide. ThiV iQdicaWeV ab WUePeQdRXV aPRXQW Rf iQbRXQd aQd RXWbRXQd WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ iV UeTXiUed WR/fURP Wheb ciW\ eYeU\ da\, RfWeQ WhURXgh UegiRQaO WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VeUYiceV.b b
IQ Whe N\VWURP NeighbRUhRRd TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SXUYe\, Whe PajRUiW\ Rf UeVideQWVb iQdicaWed WhaW Whe\ XVe SXbOic WUaQViW, bXW aOPRVW 40% e[SUeVVed WhaW iW WaNeV WRR ORQgb WR geW WR WheiU deVWiQaWiRQ. AQRWheU WhiUd e[SUeVVed WhaW SXbOic WUaQViW dReV QRW WaNeb WheP ZheUe Whe\ Qeed WR gR. ThiV iQdicaWeV WhaW WheUe aUe bRWh WUaQViW deVeUWV aQd ab OacN Rf WUaQViW cRQQecWiRQV ZiWhiQ RichPRQd WhaW PaNe iW SaUWicXOaUO\ difficXOW fRUb UeVideQWV WR acceVV SOaceV Rf ePSOR\PeQW RU WR geW aURXQd Whe ciW\ WR cUXciaOb deVWiQaWiRQV.b
b
NRWe: The UeVSRQVe PXVW SURYide a VXPPaU\ aQaO\ViV ZiWh Ne\ cRQcOXViRQV abRXW WUaYeO b b b b b b b b b b b b b SaWWeUQV aQd WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ gaSV (e.g. a TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ AcceVV DaWa AQaO\ViV) iQ Whe b b b b b b b b b b b b cRPPXQiW\ baVed RQ Whe VRXUceV abRYe. The SXUSRVe Rf WhiV UeVSRQVe iV WR SURYide aQ b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b RbjecWiYe dePRQVWUaWiRQ Rf QeedV WhaW caQ be YaOidaWed.b ÃÅ
969
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
14. :KDW W\SHV RI PHDQLQJIXO, UHSUHVHQWDWLYH, FRPPXQLW\ HQJDJHPHQW DFWLYLWLHV KDYHb EHHQ FRQGXFWHG WR DVVHVV WKH FRPPXQLW\łV WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ QHHGV? (7KH UHVSRQVHb PXVW LQFOXGH DW OHDVW WZR W\SHV RI HQJDJHPHQW DFWLYLWLHV).b OYeU Whe SaVW feZ \eaUV, Whe CiW\ Rf RichPRQd haV cRQdXcWed VeYeUaO cRPSUeheQViYeb aQd UeSUeVeQWaWiYe acWiYiWieV WR fXUWheU aVVeVV Whe cRPPXQiW\łV WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV.bb b
IQ 2019, RichPRQd SXbOiVhed iWV FiUVW MiOe / LaVW MiOe TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SWUaWegic POaQ WRb aVVeVV cRQQecWiYiW\ WR WhUee SUiPaU\ WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ hXbV: RichPRQd BART SWaWiRQ, EOb CeUUiWR deO NRUWe BART SWaWiRQ, aQd RichPRQd FeUU\ TeUPiQaO. FURP SSUiQg 2017 WRb FaOO 2018, cRPPXQiW\ PePbeUV aQd RWheU Ne\ VWaNehROdeUV SaUWiciSaWed iQ fRcXVb gURXSV, cRPPXQiW\ ZRUNVhRSV, ShRQe iQWeUYieZV, aQd SRS XS eYeQWV aQd RSeQb hRXVeV WR ideQWif\ VhaUed YaOXeV, cRPPRQ cRQceUQV, aQd heOS SUiRUiWi]e iQcOXViYeb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ iPSURYePeQWV. A TechQicaO AdYiVRU\ GURXS ZaV eVWabOiVhed, Zhichb iQcOXded UeSUeVeQWaWiYeV fURP CiW\ ageQcieV aQd deSaUWPeQWV, Whe EQYiURQPeQWaO aQdb CRPPXQiW\ IQYeVWPeQW AgUeePeQW TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ OYeUVighW CRPPiWWee, UegiRQaOb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SOaQQiQg aQd WUaQViW SURYideUV, Whe RichPRQd Bic\cOe/PedeVWUiaQb AdYiVRU\ CRPPiWWee aQd BiNe EaVW Ba\, aQd RWheU Ne\ VWaNehROdeUV. CRPPXQiW\b eYeQWV ZeUe heOd aW Whe RichPRQd BART VWaWiRQ aQd Whe EaVW BURWheU TaS RRRP,b aORQg ZiWh Whe RichPRQd HeaOWh\ ViOOage FeVWiYaO. IQ SaUWQeUVhiS ZiWh MaiQ SWUeeWb IQiWiaWiYe, aQ OSeQ HRXVe ZaV aOVR heOd aW Whe CiW\łV R-TUaQViW bXiOdiQg WR VSecificaOO\b cROOecW iQSXW fURP WUaQViW UideUV aQd QeaUb\ cRPPXQiW\ PePbeUV. OYeU 60 addiWiRQaOb VWaNehROdeUV gURXSV ZeUe ideQWified aQd eQgaged, UaQgiQg fURP VeQiRU ceQWeUV,b QeighbRUhRRd RUgaQi]aWiRQV, SUiYaWe iQdXVWU\, OaUge ePSOR\eUV, aQd ceQWeUV Rfb OeaUQiQg.b
b
The N\VWURP NeighbRUhRRd TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SXUYe\ ZaV SXbOiVhed iQ AXgXVW 2019 aQdb fRcXVed RQ gaWheUiQg a beWWeU XQdeUVWaQdiQg Rf Whe WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV VSecificaOO\b Rf Whe N\VWURP cRPPXQiW\, iQ Whe heaUW Rf RichPRQd, Zhich OacNV adeTXaWeb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ, iQ addiWiRQ WR iQVXfficieQWO\ cRQQecWiQg WR UegiRQaO WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ hXbVb WhURXghRXW Whe ciW\. MeWhRdV fRU diVWUibXWiRQ Rf Whe VXUYe\ iQcOXded dRRU-WR-dRRUb caQYaVViQg (iQ bRWh EQgOiVh aQd SSaQiVh), WhURXgh cRPPXQiW\ QeWZRUNV VXch aVb chXUcheV aQd VchRROV, aQd hRVWiQg cRPPXQiW\ eYeQWV, OiNe a QeighbRUhRRd cOeaQ-XSb da\. FRcXV gURXSV ZeUe aOVR cRQdXcWed WR gaiQ a PRUe TXaOiWaWiYe XQdeUVWaQdiQg Rfb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ habiWV aQd chaOOeQgeV. A WRWaO Rf 316 VXUYe\V ZeUe cROOecWed.b b
ÃÆ
970
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
NRWe: The UeVSRQVe PXVW diVcXVV cRPPXQiW\ eQgagePeQW acWiYiWieV dRQe WhURXgh aW b b b b b b b b b b b OeaVW WZR eQgagePeQWV VXch aV ZRUNVhRSV, cRPPXQiW\ PeeWiQgV, hRXVe PeeWiQgV, b b b b b b b b b b fRcXV gURXSV, iQWeUYieZV, RU RWheU diUecW iQWeUface ZiWh UeVideQWV. The SXUSRVe Rf b b b b b b b b b b b b hROdiQg aW OeaVW WZR eQgagePeQW acWiYiWieV iV WR iQcUeaVe RSSRUWXQiWieV fRU VWaNehROdeU b b b b b b b b b b b b UeVideQWV WR SURYide iQSXW. FRU each, iQcOXde Whe aSSUR[iPaWe daWe, ORcaWiRQ, aQd b b b b b b b b b b b b QXPbeU Rf aWWeQdeeV RU SaUWiciSaQWV, aQd ZhaW PeaVXUeV ZeUe WaNeQ WR eQVXUe WhaW Whe b b b b b b b b b b b b b b cRPbiQaWiRQ Rf acWiYiWieV SURYided UeVideQWV ZiWh aQ eTXiWabOe RSSRUWXQiW\ WR b b b b b b b b b b SaUWiciSaWe.b b
15.:KDW ZHUH WKH PDLQ WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ DQG PRELOLW\ QHHGV LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH FRPPXQLW\ b b b b b b b b b b b b HQJDJHPHQW DFWLYLWLHV RXWOLQHG? DHVFULEH LQ GHWDLO.b
The cRPPXQiW\ eQgagePeQW acWiYiWieV XQcRYeUed PaQ\ WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV, bXWb WheUe ZeUe a feZ cRPPRQ WhUeadV WhaW ZeUe ideQWified. LRZ-iQcRPe UeVideQWV aQdb diVadYaQWaged cRPPXQiWieV iQ RichPRQd aUe OacNiQg acceVV WR ecRQRPic RSSRUWXQiW\,b PedicaO faciOiWieV, VchRROV, SaUNV, gURceU\ VWRUieV, aQd RWheU baVic QeedV. ThiV iV Wheb UeVXOW Rf iQVXfficieQW iQWUa-RichPRQd WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ RSWiRQV WR effecWiYeO\ PRYe aURXQdb Whe ciW\ aQd WR cRQQecW WR UegiRQaO WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ hXbV. Of Whe WUaQViW RSWiRQV WhaWb e[iVW, Whe\ aUe QRW ZeOO cRRUdiQaWed ZiWh e[iVWiQg UegiRQaO WUaQViW. The ORcaO RichPRQdb BART VWaWiRQ iV heaYiO\ XWiOi]ed, hRZeYeU, WUaQViW UideUV dRQłW haYe PaQ\ RSWiRQV WRb cRQQecW eOVeZheUe RQce Whe\ egUeVV Whe VWaWiRQ, SUeVeQWiQg a OaUge RSSRUWXQiW\ fRUb PXOWiPRdaO WUiS cRQYeUViRQ. FXUWheU, UeVideQWV e[SUeVVed Whe Qeed fRU PRUe affRUdabOeb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ RSWiRQV.b
b
SSecific QeedV aQd SRWeQWiaO VROXWiRQV ideQWified WhURXgh cRPPXQiW\ eQgagePeQWb acWiYiWieV aOVR iQcOXded:b
● A ŃciW\ VhXWWOeń WR iPSURYe WUaQViW WUiSV WaNeQ ZiWhiQ Whe CiW\ Rf RichPRQdb ● OSSRUWXQiWieV fRU cRQQecWiYiW\ WR Whe VhRUeOiQe aQd WR RWheU SaUWV Rf Whe ciW\b fXUWheU QRUWhb
● IPSURYed cRRUdiQaWiRQ ZiWh e[iVWiQg WUaQViWb
● RedXced SUiYaWe YehicOe RZQeUVhiS aQd YehicOe PiOeV WUaYeOedb b
NRWe: The UeVSRQVe VhRXOd SURYide a cRPSUeheQViYe deVcUiSWiRQ Rf Whe UaQge Rf b b b b b b b b b b b b WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV ideQWified WhURXgh cRPPXQiW\ eQgagePeQW, iQcOXdiQg WhRVe QRW b b b b b b b b b addUeVVed Whe SURSRVed SURjecW. NeedV deVcUibe Whe SURbOeP, RbVWacOe, chaOOeQge, RU b b b b b b b b b b b ŃgaS;ń UaWheU WhaQ Whe VROXWiRQ iWVeOf. POeaVe addUeVV iQ SaUWicXOaU:b a. WhaW WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV haYe beeQ e[SUeVVed?bb
b. WhaW ZeUe Whe PRVW cRPPRQO\ e[SUeVVed WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ QeedV?b c. Which Rf WheVe QeedV dReV \RXU SURjecW addUeVV?b
d. If \RXU SURSRVaO dReV QRW addUeVV Whe PRVW VigQificaQW QeedV, Zh\ QRW?b ÃÇ
971
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
16.HRZ GRHV \RXU SURSRVHG SURMHFW FRQWULEXWH WR DGGUHVVLQJ WKH QHHGV DQGb SUHIHUHQFHV IRU WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ VROXWLRQV H[SUHVVHG E\ WKH FRPPXQLW\ LQ WKH QHHGVb DVVHVVPHQW?b
b
RichPRQd OQ-DePaQd ZRXOd addUeVV PXOWiSOe QeedV WhaW ZeUe ideQWified ZiWhiQb RichPRQdłV FiUVW MiOe / LaVW MiOe TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SWUaWegic POaQ aQd Whe N\VWURPb NeighbRUhRRd TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SXUYe\ aQd ZRXOd heOS VROYe WUaQVSRUWaWiRQb acceVVibiOiW\ iVVXeV ideQWified WhURXgh acceVVibiOiW\ iQdicaWRUV PeQWiRQed abRYe. ThiVb VeUYice efficieQWO\ aQd effecWiYeO\ SURYideV gUeaWeU fiUVW-PiOe/OaVW-PiOe cRQQecWiYiW\ WRb UegiRQaO WUaQViW VeUYiceV, ZhiOe aOVR caSabO\ aQd fOe[ibO\ fiOO iQ RichPRQdłV WUaQViWb deVeUWV.bb
b
ThiV RQ-dePaQd VeUYice aOVR heOSV addUeVV RWheU cRPPRQO\ e[SUeVVed aQd SUefeUUedb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VROXWiRQV, iQcOXdiQg:b
● RedXciQg SUiYaWe YehicOe RZQeUVhiS aQd YehicOe PiOeV WUaYeOed WhURXgh VhaUedb PicURWUaQViW.b
● MRUe affRUdabOe aQd acceVVibOe RSWiRQV fRU ORZ iQcRPe UeVideQWV b\ SURYidiQgb ORZ cRVW RU QR cRVW faUeV WR ORZeU iQcRPe aQd diVadYaQWaged cRhRUWV.b ● COeaQ PRbiOiW\ RSWiRQV WR addUeVV UeVideQW QeedV ideQWified WhURXgh ab cRPPXQiW\ WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ aQd QeedV aVVeVVPeQW aQd PeeW eTXiW\ gRaOVb WhURXgh SOXg-iQ h\bUid eOecWUic YehicOeV.b
● PURYidiQg a ŃciW\ VhXWWOe,ń WhURXgh RQ-dePaQd SXbOic WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ acURVVb OaUge aUeaV Rf RichRQd.b
b
RichPRQd OQ-DePaQd addUeVVeV Whe gRaOV Rf CMO, aV ZeOO aV Whe cXUUeQWb afRUePeQWiRQed iVVXeV, PRUe cRPSUeheQViYeO\ WhaQ a fi[ed URXWe VeUYice cRXOd.b AddiWiRQaO UeaVRQV iQcOXde:b
● COeaQ: The PicURWUaQViW VeUYice ZiOO RffeU a cOeaQ PRbiOiW\ RSWiRQ b\ 1) UedXciQgb Whe Qeed fRU ViQgOe-RccXSaQc\ YehicOeV (SOV) aQd 2) aYRidiQg haUPfXOb ePiVViRQV aQd SROOXWiRQ WhURXgh Whe SOXg-iQ h\bUid (PHEV) fOeeW.bb ● MRbiOiW\: The PicURWUaQViW VeUYice ZiOO iPSURYe WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ acceVV fRU WhRVeb OiYiQg aQd ZRUNiQg iQ RichPRQd b\ 1) beiQg RffeUed RQ-dePaQd ZiWh aOOb YehicOeV RQ Whe URad dXUiQg SeaN hRXUV, 2) cRYeUiQg Whe WUaQViWV deVeUW RQ Wheb ZeVW Vide Rf RichPRQd, aQd 3) VeUYiQg UideUV ZiWh aQ aYeUage ZaiW WiPe Rf OeVVb WhaQ 10 PiQXWeV.b
● OSWiRQV: The PicURWUaQViW VeUYice ZiOO VeUYice ZiOO SURYide TXaOiW\ PRbiOiW\b chRiceV WR UeVideQWV baVed RQ WheiU diVWiQcW PRbiOiW\ QeedV b\ 1) SicNiQg XSb UideUV aW WheiU cXUb (RU dRRUVWeS, if iPSaiUed) aQd dURSSiQg WheP aW WheiUb deVWiQaWiRQ, 2) RffeUiQg SUiRUiW\ bRaUdiQg aQd haQdicaSSed VeaWiQg iV QRWb ÃÈ
972
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
UeTXiUed ZheQ SaVVeQgeUV aUe iQ a VhaUed PiQiYaQ ZiWh aPSOe VSace, aQd aUeb Whe RQO\ RQeV bRaUdiQg aW aQ\ giYeQ WiPe. DUiYeUV UeceiYe cXVWRP QRWeV abRXWb SaVVeQgeUV ZhR Qeed addiWiRQaO aVViVWaQce.bb
b
NRWe: Whe UeVSRQVe VhRXOd SURYide a cRPSUeheQViYe deVcUiSWiRQ Rf Whe UaQge Rf b b b b b b b b b b b b SUefeUUed WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VROXWiRQV ideQWified WhURXgh cRPPXQiW\ eQgagePeQW, b b b b b b b iQcOXdiQg WhRVe QRW addUeVVed Whe SURSRVed SURjecW. POeaVe addUeVV iQ SaUWicXOaU:b a. WhaW SUefeUeQceV fRU WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VROXWiRQV haYe beeQ e[SUeVVed?bb b. WhaW ZeUe Whe PRVW cRPPRQO\ e[SUeVVed SUefeUeQceV fRU WUaQVSRUWaWiRQb VROXWiRQV?b
c. Which Rf WheVe VROXWiRQV dReV \RXU SURjecW SURYide?b d. If \RXU SURjecW dReV QRW SURYide Whe PRVW SRSXOaU WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VROXWiRQ, Zh\bb
17.:KHQ ZHUH WKH QHHGV DVVHVVPHQW DFWLYLWLHV GHVFULEHG DERYH FRPSOHWHG?b The RichPRQd FiUVW MiOe / LaVW MiOe TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SWUaWegic POaQ: FiQaO ReSRUW ZaVb SXbOiVhed iQ FebUXaU\ 2019. NeedV aVVeVVPeQW acWiYiWieV ZeUe cRQdXcWed fURP SSUiQgb 2017 WhURXgh FaOO 2018.b
b
The N\VWURP NeighbRUhRRd TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ SXUYe\ ZaV SXbOiVhed iQ AXgXVW 2019 ZiWhb VXUYe\ acWiYiWieV beiQg cRQdXcWed iQ Ma\ aQd JXQe Rf 2019.b b
NRWe: NeedV aVVeVVPeQWV PXVW haYe beeQ cRPSOeWed ZiWhiQ Whe SaVW fRXU \eaUV.b HRZeYeU, WR XVe Whe QeedV aVVeVVPeQW e[SeQVeV aV SaUW Rf Whe aSSOicaQWłV CRPPXQiW\b ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ, iW PXVW haYe beeQ cRPSOeWed ZiWhiQ Whe SaVW \eaU.b
18.AWWDFK WKH 6XPPDU\ 5HSRUW RI \RXU FRPPXQLW\ WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ QHHGV DVVHVVPHQW.b :ULWH LQ ŃDWWDFKHGń LQ WKH ER[ DORQJ ZLWK DQ\ FRPPHQWV.bb ASSeQdi[ 8_NeedVAVVeVVPeQWSXUYe\ #1, aWWachedb
ASSeQdi[ 9_NeedVAVVeVVPeQWSXUYe\ReSRUW #1, aWWachedb
ASSeQdi[ 10_NeedVAVVeVVPeQWSXUYe\ #2, aWWachedb
ASSeQdi[ 11_NeedVAVVeVVPeQWSXUYe\ReSRUW #2, aWWachedb
b
NRWe: The UeSRUW PXVW SURYide a VXPPaU\ Rf Whe RXWcRPeV Rf Whe aVVeVVPeQW. Theb aSSOicaWiRQ PXVW dePRQVWUaWe a diUecW cRQQecWiRQ beWZeeQ Whe QeedV aVVeVVPeQWb cRQcOXViRQV iQcOXded iQ Whe UeSRUW aQd a SURSRVed SURjecW PRdeO (e.g. WaUgeWb cRPPXQiW\/aXdieQce, VcaOe Rf SURjecW, SURjecW PRdeO).b
352-EC7 A5EA 352FI/Eb
ThiV VecWiRQ cROOecWV iQfRUPaWiRQ abRXW Sh\VicaO bRXQdaUieV Rf Whe SURjecW iQ UeOaWiRQ WRb Whe UeTXiUePeQW WhaW SURjecW beQefiW diVadYaQWage aQd ORZ-iQcRPe cRPPXQiWieV aVb ÃÉ
973
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
defiQed. The SURjecW aUea iV Whe geRgUaShic aUea ZheUe eQd-XVeUV UeVide, ZheUeb VeUYiceV aUe baVed, aQd ZheUe iQfUaVWUXcWXUe WR be iQVWaOOed (iW dReV QRW cRUUeVSRQd WRb deVWiQaWiRQV RU URXWeV). US WR 20 SeUceQW Rf YRXcheU-fXQded iQfUaVWUXcWXUe aQd VeUYiceVb Pa\ be ORcaWed RXWVide Whe SURjecW aUea, ZiWh dRcXPeQWaWiRQ Rf VXSSRUWiYe cRPPXQiW\b iQSXW UefOecWiQg cRPPXQiW\-ideQWified QeedV.b b
(VeOecW aW OeaVW RQe aQd aOO WhaW aSSO\)b
☒
SB 535 DiVadYaQWaged CRPPXQiWieV: CeQVXV WUacWV iQ Whe WRS 25 SeUceQW Rfb b CaOEQYiURScUeeQ 3.0 VcRUeV.b
☐ AffRUdabOe hRXViQg faciOiW\ cRQViVWeQW ZiWh Whe CMO UeTXiUePeQWV.b ☐ TUibaO OaQdV ZiWhiQ AB 1550-deVigQaWed ORZ-iQcRPe cRPPXQiWieV RU SB 535bb DiVadYaQWaged CRPPXQiWieV. FRU Whe SXUSRVeV Rf WhiV cUiWeUiRQ, ŃWUibaO OaQdVńb b iQcOXdeV aQ\ SURSeUW\ RZQed b\ a CaOifRUQia NaWiYe APeUicaQ WUibaO aXWhRUiW\bb aQd iV QRW OiPiWed WR fedeUaOO\ UecRgQi]ed UeVeUYaWiRQV.b
19. :KLFK RI WKH IROORZLQJ JHRJUDSKLHV LV \RXU 3URMHFW AUHD ORFDWHG ZLWKLQ?b NRWe: FRU Whe SXUSRVeV Rf CMO VRXcheU PiORW PURgUaP, Whe affRUdabOe hRXViQg faciOiW\b PXVW PeeW Whe fROORZiQg cUiWeUia:b
a. The SURSeUW\ PXVW haYe aW OeaVW fiYe XQiWV.b
b. The SURSeUW\ PXVW be deed-UeVWUicWed ORZ-iQcRPe UeVideQWiaO hRXViQg, ZheUe aWb OeaVW 80 SeUceQW Rf SURSeUW\ UeVideQWV haYe iQcRPeV aW RU beORZ 60 SeUceQW Rfb Whe aUea PediaQ iQcRPe.b
CRQGLWLRQDO (19D-G):b
D. II \RXU SURMHFW DUHD LV ZLWKLQ DQ DIIRUGDEOH KRXVLQJ IDFLOLW\, SOHDVH SURYLGH WKHb DGGUHVV RI WKH IDFLOLW\ RU IDFLOLWLHV.b
(ZUiWe iQ)bb
b
E. II \RXU SURMHFW DUHD LV ZLWKLQ DQ DIIRUGDEOH KRXVLQJ IDFLOLW\, SOHDVH H[SODLQ KRZ HDFKb SURSHUW\ PHHWV WKH DIIRUGDELOLW\ UHTXLUHPHQWV LQFOXGLQJ, (1) OLVW WKH WRWDO QXPEHUb DQG EUHDNGRZQ RI GHHG-UHVWULFWHG XQLWV; DQG (2) OLVW WKH DIIRUGDELOLW\/LQFRPH PL[ RIb HDFK SURSHUW\ DQG KRZ LW PHHWV WKH UHTXLUHPHQW RI DW OHDVW 80 SHUFHQW RI SURSHUW\b UHVLGHQWV ZLWK LQFRPHV DW RU EHORZ 60 SHUFHQW RI WKH DUHD PHGLDQ LQFRPH. IQb DGGLWLRQ, SOHDVH SURYLGH D FRS\ RI D UHFRUGHG GHHG UHVWULFWLRQ, UHJXODWRU\b DJUHHPHQW RU FRYHQDQW WKDW UHVWULFWV WKH SURSHUW\ WR ORZ-LQFRPH UHVLGHQWLDOb KRXVLQJ DV GHILQHG LQ WKH CDOLIRUQLD 3XEOLF 8WLOLWLHV CRGH 6HFWLRQ 2852(D)(3)(A)(L)b DQG KDV DW OHDVW 10 \HDUV UHPDLQLQJ RQ WKH WHUP RI WKH SURSHUW\łV DIIRUGDELOLW\b UHVWULFWLRQV. 3URSHUWLHV ZLWK IHZHU WKDQ 10 \HDUV UHPDLQLQJ WKDW DUH ZLOOLQJ WRb H[WHQG DIIRUGDELOLW\ UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU D WRWDO RI 10 \HDUV PXVW SURYLGH SURRI RIb ÃÊ
974
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
FRPSOHWHG H[WHQVLRQ RI DIIRUGDELOLW\ UHVWULFWLRQV IURP D VWDWH RU ORFDO DJHQF\.b :ULWH LQ ŃDWWDFKHGń LQ WKH ER[ DORQJ ZLWK DQ\ FRPPHQWV.b (ZUiWe iQ)bb
b
F. II \RXU SURMHFW DUHD HOLJLELOLW\ LV EDVHG RQ ORFDWLRQ RQ WULEDO ODQGV, SOHDVH SURYLGHb WKH QDPH RI WKH UHVHUYDWLRQ, RU LI QRW SDUW RI D UHVHUYDWLRQ, WKH DGGUHVV RI WKHb WULEDOO\ RZQHG IDFLOLW\.b
(ZUiWe iQ)bb
b
G. II \RXU SURMHFW DUHD HOLJLELOLW\ LV EDVHG RQ ORFDWLRQ LQ WKH CDOEQYLUR6FUHHQ 3.0b DLVDGYDQWDJHG CRPPXQLW\, SOHDVH LGHQWLI\ WKH FHQVXV WUDFW DQG UDQNLQJ VFRUH LQb CDOEQYLUR6FUHHQ 3.0.b
6013380000: 80-85%b
6013382000: 85-90%b
6013381000: 80-85%b
6013379000: 90-95%b
6013377000: 90-95%b
6013376000: 85-90%b
20.DHVFULEH WKH ERXQGDULHV RI WKH 3URMHFW AUHD LQ RQO\ RQH RI WKH IROORZLQJ ZD\V: (D) IIb 3URMHFW AUHD ERXQGDULHV DUH WKH VDPH DV FHQVXV WUDFW ERXQGDULHV, OLVW WKH FHQVXVb WUDFWV, (E) SURYLGH D PDS VKRZLQJ WKH JHRJUDSKLF ERXQGDULHV DQG DWWDFK LW WR \RXUb DSSOLFDWLRQ, (F) GHVFULEH WKH ERXQGDULHV XVLQJ VWUHHW QDPHV DQG FURVV VWUHHWV.bb ÄÁ
975
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
b
b
21.:KDW LV WKH SRSXODWLRQ VL]H RI WKH SURMHFW DUHD? 3OHDVH LQFOXGH \RXU VRXUFH.b b
CHQVXV 7UDFWb 7RWDO 3RSXODWLRQb
6013380000b 5,706b
6013382000b 6,964b
6013381000b 6,097b
6013379000b 6,117b
6013377000b 6,962b
6013376000b 5,962b
ÄÂ
976
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
b
SRXUce: SB 535 CaOEQYiURVcUeeQ 3.0b
22.AUH \RX VXEPLWWLQJ DSSOLFDWLRQ(V) IRU SURMHFW DUHD(V) WKDW DUH ORFDWHG HQWLUHO\ LQVLGHb XQLQFRUSRUDWHG DUHDV (L.H. QR FLW\ JRYHUQPHQW UHSUHVHQW WKH DUHD)? 1RWH: 7KLVb TXHVWLRQ DQG LWV IROORZLQJ FRQGLWLRQDO TXHVWLRQV DUH QRW DSSOLFDEOH IRU SURMHFW DUHDVb RQ WULEDO ODQGV.b
(VeOecW RQe)b
☐ <HVb
☒ 1Rb
NRWe: If Whe aQVZeU iV \eV, \RX Pa\ VXbPiW XS WR WhUee aSSOicaWiRQV. MXOWiSOe SURjecWb SURSRVaOV aUe aOORZed RQO\ fRU caVeV ZheUe a Oead aSSOicaQW iV aSSO\iQg fRU SURjecWV WhaWb aUe ORcaWed eQWiUeO\ iQ XQiQcRUSRUaWed CRXQW\ jXUiVdicWiRQV aQd WheUefRUe aUe QRWb UeSUeVeQWed b\ ciW\ gRYeUQPeQWV. If Whe aQVZeU iV QR, \RX Pa\ RQO\ VXbPiW RQeb aSSOicaWiRQ iQ Whe cRXUVe Rf each aSSOicaWiRQ VXbPiVViRQ ZiQdRZ.b b CRQGLWLRQDO (22D-E):b
D. II \RX DUH VXEPLWWLQJ PRUH WKDQ RQH DSSOLFDWLRQ (XS WR WKUHH DSSOLFDWLRQV DUHb DOORZHG LI WKH HQWLUH SURMHFW DUHD(V) DUH ORFDWHG LQ XQLQFRUSRUDWHG FRPPXQLWLHV),b DUH WKH SURMHFW DUHDV ORFDWHG HQWLUHO\ ZLWKLQ XQLQFRUSRUDWHG FRXQW\ MXULVGLFWLRQ?bb (ZUiWe iQ)bb
b
E. 3OHDVH LQGLFDWH WKH ORFDWLRQ(V).bb
(ZUiWe iQ)bb
b
352326ED B8DGE7 A1D 3/A1 F25 FI1A1CIA/ 6867AI1ABI/I7<b
ThiV VecWiRQ iQ addiWiRQ WR AWWachPeQW 1 cROOecWV iQfRUPaWiRQ abRXW Whe SURSRVed b b b b b b b b b b b b bXdgeW aQd \RXU SOaQ fRU fiQaQciaO VXVWaiQabiOiW\. PURjecWV PXVW RSeUaWe fRU aW OeaVW 4 b b b b b b b b b b b b b b \eaUV fURP Whe daWe WhaW RSeUaWiRQV fXOO\ OaXQch (ZheQ SaUWiciSaQWV VWaUW XViQg Whe b b b b b b b b b b b b b VeUYice). bThiV SeUiRd iV UefeUUed WR aV Whe PURjecW OSeUaWiRQ PeUiRd. IQ WhiV VecWiRQ, b b b b b b b b b b b b b b aSSOicaQWV PXVW deVcUibe VWUaWegieV fRU PaiQWaiQiQg Whe SURSRVed VeUYiceV aW OeaVW b b b b b b b b b b b WhURXghRXW Whe SURjecW RSeUaWiRQV SeUiRd iQ Whe UeTXiUed FiQaQciaO SXVWaiQabiOiW\ POaQ iQ b b b b b b b b b b b b WheiU aSSOicaWiRQ.bb
23.3OHDVH LQGLFDWH WKH WRWDO YRXFKHU DPRXQW \RX DUH UHTXHVWLQJ LQ WKLV DSSOLFDWLRQ.b $1,000,000b
ÄÃ
977
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
24. 3OHDVH LQGLFDWH \RXU SURMHFW W\SH, DFFRUGLQJ WR WKH FULWHULD LQ 6HFWLRQ E.4 RI WKHb IPSOHPHQWDWLRQ 0DQXDO (VHOHFW RQH):b
(VeOecW RQe)b
☒ NeZ VeUYice (Pa[iPXP aZaUd Rf $1,000,000)b
☐ E[iVWiQg VeUYice (Pa[iPXP aZaUd Rf $600,000)b
☐ CRPbiQaWiRQ Rf NeZ SeUYice aQd E[iVWiQg SeUYice (PD[LPXP DZDUG RIbb $1,000,000
)b
NRWe: NeZ SeUYice iV defiQed aV a PRbiOiW\ VeUYice WhaW iV QRW cXUUeQWO\ RSeUaWiQg iQ aQ\b ORcaWiRQ ZiWhiQ Whe SURSRVed SURjecW aUea. E[iVWiQg SeUYice iV defiQed aV a PRbiOiW\b VeUYice WhaW iV cXUUeQWO\ RSeUaWiQg iQ VRPe ORcaWiRQV Rf RU Whe eQWiUe SURSRVed SURjecWb aUea. See SecWiRQ E.4 Rf Whe CMO IPSOePeQWaWiRQ MaQXaO fRU SURjecW e[aPSOeV.b
25. AWWDFK D Ń0RELOLW\ 3URMHFW 9RXFKHU BXGJHW :RUNVKHHWń (AWWDFKPHQW 1) WKDWb TXDQWLILHV WKH ILQDQFLDO UHTXLUHPHQWV QHHGHG WR GHYHORS DQG LPSOHPHQW WKH SURMHFWb WKURXJKRXW WKH 5-\HDU YRXFKHU DJUHHPHQW WHUP. :ULWH LQ ŃDWWDFKHGń DORQJ ZLWKb DQ\ FRPPHQWV.b
AWWachPeQW 1_BXdgeW WRUNVheeW, aWWachedb
b
NRWe: VRXcheU fXQdiQg Pa\ iQcOXde VehicOeV, ChaUgiQg aQd FXeOiQg ETXiSPeQW,b Bic\cOe/VcRRWeU iQfUaVWUXcWXUe, OXWUeach aQd MaUNeWiQg CRVW,b POaQQiQg/CaSiWaO/OSeUaWiRQV/VRXcheU AdPiQiVWUaWiRQ CRVWV, aQd AddiWiRQaOb TUaQVSRUWaWiRQ EQhaQcePeQWV.b
26.DHVFULEH \RXU VWUDWHJLHV IRU PDLQWDLQLQJ WKH SURSRVHG VHUYLFH(V) IRU D PLQLPXP RI b b b b b b b b b b b b 4-\HDU SURMHFW RSHUDWLRQ SHULRG.b
<HDUV 1-2bb
DXUiQg Whe fiUVW WZR \eaUV Rf RSeUaWiRQV, Whe VeUYice ZiOO be SUiPaUiO\ VXVWaiQed WhURXghb Whe CMO VRXcheU PURgUaP. HRZeYeU, Ze iQWeQd WR chaUge a fee fRU Whe VeUYice fRUb UideUV ZhR haYe Whe PeaQV WR Sa\. FRU RWheU UideUV ZhR aUe ORZ-iQcRPe, VeQiRUV, RUb RWheU deVigQaWed gURXSV, Whe VeUYice ZiOO OiNeO\ be fUee. The UeYeQXeV cROOecWed aW Wheb faUebR[ fURP YeaUV 1 aQd 2 ZiOO be XVed WR VXVWaiQ Whe VeUYice iQ YeaUV 3-4.bb b
<HDUV 3-4bb
FRU YeaUV 3-4, RichPRQd ZiOO XWiOi]e VeYeUaO VWUaWegieV WR eQVXUe WhaW Whe VeUYice iVb VXVWaiQabOe. ReYeQXeV fURP Whe faUebR[ fURP Whe fiUVW WZR \eaUV ZiOO be cRPbiQed ZiWhb RQgRiQg UeYeQXe fURP Whe VecRQd WZR \eaUV. The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd haV aOVR SaVVed ab CRPPXWeU BeQefiWV OUdiQaQce, Zhich UeTXiUeV aOO UegiVWeUed bXViQeVVeV WhaW haYe 10b ÄÄ
978
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
RU PRUe ePSOR\eeV ZhR ZRUN aQ aYeUage Rf aW OeaVW 10 hRXUV SeU ZeeN WR RffeU RQe Rfb Whe fROORZiQg:b
● A PUe-Ta[ EOecWiRQb
● EPSOR\eU Paid BeQefiWb
● EPSOR\eU PURYided TUaQViWb
ThiV OUdiQaQce ZiOO eQabOe XV WR ZRUN ZiWh bXViQeVVeV WhURXghRXW RichPRQd WRb cRQWUibXWe WR Whe VeUYice, aQd VXbVeTXeQWO\ haYe WheiU ePSOR\eeV diUecWO\ beQefiW. ThiVb RQ-dePaQd VeUYice ZiOO SOa\ a cUiWicaO UROe Rf WUaQVSRUWiQg UegiRQaO cRPPXWeUV WR aQdb fURP ZRUN iQ RichPRQd; aV VXch, ORcaO bXViQeVVeV haYe a VWURQg iQceQWiYe WR VXSSRUWb Whe VeUYicełV VXcceVV Ō fURP eQVXUiQg WheiU ePSOR\eeVł RQ-WiPe aUUiYaOV aW ZRUN WRb aWWUacWiQg QeZ WaOeQW acURVV Whe UegiRQ. Via haV SURYeQ WhaW ORcaO bXViQeVVeV aUe ZiOOiQgb WR iQYeVW UeVRXUceV iQ Whe VXcceVV Rf ViPiOaU cRPPXWeU-fRcXVed VeUYiceV. FRU e[aPSOe,b ViałV VeUYice iQ O[fRUd, EQgOaQd ZRUNed ZiWh Whe bXViQeVV cRPPXQiW\ WR fiQdb cRUSRUaWe SaUWQeUV ZhR ZRXOd heOS fXQd Whe RQ-dePaQd VeUYice, aQd VXbVeTXeQWO\b WheiU ePSOR\eeV beQefiWed fURP aQ eaVieU, PRUe cRQYeQieQW, aQd PRUe VXVWaiQabOeb Za\ WR cRPPXWe.b
b
Via aOVR haV e[WeQViYe e[SeUieQce heOSiQg iWV SaUWQeUV VecXUe cRPSeWiWiYe VWaWe,b fedeUaO, aQd fRXQdaWiRQ gUaQWV, iQcOXdiQg bXW QRW OiPiWed WR Whe fROORZiQg:b ● 2019 FHGHUDO 7UDQVLW AGPLQLVWUDWLRQłV IQWHJUDWHG 0RELOLW\ IQQRYDWLRQ (I0I)b 3URJUDP:
Via SaUWQeUed ZiWh WZR SXbOic WUaQViW SURYideUV Ō Whe CiW\ Rfb AUOiQgWRQ, Te[aV aQd BaOdZiQ CRXQW\, AOabaPa Ō WR deYeORS ZiQQiQgb SURSRVaOV WR Whe IMI SURgUaP. The CiW\ Rf AUOiQgWRQ ZiOO UeceiYe $1.7 PiOOiRQ WRb iQWegUaWe aXWRQRPRXV YehicOeV iQWR iWV VIa-RSeUaWed RQ-dePaQd WUaQViW VeUYice.b The BaOdZiQ CRXQW\ CRPPiVViRQ ZiOO UeceiYe $261,000 WR cUeaWe aQ RQ-dePaQdb UXUaO WUaQViW QeWZRUN WaiORUed WR iQcUeaVe acceVV WR jRbV, VchRROV, aQd heaOWhb caUe aSSRiQWPeQWV.b
● 0DVVDFKXVHWWV DHSDUWPHQW RI 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ (0DVVD27) DLVFUHWLRQDU\ GUDQWb 3URJUDP:
IQ Whe faOO Rf 2019, Via cROOabRUaWed ZiWh Whe WRUceVWeU RegiRQaOb TUaQViW AXWhRUiW\ (WRTA) WR SUeSaUe Whe ZiQQiQg gUaQW aSSOicaWiRQ VXbPiWWed WRb MaVVDOT fRU a QeZ RQ-dePaQd WUaQViW VeUYice. TR iQfRUP Whe WRTAłVb aSSOicaWiRQ, ViałV WeaP cRQdXcWed aQ iQWeQViYe VeUYice SOaQQiQg e[eUciVe WRb deYeORS Whe SUeOiPiQaU\ deVigQ aQd aVVRciaWed SUiciQg fRU Whe SURjecW,b cRQVideUiQg bRWh WRTAłV YiViRQ aQd MaVVDOTłV fXQdiQg gRaOV.b ● 0LFKLJDQ 0RELOLW\ CKDOOHQJH:
IQ eaUO\ 2018, Via cROOabRUaWed ZiWh The RaSid,b
Whe SXbOic WUaQViW RSeUaWRU iQ Whe GUaQd RaSidV, MichigaQ PeWUR aUea, WRb deYeORS a SURSRVaO iQ UeVSRQVe WR Whe MichigaQ MRbiOiW\ ChaOOeQge. IQ JaQXaU\b Rf 2019, Whe GRYeUQRU aZaUded RQe Rf RQO\ fRXU gUaQWV WR Via aQd The RaSidłVb ÄÅ
979
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
jRiQW SURSRVaO, Zhich aiPed WR iQcUeaVe PRbiOiW\ acceVV fRU VeQiRUV aQdb iQdiYidXaOV ZiWh diVabiOiWieV. BXiOdiQg Rff Rf WhiV ZiQQiQg SURSRVaO, Via OaXQchedb ŃRaSid OQ DePaQdń iQ JXO\ Rf 2019, eQabOiQg The RaSid WR RffeU aQ iQQRYaWiYeb ADA SaUaWUaQViW VeUYice ZiWh PRUe fOe[ibOe bRRNiQg RSWiRQV aQd VhRUWeU ZaiWb WiPeV.bb
● 2017 0RELOLW\ 2Q-DHPDQG (0RD) Ń6DQGER[ń 3URJUDP:
IQ 2017, Via SaUWQeUedb
ZiWh LRV AQgeOeV MeWUR (CA) aQd KiQg CRXQW\ MeWUR (WA) WR deYeORSb aSSOicaWiRQV fRU Whe U.S. FedeUaO TUaQViW AdPiQiVWUaWiRQłV MRD ŃSaQdbR[ńb PURgUaP, Zhich aiPV WR VXSSRUW WUaQViW ageQcieV iQ iQcRUSRUaWiQg QeZ PRbiOiW\b WechQRORgieV. The WZR eQWiWieV UeceiYed a $1.35 PiOOiRQ gUaQW WR OaXQch VhaUed,b RQ-dePaQd PRbiOiW\ VeUYiceV SURYidiQg fiUVW- aQd OaVW-PiOe VeUYiceV iQb cRPPXQiWieV XQdeUVeUYed b\ Whe e[iVWiQg WUaQViW V\VWeP.bb ● 1DWLRQDO FHGHUDO COHDQ ALU 3URJUDP:
ThiV fedeUaO gUaQW SURgUaP Ō Zhich ZaVb
eVWabOiVhed WR fiQd iPPediaWe VROXWiRQV WR haUPfXO caUbRQ ePiVViRQV acURVVb GeUPaQ Ō VXSSRUWed Whe 2019 OaXQch Rf ViałV fiUVW- aQd OaVW-PiOe VeUYice iQb BUaQdeQbXUg, GeUPaQ\ ZiWh BeUOiQeU VeUNehUVbeWUiebeQ (BVG), Whe SXbOicb WUaQViW SURYideU iQ Whe BeUOiQ PeWUR aUea. CaOOed BeUOKùQig BC, Whe VeUYiceb SURYideV VhaUed cRQQecWiRQV WR U-BahQ UaiOZa\ VWaWiRQV WUadiWiRQaOO\b XQdeUVeUYed b\ fi[ed-URXWe VeUYiceV.bb
● 7KH CRPPXQLW\ FRXQGDWLRQ RI GUHDWHU BLUPLQJKDP:
IQ SaUWQeUVhiS ZiWh Wheb
CiW\ Rf BiUPiQghaP, AOabaPa, Via SiWched aQd XOWiPaWeO\ VecXUed a $500,000b gUaQW fURP Whe CRPPXQiW\ FRXQdaWiRQ Rf GUeaWeU BiUPiQghaP WR VXSSRUW Wheb OaXQch Rf BiUPiQghaP OQ DePaQd. The VeUYice cRPSOePeQWV aQd e[WeQdVb SXbOic WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ iQ VeOecW aUeaV Rf Whe ciW\.bb
NRWe: ThiV UeVSRQVe PXVW e[SOaiQ Whe UeOaWiRQVhiS beWZeeQ YRXcheU fXQdiQg WhaW, b\ b b b b b b b b b b b b defiQiWiRQ, ZiOO VXSSRUW Whe SURjecW fRU XS WR 3 \eaUV (i.e. XS WR 1 \eaU Rf SURjecW SOaQQiQg b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b aQd 2 \eaUV Rf fXOO RSeUaWiRQV), aQd Whe UeVRXUceV UeTXiUed WR fXOO\ RSeUaWe Whe SURjecW b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b fRU aW OeaVW 4 \eaUV (aV RXWOiQed iQ Whe MRbiOiW\ PURjecW VRXcheU BXdgeW WRUNVheeW) b b b b b b b b b b b b b b cRQViVWeQW ZiWh Whe fiQaQciaO VXVWaiQabiOiW\ UeTXiUePeQW.b
27.DHVFULEH \RXU VWUDWHJLHV IRU HQVXULQJ YHKLFOHV DQG HTXLSPHQW FRQWLQXH WR VHUYH WKHb FRPPXQLW\ LI RSHUDWLRQ GLVFRQWLQXHV DIWHU WKH 4 \HDU YRXFKHU DJUHHPHQW WHUP.bb ÄÆ
980
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
b
If RSeUaWiRQ diVcRQWiQXeV afWeU Whe 4 \eaU YRXcheU WeUP, RichPRQd ZRXOd ZRUN ZiWhb Via WR deYeORS YaUiRXV VWUaWegieV WR cRQWiQXe WR VeUYice Whe cRPPXQiW\. TheVe PighWb iQcOXde:b
● A OHDVH-WR-RZQ PRGHO IRU YHKLFOHV.
VehicOe cRVW cRXOd be aPRUWi]ed RYeU Wheb
fRXU \eaUV, RU ORQgeU, WR eYeQWXaOO\ eQVXUe WhaW RichPRQd RZQV Whe YehicOeV.b Via iV RSeQ WR e[SORUe RWheU iQQRYaWiYe PRdeOV fRU Whe YehicOeV WR cRQWiQXe WRb VeUYice Whe cRPPXQiW\.b
● E[LVWLQJ FKDUJLQJ VWDWLRQV.
ŃRichPRQd OQ-DePaQdń caOOV fRU Whe iQVWaOOaWiRQ Rfb
RQe addiWiRQaO EV chaUgiQg VWaWiRQ, Zhich ZiOO UePaiQ SeUPaQeQWO\ fRU Wheb OifeWiPe Rf Whe haUdZaUe.bb
● If RichPRQd WaNeV RYeU Whe RSeUaWiRQV Rf Whe VeUYice, ŃRichPRQd OQ-DePaQdńb cRXOd WUaQViWiRQ WR a SRfWZaUe-aV-a-SeUYice (SaaS) PRdeO, ZheUe Via QR ORQgeUb cRRUdiQaWeV aQd iQWegUaWeV Whe VeUYice aQd eQVXUeV YehicOe PaiQWeQaQce, bXWb RQO\ SURYideV Whe VRfWZaUe. ViałV SaaS VROXWiRQ aOORZV SaUWQeUV WR SOXg iWVb WUaQViW PaQagePeQW VRfWZaUe iQWR a fOeeW RSeUaWed b\ Whe SaUWQeU RU ab WhiUd-SaUW\ ageQc\. PaUWQeUV UeO\ RQ Via WR SURYide, PaiQWaiQ, aQd VXSSRUW Wheb WechQRORg\ V\VWeP Ō iQcOXdiQg Whe bacNeQd URXWiQg aQd Uide aggUegaWiRQb V\VWeP, VeUYice PaQagePeQW iQWeUface, aQd Whe Via RideU aQd DUiYeU ASSV. Theb SaaS VROXWiRQ RffeUV a fXOO VXiWe Rf WRROV aQd VXSSRUW VeUYiceV fRU SaUWQeUV WRb RSeUaWe RQ-dePaQd WUaQViW VeUYiceV ZiWh WheiU RZQ dUiYeUV, YehicOeV,b diVSaWcheUV, aQd cXVWRPeU VXSSRUW UeSUeVeQWaWiYeV.b
a
C20081I7< 5E6285CE C2175IB87I21b
28.DHVFULEH
DW OHDVW ILYH W\SHV RI CRPPXQLW\ 5HVRXUFH CRQWULEXWLRQV WKDW DUH EHLQJb SURYLGHG WR PHHW WKH UHTXLUHPHQWV GHVFULEHG LQ 6HFWLRQ -.7 RI WKH C02b IPSOHPHQWDWLRQ 0DQXDO.bb
b
EOigibOe ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQb DeVcUiSWiRQb
1. ReOaWiRQVhiSV ZiWh SURjecW-UeOeYaQWb
cRPPXQiW\ gURXSV RU CRPPXQiW\-b
BaVed OUgaQi]aWiRQV (CBOV)b
(SaUWQeUVhiSV WhaW aUe QRW SaUW Rfb
cRUe SaUWQeU WeaP)
b
LiVW Rf CBOV / CRPPXQiW\ GURXSV:b
● FUieQdV Rf RichPRQdb
● RichPRQd PROice AcWiYiWieV LeagXeb
● MeQ aQd WRPeQ Rf VaORUb
● RichPRQd CRPPXQiW\ FRXQdaWiRQb
b
See ASSeQdi[ 2_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\b
ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #1_RichPRQdFUieQdVb
ÄÇ
981
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
b
2. PURjecW-UeOaWed OabRU cRVWV dXUiQgb
VRXcheU FXQdiQg TeUP WhaW aUe QRWb
UeiPbXUVed WhURXgh YRXcheU fXQdV
b
RichPRQd ZiOO cRQWUibXWe OabRU cRVWV UeOaWed WRb
Whe adPiQiVWUaWiRQ Rf Whe VRXcheU PURgUaP.b
b
See ASSeQdi[ 3_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\b
ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #2_LabRUCRVWVb
3. PURjecW-UeOaWed PaWeUiaOV RU aVVeWVb
aOUead\ RZQed b\ SURjecWb
SaUWiciSaQWV aQd/RU dRQaWed WR Wheb
SURjecW WhaW ZiOO be XVed dXUiQg Wheb
PURjecW VRXcheU FXQdiQg TeUP
b
The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd iQWeQdV WR SURYideb
addiWiRQaO cRPPXQiW\ RXWUeach VXSSRUW, iQb
e[ceVV Rf Whe UeTXiUed PiQiPXP YRXcheUb
aOORWPeQW. ThiV ZiOO iQcOXde:b
● CRQYeQiQg VWaNehROdeUV aQdb
cRQdXcWiQg SXbOic PeeWiQgV WR PaUNeWb
Whe SURjecW aQd edXcaWe Whe SXbOicb
● PURYide PaUNeWiQg PaWeUiaOV aQd digiWaOb
aQd VRciaO Pedia VXSSRUW WhURXghb
RfficiaO CiW\ Rf RichPRQd VRciaO Pediab
chaQQeOVb
b
See ASSeQdi[ 4_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\b
ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #3_MaWeUiaOVb
4. TechQRORg\ aQd ETXiSPeQW aOUead\b
RZQed b\ SURjecW SaUWiciSaQWV aQd/b
RU dRQaWed WR Whe SURjecW WhaW ZiOOb
be XVed dXUiQg Whe VRXcheUb
FXQdiQg TeUP
b
The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd aOUead\ RZQV eighWb
chaUgiQg VWaWiRQV aURXQd Whe CiW\, ZiWh Vi[b
SeQdiQg iQVWaOOaWiRQV iQ Whe cRPiQg PRQWhV.b
TheVe SXbOic chaUgiQg VWaWiRQV caQ be XWiOi]edb
fRU Whe chaUgiQg QeedV Rf Whe RichPRQdb
OQ-DePaQd YehicOeV.b
b
See ASSeQdi[ 5_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\b
ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #4_Tech&ETXiSPeQWb
5. EQeUg\ RU fXeO cRVWV dXUiQg Wheb
VRXcheU FXQdiQg TeUP (eOecWUiciW\ RUb
h\dURgeQ)
b
CXUUeQWO\, aOO Rf Whe eQeUg\ SURYided WR Wheb
SXbOicO\ RZQed chaUgiQg VWaWiRQV iV Said fRU b\b
Whe CiW\. ThiV ZiOO aOVR be WUXe fRU Whe SOaQV WRb
iQVWaOO Whe addiWiRQaO chaUgiQg VWaWiRQ aW Wheb
CiW\łV CRUS YaUd. TheUefRUe, 100% Rf eQeUg\b
cRVWV fRU WhiV SURjecW ZiOO be SURYided b\ Wheb
CiW\ Rf RichPRQd.b
b
See ASSeQdi[ 6_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\b
ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #5_EQeUg\CRVWVb
b
ÄÈ
982
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
6. DRQaWed OaQd fRU iQfUaVWUXcWXUeb b OQe LeYeO 2 chaUgeU ZiOO be iQVWaOOed aW 6 13Whb SWUeeW, RichPRQd 94801, Zhich iV Whe ViWe Rfb
RichPRQdłV CRUS YaUd aQd iV CiW\-RZQed OaQdb
WhaW ZiOO be SURYided fRU Whe SXUSRVe Rfb
iQVWaOOiQg WhiV chaUgiQg iQfUaVWUXcWXUe.b
b
See ASSeQdi[ 7_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\b
ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #6_LaQdb
b
b
NRWe: FRU a cRPSOeWe OiVW Rf eOigibOe cRPPXQiW\ UeVRXUce cRQWUibXWiRQV, SOeaVe UefeU WR b b b b b b b b b b b b b TabOe 3. SecWiRQ J.7 iQ Whe CMO IPSOePeQWaWiRQ MaQXaO.b
29.AWWDFK DW OHDVW RQH VXSSRUWLQJ GRFXPHQW IRU HDFK RI WKH ILYH CRPPXQLW\ 5HVRXUFHb CRQWULEXWLRQV SURSRVHG LQ \RXU SUHYLRXV UHVSRQVH. :ULWH LQ ŃDWWDFKHGń DORQJ ZLWKb DQ\ FRPPHQWV.b
b
ASSeQdi[ 2_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\ ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #1_RichPRQdFUieQdVb ASSeQdi[ 3_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\ ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #2_LabRUCRVWVb ASSeQdi[ 4_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\ ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #3_MaWeUiaOVb ASSeQdi[ 5_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\ ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #4_Tech&ETXiSPeQWb ASSeQdi[ 6_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\ ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #5_EQeUg\CRVWVb ASSeQdi[ 7_LeWWeURfSXSSRUW_CRPPXQiW\ ReVRXUce CRQWUibXWiRQ #6_LaQdb b
C20081I7< 2875EACH 3/A1bb
ThiV VecWiRQ cROOecWV iQfRUPaWiRQ abRXW Whe aSSOicaQWłV SOaQV WR eQgage ZiWh Whe b b b b b b b b b b b b cRPPXQiW\ aQd SURPRWe Whe VeUYice WhURXghRXW RSeUaWiRQV.b
30.DHVFULEH, LQ GHWDLO, \RXU SODQ WR HQJDJH WKH FRPPXQLW\ UHVLGHQWV WKURXJK RXWUHDFK b b b b b b b b b b b b DQG HGXFDWLRQ WR SUHSDUH IRU WKH ODXQFK RI WKH SURMHFW DQG WKURXJKRXW WKH b b b b b b b b b b b b b SURMHFWłV RSHUDWLRQV. IGHQWLI\ NH\ SURMHFW VWDJHV LQ ZKLFK RXWUHDFK ZLOO RFFXU, NH\ b b b b b b b b b b b b SDUWQHUV, WKHLU UROHV IRU RXWUHDFK DQG HGXFDWLRQ, DQG WKHLU NQRZOHGJH DQG b b b b b b b b b b b H[SHULHQFH ZLWKLQ WKH FRPPXQLW\ WKDW ZLOO HQDEOH WKHP WR GR VXFFHVVIXO RXWUHDFK.bb ÄÉ
983
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
AV SaUW Rf Whe SOaQQiQg OaXQch SURceVV, Ze ZiOO deVigQ a SXbOic eQgagePeQW VWUaWeg\b WR giYe UideUV aQd RWheU VWaNehROdeUV aPSOe RSSRUWXQiWieV WR SURYide feedbacN aQdb aVN TXeVWiRQV befRUe OaXQch, aQd WhURXghRXW Whe Oife Rf Whe SURjecW. We SURSRVeb fRcXViQg RXWUeach aQd eQgagePeQW effRUWV RQ Whe fROORZiQg VWUaWegieV:b b
CUHDWLQJ D 3XEOLF 3DUWLFLSDWLRQ 3ODQb
The PURjecW TeaP ZiOO deYeORS a PXbOic PaUWiciSaWiRQ POaQ WhaW ZiOO deVcUibe eachb SURSRVed eQgagePeQW acWiYiW\, hRZ iW ZiOO heOS WR achieYe Whe gRaOV Rf Whe POaQ, aQdb hRZ iW ZiOO be cRRUdiQaWed ZiWh RWheU SOaQQiQg WaVNV. The WeaP ZiOO aOVR UeYieZ aQ\b daWa cROOecWed dXUiQg SUeYiRXV SXbOic RXWUeach acWiYiWieV.b b
CRQVXOWDWLRQ & IQYROYHPHQWb
CRPPXQiW\ iQYROYePeQW eQabOeV Whe cRPPXQiW\ WR SURYide RQgRiQg aQd iQ-deSWhb iQSXW abRXW Whe cRPPXQiW\ QeedV aQd deYeORSPeQW Rf VeUYiceV. SWaNehROdeUV ZiOOb YaU\ accRUdiQg WR Whe cRhRUW, bXW caQ iQcOXde UeOeYaQW ORcaO gRYeUQPeQW, cRPPXQiW\b gURXSV, bXViQeVVeV, NGOV, VchRROV, UideUV, aQd faPiOieV/caUegiYeUV Rf UideUV. TRb eQVXUe cRPSUeheQViYe aQd iQ-deSWh cRPPXQiW\ iQYROYePeQW, Ze SOaQ WR:b b
1. CRQYHQH VWDNHKROGHU DQG FRQGXFW LQWHUYLHZVb
We ZiOO iQWeUYieZ a UaQge Rf VWaNehROdeUV, iQcOXdiQg Ne\ UeSUeVeQWaWiYeV Rfb VRciaO VeUYice ageQcieV, PedicaO faciOiWieV, edXcaWiRQaO iQVWiWXWiRQV, PajRUb ePSOR\eUV, CiW\ ageQcieV, aQd UegiRQaO VWaNehROdeUV, aQd deYeORS a VWUaWeg\b WR XQdeUVWaQd SeUceiYed VWUeQgWhV/ZeaNQeVVeV iQ Whe cXUUeQW VeUYiceV; OiNeO\b beQefiWV Rf iPSURYiQg WUaQViW VeUYiceV, aQd; higheVW SUiRUiWieV fRU iPSURYiQgb WUaQViW.b
b
2. FDFLOLWDWH IRFXV JURXSVb
OSeQ b\ iQYiWaWiRQ WR VSecific gURXSV ZiWhiQ Whe cRhRUWV ideQWified abRYe, Viab ZRXOd hRVW fRcXV gURXSV WR geW iQVighW RQ VeOf ideQWified baUUieUV, cRQceUQV aQdb ZaQWV fURP a WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VeUYice.b
b
3. EQJDJH ORFDO JRYHUQPHQWb
IQYROYe CiW\ CRXQciO PePbeUV iQ Whe diVWUicWV iQcOXded iQ Whe ]RQe e[SaQViRQb WR geW WheiU bX\ iQ aQd VXSSRUW fRU Whe VeUYice.b b
b
4. CRQVXOW ZLWK FRPPXQLW\ JURXSVb
WRUNiQg ZiWh cRPPXQiW\-baVed RUgaQi]aWiRQV iQcOXdiQg WhRVe fRcXVed RQb VRciaO VeUYiceV, cRPPRQ iQWeUeVWV, faiWh-baVed aQd adYRcac\ gURXSV ZRXOdb giYe XV acceVV WR RXU ideQWified cRhRUWV. TheVe gURXSV iQcOXde:b b ÄÊ
984
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
● RichPRQd ChaPbeU Rf CRPPeUceb
● RichPRQd MaiQ SWUeeW IQiWiaWiYeb
● RichPRQd NeighbRUhRRd CRRUdiQaWiQg CRXQciOb
● FUieQdV Rf RichPRQdb
● RichPRQd PROice AcWiYiWieV LeagXeb
● MeQ aQd WRPeQ Rf VaORUb
● RichPRQd CRPPXQiW\ FRXQdaWiRQb
b
5. HRVW SXEOLF PHHWLQJVb
AV Whe cRPPXQiW\ RXWUeach SOaQ eYROYeV, iW ZiOO be iPSRUWaQW WR VhaUeb cRQceSWV, VWUaWegieV, aQd SRWeQWiaO UecRPPeQdaWiRQV ZiWh Whe cRPPXQiW\ WRb gaWheU feedbacN aQd bXiOd bX\-iQ WhURXgh cRQYeQiQg SXbOic PeeWiQgV. TheVeb ZRUNVhRSV ZiOO be cRRUdiQaWed ZiWh iQSXW fURP VWaNehROdeUV WR eQVXUe diYeUVeb SeUVSecWiYeV aUe UeSUeVeQWed. IQ SaUWicXOaU, Ze ZiOO eQVXUe WhaW WheUe iVb aSSURSUiaWe fRcXV RQ Whe iQcOXViRQ Rf PiQRUiW\ aQd ORZ-iQcRPe gURXSV, SeRSOeb ZiWh diVabiOiWieV, aQd VeQiRUV. IQ accRUdaQce ZiWh ORcaO SXbOic heaOWh gXideOiQeV,b WheVe PeeWiQgV Pa\ be cRQdXcWed UePRWeO\ Yia YideR-cRQfeUeQce.b b
EGXFDWLRQ DQG AZDUHQHVVb
EdXcaWiRQ aQd aZaUeQeVV caQ be Whe SUiPaU\ fRUP Rf eQgagePeQW eVSeciaOO\ ZheUeb WUadiWiRQaO PaUNeWiQg ZRQłW PeeW Whe QeedV Rf Whe cRPPXQiW\ Ze aUe WaUgeWiQg. Web UecRPPeQd Whe fROORZiQg chaQQeOV:b
b
1. IQVWUXFWLRQDO 9LGHRVb
IQ RUdeU WR heOS XVeUV ZhR aUe OeVV faPiOiaU ZiWh XViQg VPaUWShRQe aSSVb RYeUcRPe iQiWiaO baUUieUV WR VigQ XS, Ze UecRPPeQd cUeaWiQg a VeUieV Rfb iQVWUXcWiRQaO YideRV WR heOS XVeUV QaYigaWe Whe VigQ XS aQd bRRNiQg SURceVV.b We ZRXOd SURSRVe PaNiQg a cRUe YideR WhaW ZRXOd giYe a bUief RYeUYieZ Rfb Whe VeUYice aQd SURYide a VWeS b\ VWeS WXWRUiaO RQ hRZ WR bRRN a Uide bRWhb WhURXgh Whe aSS aQd RYeU Whe ShRQe. We ZRXOd WheQ cUeaWe a VeUieV Rfb addiWiRQaO PRdXOeV ZiWh PRUe WaUgeWed cRQWeQW h\SeU UeOeYaQW WR VSecificb dePRgUaShicV VXch aV:b
● KeeSiQg UideUV Vafe dXUiQg COVIDb
● SSeciaO iQVWUXcWiRQV UegaUdiQg acceVV aQd SURcedXUe fRU iQdiYidXaOV ZiWhb diVabiOiWieVb b
● SSeciaO iQVWUXcWiRQV UegaUdiQg acceVV fRU UideUV eOigibOe fRU cXUb-WR-cXUbb VeUYiceb
● TUaQVOaWiRQ WR diffeUeQW OaQgXageVbb
b
ÅÁ
985
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
TheVe YideRV ZRXOd be diVVePiQaWed acURVV PXOWiSOe chaQQeOV WR eQVXUe Whe\b aUe UeachiQg WaUgeW aXdieQceV, iQcOXdiQg:b
● CiW\ Rf RichPRQd SRciaO Media (FacebRRN, IQVWagUaP, YRXWXbe)b ● CiW\ Rf RichPRQd WebViWeb
● SeQiRU CeQWeU SiWeVb
● NGOV & AdYRcac\ GURXSVbb
● HeaOWh ceQWeUV/hRVSiWaOVbb
b
2. /LYH 7UDLQLQJb
UQdeUVWaQdiQg WhaW VRPe UideUV ZRXOd beQefiW gUeaWO\ fURP OiYe iQWeUacWiRQ, Zeb UecRPPeQd WhaW Ze haYe a chaQce WR VSeaN ZiWh ORcaO RUgaQi]aWiRQV WRb SURYide YiUWXaO WUaiQiQg fRU WheiU VWaff RU PePbeUV diUecWO\.b b b
3. 3K\VLFDO AVVHWVb
CUeaWe SaSeU Pedia WhaW VSeaNV WR Whe VeUYice UeOeYaQW WR Whe UideU SRSXOaWiRQb WhaW YiViWV Whe ORcaWiRQ ZheUe Whe Pedia ZRXOd OiYe.b
NRWe: The UeVSRQVe VhRXOd cRQVideU aQd diVcXVV WaUgeW aXdieQce, ZiWh cRQVideUaWiRQ Rfb SURPRWiQg XVeUV Rf VeUYice / UideUV, gURXSV iQ cRPPXQiWieV WR Ueach, ZRUNSOaceV,b deVWiQaWiRQV, aQd MXOWi-UQiW DZeOOiQgV. See SecWiRQ J.8 Rf Whe CMO IPSOePeQWaWiRQb MaQXaO fRU deWaiOV.b
31.DHVFULEH KRZ \RX ZLOO HQJDJH ZLWK RWKHU FRPPXQLW\ VWDNHKROGHUV DIIHFWHG E\ WKHb SURMHFW.bb
OXU cRPPXQiW\ eQgagePeQW effRUWV ZiOO SaUWicXOaUO\ fRcXV RQ VWaNehROdeUV ZhR PighWb PRVW beQefiW fURP RichPRQd OQ-DePaQd, iQcOXdiQg: ORcaO bXViQeVVeV, UegiRQaOb cRPPXWeUV ZhR ZiOO be SRViWiYeO\ affecWed b\ iPSURYed fiUVW-PiOe / OaVW-PiOeb cRQQecWiRQV, aQd ORZ-iQcRPe aQd diVadYaQWaged UeVideQWV. BeORZ, Ze diVcXVVb VWUaWegieV fRU hRZ WR eQgage each gURXS.b
b
LRcaO bXViQeVVeVb
LRcaO bXViQeVV cRXOd SOa\ a SaUWicXOaUO\ iPSRUWaQW UROe iQ Whe VXcceVV Rf WhiV VeUYice.b SiQce Whe CiW\ SaVVed a CRPPXWeU BeQefiWV OUdiQaQce, aOO UegiVWeUed bXViQeVVeV WhaWb haYe 10 RU PRUe ePSOR\eeV ZhR ZRUN aQ aYeUage Rf aW OeaVW 10 hRXUV SeU ZeeN PXVWb RffeU WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ beQefiWV WR WheiU ePSOR\eeV. EdXcaWiQg WheVe bXViQeVVeV abRXWb hRZ RichPRQd OQ-DePaQd cRXOd beQefiW WheiU ePSOR\eeV PighW eQcRXUage WheP WRb fiQaQciaOO\ VXSSRUW Whe VeUYice WhURXgh Whe OUdiQaQce. We SOaQ WR cRQdXcWb edXcaWiRQaO VeVViRQV WhaW VSecificaOO\ eQgage WheVe ORcaO bXViQeVVeV aQd hRZ iW cRXOdb be PXWXaOO\ beQeficiaO fRU Whe bXViQeVV b\ eQVXUiQg WheiU ePSOR\eeV geW WR ZRUN VafeO\b aQd RQ-WiPe, aQd WR WheiU ePSOR\eeV WR PaNe WheiU ZRUN cRPPXWeV PRUe efficieQW.bb ÅÂ
986
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
b
RegiRQaO cRPPXWeUVb
RichPRQd OQ-DePaQd ZiOO heOS cRPPXWeUV cRQQecW WR aQd fURP YaUiRXV UegiRQaOb WUaQVSRUWaWiRQ VeUYiceV, VXch aV BART, APWUaN, AC TUaQViW bXV VWRSV, aQd Whe QeZb feUU\ VeUYice WR SaQ FUaQciVcR. We SOaQ WR hROd SRS-XS eYeQWV aQd WabOiQg VeVViRQV aWb ORcaO WUaQViW hXbV dXUiQg diffeUeQW WiPeV Rf Whe da\ WR Pa[iPi]e aWWeQdaQce aQdb eQgagePeQW. TheVe VeVViRQV ZiOO iQcOXde SURjecW iQfRUPaWiRQ, WUaQViW SUiRUiW\ VXUYe\V,b aQd VeUYice cRQceSWV VhRZQ iQ a ViPSOe \eW deVcUiSWiYe PaQQeU. AQ\ cRPPeQWVb UeceiYed ZiOO be WabXOaWed aQd VXPPaUi]ed WhePaWicaOO\ WR iQfRUP Whe VeUYice.b b
LRZ-iQcRPe aQd diVadYaQWaged UeVideQWVb
The CiW\ Rf RichPRQd aQd Via ZiOO ZRUN ZiWh cRPPXQiW\ RUgaQi]aWiRQV, VXch aV FUieQdVb Rf RichPRQd aQd RichPRQd CRPPXQiW\ FRXQdaWiRQ, WR deeSO\ eQgage ORZ-iQcRPeb aQd diVadYaQWaged UeVideQWV. EdXcaWiRQ aQd PaUNeWiQg effRUWV ZiOO be cRQdXcWedb WhURXgh dRRU-WR-dRRU caQYaVViQg iQ VeOecWed QeighbRUhRRdV aQd Ze SOaQ WR hRVWb cRPPXQiW\ eYeQWV WR iQfRUP UeVideQWV Rf WhiV QeZ aQd affRUdabOe VeUYice. b
NRWe: The fROORZiQg VhRXOd be cRQVideUed aQd diVcXVVed iQ Whe UeVSRQVe: ORcaOb bXViQeVVeV, UeVideQWV, RU RWheU VWaNehROdeUV ZhR Pa\ be affecWed b\ QeZ cRQVWUXcWiRQb RU RWheU aVSecWV Rf Whe SURjecW. POeaVe diVcXVV VSecific eYeQWV, PaWeUiaOV, aXdieQceV,b aQd aSSURacheV. See SecWiRQ J.8 Rf Whe CMO IPSOePeQWaWiRQ MaQXaO fRU deWaiOV.b ÅÃ
987
MOBILIT9 PROJECT 6OUCHER APPLICATION6Ã
b
b
b
b
A77E67A7I216 A1D 6IG1A785Eb
1. I, Whe aXWhRUi]ed RfficeU WR UeSUeVeQW aQd VigQ WhiV aSSOicaWiRQ RQ behaOf Rf P\b RUgaQi]aWiRQ/WUibe aV Whe Lead ASSOicaQW, haYe Uead, XQdeUVWaQd aQd agUee WRb abide b\ aOO Rf Whe UeTXiUePeQWV, WeUPV aQd cRQdiWiRQV iQ Whe CMOb
IPSOePeQWaWiRQ MaQXaO;b
2. I aWWeVW WR aOO Rf Whe fROORZiQg:b
a. OXU RUgaQi]aWiRQ/WUibe iV QRW aQ e[iVWiQg CARB COeaQ MRbiOiW\ OSWiRQVb gUaQWee RU VXb-gUaQWee aQd UeTXeVWiQg fXQdiQg fRU e[SaQdiQg Whe VaPe W\Seb Rf SURjecW iQ Whe VaPe SURjecW aUea;b
b. OXU WeaP iQcOXdeV aW OeaVW RQe WeaP PePbeU ZiWh Whe PiQiPXP RQe \eaU Rfb e[SeUieQce RSeUaWiQg PRbiOiW\ VeUYiceV RU Ze cRPPiW WR VeOecW a PRbiOiW\b VeUYice SURYideU fURP Whe DiUecWRU\ RU aQ eQWiW\ ZhR PeeWV Whe PiQiPXPb TXaOificaWiRQ cUiWeUia ZiWhiQ 3 PRQWhV fURP Whe YRXcheU agUeePeQW e[ecXWiRQb daWe;b
c. If Ze aUe aSSO\iQg fRU YRXcheU fXQdiQg fRU iQfUaVWUXcWXUe:b i. We XQdeUVWaQd aQd agUee WR cRPSO\ ZiWh CEQA UeTXiUePeQWV VeW fRUWh iQb Whe
CMO PURgUaP IPSOePeQWaWiRQ MaQXaO;b
ii. We XQdeUVWaQd Whe UeTXiUed SeUPiWV aQd QeceVVaU\ SeUPiVViRQV WRb RSeUaWe Whe SURjecW VeUYice(V);b
iii. The iQfUaVWUXcWXUe ZiOO be XVed SUiPaUiO\ WR VXSSRUW Whe VeUYice Rf RXU cRUeb SURjecW PRdeO;b
d. If Ze aUe XViQg a TNC fRU Whe cRUe SURjecW PRdeO, VeUYiceV ZiOO aOZa\V RSeUaWeb b\ ]eUR-ePiVViRQ YehicOeV;b
e. OXU WeaP cRPSOieV ZiWh aOO aSSOicabOe SWaWe aQd/RU fedeUaO cRQfOicW Rf iQWeUeVWb OaZV; aQdb
f. AOO iQfRUPaWiRQ SURYided iQ WhiV aSSOicaWiRQ aQd aQ\ aWWachPeQWV aUe WUXe aQdb cRUUecW.b
b
b
b
ÅÄ
988
989
Mobility Project Voucher Budget Worksheet
Instructions: Enter data in
blue cells. Do not enter data in grey or white cells. Add rows as necessary. The entire sheet is "unlocked" and it is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that subtotals and calculations are accurate. Voucher amounts and category totals must comply with Section 1. Project Components Section 2. Voucher Budget Section 3. Other Funds Budget Description of Voucher Request Annual Budget Breakdown for Voucher Funding Term (3 Years Total) Annual Budget Breakdown for Expenses
Needed to Operate During Years 3-4 of
Operations (2 Years Total)
(a)
Expense Category
(b)
Item description
(c)
Voucher amount
requested per unit
or hour ($)
(d)
Number of units
or hours
requested
(e)
Total voucher
amount by item
($)
(f)
Project Launch (Up to 1
Year) ($)
(g)
Year 1 of Operations
($)
(h)
Year 2 of Operations
($)
(i)
Year 3 of
Operations
($)
(j)
Year 4 of Operations
($)
Motor Vehicles and Associated Hardware n/a n/a
n/a n/a
Bicycles and Scooters n/a n/a
n/a n/a
Charging/Fueling Equipment and Installation n/a n/a
n/a n/a
Bicycle/Scooter Infrastructure and Installation
(Maximum 300% of amount of electric bicycle/scooter
or 200% of non-electric bicycles/scooter amount)
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
Planning Costs Pre-Launch Planning Cost $5,000 1 $5,000 $5,000 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Outreach and Marketing Costs
(Minimum $25,000 or 10% of total voucher,
whichever is more; maxium of 30% of total voucher)
Vehicle Magnets $100 / magnet 4 $400 $400 $0 $0 $0 $0
Driver Acquisition $3.38 / hr 13,010 $43,975 $0 $21,988 $21,988 $21,988 $21,988 Launch Rider Marketing $7,500 1 $7,500 $7,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ongoing Rider Marketing $3.80 / hr 13,010 $49,440 $0 $24,720 $24,720 $24,720 $24,720 Operations and Maintenance Costs
Driver Costs $51.06 / hr 13,010 $664,311 $0 $332,156 $332,156 $332,156 $332,156 Vehicle Chargers $1.14 / hr 13,010 $14,832 $0 $7,416 $7,416 $7,416 $7,416 Vehicle Electricity $1.48 / hr 13,010 $19,255 $0 $9,628 $9,628 $9,628 $9,628 Customer Support $4.11 / hr 13,010 $53,473 $0 $26,736 $26,736 $26,736 $26,736 Insurance $1.55 / hr 13,010 $20,166 $0 $10,083 $10,083 $10,083 $10,083 COVID Partition Cost $85 / partition 4 $340 $340 $0 $0 $0 $0 COVID Disinfectant Wipes $17.75 / cannister 60 $1,065 $1,065 $0 $0 $0 $0 COVID Masks $5 / mask 32 $160 $160 $0 $0 $0 $0
Direct Software Costs $5.12 / hr 13,010 $66,613 $0 $33,307 $33,307 $33,307 $33,307 Tech Support Labor $2.85 / hr 13,010 $37,080 $0 $18,540 $18,540 $18,540 $18,540 Voucher Adminstration Costs
(Maximum 15% of total voucher)
Ongoing Admin Support $0.95 / hr 13,010 $12,360 $0 $6,180 $6,180 $6,180 $6,180 Regulatory Fees $0.10 / ride 28,876 $2,888 $0 $1,444 $1,444 $1,444 $1,444 1 990
Additional Transportation Enhancements
(Maximum 10% of total voucher)
Grand Total
Grand Total - Voucher Funding Term (Voucher Funds) n/a n/a $998,857 $14,465 $492,196 $492,196 n/a n/a Grand Total - Other Funds Budget (Non-CMO Funds) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $492,196 $492,196 Optional: Category Eligibility Check Worksheet
Instructions: Calculate sums in "Category Total" and "Applicable Demonimator" Column. User may need to adjust example formula if rows were inserted above.
Cost Category Elibility Requirement Summary
(See Implementation Manual for Details)
Category Total Applicable
Denominator
Percentage Conforms to Elibility Requirement?
Outreach and Marketing Costs Minimum $25,000 or 10% of total voucher, whichever is more; maximum of 30% of total voucher
$101,315 $998,857 10.1% Yes. More than $25,000 and between 10% and 30% of total voucher request.
Voucher Administration Costs Maximum of 15% of total voucher amount $15,247 $998,857 1.5% Yes. Less than 15% of total voucher request.
Bicycle/Scooter Infrastructure and Installation Maximum of 300% of amount of electric bicycle/scooter vehicles or 200% of amount of non-electric bicycle/scooter vehicles amount
$0 $0 n/a Yes. Less than 300% of requested voucher funds for electric bikes/ scooters (nothing in this category requested).
Additional Transportation Enhancements Maximum of 10% of total voucher amount $0 $0 n/a Yes. Less than 10% of total voucher request (nothing in this category requested).
Notes: Via's cost model is primarily based on the number of vehicle hours provided over the project's duration. The majority of costs are incurred and tracked on an hourly basis. Therefore, the preferred method of voucher reimbursement is payment based on vehicle hours incurred per month of service.
2 991
ATTACHMENT 2
INFRASTRUCTURE SITE
AND NEEDS PROFILE WORKSHEET
FOR THE
MOBILITY PROJECT VOUCHER APPLICATION
CLEAN MOBILITY VOUCHER PILOT PROGRAM
992
ATTACHMENT 2: INFRASTRUCTURE SITE AND NEEDS PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2 ATTACHMENT 2. Infrastructure Site and Needs Profile Worksheet This worksheet is a required supplement for applications to Mobility Project funding with the Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program in 2020. Applicants requesting funding for any of the following categories of infrastructure must complete this worksheet and submit with their application.
● Level 2 or DC Fast Charger EVSE
● Bicycle and Scooter infrastructure
● Solar Photovoltaic Equipment
● Hydrogen Fueling Infrastructure
Applications that do not include funding requests for specified infrastructure should not submit this worksheet.
Instructions:
First, complete Section I. Overview, then complete those subsections of Section II. Infrastructure Site and Needs Profile by Category that are relevant to your project proposal and only for categories that correspond to the funding application.
You may optionally remove subsections in Section 2 that correspond to irrelevant categories.
Additional Information:
All applicants requesting funding for specified infrastructure must fully complete all applicable sections in the worksheet below according to the instructions provided. Applications may not be processed unless this worksheet is fully completed and included in the application. Equipment or approaches that do not meet eligibility criteria will not be approved. Technical Assistance is available to help applicants complete this worksheet. Please visit
www.cleanmobilityoptions.org for
contact information.
Section I. Overview
1. Please indicate your organizations’ name as it appears on the application and a short project description (e.g. “Community Mobility Solutions – Bikeshare in Stockton”).
City of Richmond
Community Mobility Solutions – Richmond On-Demand
2. Please indicate which of the following categories of infrastructure your application requests funding for (check all those that apply):
2 993
ATTACHMENT 2: INFRASTRUCTURE SITE AND NEEDS PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2 ☒ Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE)
☒ Level 2
☐ DC Fast Charger
☐ Bicycle and Scooter infrastructure
☐ Solar Photovoltaic Equipment
☐ Hydrogen Fueling Infrastructure
3. Please describe your overall plan for deploying the infrastructure equipment and, why it is necessary to support the mobility services in your project proposal.
Richmond’s on-demand microtransit service includes three plug-in hybrid 6-passenger vehicles that will serve hundreds of riders every week. The vehicles will be both charged overnight in the Richmond Public Library’s lot where ample EV charging already exists and/or in Richmond’s Corp Yard, home to the City’s Public Works Department. The Corp Yard currently lacks any charging infrastructure.
The Corp Yard is the ideal location in which to install additional charging infrastructure because the site:
1. is connected to a suitable power source and already has electrical conduit installed right up to the site of where the station would be installed
2. is owned by the City, therefore eliminating the need for a permitting process
3. allows the storage of vehicles overnight, if need be
A vendor for installing and maintaining the charging infrastructure will be determined at a later date, likely through a competitive process.
Section II. Infrastructure Site and Needs Profile by Category Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) – Level 2 or DC Fast Charger:
1. Please check all of the following types of EVSE technology that you request funding for:
(select all that apply)
☒ Level 2 Chargers
☐ DC Fast Chargers
Note: Please see Section H in the CMO Implementation Manual for charging equipment minimum eligibility requirements. Proposals that include ineligible equipment or approaches will not be approved.
Conditional (1a):
3 994
ATTACHMENT 2: INFRASTRUCTURE SITE AND NEEDS PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2 a. If your application seeks funding for DC Fast Chargers, please provide a list of DC fast charger site(s), addresses, and an explanation of site control (attach documentation, such as appropriate agreement or contract with a site owner, public right of way approval, and other supporting documents as relevant). (write in)
Note: If you seek funding for DC Fast Chargers you must have already identified the location where the infrastructure will be sited and have permission to use that site at the time of application.
2. Please provide a description of your planned infrastructure to be installed at all proposed sites, with addresses or approximate locations for each installation.
One Level 2 charger will be installed at 6 13th Street, Richmond 94801, which is the site of Richmond’s Corp Yard.
3. Have you identified target locations for all infrastructure that is part of the project? (select one)
☒ Yes
☐ No
Note: Applicants may optionally wait to determine the exact site of the following types of infrastructure until the voucher is signed: Level 2 EVSE, Bicycle and Scooter Infrastructure, and Solar Photovoltaic Equipment. However, the location of DC fast chargers and Hydrogen Fueling Infrastructure must be determined by the time of and indicated in the application.
4. Please check all the following that apply to your EVSE installation. 4 995
ATTACHMENT 2: INFRASTRUCTURE SITE AND NEEDS PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2 (select all that apply)
☐ Installation depends on authorization to use public right of way that has not yet been granted
☐ Installation requires a new service drop, undergrounding, or new utility interconnection
☐ Installation is in a county that is not EVCS Permit Ready or where permit streamlining is in progress in support of AB-1236 compliance (see map from GoBiz at http://www.business.ca.gov/ZEVReadiness)
Conditional (4a):
a. If any boxes are checked on the previous question, please explain how the project will move forward in the event that authorizations, services, and/or permits are not secured in enough time to allow for a timely project launch.
Note: If any of the boxes are checked, you must provide a contingency plan as an attachment to the application (per Section J-9-d of the CMO Implementation Manual) that would allow operations to proceed with an alternative method. Examples of alternatives include:
o Construction of Level 2 charger under conditions that support a relatively fast installation time, such as (1) Site and right-of-way are owned/controlled by lead applicant, (2) no service drop, undergrounding, or new utility interconnections needed, (3) Location is in a county that is AB-1236 compliant (fast permitting).
o Agreement with provider of existing public charger network to use underutilized chargers.
o Retail use of existing public charger network, e.g. ChargePoint. Just set up an account (see DOE map).
o Use of portable charging device with existing plug in. o Use of Level 1 charger (overnight charge) on owned/controlled site; plug in to existing 120 or 240 v outlet and charge immediately with no construction.
5. Are permits required to site any of the infrastructure? (select one)
☐ Yes
☒ No
Conditional (5a):
5 996
ATTACHMENT 2: INFRASTRUCTURE SITE AND NEEDS PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2 a. If yes, indicate the following for all required permits: name of the permit(s), permitting agency, status of permit(s), and summary of plan to obtain permit(s).
6. If the target locations for all infrastructure have been identified, please describe how the requirement for 80 percent of voucher-funded infrastructure or services to be located within the eligible project areas is satisfied.
The entire microtransit service provided will be within SB 535 qualifying zones. The infrastructure itself will be installed at the City’s Corp Yard, which is within an SB 535 eligible project area.
Note: Response may be given in terms chosen by the applicant (e.g., 80 percent of total capital costs, 80 percent of the area in square miles, 80 percent of vehicle parking and/or chargers, etc.) as needed. If you do not know the site location, provide as much information as possible now, and Program Administrator will seek more information prior to voucher fund reimbursements. Also, note that applicants may also modify their project design following award on a case-by-case basis.
7. Have you already filed a Notice of Exemption (NOE) from CEQA for your project? (select one)
☐ Yes (please attach)
☒ No, but will file one
Note: A Notice of Exemption (NOE) from CEQA is required for all infrastructure sites.
Applicants must provide a NOE prior to redeeming voucher funds. The entity who is responsible to secure the NOE may vary based on site.
Conditional (7a):
a. If you do not have a CEQA NOE for all sites at this time, who are the lead entities that you will likely need to work with to secure them? (Write in or include discussion in separate document).
The City of Richmond will work with the selected infrastructure vendor to obtain the CEQA NOE, if need be.
In conversations with charging infrastructure vendors, they have indicated that they have not been required in the past to get this exemption for the Level 2 chargers that will be used in this service.
6 997
ATTACHMENT 2: INFRASTRUCTURE SITE AND NEEDS PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2
There is minimal environmental impact due to the voltage / power required is quite low for these this charger:
● Voltage: 208/240V
● Total Amperage: 120A
● Breaker Size: QTY4 – two pole 40A breakers
8. Do you own the property for all of the sites where you propose to install infrastructure and are you fully authorized to install such infrastructure (e.g. free of any agreements or encumbrances that would pose a conflict)? (select one)
☒ Yes
☐ No
Note: Applications may be approved prior to obtaining all necessary permissions; however, such permissions (or an approved project modification) will be required prior to signing the voucher agreement.
Conditional (8a):
a. If you do not own the property for all of the sites where you propose to install infrastructure and/or need authorization to install such infrastructure, do you have letter(s) of support from the site owner or responsible entity, including relevant public agency in the case of public right-of-way?
(select one)
☐ Yes
☐ No
i. If yes to the question above, please attach letter(s) of support. (check the box)
☐ Letter of support is attached
ii. Do you require any additional permissions (e.g. Historical Preservation, Above Ground Facilities Ordinance, Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA] accessibility requirements, etc.)?
(select one)
☐ Yes
☐ No
iii. If yes to the previous question, please describe the additional requirements and your plans to achieve them (write in).
7 998
ATTACHMENT 2: INFRASTRUCTURE SITE AND NEEDS PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2 (write in)
9. Has any part of the infrastructure already been installed, paid for, or committed to be paid for?
(select one)
☐ Yes
☒ No
Note: Answering “yes” does not disqualify your application; however, additional documentation may be required after award to demonstrate that no double-billing has occurred or will occur.
Conditional (9a):
a. If any of the infrastructure already been installed, paid for, or committed to be paid for, please describe the existing infrastructure and what costs have been incurred or committed.
(write in)
8 999
ATTACHMENT 3
TEAM PROFILE WORKSHEET
FOR THE
MOBILITY PROJECT VOUCHER APPLICATION
CLEAN MOBILITY VOUCHER PILOT PROGRAM
1000
ATTACHMENT 3: TEAM PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2
ATTACHMENT 3. Team Profile Worksheet
This worksheet is a required supplement for applications to Mobility Project funding with the Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program in 2020. Applications will not be processed unless this worksheet is fully completed and included with the application. The Program Administrator may request clarification and additional detail about the team members prior to and after the prospective funding award.
Awardees may need to update their team profile sheet when team members change throughout the duration of the project. Technical Assistance is available to help applicants complete the worksheet. Please see
www.cleanmobilityoptions.org for
contact information.
1. Please list of each organization that is part of the team, with a summary of each organization’s qualifications, and provide contact information for both decision-makers and day-to-day project leads from each organization.
The City of Richmond
The City of Richmond is committed to implementing clean transportation strategies and increasing transportation equity in Richmond’s SB 535 designated Disadvantaged Communities (DAC)
. We are fully aligned with the Clean Mobility
Voucher Pilot Program’s mission to address community residents’ transportation needs, increase residents’ access to key destinations, and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
This project fits perfectly within Richmond’s sustainability, health equity, and racial equity goals. People of color make up 70% of Richmond’s population. Richmond envisions a city where life expectancies are not years lower than those of surrounding communities, where there is equitable access to resources and opportunities. The City’s General Plan 2030, adopted in 2012, included one of the first standalone Community Health and Wellness Element and Energy and Climate Change Element in the State. The City has furthered its leadership in addressing equity and sustainability by adopting a Health in All Policies Ordinance and Strategy and Climate Action Plan. In 2016, the City of Richmond joined the Government Alliance on Racial Equity (GARE) cohort and the City Council adopted Resolution no 93-18 in 2018 in support of systematically applying a racial equity lens in decision-making.
The City of Richmond has a draft Community Engagement Toolkit and draft Racial Equity Plan to guide staff and Community Partners during grant implementation.
Development of the draft plans included extensive community engagement, 2 1001
ATTACHMENT 3: TEAM PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2
feedback and review to ensure the final plans and strategies reflect the goals and aspirations of the community to address equitable access.
The City’s adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP) includes a co-benefits framework aiming to reduce GHG emissions, increase sustainable transportation, and improve community health. The CAP builds on the adopted goals and policies in the City’s General Plan 2030, Health in All Policies Strategy, Bicycle Master Plan, and the Richmond Pedestrian Plan to advance the City’s efforts to build health equity through the reduction of local GHGs, criteria air pollutants, and toxic air contaminants.
All of the city plans included extensive community engagement, feedback, and review to ensure the final plans and strategies reflected the goals and aspirations of the community.
Project Lead (decision-maker): Lori Reese-Brown
(
[email protected])
Project Manager (day-to-day): Denée Evans ([email protected])
Via Transportation, Inc.
Starting in 2012 as a small operator in New York City, Via has built expertise delivering over 70 million rides in dozens of microtransit deployments around the world. The majority of these have been developed in partnership with city governments and public transit agencies. We operate without fixed routes or schedules, resulting in a highly flexible and configurable public transportation solution. We have developed industry-leading passenger aggregation and dynamic vehicle routing software to deliver these rides efficiently, with minimal detours and empty-vehicle time. For example, in Manhattan, public data confirms that Via is two to three times more efficient than Uber and Lyft, and provides more shared rides in Manhattan than Uber and Lyft combined.
In our partnership with the City of Richmond, Via will provide Richmond with a microtransit solution that encompasses software and operations, including vehicles, drivers, and dispatchers. We have developed an efficient launch process for these kinds of services, staffed by Via transit experts who will refine and adapt the process for the specific needs of Richmond. After launch, we will continue to support the City’s transit planning by offering detailed analytics, as well as raw rides data, as a standard component of our product. We believe that transparency around data is important not only for evaluating and improving our services, but to help cities and 3 1002
ATTACHMENT 3: TEAM PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2
transit agencies plan additional -- and potentially complementary -- transportation solutions.
Project Lead (decision-maker): Garrett Brinker (
[email protected])
Project Manager (day-to-day): Mike Flaster ( [email protected])
2. Please describe the overall team structure, including roles and responsibilities of individuals. Explain how the team will work together, and if there is any legal or other formal relationships between the parties outside of this project.
The City of Richmond Lead and Manager will play a key role in shaping the key parameters of the pilot, working closely with Via during the planning and launch phases to determine items like final zone parameters, fares, and specific marketing roadmap. On an ongoing basis, Richmond will receive highly-detailed data about the performance of the service and will be empowered to recommend adjustments or refinements to better meet its goals over time. However, Via will provide most day-to-day operations of the service on Richmond’s behalf, including fleet management, driver onboarding and scheduling, high-touch customer service, and advanced analytics. In conjunction, Richmond will handle marketing, community outreach, and the administration of the voucher.
For the life of the partnership, Via’s team will provide Richmond with analytical, consultative, and technical support.
Garrett Brinker, the Via Project Lead, will act as Richmond’s first point of contact for all questions, concerns, and requests. Her primary responsibilities include:
● Consistent and reliable communication:
organize and lead regular check-ins
with Richmond to review performance and will travel to Richmond regularly for formal reviews and informal workshops.
● Ongoing service monitoring:
monitor and analyze service performance data
on an ongoing basis, providing advice and guidance to Richmond on how to improve service quality and spur ridership growth.
● Technical support:
main point of contact for technical support, working with Via’s technical teams to escalate urgent issues. Richmond will be able to contact its Project Success Lead during working hours; at all other times, an experienced technical manager will be on call and available to Richmond. ● Product updates and bespoke features:
provide notifications and training (if
needed) on new product features, and manage any requests for enhancements specific to Richmond’s service environment. 4 1003
ATTACHMENT 3: TEAM PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2
● Service growth and expansions : coordinate internal Via resources needed to expand service and launch new service zones; Via’s deployment experts will work with Richmond to understand vehicle requirements for increased demand, while our in-house consulting team can help Richmond identify the service areas that are most ripe for expansion.
Mike Flaster, the Via Project Manager, will focus on working with Richmond to deploy a successful service. Mike specializes in planning and scoping new services, especially those with EV fleets. He has led scoping efforts and feasibility studies for Via’s projects in Utah, New Zealand, Los Angeles, and Jersey City. Mike will be directly involved in designing the service, as well as in providing ongoing support throughout the 4-year life of the project.
There are no legal or formal relationships between Richmond and Via.
3. Does the team have an agreement or contract in place with all team members who are providing resources to successfully launch and operate the project? Select one:
☐ Yes
☒ No
Conditional (3a):
a. If no, please describe the resources that still need to be brought on to the team and the plan for doing so.
As Richmond is in need of funds to support this microtransit project, we are only going forward with this project in the event we receive the CMO voucher funding. If we are approved for the voucher program, Richmond will plan to contract the provision of technology and operations to Via.
4. Please provide a list of all organizations who have provided letters of support or letters of commitment to support the project.
5 1004
ATTACHMENT 3: TEAM PROFILE WORKSHEETV.2
● Richmond Friends of Recreation
● Richmond Police Activities League
● Via Transportation
6 1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804 | 510-620-6503 | www.RichmondCAMayor.org Home of Rosie the Riveter WWII Home Front National Historical Park
October 19, 2020
CALSTART, Clean Mobility Options
48 South Chester Avenue
Pasadena, CA 91106
RE: Letter of Commitment to Donate Project-Related Labor, Materials, Technology, Equipment, Energy Costs, and Land towards Richmond’s Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program Proposal
Dear Clean Mobility Options Project Team,
On behalf of the City of Richmond, I am writing to express our support and commitment to Richmond’s Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program (CMO) Proposal. Our proposal will increase access to clean mobility options and uptake of zero-emission vehicles, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and criteria pollutants, and improve air quality and public health. Since the program requires community resource contributions, Richmond is willing to donate the following labor, materials, technology, equipment, energy costs, and land with no expectation of reimbursement.
Labor:
The City of Richmond intends to designate Denée Evans, Transportation Project Manager, as the Project Manager for “Richmond On-Demand.” Her roles and responsibilities will include:
● Managing the project, meeting milestones, and achieving the goals of the CMO ● Overseeing and coordinating the efforts of every team member ● Managing reporting requirements
● Convening community stakeholders to learn about and support the project
As the primary point of contact, Denée has the responsibility and authority for project delivery. Up to 15% of Denée’s time will be allocated to this project.
Materials:
The City of Richmond intends to provide additional community outreach support in excess of the required minimum voucher allotment. This will include:
● Convening community stakeholders to learn about and market the project ● Providing marketing materials and digital and social media support through official channels
Technology and Equipment:
The City of Richmond owns eight charging stations around the city, with six pending installations in the coming months. These public charging stations can be utilized for the charging needs of the Richmond On-Demand vehicles. A list of the current public EV charging inventory is included with the application. 1011
450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804 | 510-620-6503 | www.RichmondCAMayor.org Home of Rosie the Riveter WWII Home Front National Historical Park
Energy Costs:
Currently, all of the energy provided to the publicly owned charging stations is paid for by the city. This will also be true for the plans to install the additional charging station at the city’s Corp Yard. Therefore, 100% of energy costs for this project will be provided by the city.
Land:
One Level 2 charger with two ports will be installed at 6 13th Street, which is the site of the city’s Corp Yard and land that will be provided for the purpose of installing this charging infrastructure.
Through these community resource contributions, we hope to indicate our deep commitment to this project and to better serving the clean mobility needs of our community. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out at 510-620-6503 or
[email protected].
Sincerely,
Mayor Tom Butt
City of Richmond
1012
1013
1014
R I C H M O N D P A L S T A F F
C o r p o r a l L a r r y L e w i s , E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r - P a n d o r a T u r n e r , A s s i s t a n t E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r - J e r r y A n d e r so n , O p e r a t i o n s M a n a g e r - B r a n d o n E v a n s , O u t r e a c h C o o r d i n a t o r - C a r l o s B e l l J r , Y o u t h D e v e l o p m e n t L e a d e r - A b r i a n a M i n o r , R e c e p t i o n i s t - J o h n I s l a n d , B o x i n g I n s t r u c t o r - C o u r t n e y C u m m i n g , O u t r e a c h C o o r d i n a t o r
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
JOHN ZIESENHENNE, PRESIDENT
M. A. HAYS INSURANCE
LT. JOSEPH SCHLEMMER, VICE
PRESIDENT
RICHMOND POLICE DEPT.
JANIE HOLLAND, SECRETARY
CHDNR
SUE HARTMAN, TREASURER
CITY OF RICHMOND
IT DEPARTMENT
MARK AYERS, FIRE CHIEF
CHEVRON RICHMOND REF.
MGR EMERGENCY SERVICES
MIKE BOOKER, LIUETENANT
RICHMOND POLICE DEPT.
ALLWYN BROWN, POLICE CHIEF
RICHMOND POLICE DEPARTMENT
JERRY FEAGLEY
FEAGLEY REALTORS/FMI, INC.
JERROLD HATCHETT
SIMS METAL
Terry Hudson
RICHMOND POLICE DEPT.
RETIRED CHIEF
ART JOHNSON
RICHMOND POLICE DEPT.
CAPTAIN, RETIRED
DONNA NEWTON
CITY OF RICHMOND
BRUCE HARDER, PH.D.
Hedges Consulting
LARRY LEWIS, RPAL
Executive Director
MICHAEL DAVENPORT
DP SECURITIES
BENJAMIN THERRIAULT
RICHMOND POLICE OFFICER
WILLIE MCGEE
MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL RETIRED
GEORGE MILLER
US REPRESENTATIVE
CALIFORNIA 7TH DISTRICT
C.A. ROBERTSON
RICHMOND PAL, RETIRED
Richmond Police Activities League
2200 Macdonald Avenue
234 - 22nd St.
Richmond, CA 94801
Phone: 510 621 1221
Fax: 510 215 8085
www.rpal.org
make ‘RPAL’ your PAL
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS
HONORARY MEMBERS
October 16, 2020
Denée Evans, MA, CPM
City of Richmond
Transporta on Services Division
440 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA 94804
Subject: Lette of Support from Richmond Police Activi s League for the City of Rich- mond’s Clean Mobility Op ons Voucher Pilot Program Proposal
Dear Ms. Evans:
On behalf of Richmond Police Activitie League (RPAL), I am wri n g to express my sup- port for the City of Richmond’s proposal to the California Air Resource Board’s Clean Mobility Op ons Voucher Pilot (CMO) Program. The CMO program will increase access to clean mobility op ons in disadvantaged communi es, reduce greenhouse gas emis- sions (GHG) and criteria pollutants, increase the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, and improve air quality and public health in the State’s most vulnerable communi es.
RPAL is a non-profi organiza on established in 1982 to provide youth with alterna ve to the streets. RPAL provides a myriad of youth development programs and activ es to at-risk, low-income youth ages 10 – 18 years old.
RPAL has been suppor ve of previous mobility initia ves such as providing support dur- ing the City’s annual Na on al Drive Electric Week events. Addi ona lly, the RPAL facility is centrally located within the city and will serve as the city’s fir t mobility informa on hub. We view the CMO program as an opportunity that will provide the infrastructure and support to residents to choose op on s they may not have considered before, re- sul n g in lower greenhouse gas emissions, greater e cienc ies, and lower household costs.
RPAL meet the CMO program’s requirements of a CBO as follows:
An organizati n that is place-based, with an explicit geographic focus that includes the proposed project area. RPAL is based in Richmond and has served the communi- ty of Richmond and proposed project area for over 37 years.
1015
75 percent of RPAL staff members, volunteers, and Board members reside in the community where the project will be located.
The organization has a demonstrated track record of providing support, services, and advocacy in the proposed project area.
The City of Richmond’s project proposal aligns with our work of helping the community gain access to more services and opportunities that enhance their quality of life. Specifically, the proposal will make on-demand electric vehicle services available to Richmond’s most transportation and air quality burdened constituents so they may easily access regional transportation hubs, commute directly to places of employment within Richmond, get to medical appointments, pick up groceries, and go to local parks.
The CMO program presents an opportunity for bolder, more innovative approaches to addressing structural inequalities in transportation for low-income communities. The City of Richmond’s proposal is a step closer to such an approach. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 510-621-1225 or [email protected].
Sincerely,
Larry Lewis, Executive Director
Richmond Police Activities League
1016
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies
DRAFT STRATEGIES
These first and last-mile transportation strategies were devel oped to help people access three primary mobility hubs:
1. Richmond BART Station
2. Richmond Ferry Terminal
3. El Cerrito del Norte BART Station
These tables provide information about the strategies illustrated on th e ac- companying maps. These strategies draw on many relevant plans devel - oped to date by the City of Richmond, Contra Costa County, BART, AC Transit, and others, as well as from stakeholder and community feedback through the study’s Technical Advisory Group, stakeholder interviews , and community meetings.
After compiling and reviewing all potential strategies, some strategie s from the list were removed because the projects have already been completed; as such, some numbers in the list look like they are missing.
Which strategies do you want to see implemented first?
Add your comments to the boards to let us know!
1017
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies
RICHMOND BART DRAFT STRATEGIES
Proj.
#
Location
Category Treatment
Street Extents
R-2 23rd Street Emeric Avenue-
Bissell Avenue
Bicycle
Pedestrian
Streetscape Improvements to improve pedestrian and bicycling access to the station
R-4 Marina Way Marina Way/
Barrett Avenue Pedestrian
Install crosswalk on east leg of intersection (Marina Way/ Barrett Avenue Intersection); Crossing Enhancements: Stripe crosswalk on east leg of Barrett Avenue Intersection Crossing Enhancements. Construct pedestrian-scale lighting on
approaches
R-5 Marina Way S Wright Ave to San
Francisco Bay Trail
Bicycle
Pedestrian
One-way buffered bicycle lanes 5 to 7 feet wide in each di - rection with pedestrian-scale lighting.
Short-term: painted lanes and physical separation between bi - cyclists and vehicles.
Long-term: raised curbs to provide vertical separation.
R-6 Richmond BART
Station N/A Station
Amenities Security cameras, especially for bike parking areas R-10 Richmond BART
Station N/A Wayfinding Install map of bicycle facilities and parking around station in - corporated with transit information
R-11
Barrett Ave,
Nevin Plaza, and
Macdonald Ave
Between Marina
Way and 19th
Street
Wayfinding Wayfinding signs and lighting along local streets and in the transit village
R-13
Richmond BART
Station/Amtrak
Station
N/A Transit
Install indicator sign for Capitol Corridor trains of approach - ing BART trains to streamline transfers, train arrival screens at platforms
R-15 Richmond BART
Station N/A Bicycle Bike station, Class I bike parking, Class II bike parking, addi - tional BikeLink card vending machines or purchasing locations R-16 Richmond BART
Station N/A Bicycle Install bike stair channels at station entrances consistent with BART’s Bicycle Access and Parking Plan
R-18 TBD
Richmond BART
Station to Richmond
Ferry Terminal,
other key Richmond
destinations
Transit Shuttle or BRT service between BART and ferry (possibly au - tonomous vehicle)
R-20 Portola Avenue Pennsylvania Avenue
to Barrett Avenue Bicycle Protected path to the north of Barrett Avenue R-22 19th Street Barrett Ave Bicycle
Create bicycle turn lanes between Barrett and 19th and head towards the station, improving the connections between bicycle boulevards on 18th/19th and on Nevin.
R-23
Intersection of 22nd
Street, Broadway,
and Carlson
Boulevard
N/A
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Wayfinding
Improve crossings at Carlson Boulevard/ Broadway/22nd
Street intersection to connect Greenway. Provide pedestrian/ bicycle actuated signal to allow Greenway users to cross diag - onally across the intersection. Add signage for bicyclists and drivers to navigate the intersection safely.
R-25 Barrett Avenue Marina Way to 19th
Street Pedestrian
Stripe crosswalk on east leg of Barrett Avenue; Provide cross - walk connection to proposed multi-use path to North Richmond and upgrade traffic signal to include pedestrian countdown R-27 Macdonald Ave and
Nevin Ave
Between 4th Street
and Richmond BART
Station
Pedestrian Safe, green, and clean walking and biking route. These are “Branch Routes” in the Yellow Brick Road network.
R-28 16th Street
Between Richmond
Greenway and BART
Station (16th Street)
Bicycle
Pedestrian
Traffic calming, curb extensions, high visibility crosswalks, speed humps, bicycle boulevard (sharrows) per Yellow Brick Road Plan
R-29 Nevin Avenue Richmond BART
Station Land Use Two large underutilized lots east of the BART station provide an opportunity for high intensity, mixed-use development. 1018
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies
FERRY TERMINAL DRAFT STRATEGIES
Proj
#
Location
Category Treatment
Street Extents
F-3 At Ferry Terminal N/A Transit
Marketing
Install real-time arrival information at AC Transit stops to reassure passengers about bus and ferry departures
F-4 Regatta Boulevard
and 23rd Street
23rd Street and
Marina Way Bicycle
Install Class I multi-use paths along Regatta Boulevard and 23rd Street to provide continuous, low-stress bike - way access to the Marina and Ferry area
F-5 I-580 interchange
with Harbor Way
Cutting Blvd and
Wright Ave Bicycle
Install Class II buffered bike lane along Harbour Way
to provide continuous, low-stress bikeway access to BART and Ferry Terminal.
F-6 At Ferry Terminal N/A Bicycle
Install secure bicycle parking (e.g. bike lockers) to pro - vide a secure and easily accessible location for bicycle riders to store their bikes close to their destinations F-7 I-580 interchange
with Harbor Way
Cutting Blvd and
Wright Ave Pedestrian
Install high-visibility pedestrian crossing lights, stop lines, pedestrian-scale lighting to increase visibility and slow vehicle traffic safely. Install striped curb extensions and soft-hit posts at on- and off-ramps.
F-8 Harbour Way At railroad crossing Pedestrian
Install ADA-compliant sidewalk/crossing and pedestri -
an-scale lighting. Add warning lights, gates and traffic signals.
F-9 Hall Ave and Marina
Way N/A Pedestrian
Install crosswalks across Marina Way and Hall Ave on
north side of the intersection and pedestrian-scale light - ing. Consider midblock crossings on Hall and Marina
approaches.
F-10 Hall Ave Marina Way and
Harbour Way Pedestrian Install sidewalks and pedestrian-scale lighting F -11 Ferry Terminal N/A Auto Establish designated passenger loading areas for taxis and TNCs
F-12 Marina Way,
Harbour Way
Ferry Terminal to
Cutting Blvd
Program/Policy
Land Use
Encourage infill development to provide vibrant commu - nity and streetscape.
F-13 Ferry Terminal N/A Auto
Implement point-to-point car sharing to enable access to the Ferry Terminal for people without personal vehicles or live beyond the reach of walking, biking, and taking transit
F-14 N/A N/A Marketing
Provide integrated and consistent wayfinding informa -
tion on potential paths and options, including nearby
destinations
F-15 N/A N/A Auto Facilitate conversations among employers in the Ferry Terminal area to provide shared parking facilities
F-16 Harbour Way South Ferry Terminal to
Hall Ave. Pedestrian
Provide a more comfortable safer walking environment
along Harbour Way South, increase visibility of pedestri - ans crossing, reduce crossing distances
F-18
Harbour Way
South, Cutting Blvd,
Richmond Ave,
Garrard
Ferry Terminal to
Point Richmond and
Richmond Greenway
Pedestrian
Complete streets. Provide a more comfortable walking
and bicycling connection between Point Richmond and
non-vehicular transportation options
F-19 N/A N/A
Transit
Bicycle
Pedestrian
Wayfinding
Provide a more comfortable safer walking environment
along Harbour Way South, increase visibility of pedestri - ans crossing, reduce crossing distances
1019
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies
DEL NORTE BART DRAFT STRATEGIES
Proj
#
Location
Category Treatment
Street Extents
E-1 San Pablo Avenue Richmond Greenway
to Ohlone Greenway
Bicycle
Wayfinding
Signage and wayfinding. Construct bicycle wayfinding to augment new Ohlone-Richmond Greenway connection.
E-5 Cutting Boulevard El Cerrito BART to
Point Richmond
Transit
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Dedicated Transit and Stop Upgrades. Consolidated and
higher-frequency service along Cutting with upgraded
stop amenities (including bicycle parking) at key transfer points, priority bus stop locations and BRT treatments that can be converted into center-running BRT or LRT transit.
E-7 Cutting Boulevard Ohlone Greenway to
Hoffman Boulevard Bicycle
Class II Bike Lanes or more protected bike laneS with
high-visibility markings and reflectors, through the I-80 overpass and San Pablo Avenue. Wayfinding signage at
both ends.
E-8 Barrett Avenue/ Key
Boulevard
44th Street to
Conlon
Bicycle
Pedestrian
Wayfinding
Protected bike lane through the I-80 overpass and San
Pablo Avenue. Wayfinding signage at both ends.
Widen walkway underneath the underpass, and install
pedestrian scale lighting.
Upgrade and widen the pedestrian connection between
44th Street and Barrett Ave to a shared-used path with
landscaping and signage.
E -11 Potrero Avenue Eastshore Avenue to
Carlson Boule-vard
Bicycle
Wayfinding
Class II Bike Lanes. This would connect with one of El
Cerrito’s ATP priority projects to install Class II bike lanes on Potrero Ave from Richmond border to Lexington, pro - viding better access to the Ohlone Greenway.
E-12 San Pablo Avenue Full extent
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Pedestrian-scale lighting consistently applied at regu - lar intervals and at all corners. On-street bicycle parking should also be located at priority bus stop locations
E-14
Key Boulevard,
Clinton Avenue,
Amador Street
Conlon Avenue/
Ohlone Greenway
Access Path to
McBryde Avenue
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Wayfinding
Continuous buffered bicycle lane with high-visibility
markings and protective barriers placed at straight -
aways and intersections with currently generous turning/ curb radii. Continue wayfinding on Richmond side of Key Boulevard to direct people to the Ohlone Greenway.
E-15 Macdonald Avenue Key Boulevard to
Nevin Avenue
Bicycle
Pedestrian
Class II (or more protected) bike lane through the I-80 overpass. Establish bicycle link to the Target bike path west of the highway that provides a connection to the
Richmond Greenway. Wayfinding signage at both ends.
Install pedestrian-scale lighting, especially at the under - pass, and improve sidewalk where needed.
E-23 Cutting Boulevard
and South 45th Street
Kennedy High
School Land Use
Small neighborhood retail center. By changing the zoning requirements, the density could be increased by 15 du/
ac without changing the neighborhood feel. An opportu - nity at this lot could involve retail or office on the ground floor with residential above.
E-24 El Cerrito Del Norte
BART Sta-tion
1 /2-mile from El
Cerrito Del Norte
BART Station
Land Use
Reduce parking stand-ards or provide parking maxi -
mums. By reducing parking standards or providing park - ing maximums for lots within a half mile of transit, it is possible to increase the density of housing, and people living within this buffer would have access to transit as an alternative mode of travel.
1020
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
%
%%
%
%
%
%
% %
R-4
R-27
R-25
R-22
R-23
R-2
R-20
R-18
R-5
R-28
R-6
R-10
R-13
R-15
R-16
R-29
Cutting Blvd
Macdonald Ave
Nevin Ave
Richmond Greenway Trail
Barrett Ave
Portola Ave
7th St
Harbour Way
Marina Way
16th St
Canal Blvd
Carlson Blvd
Rheem Ave
Costa Ave
Roosevelt Ave
Garrard Blvd
Regatta Blvd
Richmond Pkwy
27th St
18th St
San Pablo Ave
Ripley Ave
13th St
23rd St
17th St
Bissell Ave
Hall Ave
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
Richmond BART
Blue Apron
T arget
Home
Depot
Safeway BakeryThe Permanente Medical Group
The Permanente Medical Group
Galaxy Desserts
Richmond First/Last Mile, Task 4 - Richmond BART Station 1.5 Mile Bikeshed Map Transit Hubs
1.5 Mile Bikeshed
BART
Ferry Terminal (future)
Richmond City Limits
Hilltop Mall
Contra Costa College
Key Corridor
Neighborhood
Route
Bikeways
Existing Planned
Intermodal Hub%
BART Station
FAST Station
VINE Station
Golden Gate Transit
Station
Major Employers
Transit
Wayfinding
Parking
Land Use
Bicycle/Pedestrian
Existing Bikeways
Transit Stations
Existing Conditions
%
Project Recommendation
Category
Richmond First/Last Mile, Task 4 - Richmond BART Station 1/2 Mile Walkshed Map Transit Hubs
1/2 Mile Walkshed
BART
Ferry Terminal (future)
Hilltop Mall
Contra Costa College
Richmond City Limits
Intermodal Hub%
0 0.5 1 Miles
Richmond BART Mobility Hub First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategic Plan May 10, 2010
1021
%
%
%
%
!E-5
E-7
E-8
E-1
E-15 E-24
E-14
E-12
E-23
E-11
Carlson Blvd
Carlson Blvd
Cutting Blvd
Key Blvd
Amador St
Richmond St
Ashbury Ave
Roosevelt Ave
Barrett Ave
Regatta Blvd
Moeser Ln
40th St
Potrero Ave
42nd St
Clinton Ave
Blake St
Virginia Ave
Maine Ave
23rd St
Berk Ave
37th St
Manila Ave
Grant Ave
Wall Ave
Donal Ave
Bayview Ave
Sutter Ave
Fresno Ave
Hoffman Blvd
Ells Ln
52nd St
Barrett Ave
Macdonald Ave
30th St
38th St
Fall Ave
46th St
Berk Pl
Panama Ave
Richmond Greenway Trail
Ohlone Greenway Trail
San Pablo Ave
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦80
El Cerrito del Norte BART
Richmond BART
The Home Depot
T arget
Blue Apron
Safeway Bakery
Richmond First/Last Mile, Task 4 - El Cerrito del Norte BART Station 1.5 Mile Bikeshed Map Transit Hubs
1.5 Mile Bikeshed
BART
Ferry Terminal (future)
Richmond City Limits
Hilltop Mall
Contra Costa College
Key Corridor
Neighborhood
Route
Bikeways
Existing Planned
Intermodal Hub%
BART Station
FAST Station
VINE Station
Golden Gate Transit
Station
Major Employers
Transit
Wayfinding
Parking
Land Use
Bicycle/Pedestrian
Existing Bikeways
Transit Stations
Existing Conditions
%
Project Recommendation
Category
Richmond First/Last Mile, Task 4 - El Cerrito del Norte BART Station 1/2 Mile Walkshed Map Transit Hubs
1/2 Mile Walkshed
BART
Ferry Terminal (future)
Hilltop Mall
Contra Costa College
Richmond City Limits
Intermodal Hub%
0 0.5 1 Miles
El Cerrito Del Norte BART Mobility Hub First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategic Plan May 10, 2010
1022
!
!
!
!
!
!
%
%
%
%
% %
F-4
F-4
F-5
F-7
F-8
F-9
F-6
F-10
F-18
F-16
F-11
Richmond Greenway Trail
Cutting Blvd
Macdonald Ave
Ohio Ave
Marina Way
Harbour Way
Harbour Way
Carlson Blvd
Garrard Blvd
23rd St
Castro St
22nd St
Dornan Dr
Marina Bay Pkwy
Richmond Ave
Hall Ave
Regatta Blvd
Brickyard Cove Rd
Wine St
Canal Blvd
Hoffman Blvd
§¨¦580
Ferry Terminal (future)
Richmond BART
Galaxy Desserts
The Permanente Medical Group
Sunpower Corporation Systems
Richmond First/Last Mile, Task 4 - Ferry Terminal 1.5 Mile Bikeshed Map Transit Hubs
1.5 Mile Bikeshed
BART
Ferry Terminal (future)
Richmond City Limits
Hilltop Mall
Contra Costa College
Key Corridor
Neighborhood
Route
Bikeways
Existing Planned
Intermodal Hub%
BART Station
FAST Station
VINE Station
Golden Gate Transit
Station
Major Employers
Transit
Wayfinding
Parking
Land Use
Bicycle/Pedestrian
Existing Bikeways
Transit Stations
Existing Conditions
%
Project Recommendation
Category
Richmond First/Last Mile, Task 4 - Ferry Terminal 1/2 Mile Walkshed Map Transit Hubs
1/2 Mile Walkshed
BART
Ferry Terminal (future)
Hilltop Mall
Contra Costa College
Richmond City Limits
Intermodal Hub%
0 0.5 1 Miles
Ferry Terminal Mobility Hub First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategic Plan May 10, 2010
1023
Strategy Stickers and Notes
1. Develop Local Shuttle
This plan recommends a study to identify a local Richmond shuttle route, sche dule, operating plan, and funding sources.
Potential stops include the Ferry Terminal, Richmond and El Cerrito del N orte BART Stations, and Point Richmond. The study would also consider an autonomous vehicle route. The City of Richmond formerl y offered the Richmond Circular Shuttle, a free service connecting BART stations and employment centers. Buses we re operated by transMetro and funded by the Bay Area Air Quality Mitigation District (BAAQMD) until 2013, when funding w as no longer available.
2. Parking Management Plan
This Plan recommends the City of Richmond develop a Parking Management Plan.
Parking is a way for people to access transit and other modes, but it requires effe ctive parking management to avoid incentivizing driving and adding to congestion and GHG emissions. Wit hout effective management, pricing, and right-sizing the parking supply, the amount of land devoted to parking will expand and inc entivize more people to drive for all trips and purposes. Additionally, the pricing and regulation of parking, if not in tentionally managed, can exacerbate congestion as drivers will devote time to searching for the most convenient and cheapest spa ces available, or undo any TDM policies that aren’t as attractive as free guaranteed parking.
3. Manage Curbside Space at Richmond BART Station and
Ferry Terminal
The City of Richmond should work with BART and the Ferry Terminal to manage the cu rb space for BART and Ferry passengers. As BART and Ferry ridership grows, so does demand for station ar ea parking and curb space as more people are picked-up and dropped-off at stations via shuttles, carpools, taxi s and ride-hail services. These pressures and the rapid growth of ridesharing services is leading to more curb congestion, driv ing the need to manage curb space to maximize access for BART and Ferry passengers and improve the customer experience.
4. Prepare for Autonomous Vehicles
The City of Richmond should prepare for autonomous vehicle technology (AV) b y implementing policies that support safe and successful AV operations. Specifically, the City should pursue three efforts.
1. Provide space for companies to test different types of AV technology
2. Adjust the City’s approach to managing curb-space in street design
3. Adjust the City’s parking regulations and the extent to which these regulati ons provide and/or operate public space for vehicle storage
5. Prioritize the Transportation Demand Management
Program and Commuter Benefits Ordinance
The City of Richmond requires residential and commercial developments to i mplement transportation demand management programs with the goal of reducing single-occupant vehicle trips genera ted by the development. As of this Plan’s publication, there have been no development applications that fall under this requiremen t.
The City also currently has a Commuter Benefits Ordinance (CBO) , which requires employers with 10 or more employees to implement a Commuter Benefits Program (CBP). The City should co nsider increased oversight of the CBO to ensure existing and future businesses are complying with requirements.
6. Provide Guaranteed Carpool Parking
BART offers guaranteed parking for customers who commute to select BART sta tions using the rideshare app, Scoop. The City of Richmond should work with BART to investigate implementing the program a t the Richmond BART Station. Carpooling is the shared use of a car by the driver—usually the owner of the vehicle—and one or more p assengers. When carpooling, people either get a ride or offer a ride to others instead of each driving separately. 7 . Implement Transit Wayfinding Recommendations
The City of Richmond should implement the recommendations from the Transit Enhancement and Wayfinding Plan (WCCTAC, 201 1) to provide enhanced signing for people walking and bicycling to and fr om transit hubs.
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies
REGIONAL DRAFT STRATEGIES
1024
! !!!!! !
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
%
%
%
Richmond Pkwy
Carlson Blvd
Arlington Blvd
Pinole Valley Rd
23rd St
Ohio Ave
Cutting Blvd
Castro St
Giant Rd
3rd St
37th St
2nd St
Richmond St
Market Ave
Parr Blvd
Castro Ranch Rd
Arlington Ave
Atlas Rd
Hilltop Dr
Moeser Ln
Amador St
Blume Dr
Regatta Blvd
Valley View Rd
Garrard Blvd
55th St
Redwood Rd
May Rd
29th St
Giant Hwy
Shawn Dr
Potrero Ave
Ashbury Ave
Church Ln
Barrett Ave
Fitzgerald Dr
Chesley Ave
Manila Ave
Colusa Ave
County Hwy 20
1st St
San Mateo St
13th St
El Portal Dr
Macdonald Ave
Vale Rd
Western Dr
Tara Hills Dr
Wilson Ave
Richmond Pkwy
23rd St
Barrett Ave
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦80
Hilltop Mall
Contra Costa College
El Cerrito Plaza
Pinole Vista
Shopping Center
El Cerrito BART
Richmond BART
El Cerrito del
Norte BART
Richmond Parkway
Transit Center
Transit Hubs
Project Recommendation
Category
Bicycle/Pedestrian
Land Use
Transit
Wayfinding
Parking
BART
Ferry Terminal (future)
Hilltop Mall
Contra Costa College
Richmond City Limits
Intermodal Hub%
Citywide Map First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategic Plan May 10, 2010
0 1 2 Miles
1025
Strategy Example Stickers
On-Street Bikeways
On-street bikeways typically come in the form of bike lanes and pavement markings. Such bicycle infrastucture improves mobility for people who bicycle, and studies have shown that it is correlated with higher rates of bicycle commuting. The type of on-street bicycle facility depends on the existing roadway conditions, including traffic volumes and spe ed.
Off-Street Bikeways
Off-street bikeways create a low-stress environment that encourage s people of all ages and abilities to bike. They attract a larger cross-section of the community, but can be more expensive to build than on-street bikeways.
Bicycle Parking and Storage
Long-term bicycle parking is for people to park their bikes for longer than two hours. Long-term bicycle parking is secured and protected from the elements. Types of bicycle parking and storage include shelters, lockers, stations, racks, and repair stations.
Folding Bicycles
Folding bicycles can provide ultimate flexibility for transit us ers since they can be used for both first and last-mile travel and do not necessarily require special storage facilities on trains, stations or at fin al destinations.
Bicycle Sharing
Bicycle sharing is a member-based service that makes bicycles available to individuals for short, one-way trips. Studies have shown it can ease traffic congestion, reduce automobile use, and increase transi t use.
Currently, Ford GoBike is the only public bicycle sharing system in the Bay Area, but new systems without docks, such as Lime Bike, are expanding.
Electric Bicycles
Electric bicycles provide a more attractive alternative for some users, particularly in hilly areas, and for riders who have difficulty a ccelerating and maintaining higher speeds.
Bicycle Events and Programs
A marketing and educational campaign can promote bicycling as an everyday activity. Campaigns, including Bike to Work Day and regularly occuring commuter events throughout the year, can also educate the public about new and improved bicycle facilities.
Other Ideas...
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies Courtesy of Flickr User Richard Masoner / Cyclelicious
Courtesy of Flickr User dog98209
BICYCLE ACCESS
1026
Strategy Example Stickers
Carpooling & Vanpooling
Carpooling is the shared use of a car by the driver—usually the owner of the vehic le—and one or more passengers. Vanpools typically serve commuters who live and w ork near each other and travel more than 15 miles to work one-way.
Employer-Specific Ridematching
Some employers facilitate ridesharing among their employees. This app roach enables a greater degree of customizability and has proven more attractive to some e mployees, particularly those of large employers who have enough employees to suppor t their own ridematching system.
Ride-Hail Services (Lyft, Uber, etc.)
To be a successful first-/last-mile solution, a ride-hail serv ice needs to find balance in its driver supply and customer demand, coordination with transit agencies, and eff ective marketing. This may be an expensive first/last mile solution for transit ride rs to use on a regular basis.
Conventional Taxi Service
As evidenced by the presence of taxi stands outside of many BART stations, ta xis have been a last-mile solution for decades. Many individuals are not able to afford ro utine taxi rides, and taxis are not always available when desired. Nevertheless, opportuni ties exist to make taxis more appealing, easier to access, and more affordable.
Car Sharing
Car sharing programs allow for 24/7 on-demand access to a share d fleet of vehicles on an as- needed basis. Other benefits include convenient pick-up and d rop-off locations and low hourly rates that incorporate insurance and gas costs. Car sharing services ca n be provided by either a membership-based car sharing organization or a national rental car compa ny.
Personal / Peer-to-Peer Car Sharing
A number of companies are enabling individuals to rent out their cars when not i n use.
Companies provide in-car technology to enable borrowing and provide in surance when the car is being used by other members. Owners have the ability to set their own price and s chedule for their cars.
Autonomous Vehicle (AV) Governing Policies
Governments are currently dealing with the legal definition of A Vs, the necessary safety prerequisites, and the extent to which car occupants may be responsible for t heir operation.
As knowledge becomes more prevalent and mainstream, a more widespread ad option of AV policies may emerge.
AV Curb Management, Land Use, & Parking
Neighborhood and regional transit centers could serve as the nexus betwee n localized, autonomous circulation and the regional mass transit system. Recommend ations will continue to be responsive to changes in the industry as these vehicles make their way onto o ur roads.
Other Ideas...
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies Courtesy of Flickr User Torbakhopper
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCESS
Courtesy of Flickr User IG: cb2017_
Courtesy of Flickr User Torbakhopper
Courtesy of Flickr User Josh Bancroft
Courtesy of Flickr User Luis Tappa
1027
Strategy Example Stickers
Streetscape Improvements
Improve the overall look, feel, and design of the roadway and public realm, including sidewalks, street trees, landscaping, green infrastructure ( such as rainwater drainage), lighting, paving, signage, and street furnitur e (such as benches and tables).
Sidewalks
Improve pedestrian safety and mobility, particularly for those with disabilities. All roadways within ¼ mile to ½ mile of stations/stops should have sidewalks on both sides of the roadway.
Intersection Improvement Tools
Increase pedestrian safety and mobility by improving visibility, slow ing vehicular traffic, and reducing crossing distances for pedestr ians. This is critical on roadways with high traffic volumes and/or speeds. Tools include curb extensions, reduced curb radii, predestrian refuge islands, and curb ramp improvements.
Intersection Crossing Enhancement Tools
Increase pedestrian safety on crosswalks by improving visibility, del aying green lights for turning vehicles, and providing more time and/or shorter distances to people to cross roadways. Tools include raising c rosswalks and pavement markings to heighten driver awareness, longer times for walkers to cross at a signal, and countdown timers for those signals.
Mid-Block Crossing Enhancement Tools
Introduce more crosswalks in the middle of blocks to significant ly shorten pedestrian travel distances and make walking a more attractive choice.
Tools include installing flashing beacons and signs to warn oncom ing drivers and placing “islands” in the middle of the street for pedestrian refuge.
Lighting
Install lighting which is oriented and scaled to pedestrians on sidewalks and crosswalks -- not just vehicles on the street. This will increas e pedestrian visibility for drivers, enhance safety and security, and ultimately creat e a more inviting and appealing walking environment.
Traffic Speed Reduction
Improve safety by decreasing traffic speeds. Tools include r educing the posted speed limit, narrowing the roadway, and reducing the number of vehicle lanes in the street.
Other Ideas...
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies 1028
Strategy Example Stickers
Shuttle Programs
Shuttle services provide point-to-point transportation, or between o ne point and many to fill gaps or make connections with the broader public transi t network, often for specific groups of individuals. Shuttle ser vices typically serve riders in a well-defined area or along a specific route and pr ovide convenient and direct service to desired destinations.
Intermodal Station Improvements
The experience of a rider in a transit station, when transferring, a rriving, or disembarking, can affect the decision to ride transit as much a s the trip itself. If one does not feel comfortable or satisfied in the stop an d station environment, they may decide the transfer or waiting experience makes the entire trip no longer worth it. Therefore, access improvements are key to solving such deficiencies in intermodal stations. Solutions inc lude: accessible and direct paths of travel for riders’ transferring and access needs, sufficient space to ensure the smooth maneuvering of buses, safe and clean elev ators/ escalators, protection from the elements, and convenient locati ons for multimodal pickup, drop-off, and parking. Some of these element s, including those dependent on safety and wayfinding systems, are also indic ative of good practice in urban design for pedestrians.
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies
TRANSIT ACCESS
Other Ideas...
1029
Strategy Example Stickers
Integrated & Interactive Wayfinding Signs
Wayfinding signage helps orient visitors, shoppers, and res idents alike, pointing them to area parking facilities, retail establishments, pedestria n and bicycle access routes, and other important destinations.
Real-Time Transportation Information
Real-time arrival information gives passengers the comfort of knowing exactly when the next bus will arrive. Passengers can look online, on their cell ph ones, or at a digital sign at the station to know exactly how long they have to wait – or they can choose to stay at home or at work a little longer and catch the bus just in the nick of time.
Marketing and Promotion
Marketing is important both to help customers understand their transportation options and to provide customers with a good first impression, as no program w ill succeed if first-time users have a negative experience due to unclear operating instruct ions or inflated expectations.
Transportation Management Association
Transporatation management associations (TMAs) are usuall y formed among employers located close to one another. They are typically staffed by a mobility coordinator who administers and actively markets local transportation demand management pr ograms for the area.
Safe Routes to Schools
A Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program creates plans to encou rage students to walk and bike to school. SRTS works with elementary, middle, and high schools to encourage walking and bicycling to school. The program includes key messages about pedestrian and bicyclist safety, and assessments to identify and resolve physical barriers to walking and biking to school.
Land Use Controls
Land use controls should encourage the integration of transp ortation options for new developments. Policy options include development impact fee s and incentives for riding transit.
Transit-Oriented Development
Transit-oriented development (TOD) policies emphasize the long-term growth and accessibility of the urban and suburban areas surrounding transit hubs and corridors.
Transportation Demand Management
A transportation demand management (TDM) program is designe d to encourage smarter travel options so people can get around more easily without a car. TD M programs may be operated for a single location, a neighborhood, or an entire city.
Parking Management
With centralized parking management, departments work togeth er to establish shared parking goals that make the system work more efficiently. These may inc lude coordinating parking regulations, fees, and permits, and determining the appropri ate quantity of parking needed.
Employer-Based Incentives and Support
All businesses in Richmond with at least ten employees are re quired to offer a commute subsidy, paid transit pass, free employer-operated transit, or an al ternative benefit pre-approved by the City. This ten-employee threshold is much lower than a sim ilar regional measure.
Other Ideas...
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies
MULTIMODAL POLICIES
Courtesy of Flickr User Richard Masoner / Cyclelicious
Courtesy of Flickr User
Richard Masoner /
Cyclelicious
1030
Prioritization Criteria
(What is Being Measured?)
Stickers and Notes
City-Owned Location
A project receives points if it is on City-owned property. This Plan address es access to BART, Caltrans, AC Transit, and other project partners, but it will be led and implemented by the City of Rich mond. A project located directly in City-owned property (including streets) will be easy to imp lement, as the City has authority to make changes to its own streets and properties.
Proximity to Transit Hub
A project receives points if it is in a 5-minute walking distance or 10 minute bi king distance of a Mobility Hub (Richmond BART, El Cerrito del Norte BART, or the future Ferry Terminal).
Funding Opportunities
A project receives points if it is eligible for specific types of funding (e.g., Chevron Modernization Project Environmental and Community Investment Agreement (ECIA)) or if the project ca n be funded in part by a private entity (e.g., a developer) or an active project partner, such as BART.
Transit Ridership
A project receives points if it encourages more people to ride transit. A goa l of this Plan is to get more people to ride transit into, out of, and around Richmond. If a project will directly o r indirectly contribute to more transit riders on BART, AC Transit, and other shuttle services, it will receive poi nts.
Serves Communities of Concern and People in Need
A project receives points if it directly serves a Community of Concern (CoC). T here is a legacy of socially inequitable infrastructure investments in the region’s margin alized communities, including those in the City of Richmond. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has de signated CoC throughout the Bay Area based on a demographic criteria (including income and race). Projects dir ectly connecting and serving these communities would receive points.
Safety
A project receives points if it is located in close proximity to places that ha ve experienced car crashes, particularly car crashes involving people walking and riding their bik es. Preventing fatalities caused by automobiles is a priority in Richmond’s future transportation investme nts.
Existing City Support
A project receives points if it has already been proposed as part of an approve d City Plan. This suggests that the project has already gone through a thorough review process and has been end orsed by City Council.
Existing Public Support
A project receives point if it has received public support. If the project wa s suggested or supported at a recent community meeting (including this one!), it will receive points.
Environment
A project receives points if it reduces greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) an d vehicle-miles travelled (VMT).
Projects that reduce VMT and GHG will improve our air quality and protect our e nvironment.
Any Other Ideas?
Richmond First-Mile/Last-Mile Transportation Strategies
EVALUATING PROJECTS
With so much hard work already going on in communities to revi talize and transform transportation options, the next stra tegic question is:
How will the City of Richmond decide which transportation projects to i mplement next? A series of criteria is proposed to grade projects is listed below. A project would receive points based on how well it meets each cri terion., and the highest-scoring projects will be at the top of the list for immediate prioriziation.
Which criteria do you think are most important to evaluate transpor tation projects? Place a sticker next to the criteria you value most .
Write your questions, comments, and other suggestions for criteria. 1031
Richmond Transportation Hubs and Operators
Richmond Pkwy
Richmond Pkwy
Carlson BlvdCarlson Blvd
Arlington Blvd
Arlington Blvd
Pinole Valley Rd
Pinole Valley Rd
23rd St23rd St
Ohio AveOhio Ave
Cutting BlvdCutting Blvd
Castro StCastro St
34th St34th St
Giant RdGiant Rd
3rd St3rd St
37th St37th St
2nd St
2nd St
Appian W
ay
Appian W
ay
Richmond StRichmond St
Market AveMarket Ave
30th St30th St
Parr BlvdParr Blvd
Castro Ranch Rd
Castro Ranch Rd
Arlington Ave
Arlington Ave
Atlas Rd
Atlas Rd
Hilltop DrHilltop Dr
Moeser Ln
Moeser Ln
Amador StAmador St
Blume Dr
Blume Dr
Regatta BlvdRegatta Blvd
Valley View Rd
Valley View Rd
Garrard BlvdGarrard Blvd
55th St55th St
Redwood Rd
Redwood Rd
May Rd
May Rd
29th St29th St
Giant Hwy
Giant Hwy
Shawn Dr
Shawn Dr
Potrero Ave
Potrero Ave
Ashbury AveAshbury Ave
Church LnChurch Ln
Barrett AveBarrett Ave
Fitzgerald Dr
Fitzgerald Dr
Chesley AveChesley Ave
Manila AveManila Ave
Colusa Ave
Colusa Ave
County Hwy 20
County Hwy 20
1st St
1st St
San Mateo St
San Mateo St
13th St13th St
El Portal DrEl Portal Dr
Macdonald AveMacdonald Ave
Vale RdVale Rd
Western DrWestern Dr
Tara Hills DrTara Hills Dr
Wilson AveWilson Ave
Richmond Pkwy
Richmond Pkwy
23rd St23rd St
Barrett AveBarrett Ave
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦80
%
%
%
Richmond
Station
El Cerrito del
Norte Station
Future Ferry
Terminal
El Cerrito Plaza
Station
Contra Costa
College Transit
Center
Hilltop Mall
Richmond
Parkway
Transit Center
0 1 2 Miles
AC Transit
FAST Transit
WestCAT
Golden Gate Transit
Bay Area Rapid
Transit (BART)
Vallejo Transit
City Boundaries
1032
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | i
Richmond First Mile/Last Mile
Transportation Strategic Plan
Final Report
February 2019
1033
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | i
Acknowledgements
This effort was made possible with the support of a 2016 -17 Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant awarded to the City of Richmond in partnership with the Local Government Commission ( LGC). This study owes much to the participation and dedication of its Technical Advisory Group and Stakeholder Group members, as identified below. Thanks to everyone who contributed time and energy, and to those that shar e the vision of a connected Richmond.
Technical Advisory Group Members
Affiliation Member Name(s)
AC Transit Michael Eshleman, Stephen Newhouse, and Kathryn Vo BART Niki Foletta, Ian Griffiths, Rachel Factor
Caltrans Blesilda Gebreyesus
CCTA Brad Beck
City Manager Bill Lindsay
City Manager’s Office Lori Reese-Brown
EICA Transportation Oversight Committee Eric Anderson and Marena Brown Engineering and Capital Improvements Patrick Phelan
Environmental Manager Adam Lenz
Fire Department Robin Poindexter
IT Director Sue Hartman
Mayor’s Office and RBPAC Sequoia Erasmus
Planning and Building Services Lina Velasco
Police Department Aaron Pomeroy
Richmond Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee and
Bike East Bay
Cynthia Armour and Susie Hustader
Transportation Department Denée Evans
WCCTAC Joe Nemeth and Leah Greenblat
WETA Chad Mason and Taylor Rutsch
Stakeholder Groups
City of Richmond (all departments) East Bay Municipal Utility District Environmental and Community and Investment
Agreement (ECIA) Transportation Oversight Committee
PG&E
Richmond Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee
(RBPAC)
West County Wastewater District
Bike East Bay West Contra Costa Unified School District 1034
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | ii
AC Transit Bayside Council of PTAs
Bay Area Rapid Transit University of California Berkeley Contra Costa Transportation Authority Richmond Neighborhood Coordinating Council West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee Richmond Main Street Initiative Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority Richmond Village-Metro Square Neighborhood Council Bay Area Air Quality Management District Richmond Annex Neighborhood Council Caltrans, District 4 Point Richmond
Port of Richmond Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council
Water Emergency Transportation Authority Belding Woods Neighborhood Council Kaiser Permanente East Bay Disabled People's Recreation Center Healthy Richmond Reentry Success Center
Richmond Senior Center Rubicon Programs
Bay Area Rescue Mission Rich City Rides
Contra Costa Interfaith Supporting Community
Organization
Pogo Park
Community Housing Development Corporation First 5 Contra Costa Neighborhood House of North Richmond Bay Area Rescue Mission San Francisco Estuary Institute Social Security Administration Richmond Chamber of Commerce Rosie the Riveter Trust
Chevron General Chemical
Sims Metal Management Restoration Hardware
Park Plaza R and B Cellars
Assemble Restaurant Auto Warehousing Company
Chevron Galaxy Deserts
Richmond Courtyard Connexsys Engineering
Republic Services Amazon
SunPower BP Lubricants
Nutiva Parker-Hannifin Corporation
Blue Apron Rubicon Bakery
Auto Warehousing Company DiCon Fiberoptics
Colliers International California Oils Corporation
Sims Metal Management SunPower
Courtyard Marriott Food Service Partners
1035
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | iii
Contents
1 Executive Summary .........................................................................................................1-1 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 Bridging the First Mile/Last Mile Gap .............................................................................................. 1-2 Public Engagement ................................................................................................................................ 1-3 2 Methodology ...................................................................................................................2-6 3 Priority Projects ................................................................................................................3-8 Project #1. MacDonald and Nevin Yellow Brick Road Imrpovements ........................................ 3-9 Project #2. Ferry to Bridge Complete Streets ............................................................................... 3-12 Project #3. Barrett Ave and Marina Way Intersection Improvements ..................................... 3-14 Project #4. Marina Way Pedestrian Improvements ..................................................................... 3-16 Project #5. First Mile/Last Mile Shuttle Network .......................................................................... 3-18 Project #6. Prepare for Autonomous Vehicles ............................................................................... 3-22 Project #7. Prioritize the TDM Program and Commuter Benefits Ordinance .......................... 3-26 Project #8. Implement an E-Scooter Permit Program ................................................................... 3-30 Project #9. Implement a Bike Share Program ............................................................................... 3-34 Project #10. Support Paratransit and Senior Mobility Programs ............................................. 3-36 Appendix A Inventory of Modern Practices ..........................................................................3-1 Appendix B Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment .....................................................3-2 Appendix C Community Engagement Summary ..................................................................3-3 Appendix D Complete List of Recommended Projects ..........................................................3-1
1036
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | iv
Table of Figures
Page
Figure 1 This report includes first mile/last mile recommendations for the Richmond BART Station, El Cerrito del Norte BART Station, and the Richmond Ferry Terminal ......... 1-2 Figure 2 Members of the Richmond community provided feedback on first mile/last mile strategy recommendations and evaluation criteria ....................................................... 1-4 Figure 3 Prioritization Criteria ........................................................................................................... 2-6 Figure 4 Yellow Brick Road Vision Network .................................................................................... 3-9 Figure 5 A Bicycled-Pedestrian Path Planned for the Richmond San-Rafael Bridge ............ 3-12 Figure 6 Barrett Ave and Marina Way Crossing Improvements ............................................... 3-14 Figure 7 Barrett Ave Corridor Improvements ................................................................................ 3-16 Figure 8 Example of a Revised Shuttle Network .......................................................................... 3-18 Figure 9 Waymo Vehicle Operating in California’s Bay Area ................................................. 3-22 Figure 10 People Riding E-scooters in a Bike Lane ........................................................................ 3-30 Figure 11 E-Scooter Program Implementation Schedule ............................................................... 3-32 Figure 12 Ford GoBike Bikeshare System in the San Francisco Bay Area ................................ 3-34 Figure 13 R-Transit Paratransit Vans ................................................................................................. 3-36 Figure 14 First Mile/Last Mile Recommended Infrastructure Projects ........................................... 3-1 Figure 15 First Mile/Last Mile Recommended Policy and Program Projects ............................... 3-6
1037
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond
2 BRYANT STREET, SUITE 300 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 415-284-1544 FAX 415-284-1554 www.nelsonnygaard.com
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The City of Richmond has a robust multi modal system of transportation options , including BART and Amtrak regional rail, AC Transit local and express bus services, and a recently launched ferry service to San Francisco. However, the use of public tran sit in Richmond is limited by a lack of effectiv e connections to these services , which are complicated by the c ity’s topography, administrative boundaries, and proximity to major r egional freeways. Residents, workers, and visitors a like experience challeng es in accessing transit when making trips within Ri chmond and to and from regional destinations. As Richmond densifies its downtown areas and seeks to reduce reliance on automobile ownership, infrastructure im provements to enhance mobility options and impr ove connections between Richmond’s neighborhoods an d to the Bay Area region will be critical to achieving the City’s environmental and equity goals .
The Richmond First Mile/ Last Mile Transportation Strategic Plan builds upon recent planning efforts that f ocus on improved transit connectivity , enhanced accessibility, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions . Over the last two decades, t he City has developed many relevant plans and policies , including the South Richmond Tr ansportation Connectivity Plan and the Livable Corridors Form -Based Code, which reflect the City’s commitment to improving multimod al mobility and access to Richmond’s transit network. The 2030 General Plan put forth a number of policies that stress the importance of balancing mo des of travel, supporting pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, and transit accessibility. With a focus on connectivity and a reduction in greenhouse gas reductions, this study is consistent with the City’s 2030 General Plan 2030 and its obligations to develop community -based greenhouse gas reduction programs under the Ch evron Environmental and Community Investment Agreement
The purpose of th is study is to develop a comprehensive strategy for mobility withi n the Richmond community that focuses on development and implementa tion of a first mile/ last mile transportation network at three primary transportation hubs .
1. Richmond BART Station
2. El Cerrito del Norte BART Station
3. Richmond Ferry Terminal
1038
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 1-2
Figure 1 This report includes first mile/last mile recommendations for the Richmond BART Station, El Cerrito del Norte BART Station, and the Richmond Ferry Terminal
This report recommends infrastructure improvements and program s to bridg e the first mile/ last mile gap . These recommendations are designed to leverage funding to reduce greenhou se gas emissions and promote a more effective transit prog ram that will support the City’s vision for a connected and integrated multimodal transportation system that will better serve its communities .
BRIDGING THE FIRST MILE/LAST MILE GAP
First mile/ last mile strategies provide important connections to pu blic transportation . While public transportation agencies may provide services for the bulk of a person’s trip, individuals must complete the first and last leg of their trip to and from a transit station on their own. A first or last mile gap is a barrier that discourages potential riders from using transit because a station cannot be easily accessed from home, work, or other locations. T he ways and means in which someone accesses rail or bus services can determine whether someone chooses to ride trans it or not. Even when the physical distance between a person’s origi n and a transit station is short, the issues of comfort, safety, convenience, and cost al l affect that perso n’s travel choices. All transit rid ers must contend with the first mile / last mile challenge ; the easier it is to access the system, the more likely people are to use it.
Due to its location in the Bay Area and connections with multiple major transportatio n networks, the City of Richmond is well positioned to take adv antage of ongoing innovations in mobility and 1039
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 1-3
develop first mile/ last mile connections that will improve its public realm. The vibrancy of Richmond’s public realm is challenged by auto -oriented street design, poor maintenance of roads, gaps in the sidewalk network, a non -linear street grid, and a hilly topography . First mile/ last mile infrastructure improvements, such as cohesive pedes trian and bicycle networks that are inviting and safe , can encourage people to bike or walk to transit and/ or use non -auto modes for trips that otherwise would have occurred in a car . As a result, providing convenient, affordable, and safe options to access transit can have a wider influence on a community’s quali ty of life, particularly for residents who don’t have access to automobiles and/ or live or work in neighborhoods that are underserved by the public transit system.
No one strategy fully addresses first and last mile gaps. The recommendations in this report are designed to leverage and connect the City’s existing mobility hubs, including the Ri chmond BART Station, Richmond Ferry Terminal, El Cerrito del No rte BART Station; its smaller activity centers, such as Richmond Parkway Transit Center/ Hilltop Mal l, El Cerrito Plaza BART Station, Contra Costa College; as well as the transit -friendly characteristics of the downtown, including the density of intersections, population, and employmen t. Implementing first mile/ last mile solutions is part of building an ecosystem of supportive opti ons, information, and technologies. This ecosystem increases both the accessibility a nd attractiveness of transit, helps build a culture of transit use over time , and foster a high quality of life . As such, best practice is to pursue multiple strategies that increase the number of transit acce ss points and options across communities.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
The Richmond First Mile/ Last Mile Plan engaged comm unity members and stakeholders to explore strategies that could be deployed to improv e access to transit and connectivity across all types of travel. From S pring 2017 through Fall 2018, residents, agencies, transportation service providers, employers, and community -based organizations were engaged in focus meetings, workshops, phone interviews and pop up events. The activities helped document conditions for all travel modes (walking, bicycling, transit, and driv ing) and users (youth, seniors, people with disabilities, residents, diverse groups, visitors, and businesses), helped identi fy shared values and concerns, and helped identify and prioritize strate gies and improveme nts for inclusion in the plan. Principal events and activities are summarized below .
Technical Advisory Group
A Technical Advisory Group (TAG) of approximately 1 8 pa rticipants was established and met three times during the course of the project. The m eetings included representatives from City agencies and departments, the Environmental and Com munity and Investment Agreement (ECIA) Transportation Oversight Committee, r egional transportation planning and transit providers, Richmond Bicycle/ Pedestrian Advisory Com mittee and Bike East Bay, and other stakeholder groups. The meetings provided guidance and feedback regarding existing issues and opportunities and strategy deve lopment. Participants also helped identify key stak eholders, strategies for engaging all segments of the communi ty, and leverage and coordination opportunities with other plans, infrastructure proj ects, and programs.
Focus Groups and Community Workshop
In person stakeholder listening sessions, phone interv iews and a community workshop were conducted during the summer and early fall in 2018 to learn about mobility needs across different 1040
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 1-4
sectors and demographics, challenges that residents and employees of all ages and abilities face getting to and from destinations inside and outside the city, and barriers or gaps in the local transportation network, particularly across differe nt transit systems.
Pop up Events and Open House
Pop up events were held at the Richmond BART station and East Brother Tap R oom on May 10, 2018 near the Richmond Harbor in conjunction with Bike t o Work Day, and at the Richmond Healthy Village Festival on J une 23, 2018 to collect input and preferences for infrastructure improvements and citywide policies, programs and se rvices for enhanced mobility and access to transit. The project team, in partnership with Main Street Initiative, also hosted an Open House at the City’s R -Transit building at the Richmond BART Station on J u ne 7 , 2018 during which stakeholders, community members, transit riders and others weighed in on proposed improvements and potential citywide policies and pr ograms.
Figure 2 Members of the Richmond community provided feedback on first mile/last mile strategy recommendations and evaluation criteria
Source: LGC
ECIA Transportation Oversight Committee
The Richmond Environmental and Community and Investment Agreemen t (ECIA) Transportation Oversight Committee was established to review and help prioritize funding allocations for transit and transportation projects identified in the Chevron Refinery Modernization Project ECIA Community -Based Greenhouse Gas Reduction Progra m. Project 1041
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 1-5
team members met with the Committee in August and N ovember 2018 for input and feedback regarding the evaluation and ranking of proposed pr ojects in terms of importance and feasibility.
1042
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 2-6
2 METHODOLOGY
Understanding the effectiveness of current fi rst mile / last mile strategies requires that an agency take stock of what is currently implemented. To assess the existing conditions of the transportation network , the project team evaluated and documented opportuni ties and barriers related to accessibility and connectivity within th e City of Richmond and a thorough review of relevant planning documents, meetings with key stak eholders, in -person observations, field data collection, and GIS analysis. Existing conditions are documented in Appe n dix A .
Building on the opportunities and challenges identi fied in the existing conditions evaluation, the project team identified a series a first mile/ last mile infrastructure improvements that wo uld improve connectivity to three primary transit hubs: The Richmond BART St ation, the El Cerrito del Norte BART Station, and the Richmond Ferry Term inal. These potential projects were then prioritized based on a set of seven criteria:
1. Serves communities of concern and people in need;
2. Proximity to mobility hub;
3. Funding opportunities;
4. Quality of service investments;
5. Safety;
6. City-owned location; and
7. Environment.
All projects were evaluated using the seven criteria. A project received a certain number of points if it met the prioritization criteria as described in Figure 3. A list of priority p rojects are included in the following chapter. These projects were deeme d to be a priority for the community based on the evaluation criteria and input from the City. Pe r direction from the City, the priority projects that describe services should be prioritized for EC IA funding.
Figure 3 Prioritization Criteria
Prioritization
Criteria
Prioritization Criteria Description
(What is Being Measured?) Point Values
1. Serves
Communities of
Concern and
People in Need
A project receives points if it directly serves a Community of Concern (CoC). There is a legacy of socially inequitable infrastructure investments in the region’s marginalized communities, including those in the City of Richmond. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has
designated CoCs throughout the Bay Area based on a
demographic criteria (including income and race). Projects directly connecting and serving these communities would receive points.
Project is entirely contained
in CoC, runs through (with
a stop,if applicable in) a
CoC or connects directly to
the edge of a CoC = 10 pts
2. Proximity to
Mobility Hub
A project receives points if it is in a 5-minute walking distance or 10-minute biking distance of a Mobility Hub (Richmond BART, El Cerrito del Norte BART, or the future Ferry Terminal).
Walk shed = 10 pts
Bike shed (but outside walk
shed) = 5 pts
Transit shed (5-10 min of
travel time) = 2 pts
1043
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 2-7
Prioritization
Criteria
Prioritization Criteria Description
(What is Being Measured?) Point Values
No travel sheds = 0 pts
3. Funding
Opportunities
A project receives points if it is eligible for the specific types of funding identified in the Chevron Modernization Project Environmental and Community Investment
Agreement (ECIA), under the Easy Go and the
Transportation and Transit services as identified in the ECIA Agreement.
Qualifies for ECIA Funding
= 15 pts
4. Quality of
Service
Investments
Instituting a transit service itself receives the highest number of points (15), followed by the institution of a program or policy targeted to support or incentivize transit use in the community. New infrastructure which creates or improves bicycle and pedestrian links to mobility hubs
receive 5 points, as does infrastructure pertaining to
amenities and improved waiting environments for transit riders.
Service = 15
Program or Policy = 10 pts
Infrastructure (e.g., new
bike/ped links/access
points to hubs) = 5 pts
Amenities (e.g., wayfinding,
amenities) = 5 pts
5. Safety A project receives points if it is located in close proximity to places that have experienced car crashes, particularly car crashes involving people walking and riding their bikes.
Preventing fatalities caused by automobiles is a priority in Richmond’s future transportation investments.
Number of
bicycle/pedestrians crashes
within 500 feet of
point/intersection location
(or directly along corridor
location) over the past 3
years. Each crash receives
one point. Severe Injuries
are doubled in score.
Fatalities are tripled in
score.
Example of a location: 3
crashes (1 no injury, 1
severe injury, 1 fatality) in
the past 3 years = 6 pts
6. City-Owned
Location
A project receives full points if it is on City-owned property because a project located directly in City-owned property (including streets) will be easy to implement, as the City has authority to make changes to its own streets and
properties. If the plan is located on the property of an active project partner (e.g., BART, Caltrans, AC Transit, and other governments), it will receive partial points.
City is owner = 15 pts
Active project partner (aka
other government/public
sector) is owner = 7 pts
Private or inactive owner =
0 pts
7. Environment A project receives points if it reduces greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and vehicle-miles travelled (VMT).
Projects that reduce VMT and GHG will improve our air
quality and protect our environment.
VMT reduction greater than
15% = 10 pts
VMT reduction less than
15% = 5 pts
No VMT reduction = 0
pts
1044
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-8
3 PRIORITY PROJECTS
This study recommends ten priority projects that will help to facilitate easy, safe, and efficient access to Richmond’s transit hubs . The following sections describe each of these pro jects, its proposed treatment or scope, the project need, proj ect integration, cost estimate, and funding opportunities. The infrastructure projects are listed first, follo wed by policy and program recommendations.
The projects include:
1. MacDonald and Nevin Yellow Brick Road Improvemen ts
2. Ferry to Bridge Complete Streets
3. Barrett Ave and Marina Way Intersection Improvement s
4. Marina Way Pedestrian Improvements
5. First Mile/ Last Mile Shuttle Network
6. Prepare for Autonomous Vehicles
7. Prioritize the Transportation Demand Management Pro gram and Commuter Benefits Ordinance
8. Implement an E -Scooter Permit Program
9. Implement a Bike Share Program
10. Support Paratransit and Senior Mobility Programs
1045
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-9
PROJECT #1. MACDONALD AND NEVIN YELLOW BRICK ROAD
IMRPOVEMENTS
The Yellow Brick Road Walkable Neighborhoods Pr oject 1 addresses key community -identified barriers, issues, and opportunities in the community to desig n and implement complete streets improvements along roadways in the Yellow Brick Roa d (YBR) network. These complete streets improvements would be impleme nted in conjunction with rehabilitation of abandoned buildings and properties, code enforcement issues of aggressive dogs and fence lines, and personal security improvements to create safe, pleasant, artful, and walkable roadways in the Iron Triangle Neigh borhood. The routes would connect the key assets in the neighborhood, includi ng local elementary schools, parks, and transit.
The “Branch Routes” are intended to fill in the gaps between the Roots and Trunk Rou tes in the third phase of the Yellow Brick Road Walkable Neighborhoods plan . Key Proposals include complete streets along Nevin Avenue and Macdonald A venue from the Richmond BART station to 4th Street based on the design guidelines developed by the city and consultants in partnership with community organizations.
Figure 4 Yellow Brick Road Vision Network
Source: Yellow Brick Road Iron Triangle Walkable Neighborhoods Plan, page 43
1 http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3162/Yellow-Brick-Road
1046
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-10
Project Need
Improve s connectivity between the YBR and Richmond BART stat ion and public transp ortation.
Provides safe, walkable, bike able routes to over 10,000 residents live within walking distance of the BART station; a third of those are underserved youth and 704 of the households (approximately 2,800 residents) do not h ave access to a car. A shift in mode choice helps reduce GHG emissions and build local resilience to climate change.
Improved walkability and access to public transit h elps lower household expenses, improve air quality for a highly -vulnerable population, and reduces the number of bicycle and pedestrian accidents to residents who can’t aff ord insurance. The Yellow Brick Road Plan describes issues and opp ortunities to improve north -south walkability along the 4 th Street Branch Route, including 1) Uncontrolled Crosswalks:
intersec tions at Barrett Avenue and Nevin Avenue both have uncontrolled and unmarked crosswalks ; 2) Intersection Offset s: At Barrett Avenue, 4th Street is offset which may be difficult to negotiate for pedestrians and bicyclis ts; and 3) Long Blocks: long blocks wi th limited traffic control may increase auto speeds .
Proposed Treatment or Scope
The Yellow Brick Road routes are intended to create “slow streets” that are community focused and incorporate design guidelines developed for these e lements :
Pedestrian and bicycle improvements, including considerations of s afety, comfort, wayfind ing, and crosswalk enhancements
Traffic calming improvements, such as traffic circl es, raised crosswalks, and speed tables Public art, including sculpture, murals, an d painted inters ections/ streets Streetscape amenities and secure places, including street trees, bioswales and landscape plantings, benches, and garbage cans as well as pedestrian -scale street lighting and law enforcement
Improvements where YBR “branch routes” connect with “trunk routes” may include a raised intersection at Nevin Avenue and a r oundabout at the intersection with Macdonald Avenue, assuming lane reduction on Macdonald Avenue , or ladder crosswalks with median refuges and Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRF Bs) across Macdonald .
The planning level plans and design guidelines have been developed and initial phases for the YBR phase 1 “trunk lines” are currently funded and implementation is underway. Also, implementation of a similar complete streets projec t along Nevin Avenue east of BART is complete, and will serve as a proof of concept for future improvements on Nevin Avenue and Macdonald Avenue. However, the branch routes are no t yet funded. The YBR consultant team is selected, and next steps include an existing condit ions surveys and detailed design and engineering.
Project Integration
The Yellow Brick Road is envisioned to be an interc onnected network of safe and secure roadways where children, parents, and all members o f the community can travel safely. 1047
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-11
The Yellow Brick Road streets are intended as impor tant walking routes through the community and, in many cases, this coincides with i mportant bicycle connections. The YBR vision network includes “Branch Routes” which are intended to fill in the gaps bet ween the Roots and Trunk Routes in the third phase of the Yellow Brick Road.
Macdonald Avenue, Nevin Avenue, 6th Street, and Har bour Way have proposed improvements and have been studied in further detai l in the Richmond Bicycle Master Plan, Richmond Pedest rian Plan, and/ or Richmond Livable Corridors. Plans for these roadways include the range of treatments presented in the Design Guidelines section of th e Yellow Brick Road Plan.
Cost Estimate
The YBR includes improvements at two intersections. The cost estimates for these improvements are listed below.
Nevin Ave: $6,000,000
Macdonald Ave: $4,000,000
Funding Opportunities
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)
Chevron Modernization Project Environment and Commu nity Investment Agreement (ECIA) Grant Program
Multiple state agencies are administering grants fo r California Climate Investments (cap and trade dollars). This includes grants for urban greening, stormwa ter, parks, and natural and cultural community resources that help reduce GHG emissions and provide multiple benefits including a decrease in air and water pollution or a reduction in the consumption of natural resources and energy.
Foundation grants for Artwork and Creative Placemaking
1048
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-12
PROJECT #2. FERRY TO BRIDGE COMPLETE STREETS
Multimodal connections between the Richmond Ferry T erminal and the Richmond -San Rafael (RSR) Bridge will make it easier to walk and bike t o and around Richmond. The City has re tained a consulting firm to prepare a conceptual multimodal plan aimed at maximizing activ e transportation connections to and between existing and planned operational investments at the RSR Bridge and the Ferry Terminal. The Plan will provide a framework f or projects aimed at providing safe and attractive multimodal transporta tion options for Richmond residents to connect three counties: Contra Costa, San Francisco , and Marin.
Figure 5 A Bicycled-Pedestrian Path Planned for the Richmond San-Rafael Bridge
Source: HNTB Corp.
Project Need
Enhances connectivity and multimodal transportation options between the existing Bay Trail, the existing Richmond Greenway, the Richmond -San Rafael Bridge, and the Richmond Ferry Terminal.
Enhances Safer Routes to School for Washington and Lincoln Elementary Schools. Enhances multimodal transportation options to parks , open space, and community facilities for the residents of the Disadvantaged I ron Triangle, Atchison Village, and Santa Fe ne ighborhoods.
Improves safety, comfort, and convenience for non -motorized modes and local transit. Reduces the dependence on vehicle travel to Marin ( over the RSR Bridge) and to San Francisco (by promoting the Ferry).
Enhances circulation for both the local community a s well as regional travelers, while enhancing multimodal mobility.
Promotes active living and health.
Emphasizes the Community’s significant historical an d cultural assets by improving access to and from community resources and events w ith alternative, safe, secure, and well integrated multimodal facilities that protect these resources. 1049
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-13
Proposed Treatment or Scope
The product of the Complete Streets Plan will inclu de conceptual alignments for complete street designs. The current planning p rocess includes the following scope tasks:
1. Data Collection
2. Public Participation and Outreach
3. Existing Conditions
4. Draft Plan Components
5. Final Documentation
Project Integration
The current planning effort is scheduled for comple tion in summer 2020.
Cost Estimate
The current planning effort cost is $312,287 , which will also determine implementation costs and funding options for future phases .
Funding Opportunities
Caltrans Sustainable Communities Grant (current fun ding) Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)
Chevron Modernization Project Environment and Commu nity Investment Agreement (ECIA) Grant Program
1050
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-14
PROJECT #3. BARRETT AVE AND MARINA WAY INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS
People need safe and comfortable walking and biking connections to access transit stations. The Draft BART Walk and Bicycle Network Gap Study (in -progress) identifies global and station - specific solutions to facilitate pedestrian and bicyclist mobil ity in and out of BART stations, including improvements at Barrett Avenue and Marina Way to help facilitate access to the Richmond BART Station.
Figure 6 Barrett Ave and Marina Way Crossing Improvements
Project Need
• BART is committed t o increasing the percentage of people who walk and bike to their stations.
• Providing convenient and safe streets and sidewalks will encourage more people to walk and bike. This is particularly important for the st reets and intersections closest to BART stations.
• The Barrett Avenue and Marina Way intersection is t wo blocks from the BART station. • The proposed treatments suggested below can help ma ke this intersection more inviting for people to walk and bike to the BART station.
Proposed Treatment or Scope
W alkin g Tre atm e n ts
− Add a new crosswalk on the east leg of the intersec tion 1051
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-15
− Add high -visibility crosswalks on all intersection approache s − Add advanced stop lines on all legs of the intersec tion Bicycle Tre atm e n ts
− Upgrade bike lane buffer to a concrete b arrier on bike lanes east of intersection − Add green stripes on the west bound protected bike lane where bikes merge with right- turning vehicles
Sign al Tre atm e n ts
− Update signals to accommodate new pedestrian crossi ng on east leg − Add automatic pedestrian recall so that no button press es are necessary to trigger a walk signal
− Increase pedestrian clearance time to ensure people who may be slow can still make it across safely.
− Add Leading Pedestrian Interval to allow pedestrians to go first before cars get the green light.
− Add Accessible Pedestrian Signals that transmit info to visually -impaired ped estrians with audible signals & vibration
− Add b icycle detection to the signal
Project Integration
These recommendations originated from the BART Walk and Bicycle Network Gap Study (in- progress).
Following the Board approval of the Station Access Policy and the voter passage of Measure RR in 2016, BART is seeking to identify way s to make it safer and easier to walk and bike to and from BART stations, to gather stati on access data and information of the area around the station and to recommend global and station -specific solutions to facilitate pedestrian and bicyclist usage in and ou t of stations.
Cost Estimate
The estimated cost for the intersection improvement s range from $90K to $170K, depending on if the City uses contracted labor or City labor. These cost estimate s are planning level estimates .
Funding Opportunities
Metropolitan Transportation Comm ission (MTC)
Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)
Chevron Modernization Project Environment and Commu nity Investment Agreement (ECIA) Grant Program
Multiple state agencies are administering grants fo r California Climate Investments (cap and trade dollars). This includes grants for urban greening, stormwater, parks, and natural and cultural community resources that help reduce GHG emissions and provide multiple benefits including a decrease in air and water pollution or a reduction in the consumpti on of natural resources and energy.
1052
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-16
PROJECT #4. MARINA WAY PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS
People need safe and comfortable walking and biking connections to access transit stations. The Draft BART Walk and Bicycle Network Gap Study (in -progress) identifies globa l and station - specific solutions to facilitate pedestrian and bic yclist mobility in and out of BART stations, including improvements on Barrett Avenue between Marina Way and 19 th Street to help facilitate access to the Richmond BART Station.
Figure 7 Barrett Ave Corridor Improvements
Project Need
• BART is committed to increasing the percentage of p eople who walk and bike to their stations.
• Providing convenient and safe streets and sidewalks will encourage more people to walk and bike. This is particularly important for the st reets and intersections closest to BART stations.
• The Barrett Avenue is a critical connection to the BART station. • The proposed treatments suggested below can help mak e this intersection more inviting for people to walk and bike to the BART station.
Proposed Treatment or Scope
Implement a road diet on Barrett Ave east of 18 th that reduces the number of travel lanes from four to three.
Add high -visibility crosswalks on all approaches at the Barr ett Avenue and 18th Street and 19th Street intersection s
Add advanced stop lines on all legs of the intersec tion s Add yield markings at unsignalized intersections
Add raised concrete islands in place of existing st riped buffers on Barrett Ave Project Integration
These recommendations originated from the BART Walk and Bicycle Network Gap Study (in- progress).
1053
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-17
Following the Board approval of the Station Access Policy and the voter passage of Measure RR in 2016, BART is seeking to identify way s to make it safer and easier to walk and bike to and from BART stations, to gather stati on access data and information of the area around the station and to recommend global and station -specific solutions to facilitate pedestrian and bicyclist usage in and ou t of stations.
Cost Estimate
The estimated cost for this project’s improvements range from $150K -$270 k, depending on if the City uses contracted labor or City labor. These cost estimates are planning level estimates .
Funding Opportunities
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)
Chevron Modernization Project Environment and Commu nity Investment Agreement (ECIA) Grant Program
Multiple state agencies are administering grants fo r California Climate Investments (cap and trade dollars). This includes grants for urban greening, stormwa ter, parks, and natural and cultural community resources that help reduce GHG emissions and provide multiple benefits including a decrease in air and water pollution or a reduction in the consumption of natural resources and energy.
1054
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-18
PROJECT #5. FIRST MILE/LAST MILE SHUTTLE NETWORK
The majority of Richmond is beyond walking distance from BART, the new ferry terminal and, in some areas, AC Transit bus service. T he re -establishment of a first mile/ last mile shuttle network, strategically coordinated with conn ecting modes, can provide more neighborhoods and destinations with easy proximity to connections and destinations.
There are a range of options to explore for re-establishing a shuttle network. A straightforward process of demand analysis, service plannin g, and outreach could lead to an implemented servic e in under a year. Figure 8 provides one of many possible examples to present f or discussion in a planning process to re -establish a shuttle network in Richmond. Such a net work could improve over previous service networks with more direct rou tings, timed connections with selected BART trips and ferries, and new destinations. An optimiz ed network would prove more attrac tive to the customer market, solving the first mile/ last mile problem for a city with many areas quite a long distance from BART, the new ferry, or each other.
This particular example is a 3-route prototype system with three linear routes, serving some of the destinations from a previous local shuttle, but adding new destinations such as the Ferry terminal, Point Richmond , and the North & East Neighborhood. In this example, some neighborhoods on the previous shuttle but also serv ed by AC Transit connection s to BART are no longer served by the shuttle; instead, neighborhood s further from AC Transit routes, such as North and East, and the new destinations are added to the system. The conceptual schedule is adjusted to make specific timed BART connections (alt ernate trains to/ from San Francisco). All data is order -of-magnitude, pending an actual planning process.
Figure 8 Example of a Revised Shuttle Network
Source: Nelson\Nygaard
1055
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-19
Project Need
The project has the potential to reduce VMT, auto o wnership, and parking demand, and increase overall transit mode share and transit rid ership. The current BART ( Richmond + El Cerrito del Norte stations ) ridership is approx imately 12,000 round trips per d ay. A system with similar coverage to the example pro vided could aspire to capture 1,200 round trips per day , as the market matures. This level of ridership would support a potential GHG reduction of 5.7M lbs. of C02/ year .2 This service would also increase the city’s overall transit mode share by +1%.
Proposed Treatment or Scope
Following is a recommended process to develop a service plan , and further details on the example of a possible outcome, shown above.
Planning Process : (10 mos., approx. $100k)
3 m os. Demand Analysis
− Ridership data
− Market Research
− Ongoing Outreach
3 mos. Route/ Schedule Planning
− Stop locations
− Timetables
− Ongoing Outreach
1 mos. Fleet and Infrastructure
− Bus Stop Treatment
− Design/ Branding
− Fleet Selection
3 mos. Procurement of Contrac tor Services
− Staffing
− Maintenance
− Procurement
Implementation
Example of Possible Route Network
The public and staff planning processes would benef it from one or more examples of a potential route network that reflects both previous community concerns and state -of-the -art pr actice. The example mapped in Figure 8 and described below provides the following attribut es:
Not Circular: provides more direct routing
Serves Peak and Reverse Commuters, with one route serving midday Provides scheduled BART and Ferry Connections
2 At 4,800 lbs./year/round trip rider.
1056
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-20
− Meets every other BART trip to/ from San Francisco
New Destination s
− Point Richmond
− North and East Neighborhood (AC Transit gap )
− Ferry Terminal
The follo wing is the route pattern associated with this exam ple:
1. West Route: Richmond BART, Downtown (Harbor/ MacDona ld), Chevron Refinery, Washington/ Park Place (Point Richmond)
− Frequency match every other BART connection to/ from SF (ex. 30 min.) − Span : bi-direction al peaks only
2. North Route: Richmond BART, City Hall, North and Ea st Neighborhood, Casino, Medical Center, Contra Costa College
− Frequency match every other BART connection to/ from SF (ex. 30 min.) − Span : bi-directional peaks, midday, early evening
3. South Ro ute: El Cerrito Del Norte BART, Regatta Blvd. industrial and residential, Ros ie the Riveter, some trips to Ferry Terminal
− Frequency match every other BART connection to/ from SF (ex. 30 min.) , with adjustment for ferry.
− Span : bi-directional peaks and early evening only
Previous Operations 2011 & 2013
The previous operation (J uly 2011) was contracted to TransMETRO Inc . The service consisted of a bi-directional, circular route serving Richmond BART, Downtown , City Hall, the Casino, Medical Center, and Contra Costa College . Typical frequency was every 40 minutes, which is no t a multiple of the BART headway, meaning that there we re no scheduled connections. The span included peak hours and portions of midday, with a service gap from 11:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.
The p revious service also included a linear route servin g El Cerrito del Norte station, Cutting Blvd., and Marina Bay, on a frequency of 25 -30 minutes, during peak hours only.
Additional peak service was provided beginning Augu st 2013, directly targeted to majo r employers, running from Richmond BART to Chevron an d Kaiser Permanente, and from Richmond BART to California Department of Public He alth, Target, and the Childrens Services Center. These two routes ran every 40 -45 minutes each. At that time, the Marina B ay service was reoriented to serve 3200 Regatta Blvd., and reduced to two trips in each direction in each peak.
Project Integration
A shuttle program geared to time d connections with BART and ferries would build on the value added by pedestrian network improvements, and the investments in BART and the ferry operation.
It would also coordinate with AC Transit service pr ovided in Richmond by providing complimentary service that emphasizes origin -destination p airs and service areas not well served by AC Transit.
1057
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-21
Cost Estimate
The shuttle network will generate 9,000 revenue veh icle hour (RVH) per year requiring four vehicles. Based on typical typical privatized costs per RVH, the cost would be about $600,000 an nually.
A dollar cost per revenue vehicle hour (RVH) is not available for the 2011 -2013 service, so RVH are used as a point of cost comparison. The 2011 service consisted of approximately 5,000 RVH per yea r, with 3 vehicles required.
The 2013 changes led to a net increase in annual RVH of approximately 1, 000 RVH, and the vehicle requirement appeared to be plus one veh icle, for a total of 6,000 RVH and 4 vehicles.
Funding Opportunities
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Carl Moyer program (c apital) Chevron Modernization Project Environment and Commu nity Investment Agreement (ECIA) Grant Program
Federal funding through MPO
1058
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-22
PROJECT #6. PREPARE FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES
Located near regional rail and highway networks as well as autonomous vehicle (AV) testing grounds at GoMentum Station, the City of Richmond i s in a unique position to leverage local policies and street design to integrate AV’s into R ichmond’s transportation environment. The emergence of AVs in coming decades creates the oppo rtunit y for improved safety, efficient first mile/ last mile transit connections, and reduced parking demand. There are also challenges to incorporating AV s into the transportation network. AVs can make it easier to use a car, deterring adoption of more sustainab le modes, which may result in increased vehicle mil es travelled (VMT) and congestion. The concept recommends the City of Richmond adopt a comprehensive strategy that creates a convenient multimodal environment, p aired with thoughtful policies and street ne twork design, to overcom e the potential challenges of AV s.
Figure 9 Waymo Vehicle Operating in California’s Bay Area
Source: Kristoffer Tripplaar/Alamy via Wired 3
Project Need
Facilitate pilots to enhance connectivity to region al transit service from residential communities, adding a first mile/ last mile option f or community members.
3 Aarian Marshall. (2018). “Waymo can Finally Bring Truly Driverless Cars to California.” Retrieved from:
https://www.wired.com/story/waymo-self-driving-cars-california/ 1059
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-23
Manage curb space to maximize utility and minimize conflicts between road users. Guide development in a way that prepares for and cr eates con ditions amenable to reduced demand for parking, gaining efficiency in d evelopment patterns that increase more active land uses in need in Richmond.
Partner with other municipalities to weigh in on re gional, state, and federal AV policy to ensure rollout ca n be managed toward Richmond’s goals.
Proposed Treatment or Scope
The City of Richmond could use an AV policy framewo rk and partnerships with AV companies to guide responsible adoption within its jurisdiction. This section identifies priority steps in anticipation of AVs in Richmond, including policies , pilots, and partnerships.
Ensure AV goals match overall mobility goals
Before taking action on AV preparation, the City sh ould first identify what it hopes to achieve through their use. Rather than considering AVs as a new and separate part of the transportation system, Richmond’s existing multimod al access and safety goals should guide its approach to AVs.
Hosting AV Technology Pilots
Refer to the State of California’s regulations for Testing of Autonom ous Vehicles by Manufacturers. 4 These regulations include requirements for AVs with and without drivers present and eligible uses of public roads, among ot hers. Strategic partnerships between the City of Richmond and AV companies provide an opportunity for AV technology to be tested in real -life conditions while providing the City an opportunity to observe what policy decisions are needed for the future of AVs. These partnerships, however, must be approached with clea r intention, tied to the City’s goals, and attention to the State’s requirements for the te sting of AVs. The partner(s) must obtain a testing permit from the State of Californi a.
The City of Richmond should provide space for compa nies to test different types of AV technology that considers the f ollowing:
− Focus should be on low -speed testing within areas where modal conflicts ar e limited.
Recent pilots have revealed challenges in AVs proce ssing of bicycle facilities or other less -used traffic control tools such as mid -block crossings. − Given Richmond’s proximity to regional rail service , a first mile / last mile pilot could showcase how AV technology can help facilitate effi cient connections from residential areas to high quality transit facilities.
Curb Management
Observed use patterns of ride -hailin g services (such as Lyft or Uber) provide insights into future curb access and management issues. Currently , curb space is in demand for multiple purposes – primarily for auto parking, but also for loading an d bicycle facilities, parking, and bus stops. Current competition for cur b space has raised awareness of the
4 https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/testing 1060
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-24
need to proactively manage curb access, both for pa rking and other uses. Demand for both passenger and package delivery at the curb is growing in urban areas, and that pace is expected to grow wi th AVs.
The City of Richmond should develop a consistent ap proach to managing curb space, particularly within any AV testing zone or corridor , that includes:
− An approach for anticipating passenger loading and unloading behaviors to minimize conflicts in ar eas where curb space is allocated for transit or bi cycles. − Consideration for how freight/ commercial delivery n eeds will be managed in a future with competing curb space demands.
− A context -sensitive approach to manage curb space to meet the needs of surroun ding land uses.
− A shift in prioritization of curb space from use fo r parking to active loading and unloading activity.
Rethinking Parking
A shared ownership model for AVs could result in si gnificantly lower parking demand over time. Even a private ownershi p AV model could create more efficient parking behaviors than today.
To anticipate this trend and avoid overbuilding fut ure parking supply in Richmond, the City should revise parking standards to:
− Eliminate parking minimums and implement parking ma ximums to reduce incentives for private vehicle ownership provided b y free parking. − Where parking supply is needed, utilize a shared par king approach across different uses to avoid underutilized spaces.
− “Future proof” parking systems by requiring designs that accommodate future conversion to other active land uses if parking dem and decreases over time. − Reduce the availability of parking around major tra nsit stations in favor of passenger pick -up and drop -off facilities.
− Consider adopting TransForm’s GreenTRIP cer tification, allowing developers of new developments to provide discounted transit passes f or reduced parking requirements. 5
Project Integration
AVs are just one of many options for providing comm unity members access to high capacity transit, and will not offer meaningful solutions without thoughtful plann ing by cities.
The City of Richmond will be able to learn from other cities in the Bay Area, such as Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Palo Alto, where AVs are being tested. These communities are de facto tes ting grounds due to neighboring AV companies. By co ntrast, a partnership with Richmond would be more intention al, offered to a significantly
5 TransForm CA. (2017). “GreenTRIP Traffic Reduction Strategies Discount Transit Passes.” Retrieved from:
http://www.transformca.org/sites/default/files/TransitAgencySheet_2017-06-20.pdf 1061
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-25
different socioeconomic community, and could levera ge a BART access component, in service of advancing both AV technology and its rol e in different community types.
Cost Estimate
The cost to conduct the below tasks is estimated to range from $100,000 to $150,000:
Conduct a comprehensive review of curb management a nd parking practices Develop a Curb Management Plan for the City of Richmond Provide recommendations for updating parking practi ces in Richmond Develop an AV testing implementation plan, includin g proposed zones or corridors and a monitoring and evaluation plan
Funding Opportunities
The U.S. Department of Tra nsportation Automated Driving System Demonstration Grant Program makes $60 million available to public entit ies for AV demonstration projects.
Applications are due March 21, 2019.
The Chevron Modernization Project Environment and C ommunity Investment Agreement (ECIA) Grant Program provides $90 million to the City of Richmond over a 10-year period (beginning J uly 2014) for efforts that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
An AV pilot focused on transit access could be desi gned with this goal in mind. 1062
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-26
PROJECT #7. PRIORITIZE THE TDM PROGRAM AND
COMMUTER BENEFITS ORDINANCE
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is a
general term for strategies that encourage a shift from single- occupant vehicle (SOV) trips to non -SOV
modes, or shifting trips out of peak commute p eriods.
TDM seeks to reduce auto trips by increasing travel
options, providing incentives and information to
encourage and help individuals modify their travel
behavior. TDM strategies include, but are not limit ed
to, employee provided transit passes, ride share
incentives, employer -run shuttles, and flexible
schedule options.
In an effort to reduce SOV trips, the City of Richm ond adopted a TDM ordinance 6 and a Commuter Benefits
Ordinance 7, which requires employers to monitor how
their employees travel to a nd from work.
Commuter Benefits Program
Richmond’s Commuter Benefits Program applies to pri vate businesses, public agencies, and non - profit organizations who employ 10 or more full tim e employees. Participating companies submit quarterly progress report s, as well as annual reports. Compliance is met by meeting the following three requirements. 8
Provide employees with one of the following commute r benefit options:
− Provide employees with a pre -tax commuter reimbursement − Supply a pass or reimbursement equivalent to a vanp ool rental − Offer an employer -run transportation option (e.g. multi -passenger van) − Offer an alternative commuter benefit approved by t he City of Richmond Hire a commuter benefits coordinator
Make commuter benefits available to all employees
Project Need
Evaluate the administration and compliance of Richmo nd’s Commuter Benefits Program. Upon better unde rstanding, City staff will be able to make thoughtf ul adjustments, which overtime, will more effectively meet the City’s SOV and emission reduction goals. 9
6 City of Richmond City of Richmond. Chapter 11.92 Transportation Systems Management. Retrieved from https://library.municode.com/ca/richmond/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=ARTXIPUSAWE_CH11.92TRSYMA 7 City of Richmond. Chapter 9.62. Commuter Benefits Compliance Guide. Retrieved from http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/29957/cbo_guide?bidId 8 Ibid.
9 City of Richmond (2016). Climate Action Plan. Retrieved from https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/40636/CAP-combined?bidId= Source: City of Richmond,
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3119/Commuter
-Benefits-Ordinance
1063
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-27
Proposed Treatment or Scope
The following tasks aim to help evaluate the existi ng program; City staff should complete all tasks internally.
Task 0: Hire a Transportation Coordinator (Optional)
The City of Richmond can either directly administer or participate in the coordination of a more robust and varied commuter program by onboarding a dedicated ci ty employee to monitor the program.
The Transportation Coordinator would be responsible for managing the Commuter Benefits Program, which would include the deployment of Task 1 and 2. Additionally, the role would require liaising between developers, emplo yers, city staff, and city council, and would requi re coordination with external partners to solicit additional program support (e.g. the d evelopment of a dedicated transportation web page and infrastruct ure planning and construction ).
Sh o rt-te rm (1-3 ye ars ) : Depending on market trends, this position will likely cost approximately $ 65,000 - $100,000 annually in salary and benefits.
Task 1: Assess Employers’ Commuter Benefit Programs
Conduct interviews with participating employers to capture the successe s and challenges of administrating Richmond’s Commuter Benefits Program .
Sam ple in te rvie w qu e s tio n s :
• How effective is the com pany’ s Com m uter Benefits Pr ogram ? • How do you prom ote the Com m uter Benefits Program ? • How can city staff provide m ore program m ati c support? Task 2: Assess Current Sites’ Commute Mode Split and Preferred Commute Choices
Evaluate employees’ existing commute choices via an employee survey. The employee survey will help identify current travel patterns and create a program that better suits employees’ transportation needs. (Sam ple survey provided in Appendix A .) Task 3: On-Going Program Support and Evaluation
Following the completion of Task 1 and 2, City staf f (led by the Transportation Coordinator) will be responsible for working with on -site commuter coordinators to complete quarterly an d annual reporting requirements. City staff will complete a publicly ava ilable annual evaluation that details employers’ compliance and program performance.
Sample Employee Survey
H o w far do yo u trave l fo r w o rk? (On e -w ay)
o Less than 5 miles
o Between 5 and 25 miles
o 25 miles or more
W h at tim e did yo u arrive to w o rk TODAY?
1064
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-28
o Befor e 6 A.M.
o 6:00 A.M. – 6:59 A.M.
o 7:00 A.M. – 7:59 A.M.
o 8:00 A.M. – 8:59 A.M.
o 9:00 A.M. or Later
W h at tim e did yo u le ave w o rk TODAY?
o Before 3 P.M.
o 3:00 P.M. – 3:59 P.M.
o 4:00 P.M. – 4:59 P.M.
o 5:00 P.M. – 5:59 P.M.
o 6:00 P.M. – 6:59 P.M.
o 7:00 P.M. or Later
Typically, h o w do yo u co m m u te to w o rk? If yo u take m o re th an o n e m o de , s e le ct th e m o de th at yo u take fo r th e lo n ge s t le g o f yo u r trip. o Drive- alone
o Carpool
o Lyft, Uber, Taxi
o Public Transportation
o Private Commuter Shuttle
o Bike or Walk
o Vanpool
o Work from home
o Other
Do yo u participate in th e Co m m u te r Be n e fits Pro gram ? o Yes
o No
If Ye s , w h at co m m ute r be n e fits do yo u us e ? o Rideshare and Ridematching
o Employer -operated shuttle
o Transit subsidy / voucher
o Parking cash out benefit
o Flexible scheduling
o Guaranteed Ride Home
o Other: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _
Project Integration
This effort will improve the City’s existing TDM an d Commuter Benefits Program by holding both city staff and employers more accounta ble to the program’s reporting and monitoring requirements.
A more robust program will illuminate how employees are currently traveling to and from work, and inform city staff on how to prioritize fu ture capital and programmatic investments for non -drivin g modes – biking, walking, and taking transit. A city’s TDM and Commuter Benefits Program is only successful when efforts to reduce single- occupancy vehicles are introduced to the transporta tion network. This includes exploring AV technology and first mil e/ last mile shuttle services. 1065
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-29
Cost Estimate
In the immediate term, the City of Richmond can create one full -time equivalent (FTE) Transportation Coordinator position. Depending on m arket trends, this position will likely cost approximately $ 65,000 - $100, 000 annually in salary and benefits. Annual tasks include the abovementioned tasks:
• Task 1: Assess Employers’ Commuter Benefits Program
• Task 2: Assess Current Sites’ Commute Mode Split an d Preferred Commute Choices • Task 3: On -Going Program Support and E valuation
Funding Sources
• Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Transportation Fund for Clean Air Grant (TFCA) Regional Fund
1066
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-30
PROJECT #8. IMPLEMENT AN E-SCOOTER PERMIT PROGRAM
Electric scooter share (e -scooter) systems are services that provide electric -powered scooters for short -term rentals, usually through the use of an app and without docking locations. Inviting e - scooter systems to Richmond will provide first mile / last mile connections between transit stops and people’s ultimate destinations, expanding the s cope of existing public transportation systems.
Early studies 10 suggest e -scooters have a low -barrier to entry compared to bicycles and have a fa st uptake rate once put in to a city. This early research also suggests that e -scooters may be viewed favorably and enjoy a higher adoption rate among wo men and low -income populations.
Richmond can encourage access to e -scooters by establishing an e -scooter policy and permit program that allow private companies to operate in Richmond and outlines specific rules around e-scooter riding, parking, data -sharing, and other mutual expectations. The develop ment of this policy and programmatic approach can be developed i teratively by starting with a pilot designed to evaluate success and adjust program rules before full deployment.
Figure 10 People Riding E-scooters in a Bike Lane
Source: Nelson\Nygaard
Project Need
Expand the reach of public transit through providin g a first mile/ last mile travel mode, especially for areas slightly too far to walk from transit stops Increase connectivity between areas not easily trav elable using transit, especially trips that are approximately 0.5 to 2 miles
10 2018. Measuring Equitable Access to New Mobility: A Case Study of Shared Bikes and Electric Scooters. Populus.
Available for download at https://www.populus.ai/research. 1067
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-31
Improve environmental health through replacing shor ter commutes previously taken with private vehicles or ride -hailing with e -scooters Enhance mobility options for disadvantaged communit ies, particularly those who cannot bike, do not own a bike, or cannot afford a private vehicle or ride -hailing Proposed Treatment or Scope
When designing an e -scooter policy, the City of Richmond should conside r the following components. 11 Program rule s can be developed iteratively by starting with a p ilot program and testing each rule’s feasibility to deliver good cus tomer service, encourage private operator to continue operations, and uphold the city’s mobility goals.
1. Riding, parking, and service area s
a. Riding on streets, bike lanes, and/ or sidewalks. Fo r the safety of pedestrians and e - scooter users, sidewalk riding is not recommended. California Assembly Bill 2989 establishes statewide requirements regarding eligib le streets for e -scooter use, which limits use to low -speed streets or streets with designated Class II o r Class IV bikeways. 12
b. Parking in designated areas, curb strips, converted vehicle -parking spaces. Parking rules should be simple enough to be complied with a nd enforced. c. Considerations of service area boundaries, such as city boundaries, as well as mandating or incentivizing service in certain zones , such as low -income neighborhoods with low transit access.
d. How to clearly communicate these rules both to oper ators as well as to customers.
2. Maintenance, safety, and accessibility
a. Setting minimum requirements for charging and maint enance of e -scooters b. Incentives for providing more accessible vehicles, such as three -wheelers or scooters with seats
3. Fees and limits on companies
a. Charging fees to each private company, either per scooter or per trip, to cover cost of implementing, maintaining, and enforcing e -scooter program, or to fund the improvement of on -street infrastructure
b. Limits on number of e -scooters for each neighborhood, company, or city -wide depending on demand. Many cities have established d ynamic caps, in which operators are allowed to deploy more e -scooters as certain minimum performance thresholds are met.
4. Data collection and sharing
a. Mandated data -sharing with regards to trips, fleet, customer sati sfaction, parking, operations and maintenance, and safety
11 Components adapted from: 2018. Remix Mobility Brief: Micromobility Policy Survey. Remix. Available for download at https://blog.remix.com/mobility-brief-3-micromobility-policy-survey-f4a9868cb98d. 12 California Assembly Bill No. 2989, Chapter 552: An Act to Amend Section 21235 of the Vehicle Code, related to vehicles. Approved by Governor September 19, 2018. Available online at https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB2989. 1068
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-32
b. Considerations of real -time versus static data, delivered through an API ( application program interface) or regularly scheduled data tran sfers. Richmond should assess its capabilities to access and leverage real -time access to data before requiring it. c. Public engagement and outreach, as well as surveys conducted regularly In addition to putting in place the above policy, t he City of Richmond can set up an application and evaluation proce ss for a pilot of the program, selecting one or a f ew e-scooter companies to apply and operate in certain service areas with a l ower limit on the number of e -scooters. The City can then edit the policy and requirements based on the results of the pilot and initial data collected. Once the pilot shows success, more compa nies can apply to bring their services to Richmond in larger numbers.
Figure 11 E- Scooter Program Implementation Schedule
1-Year Process: 4-Month Phases Phase 1: Define Phase 2: Pilot Phase 3: Permanence Project Management
Background Review & Public Outreach
Policy & Program Design
Pilot Launch
Data Collection & Reporting
Permanent Program Launch
Project Integration
Richmond Bicycle Master Plan – In 2011, the City of Richmond adopted a Bicycle Mas ter Plan that includes goals of expanding the city’s bi ke routes and parking facilities and making streets safer for bicyclists both day and ni ght. A safe, comfortable bike network supports the success of scooters, since e -scooters will likely use the same routes. E - scooter parking areas can also be tied to existing bike parking or bike -share facilities. E-scooter programs in the region – Other cities in the Bay Area, like San Francisco an d Oakland, are running their own pilot programs for e -scooters, and Berkeley launched its application process in J anuary 2019. Since many peo ple commute across city boundaries, providing similar services for both sides of a publ ic transit trip can boost mobility for the whole region.
Cost Estimate
The estimated cost to implement this program is $250,000. This c ost estimate is based on costs reported by the City of Oakland. 13 The cost includes:
$225,000 for hiring staff to manage day -to-day operations, outreach, enforcemen t, and implementation.
$25,000 for funding to boost software and data management capab ilities in order to more effectively monitor the program.
13 2018. Remix Mobility Brief: Micromobility Policy Survey. Remix. Available for download at https://blog.remix.com/mobility-brief-3-micromobility-policy-survey-f4a9868cb98d. 1069
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-33
Funding Opportunities
Chevron Modernization Project Environment and Commu nity Investment Agreement (ECIA) Gran t Program
Fees on private e -scooter companies to operate in the city per number of scooters, trips, or other measure
1070
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-34
PROJECT #9. IMPLEMENT A BIKE SHARE PROGRAM
Bikeshare is a service that provides bicycles for s hort -term use for a fee. A bikeshare program in Richmond will expand mobility options, improve publ ic health, and support community growth.
Residents and visitors can also use the service to complete their first mile or last mile trip to transit stations, especially when bicycles are plac ed near public transit stops and residential and commercial zones. Integrating the system with Clipp er cards and providing opportunities for subsidized memberships will bri ng more users into the system, encouraging people t o use more active and less polluting forms of transportation, and increase transportation equtiy by providing a local, local cost mobility option.
Figure 12 Ford GoBike Bikeshare System in the San Francisco Bay Area
Source: Paul Wasneski on flickr (public domain)
Project Need
Enhance access to the five public transit systems t hat operate to and from Richmond, as well as over 20 systems in the Bay Area, by providi ng a new mode to get from transit stops to farther destinations.
Expand mobility options for residents and workers i n Richmond, especially low -income residents with the provision of subsidized membershi ps. Improve public health through increased physical ac tivity and redu ced emissions.
Proposed Treatment or Scope
The City is currently pursuing a bikeshare system w ith the following steps:
1071
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-35
1. RFP posted and c onsultants interviewed in December 2018
2. One firm will be selected and notified in J an uary 2019
3. Contract will be executed in the first q uar ter of 2019
4. Richmond is proposing over 144 bikes with more the six stations throughout the City
5. Proposed locations include City Hall, Richmond BART , Richmond Ferry , and more
6. Service to commence by s ummer 2019
Project Integration
Metropol itan Transportation Commission (MTC) Bike Share Cap ital Program – In 2017, MTC approved funding for the City of Richmond to es tablish the first phase of a bikeshare system with six stations and 144 bikes.
Richmond Bicycle Master Plan (BMP) – This project aligns with the BMP’s goals to expand the City’s bicycle network, and to increase the number of people of all ages and background who bike for transportation, recreation, and health.
Cost Estimate
The estimated cost to implement a bikeshare program is $2,7 70,000. This cost includes:
Project management and partner coordination: $225,0 00 Background review and existing conditions: $10,000
System development, procurement, and design: $310,0 00 Operations and maintenance: $2,180,000
Monitoring and reporting: $45, 000
Funding Opportunities
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Bike S hare Capital Program Chevron Modernization Project Environment and Commu nity Investment Agreement (ECIA) Grant Program
Sponsorship and partnership with other major employ ers in the area 1072
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-36
PROJECT #10. SUPPORT PARATRANSIT AND SENIOR MOBILITY
PROGRAMS
The City of Richmond should work to ensure the viab ility and sustainability of R-Transit , the City’s paratransit service, while finding ways to meet the mobility needs of th e elderly and disabled community. Currently it costs R -transit $107 to provide one paratransit trip, these costs are almost double that of comparable city -based paratransit programs. In addition to the hi gh cost of service, service gaps are leading to high r ates of service denials in the unincorporated parts of the service area. The inability of the City to c ontrol the costs of paratransit service threatens t he mobility of seniors in Richmond and West Cont ra Costa County. R -transit would benefit from a top to bottom review to address the inefficiency and gaps in serv ice coverage. This review should explore the coordination of service with neighborin g transit systems, as well as administrative changes that c an bring about the reforms needed to control costs and improve service.
Figure 13 R- Transit Paratransit Vans
Source: City of Richmond
Project Need
Increase s the productivity of paratransit service and improve the q uality of serv ice for residents with in the service area.
Addresses the current paratransit program’s inefficiency and inability to meet the transportation needs of the community .
Paratransit service is critical for elderly and disabled residents to a ccess community resources.
1073
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-37
Proposed Treatment or Scope
The City of Richmond should undertake a Comprehensive Service and Unmet Needs Analysis of the R -Transit. This study should include an independent a nalysis of R -transit’s operations to identify ways to impro ve service and an intensive customer survey to dete rmine the unmet needs of the community. The City should then develop a se rvice development plan to address the issues identified in the service and unmet needs analysis . The City would implement these chan ges u sing the best practices and strategies identified in the plan.
Planning
Comprehensive Service and Unmet Needs Analysis
− A complete analysis of the existing service focused on system performance and service delivery.
− Conduct outreach to seniors and dis abled persons to determine unmet community needs and gaps in service.
Service Development Plan
− Use the service and unmet need s analysis to d evelop short , medium , and long -range plan s for R -Transit to address the issues of productivity and v iability of the service. − Focus on developing a model for paratransit service that best meet s the needs of the City of Richmond and West Contra Costa County.
Implementation
Implement recommendations in the Service Developmen t Plan in coordination with the senior and disab led communities and stakeholders to include West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC), Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA), East Bay Paratransit and WestCAT .
Timeline
The timeline for the proposed study, planning, and implementation would be between 6 - 12 months.
Project Integration
In 2008, the City of Richmond conducted an audit of paratransit services that included recommendations for improv ing service. The audit r ecommended the City privatize service; establish new a dministrative policies and procedures for R -Transit and move the program to the rec reation department.
In 2018 , the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee conducted the West County Needs Assessment Study of Measure J Programs for seniors and persons with disabilities . That study identified some of the challenges of R -transit and provided potential solutions, including better coordination with neighboring city based paratransit services and reassignment of the service area. Thes e studies should be the foundation upon which future studies are built.
1074
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond, CA
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3-38
Cost Estimate
The estimated cost for the Comprehensive Service and Unmet Needs Analysis , Service Development Plan, and Implementation Plan is $35,000 to $40,00 0.
Funding Opportunities
Contra Costa T ransportation Authority Measure J Sales Tax Revenue Federal Transportaion Adminstration 5310 Grant Program (Capital and Mobility Management)
1075
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
APPENDICES
1076
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
Appendix A Inventory of Modern
Practices
1077
116 NEW MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 500 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 415-284-1544 FAX 415-284-1554 www.nelsonnygaard.com
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE
TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
INVENTORY OF BEST MULTIMODAL PRACTICES
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Pedestrian Access ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Bicycle Access ............................................................................................................................................. 2 Bikeways and Bicycle Parking ........................................................................................................... 2 Folding Bikes ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Bicycle Sharing ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Transit Access .............................................................................................................................................. 3 Shuttles ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Intermodal Station Improvements...................................................................................................... 3 Motor Vehicle Access ................................................................................................................................ 4 Carpooling............................................................................................................................................. 4 Short-Distance Vanpools ..................................................................................................................... 4 Ride-Hailing Services ........................................................................................................................... 4 Taxis ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Car Sharing ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Autonomous Vehicles ............................................................................................................................ 5 Multimodal Policies and Programs ......................................................................................................... 6 Integrated and Interactive Wayfinding .......................................................................................... 6 Real-Time Information ......................................................................................................................... 6 Marketing and Promotion ................................................................................................................... 6 Transportation Management Association ........................................................................................ 6 Safe Routes to School .......................................................................................................................... 7 Land Use Controls to Promote Walkable and Mixed-Use Environments .................................. 7 Transportation Demand Management ............................................................................................. 7 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................... 9
INTRODUCTION
This memo provides a description of approaches to address last -mile access to and from transit stations, including illustrative examples of projects and programs from North Americ a and Europe. Although commonly referred to as “last -mile solutions, ” the access tools described here address a broader r ange of access needs, including pedestrian access within the more immediate vicinit y (a five to 10 -minute walk) of stations, as well as bicycle, shuttle , or other vehicle access to locations a half -mile a way or farther. It also includes a description and peer examples of supportive programs that combine inform ation, education, marketing, and incentives to leve rage capital and operational investments to further incr ease transit use.
Each section of this do cument provides an overview of “ last -mile ” tools used in other communities that are relevant to Richmond due to a variety of shared characteristics (including urban geography, social demographics, public -private partnerships, and transportation infrastru cture) . The memo concludes with summary tables with 1078
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 2
more detailed descriptions of the tools and example s and best practices from communities in North Amer ica and Europe. Nelson \ Nygaard will use this toolbox — and build upon it as the project progresses — to develop site - specific strategies for transit and activity hubs in Richmond.
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS
Walking is a free transportation option for accessing public tra nsit and other key destinations, and is a viable option for most people within a quarter - to ha lf-mile of transit stations/ stops and other destinations .
Consequently, a safe, comfortable, and convenient walking enviro nment is key to s upporting and facilitating transit use and reducing short driving trips . A well-designed network of streets and path ways that improve the pedestrian experience will enhance pedestrian accessibility and connectivity to transi t and other key destinations.
An appealing walking environment includes infrastru cture that can used by people with specialized mobility needs, safe intersections, low traffic speeds, and a pedestrian -oriented built environment.
When taking concrete action for pedestrian access i mprovements, there are multiple “toolkits” of strat egies. These different sets can be primarily categorized by the specific location of such improvements in the context of the overall street network. J ust like motor vehicles, p edestrians rely on a continuous network of public r ights -of-way and safe, effective, and efficient intersections. T herefore, such strategies to improve pedestrian access from a first - and last -mile perspective include:
Stre e ts cape Im pro ve m e n ts
Side w alks
In te rs e ctio n Im pro ve m e n t To o ls
In te rs e ctio n Cro s s in g En h an ce m e n t To o ls Mid -Blo ck Cro s s in g En han ce m e n t To o ls
Ligh tin g
Traffic Sp e e d
BICYCLE ACCESS
Integrating bicycles with transit combines t he long -distance coverage of transit with the door -to-door service of riding a bicycle. Transit is most effective for trips of moderate to long distance on busy corridors, and bicycles are effective for trips of shorter distances . For these reasons, the combination of bicycling and transit can provide a high level of mobility comparable to automobile travel in terms of the overall travel time and distance. BART and AC Transit promote and support the use of bicycle s by allowing bikes onboard trains and providing racks on the front of all buses. Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) fe rry boats serving the Bay currently have capacity for parking bicycles at no additional cost .
Bikeways and Bicycle Parking
Allowing bicycles on transit is only one- step in promoting transit- bike integration . Safe and convenient bikeways to transit stations and key destinations such as schools are required, and secure and convenient bike parking at transit stations / stops and key destinations is equally important. In addition, planning should consider effective access, such as how bicyclists navigate to station areas. Maps of the bicycle network can be provided near stops, and wayfinding signage and/ or pavement markings sh ould guide bicyclists from the nearest bike path to stations and key destinations .
1079
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3
Folding Bikes
Encouraging folding bikes on transit has the advant age of addressing first- mile / last -mile barriers on both ends of the transit trip. Folding bikes on transit also inc reases user convenience (compared to leaving a non- folding bike at a transit stop/ station all day) without exacerba ting peak -hour transit capacity constraints (compared to bringing a non- folding bike on board a transit vehicle). As for the benefit s to the rider, a folding bike is highly convenient for anyone who lacks the space to store their bicycle at any point in their journey or work day. Folding bikes can be easily stored in the office or cubicle , and then unfolded and ready to ride in seconds . The Capitol Corridor J oint Powers Authority (J PA), which servic es Richmond, recently inquired about building stati ons for folding bikes.
Bicycle Sharing
Similar to car sharing, bike sharing is a form of short -term bicycle rental where people can acces s a shared fleet of bicycles as needed . Bicycle sharing programs provide safe and convenient access to bic ycles for short trips, such as running errands or transit- work trips. Cities of all sizes from around the world have experimented with bicycle sharing programs for nearly 40 years. In the summer of 2017, Ford GoBike (formerly called Bay Area Bike Share ) expanded bike share facilities into the East Bay . Although Contra Costa County is not covered in th e currently planned expansion phases for the East Bay, Motivate (the operator of Ford GoBike) is still accepting submissions and proposals for bicycle share stations. As of J an uary 2017, over 20 individuals expressed support fo r a bicycle share dock located at the Richmond BART and Amtrak station.
TRANSIT ACCESS
Shuttles
Shuttle buses typically serve a de fined group of riders within a defined a rea or along a specific route. Shuttle service is usually from point to point, or between one point and many to fill gaps or make connections with the broader public transit network, often for s pecific groups of individuals. Fare s are usually free or nominal. Shuttles are an important aspect of first mile/ last -mile connectivity because they provide convenient and di rect service to desired destinations.
Private/ institu tional shuttle services have gained enormous popularity in recent years. In the past, Richmond had piloted a Circular Shuttle program , which was cancelled when the Bay Area Air Quality Management District removed funding in 20 3. The city is currently serve d by some existing employer and medical shuttles , including the UC Berkeley shuttles from the El Cerrito Plaza BART station and Kaiser Permanente shuttles from the Richmond BART station .
Shuttles serve as connectors to and from the regional transit system with employers or institutions, and can also provid e important neighborhood circulation . Effective s huttles offer a service that is finely tailored to local needs.
Some of the most successful shuttles are privately funded, or funded through public/ pri vate partnerships , such as a Transportation Management Association (TMA). Shut tle operations usually fall under three main catego ries or combinations thereof: 1) city supported and operate d, 2) transit agency operated , and 3) employer operated.
Intermodal Station Improvements
For the purposes of this memo, intermodal stations are defined as a transit facility in which an inter change or transfer of passengers is intended. These transfer opportunities may include connections to rail, bus stops, bicycle share dock s, bicycle parking, car sharing pods, bikeways, and sidewalks. Facilities in intermodal stations may include information booths, Clipper Card vending machines, accessible paths of travel and elevators , and connections to surrounding developments .
1080
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 4
Whether the priority is increasing transit ridership or max imizing economic development, it is critical that intermodal stations are designed around maximizing the security and convenience of its users . Such strategies can include the aforementioned pedestrian and bicycle improvements, but also greater wayfinding s ystems and fare media systems that facilitate easy and convenient t ransfers across the many regional transit options servicing Richmond and the East Bay.
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCESS
Carpooling
Carpooling is the shared use of a car by the driver — usually the owner of the vehicle — and one or more p assengers .
When carpooling, people either get a ride or offer a ride to others instead of each driving separately. Carpooling arrangements and schemes involve varying degr ees of formality and regularity. Carpools may be fo rma l (arranged through an employer, public website, etc .) or casual (the driver and passenger might not know each othe r or have agreed upon arrangements) . Carpooling can be used as a first mile/ last -mile connector by efficiently connecting with public transit or other alternative commute mode s.
Short-Distance Vanpools
Short -distance vanpools (sometimes called van shares) are designed to provide “ last -mile ” connections between transit centers and nearby employment locations, ty pically two to five miles away. Vanpools consist of at least four or five commuters who rideshare to and from work in vans provided by an outside operator. Vans can be provided by an employer , provided through a vanpool vendor, or can be owned by individual employee s.
Ride-Hailing Services
Ride -hailing services, sometimes called transportation network companies ( TNCs) , are on -demand ridesharing services where the ride is shared through mobile apps to connect passengers with drivers. Pay ment is collected through the mobile app and drivers are paid a porti on of the user charge.
Ride -hailing services offer on- demand, point -to-point transportation that can augment public transit by p rovid ing a demand -responsive option. Similar to taxis, companies such as Uber and Lyft provide on -demand transportation services for compensation using an o nline-enabled application or platform (such as smar t phone apps). The difference between ride -hailing ser vices and taxis is that passengers are connected to drivers who use their personal vehicles rather than vehicles in ass ociation with a taxi or limousine company.
Taxis
A taxicab transports passengers between locations of their choice . Examples of services in Richmond include Yellow Cab, Metro Cab, and Richmond Taxi Cab Servic e. Taxis are best for short- distance trips. For these reasons, taxis are an excellent f irst/ last -mile connector to bridge the gap between a transit stati on and a pe rson’s origin or destination . Taxi fares can be costly for some . Some communities offer taxi voucher programs or hel p subsidize taxis for low -income residents or older adults . Taxis can use already existing technology to pick u p multiple riders in proximit y to one another, provide on -demand door -to -door travel and connect riders from home to transi t or from transit to job centers.
Car Sharing
Car sharing programs allow people to have on -demand access to a shared fleet of vehicles on an as -needed basis.
Usage charges are assessed at an hourly and/ or mileage rate, in addition to a refundable deposit and/ or a low annual membership fee. Car sharing is similar to conventional car rental prog rams with a few key differences 1081
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 5
between most programs: a) system users must be membe rs of a car -sharing organization , b) fee structures typically emphasize short -term rental s rather than daily or weekly rentals , c) vehicle reservations and access is “self-service ,” d) vehicle locations ar e widely distributed rather than concentrated , and e) most systems require vehicles to be picked up and dropped off at the same location. 1 Car sharing has proven successful in reducing both household vehicle ownership and the percentage of e mployees who dr ive alone because of the need to have a car for err ands during the workday. As a result, car sharing c an be an important tool to reduce parking demand.
For residents, car sharing reduces the need to own a vehicle, or a second or third car. Survey have show n that more than half of car- share users have sold at least one vehicle since jo ining the program in the San Francisco Bay Area. 2 For employees, car sharing allows them to take tran sit to work, since they will have a vehicle availab le for errands during th e day.
There is an important distinction in both the manag ement structures of car sharing systems and the tri p types that can be taken with car sharing.
With regards to management structures, car sharing systems have included:
Exclusive car sharing services in which vehicles ar e company -owned (e.g., Zipcar) Car sharing services provided under the banner of t raditional car rental companies (e.g., Enterprise C ar Share)
Peer -to-peer car sharing services in which vehicles are own ed and shared by individuals o r households (e.g., Getaround)
The two kinds of trips taken with car share are:
Round -trip or “static” trips: these are the typical trips used with car share . The user must return the car to the location they picked it up.
One-w ay or “point to point” trips: these are a less prevalent option for car share, but many markets are testing them out. These trips fill a gap in both price and convenience between a transit ride and a TNC ride.
Autonomous Vehicles
Also commonly defined as “self -driving cars” and “hi ghly automated vehicles,” the autonomous vehicle (A V) is an emerging technology that depends on computer and ro botic science to conduct the driving of a vehicle. It is being tested by private corporations on roads throughout the Bay Area and in conjunction with other cities and states throughout the country. Although this is a nascent technology, AVs are a complex and consequential development in the built environment b ecause they have the potential to affect traffic co ngestion, travel decisi ons, road safety, land use, and public health. Some researchers predict that autonomous vehicles w ill reduce vehicle ownership by upwards of 40 %. 3
1 It should be noted that certain aspects of the service models offered by car rental companies and car-sharing organizations can overlap.
For example, “Connect by Hertz” is a short-term car rental service that shares many of the same attributes as a carsharing service. A key distinction is that traditional carsharing organizations only provide short-term carsharing (rather than both short-term and long-term car rental) and typically have an organizational mission to reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). 2 Source: Survey by Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates for City Car Share – now Carma 3 http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/PT/PROGRAMS/transportation-options/ODOT-Rideshare-opportunities.pdf 1082
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 6
MULTIMODAL POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
These policies and programs often leverage multiple modes of transportation.
Integrated and Interactive Wayfinding
A successful wayfinding system provides integrated, consistent , and user -friendly information to confirm that chosen routes are efficient, safe, and ultimately l ead directly to one’s destination. Wayfinding parti cularly helps new users and visitors feel comfortable in an unfam iliar environment and is an essential element of bo th pedestrian and bicycle improvements. Wayfinding inc luding directional signs, maps, schedules, and inst ructions.
It also includes pavement mar kings to guide pedestrians, bicyclists , and transit users to their destinations.
Branded wayfinding with consistent formatting and c olors can help alert people to their location.
Real-Time Information
Real -time information provides transit arrival informa tion, usually updated at regular intervals, based o n automated vehic le locator (AVL) data, global positioning system (G PS) data, dispatch respond ers (or based on modeled assumptions about speed), or even social ne tworking feedback. Real -time information h elps passengers plan their trip (e.g. if the bus is delayed, the pa ssenger may choose to walk instead. Real -time information also makes for a more pleasant waiting experience and ov erall transit experience; waiting without knowing i s tedious and frustratin g, and passengers tend to overestimate how long the y wait for transit by up to 50%. Passengers with access to real -time information tend to rate their overall transit experience more highly than others without the information. 4 Passengers have access to real -time information for BART, AC Transit, and Amtrak t hrough digital signs or phone apps.
Marketing and Promotion
Awareness of transportation options affects travel behavior. Providing information about travel optio ns affects a person’s likelihood of using these options, and hel ps commuters learn about the health, financial, and environmental benefits of alternative commute modes . Marketing and promotion is critical to ensure that commuters are aware of commute options and are able to provide input needed to make the programs effec tive.
These efforts may include a commuter website, apps and multimodal access guides, as well as pamphlets regarding walking and biking routes, transit option s and real-time schedules, and information on acces sing all the available transportation options .
Transportation Management Association
A Transportation Management Association (TMA) gener ally seeks to improve transportation access by reducing people’s dependence on the single occupant vehicle and promoting strategies to make it easier to bicyc le, vanpool, or take transit to a site. TMAs can be structured t o serve one large development site, a group of employers, or an entire community. TMAs are generally financed through a public-priva te partnership or with private funding .
Transportation Management Associations can provide a variety of services that encourage more efficient use of transportation and parking resources, such as:
Access management
Commuter programs
Coordination between employers and facilitation wit h public agencies Parking management and brokerage
4 http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/01/why-technology-forever-changing-psychology-waiting-bus/8158/ 1083
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 7
Direct service provision
Standard and guidelines development
Wayfinding and multimodal navigation tools
Marketing and promoti on
Safe Routes to School
The Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program is a natio nal program to encourage children to walk and bike to school.
In Richmond, SRTS partnerships are enabled by the Cont ra Costa Health Services department.
SRTS programs consist of a variety of activities including:
An audit and evaluation of existing walking conditions surrounding the scho ol, usually leading towards advocacy for specific infrastructure (e.g., traffic calming, intersection improvements, pedestrian sig nals, bicycle faci lities)
Prearranged groups of children walking to school wi th a supervising adult, also known as a “walking school bus”
Safety training for bicycle riders
Monthly or annual “walk and roll to school days” in which students are actively encouraged and incen ted to walk or bike to school
Development of an official “Walking routes” map for the school Land Use Controls to Promote Walkable and Mixed-Use Environments Land use controls (including zoning and urban desig n standards) has a direct influence – and is o ften influenced in return – on transportation needs and decisions. For example, i f an indivi dual decides to drive from the ir house to the post office, there are land use controls and regulations (or lac k thereof) that may have motivated the decision. An in tegrated approach to land use controls with conside ration towards the impacts on the transportation networks and people’s intentional tr ansportation decisions can make a large difference. Some examples of positive land use controls include:
Reform of park ing codes, including implementing shared parking pr ovisions and incentives, and maximum off -street requirements .
Requirements that improve the pedestrian experience , including restricted parking at corners, visible frontage, sidewalk widths .
Development impact fees to ensure that the costs of transportation infrast ructure and services necessary to support new development are not borne disproport ionately by existing residents and businesses. Public -private partnerships to open up programming stream s for multimodal infrastructure and services (including capital and operations).
Transit -oriented development (TOD) land use poli cies to encourage mixed use development within walking distance of t ransit stations to increase transit ridership. As a first and last -mile strategy, a TOD effectively shortens the mile to make create conven ient access to transit. A TOD includes high -density development, a pedestrian -friendly environment, and a mix of comple mentary land uses.
Transportation Demand Management
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is a general term for strategies that increase overall system efficiency, most often by encouraging a shift from single- occupant vehicle (SOV) trips to non -SOV modes, or shifting trips out of peak periods. TDM seeks to re duce auto trips – and hopefully vehicle miles traveled (VMT) – 1084
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 8
by increasing travel options, providing incentives and information to encourage and help individuals m odify their travel behavior, or reducing the physical need to travel through transp ortation -efficient land uses. The cumulative impact of a comprehensive set of TDM strategies can have a significant benefit on system efficiency, accommodation of new growth, and success of a metro politan area. Typically , public agencies, employers, and public -private partnerships implement TDM programs. A TDM program can provide support and incentives to employees to leave their cars at home and use trans it, rideshare, walk, or bike to work. A few examples of supportive programs include many of the strategies discussed earlier in this me mo, in addition to :
Priority parking for carpools/ vanpools
Parking cash -out programs
Employee shuttles
Information and assistance with transportation opti ons Guaranteed or emergency ride home programs
Subsidies or other incentives such as the commuter pre -tax transit benefit program and deep discount bulk transit pass programs
Flexible work schedules (to facilitate ridesharing arrangements) On-site amenities or vehicles (bi cycles or cars) available to run errands during the day Lockers and showers for those who bicycle to work a s well as secure and convenient bicycle parking Parking Management
Parking is a way for people to access transit and o ther modes, but it requires eff ective parking management to avoid incentivizing driving and adding to congestio n and GHG emissions. Without effective management, pricing, and right -sizing the parking supply , the amount of land devoted to parking will expand and incentivize more people t o drive for all trips and purposes. Additionally, t he pricing and regulation of parking, if not intent ionally managed, can exacerbate congestion as drivers will devote time to searching for the most convenient an d cheapest spaces available.
A comprehensive management program’s primary goal is to create avai lability for all types of users of parking resources (i.e. residents, employees, commuters, an d visitors). Such parking management practices include:
Residential and business permit programs
City governme nt fleet management and accounting
Customer -friend e nforcement
Pricing locations based on demand
Right -sizing (in which citywide development regulations respond to demand trends and observed utilization to promote sharing of existing resource s)
Improving wayfinding and multimodal access to parking Employer-Based Incentives and Support
Employers can provide TDM measures for their employ ees to encourage people to walk, bike and take tran sit to and from work. These measures are similar to the TD M measures lis ted above, including shuttles, flexible work schedules, and transit subsidies. The TDM measures take advantage of existing transportation infrastru cture and can financially support options other than driving alone, such as an employer -based shuttle to and from the nearby transit station. B usinesses in Richmond with at least 10 employees ar e required to offer a pre -tax selection of TDM strategies.
1085
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 9
CONCLUSION
This toolbox of multi -modal mobility strategies highlights the many options available to the City of Richmond.
Summary tables of the different types of strategies and best practices follow. Which tools to use and prioritize in Richmond will depend on the City’s existing infrast ructure and programs, along with inp ut from members of the public and local stakeholders.
1086
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 10
Table 1 Pedestrian Mobility Tools
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Streetscape Improvements: Streetscape includes the
overall look, feel, and design of the roadway and public right-of-way, including sidewalks, street trees and
landscaping, green infrastructure, lighting, paving,
signage, and street furnishings.
Encourages walking and can improve pedestrian safety.
Applicable to key pedestrian routes within quarter- to
half-mile of transit stations/stops and key destinations. North American cities have made streetscape,
sidewalk, intersection and other improvements to
enhance the quality and safety of the pedestrian
environment to increase the number of trips made on
foot.
The National Association of City Transportation
Officials (NACTO) states in the “Urban Street Design
Guide” that throughway zones of sidewalks should be
5-7 feet wide in residential settings and 8-12 feet
wide in commercial or downtown settings.
The City of Richmond has completed a Pedestrian
Plan
(
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/2738/Pedestrian-
Plan) that incorporates many of the pedestrian
improvements listed on the left. The adopted
Pedestrian Plan also includes two detailed subarea
plans-Iron Triangle Walkable Neighborhood Plan and
the Richmond Wellness Trail.
The County of Alameda developed a sidewalk
construction prioritization tool for high-demand
pedestrian areas in unincorporated communities. The
project used a points system to prioritize sidewalk
projects for construction based on demand and
safety.
http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/ENG
.SidewalkConstructionProgram.pdf
The City of Albany, CA installed bulbouts at an
uncontrolled crosswalk to improve pedestrian safety.
Research showed an increase in drivers yielding to
pedestrians at the crosswalk with a bulbout
compared to a crosswalk without a bulbout.
http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/pedestrian_safety_impacts
_of_curb_extensions_randal.pdf
Sidewalks: The sidewalk zone is the portion of the
street right of way between the curb and building front.
Sidewalks should be wide enough to accommodate
people with wheelchairs and strollers.
Improves pedestrian safety and mobility, particularly for those with disabilities. All roadways within ¼ mile to ½ mile of stations/stops should have sidewalks on both
sides of the roadway.
Intersection Improvement Tools:
Curb Extensions
Reduced curb radii
Pedestrian refuge islands
Curb ramp improvements
Increases pedestrian safety and mobility by improving
visibility, slowing vehicular traffic, and reducing crossing distances for pedestrians. Roadway intersections on key pedestrian routes should be designed to maximize
pedestrian mobility, safety, and visibility, particularly on roadways with high traffic volumes and/or speeds.
Intersection Crossing Enhancement Tools:
Advanced yield markings for multi-lane roadways
Longer traffic signal walk phases
Pedestrian signal countdown timers
Accessible pedestrian signals
Leading pedestrian signal intervals
Marked and high visibility crosswalks
Raised crosswalks
In-street pedestrian crossing signs
High-visibility signs and markings
Increases pedestrian safety and mobility by improving
visibility, separating or phasing pedestrian and vehicular movements, and providing more time and/or shorter
distances to cross roadways. Roadway intersections on
key pedestrian routes should be designed to maximize
pedestrian mobility, safety, and visibility, particularly on wide roadways with high traffic volumes and/or speeds
and large turning volumes.
Mid-Block Crossing Enhancement Tools:
HAWK (High Intensity Activated Crosswalks) or
Pedestrian Crossing Hybrid beacons
Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB)
In-pavement flashing lights crosswalk warning
system
Staggered pedestrian refuge island
Pedestrians often cross the street at locations other
than intersections due to the location of trail crossings, transit stops, or key attractions. These crossings are
more frequent when the spacing between intersections
is very wide. Creating safe mid-block crossings can
shorten pedestrian travel distances significantly and
make walking a more attractive choice.
1087
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 11
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Lighting:
Pedestrian-oriented street lighting
Pedestrian-oriented lighting is generally at a lower
height (10-12 feet) and more closely spaced than
conventional street lighting, which is used to light the roadway. Pedestrian-oriented lighting increases
pedestrian visibility for drivers and enhances safety and security, ultimately creating a more inviting and
appealing walking environment.
Several resources provide both general and
specific guidance for improving the pedestrian
environment. These include:
“Urban Street Design Guide,” NACTO, A “Blueprint
for 21st Century Streets”
(
http://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-
guide/)
“Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A
Context Sensitive Approach”, an Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Recommended
Practice (
http://www.ite.org/css/)
“Model Design Manual for Living Streets”, Los
Angeles County
(
http://www.modelstreetdesignmanual.com/)
“Metrorail Bicycle and Pedestrian Access
Improvements Study”, Washington D.C. Metro
(
http://planitmetro.com/wp-
content/uploads/2010/12/Metrorail-Bicycle-
Pedestrian-Access-Improvements-Study-_Final.pdf)
“Complete Intersections: A Guide to Reconstructing
Intersections and Interchanges for Bicyclists and
Pedestrians,” Caltrans
(
http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/complete_intersections_c
altrans.pdf)
The City of Berkeley, CA has a citywide speed limit of 25 MPH, with a handful of exceptions for highways
and overpasses, where speed limits reach 35 MPH,
and school zones, where speed limits are 15 MPH.
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ContentDisplay.aspx?id=
8244
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ContentPrint.aspx?id=99
348
Traffic Speed:
Speed limit reductions
Roadway narrowing (10-12 foot travel lanes)
Reductions in the number of travel and turning lanes
High traffic speeds pose a significant safety threat to pedestrians and can create an unpleasant walking
environment. The risk of death or a severe injury to a
pedestrian being hit by a vehicle travelling 30 MPH is
over three times higher than if the car was travelling 20 MPH. If the car was travelling 40 MPH, the risk of death or a severe injury to a person walking is 80%. 5 Physical design changes that cause drivers to reduce their speed can improve both safety and overall walkability.
5 AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, “Impact Speed and Pedestrian’s Risk of Severe Injury or Death”, p. 12 1088
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 12
Table 2 Bicycle Connectivity Tools
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Bikeways:
Bicycle trails and paths
Bicycle lanes (conventional, buffered, protected)
Shared vehicular lanes
Bicycle detection at signalized intersections
Signage/wayfinding
Bikeways improve mobility for people who bicycle, and
studies have shown that higher levels of bicycle
infrastructure are positively and significantly correlated with higher rates of bicycle commuting.6 Bicycle facilities also enable a wider range of bicyclists with varying skills and abilities to comfortably and safely travel.
The bikeway design should provide the lowest stress
environment to encourage more people to bike. The type
of bikeway will depend on the existing roadway
conditions, including traffic volume and traffic speed.
A number of cities have provided a combination of
bikeway facilities and secure bicycle parking as one of the primary modes of transportation from home to rail
stations to destinations within the city. Recent
improvements around MacArthur BART Station in
Oakland include a protected bicycle lane built in tandem with a new parking garage and future transit-oriented
development. In Richmond, bikeways were proposed in
the South Richmond Transportation Connectivity Plan
and Richmond Bay Specific Plan, including protected
lanes along Harbour Way, Carlson Boulevard, and
Hoffman Boulevard.
Resources for bikeway planning and design include:
National Association of City Transportation Officials Urban Bikeway Design Guide (
http://nacto.org/cities-
for-cycling/design-guide/)
“Guidelines for Successful Pedestrian and Bicycle
Facilities in the Denver Region”, Denver Regional
Council of Governments
(
http://www.drcog.org/index.cfm?page=BicycleandPed
estrianPlan)
Oakland Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines, City of
Oakland
(
http://www2.oaklandnet.com/government/o/PWA/o/E
C/s/BicycleandPedestrianProgram/OAK024653)
The City of Richmond has completed a Bicycle Master
Plan “Richmond Bicycle Master Plan,” City of Richmond,
CA (http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/2739/Bicycle-Master-
Plan) that identifies a network of bicycle improvements and design guidelines.
Bicycle Parking and Storage:
Shelters
Lockers
Long-term bicycle parking is for people to park their
bikes for longer than two hours. Long-term bicycle
In the San Francisco Bay Area, BikeLink
(
http://www.bikelink.org/) provides secure on-demand
parking for bicycles and other small vehicles to make it
6 The Atlantic Cities Place Matters, “Do Bike Paths Promote Bike Riding?” http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2012/02/do-bike-paths-promote-bike-riding/1318/ (accessed January 3, 2017).
1089
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 13
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Stations
Racks
Repair Stations along highly used bicycle routes or
stations
parking is secured and protected from the elements.
Examples include lockers, shelters and stations.
To effectively increase the capacity of bicycle lockers and provide more convenience and flexibility to users,
transit agencies have installed “eLockers”: computerized, on-demand systems that allow users to check for
available lockers or sign up for them online.
Models from eLocker and CycleSafe allow keyless
access to the locker with the use of a SmartCard or cell phone. Advance reservation systems are being tested
that would enable users to reserve a locker in advance.
With an internet connection, centralized computerized
administration allows the transit agency to monitor and respond to demand for one-time use as well as reserved
lockers.
Lockers available for one-time use have the advantage
of serving multiple users a week. Monthly rentals, by
contrast, ensure renters that their own personal locker will always be available, however incidental users cannot be accommodated, and rentals are limited to a particular location.
Bicycle stations provide a range of services to people
who ride bicycles, including security, valet bicycle
parking, bicycle repair, and sales on-site, and in some cases bicycle rentals or bike sharing.
easier to use transit and other mobility alternatives.
Lockers are located outside of BART, Caltrain, VTA, and Capitol Corridor rail stations—as well as multiple park- and-ride termini. Richmond Ferry Terminal also
proposed to provide lockers.
eLockers are available at BART stations throughout
the system, including 24 at the Richmond station.
(
https://www.bart.gov/guide/bikes)
Caltrain has on-demand and 6-month rental eLockers.
(http://www.caltrain.com/riderinfo/Bicycles/BicyclePark ing.html)
Bike stations are located at US and European train
stations.
The Caltrain Bike Station in San Francisco offers
repairs, rentals, and free valet parking.
(
http://bikehub.com/caltrain-bike-station/)
The Radstation in Muenster, Germany includes bike
parking and other amenities, including a bike washing
machine (
http://www.radstation.de/).
BikeHub® operates bike stations on the BART
system. Services vary, but include free valet, 24-hour
controlled access, and repairs.
(
http://bikehub.com/bartbikestation/)
Bikestation® has several North American locations
(
http://home.bikestation.com/) and offers secure
bicycle parking and other services and facilities for
bicyclists.
Bicycle parking resources include:
“Essentials of Bike Parking” and “Bicycle Parking
Guidelines, 2nd Edition”, Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals
(
http://www.apbp.org/?page=Publications)
“Metrorail Bicycle and Pedestrian Access
Improvements Study”, Washington D.C. Metro
(
http://planitmetro.com/wp-
content/uploads/2010/12/Metrorail-Bicycle-Pedestrian-
Access-Improvements-Study-_Final.pdf)
1090
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 14
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Folding Bicycles
Folding bicycles can provide ultimate flexibility for transit users since they can be used for both first and last-mile travel and do not necessarily require special storage
facilities on trains, stations or at final destinations. Many folding bikes provide all the comfort and ease of use of a full-size bike, but that then fold easily and quickly for transport and storage.
The City of Santa Cruz, CA initiated a folding bicycle program to allow riders greater access to METRO
buses by bicycle. Although buses were equipped with
bike racks, racks on higher-ridership routes were often full. The program offered $200 in rebates on specific
vendors’ folding bicycles, and offered program
participants the option of purchasing two months’
worth of Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District bus
passes at up to 70% off retail price. Participants were required to attend a two-hour safety program first
before they could qualify for the program.
At Stanford University in Palo Alto, CA, Parking and
Transportation Services partners with the on-campus
bike shop to offer free one-week rentals and $100
subsidies for certain models.
(
http://transportation.stanford.edu/alt_transportation/Bi kingAtStanford.shtml)
Bicycle Sharing:
Publicly shared bicycles
Private or employer-based programs
Ford GoBike is a public bike sharing system serving the Bay Area for short (30 minutes or less) trips. System
members can pick up a bike at any station and return it to any other station when done. System membership
(annual or daily) or a single ride can be purchased online or at any kiosk. Members can use their Clipper Card or a mobile app to unlock and use a bike. As of the summer
of 2017, Ford GoBike serves parts of San Francisco,
Oakland, Berkeley, and San Jose.
There are smaller bike share systems in the Bay Area
that serve private campuses (e.g., Google) or other city- specific services, such as San Mateo Bay Bikes.
Google, based in Mountain View, CA provides a fleet
of bikes distinctively painted in red, green, blue, and yellow for employees to use to travel around its
campus and run errands during the workday.
In 2016, the City of College Park, MD, in coordination with the University of Maryland and Zagster (a bike
sharing provider throughout North America), launched
mBike, a bike share system available to the public.
Supported by grant funding, the system has 120 bikes
across 14 stations (including the two Metrorail stations serving College Park). Although there is a larger
regional bike share system in Washington, DC
(Capital Bikeshare), the establishment of mBike
ensured that bike share could be implemented in
College Park more quickly, with more bikes, and at a
lower cost, than what the regional bike share system
could offer.
European cities have used bicycle sharing to facilitate bicycle use for several years. Copenhagen has one of
the oldest (and now somewhat outdated systems) that
offers free public bikes with the deposit of a coin.
1091
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 15
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Since September 2011, the City of Lille, France
provides a public bicycle sharing system called V’Lille.
Each V'lille station is equipped with an automatic
rental terminal and has stands for dozens of bicycles.
Maps showing the locations of the city's V'lille stations are available at all kiosks. Users must have a daily,
weekly or annual subscription. With a subscription,
bike rental is free for the first half hour. A trip that lasts longer than 30 minutes incurs a charge of €1 for each
subsequent 30-minute period. Over 1000 Free
Service bikes are available in areas with transit
access in the municipalities of Lille, La Madeleine and Mons in Baroeuland, and 3000 bicycles are available
for longer-term rentals, with plans to expand. In
addition, a local bike manufacture (“b’twin”) is
planning to build a bike-friendly, car-free campus in
the area.
Station Bicycles For some who want to travel between transit stations and their workplace by bicycle, it may be most convenient to keep a bicycle at the station for this express purpose
(and to use for errands and other trips during the
workday). Rather than expect a person to buy multiple
bicycles (and leave them scattered throughout the
transportation network), one could reserve a shared
bicycle at their destination station for a guaranteed last- mile connection. These “station bicycles” are typically low-cost bikes and ideally would be stored in lockers or covered bicycle parking areas.
In 33 stations throughout the United Kingdom,
Brompton Bike Hire has established docks with folding
bicycles for people to reserve in advance and take
with them for transportation needs immediately
preceding and following a transit trip. The system is
intended to be “accessible to all, easy and cheap to
install and run, economical to use, not dependent on
state subsidies, flexible and compact.” In Oakland,
CA, the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority has
reached out to Brompton about the feasibility of such
a program in tandem with its Bicycle Access Plan.
Electric Bicycles Electric bicycles provide a more attractive alternative for some users, particularly in hilly areas, and for riders who have difficulty accelerating and maintaining higher
speeds. Electric bicycles can be combined with trailers or other equipment so that they can transport cargo as well as people.
The My-Go-Pasadena pilot program provided rebates
to transit commuters to purchase a two-wheel electric
bicycle from one of several participating dealers in the Pasadena area. The goal of the program was to
demonstrate the value of these electric vehicles as
new transportation options to connect to Metro Gold
Line transit stations in lieu of single occupancy
automobiles. The Los Angeles M.T.A., the City of
Pasadena, Pasadena Water and Power, and the
Federal Transit Administration generously funded the
1092
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 16
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples program. (http://www.calstart.org/projects/first-
mile/First-Mile-Projects/MyGo-Pasadena.aspx)
Bicycle Events and Programs
General marketing and promotion
Bike to Work Day
Bicycle commuter events throughout the year
A marketing and educational campaign can promote
bicycling as an everyday activity. Campaigns can also
educate the public about new facilities, such as improved bicycle parking facilities. People are unlikely to change from established patterns unless they are persuaded that parking bicycles at the transit stop is easier than bringing their bicycles with them, that spaces will be available, that they will be able to retrieve their bicycles easily upon their return, and that it is not going to cost them too much additional money or time.
GoLloyd, a TMA in Portland, OR, sponsors several
supportive programs to encourage cycling and
walking, including the distribution of safety lights,
bicycle maps, sponsored group bike rides, bicycle
commuter breakfasts, and a “Bike Champ” mentoring
program. (
www.golloyd.org)
Cycling Scotland sponsors a “Cycle Friendly
Employer” program that provides information, support
and other services to encourage and facilitate cycling
to work. (
http://www.cyclingscotland.org/our-
projects/award-schemes/cycle-friendly-employer/)
Table 3 Transit First-/Last-Mile Tools
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Shuttle Programs:
Partnership Programs
Employer Sponsored Shuttles
Agency Sponsored Shuttles
Short-Distance Vanpools
Shuttle services provide point-to-point transportation, or between one point and many to fill gaps or make
connections with the broader public transit network, often for specific groups of individuals. Shuttle services
typically serve riders in a well-defined area or along a specific route and provide convenient and direct service to desired destinations.
Shuttles can be costly and difficult to administer,
however. There are several approaches to shuttle
programs, described further below, that can be used to
address these issues:
Partnership Programs: Several partners financially
sponsor Shuttles, including employers, TMAs, and
government agencies. Typically, one agency is
responsible for ongoing administration, and a
governing board makes major decisions.
Employer Sponsored: Shuttles are paid for and
administered solely by an employer or group of
employers and serve specific employees only.
Examples of different shuttle programs include:
South of San Francisco, CA, a number of employer
shuttles connecting commuter rail stations to nearby
employers are jointly funded by the transit authority,
air district, and local employers
(
http://www.caltrain.com/schedules/Shuttles.html)
Downtown Walnut Creek Trolley service is operated
by the City of Walnut Creek, which supports a number
of free transportation options for residents and visitors including the Route 4 Downtown Trolley, and the
Route 5 Shuttle. The Free Downtown Trolley operates
7 days a week from the Walnut Creek BART Station
to various downtown destinations. The Route 5
Shuttle operates from the Walnut Creek BART Station
to Creekside Drive Monday through Friday.
The Emery Go-Round shuttles connects destinations
in Emeryville with the nearest BART rail station. The
service is funded entirely by commercial property
owners in the citywide transportation business
improvement district and does not charge a fare to
passengers (
http://www.emerygoround.com/).
1093
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 17
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Agency Sponsored: Shuttles are paid for and
administered by an agency or TMA and are open to
the public.
Short-Distance Vanpools: Employees, employers, or
an agency sponsor vans. Vans are parked at transit
stations and driven by employees to the worksite, then
driven back to the station at the end of the day (or
shift).
Kaiser Permanente provides a free, public shuttle
between its medical campus in Richmond and both
the Richmond and El Cerrito Del Norte BART stations.
In Oakland, CA, the fare-free Broadway Shuttle
connects nearby destinations with Amtrak, BART,
ferry, and other bus routes. As of December 2016, the
shuttle is funded through a partnership of eight
different organizations and agencies and is operated
by AC Transit
(
http://www.meetdowntownoak.com/shuttle.php).
In the Seattle, WA area, King County Metro sponsors
a van share program to provide last-mile connections
between public transit and workplaces
(
http://metro.kingcounty.gov/tops/van-
car/commutervans.html).
Intermodal Station Improvements The experience of a rider in a transit station, when transferring, arriving, or disembarking, can affect the decision to ride transit as much as the trip itself. If one does not feel comfortable or satisfied in the stop and
station environment, they may decide the transfer or
waiting experience makes the entire trip no longer worth it. Therefore, access improvements are key to solving
such deficiencies in intermodal stations. Solutions
include: accessible and direct paths of travel for riders’ transferring and access needs, sufficient space to ensure the smooth maneuvering of buses, safe and clean
elevators/escalators, protection from the elements, and convenient locations for multimodal pickup, drop-off, and parking. Some of these elements, including those
dependent on safety and wayfinding systems, are also
indicative of good practice in urban design for
pedestrians.
In addition to improving station design for bicycle and pedestrian access, many transit agencies are interested in fare payment media that is itself multimodal—one card or smartphone app that is accepted as payment on
transit, car share, bike share, parking, or other mobility options. The main challenge with these programs is the
high level of coordination and lead time required to
Improvements in transit station access were
researched as part of a plan for the West Contra
Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC)
in 2011. Among other recommendations and stations
throughout the County, a number of enhancements in
wayfinding systems, bus bays, shuttle connections,
and rider crossings were proposed for the Richmond
BART Station, Richmond Parkway Transit Center, and
the proposed Richmond Ferry Terminal.
WMATA in Washington, DC, has begun an 18-month
pilot of its New Electronics Payment Program, which
will allow passengers to pay using a smart card,
government I.D. cards, contactless credit cards, and
smartphones. One of the program’s primary objectives
is to maintain seamless regional transfers among
existing transit services. WMATA has partnered with
more than a dozen agencies to implement this
program. The pilot will encompass Metro rail, bus, and
parking, though the agency is in conversation with
regional bike share and car share companies about
integrating with their systems, as well. It is several
years from implementation.
1094
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 18
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples implement; a long lead time can render chosen
technologies obsolete or outdated by the time of
implementation.
Table 4 Motor Vehicle First-/Last-Mile Tools
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Carpooling & Vanpooling Carpooling is the shared use of a car by the driver— usually the owner of the vehicle—and one or more
passengers. When carpooling, people either get a ride or offer a ride to others instead of each driving separately.
Carpooling arrangements and schemes involve varying
degrees of formality and regularity.
Vanpools typically serve commuters who live and work
near each other and travel more than 15 miles to work
one-way.
It may be possible for longer-distance car- or vanpools to pick up additional passengers at light rail stations and transport them the last few miles to work. Given the fact that stations are located within close proximity of freeway exits, the detour required to pick up someone from the
station would be minimal.
The City of Portland has a preferential on-street
parking program for people who carpool to certain
districts of the city. These locations, surrounding
Downtown and Lloyd Center, are well served by
transit. The program is so popular that that the City is not accepting new applications as of December 2016.
In the Bay Area, 511.org provides a carpool matching
program for over 60,000 commuters, but also links to
other private matching firms operating in the Bay
Area, including Scoop (
www.takescoop.com) and
Carzac (www.carzac.com).
Employer-Specific Ridematching Some employers facilitate ridesharing among their employees, either through a company intranet site or
through a third-party provider. This approach enables a greater degree of customizability and has proven more
attractive to some employees, particularly those of large employers who have enough individuals to support their
own ridematching system. Such systems can be easily
combined with incentives and other promotions into a
comprehensive employer-based commute program.
Many online ride-matching services already exist,
allowing potential users to enter information about
their trips – including origin and destination, time of day, which days of the week, etc. – and the system
can pair them up with others with similar
requirements. Some examples include RideAmigos
(
http://www.rideamigos.com/), and TripSpark
(http://www.tripspark.com/). Bay Area companies (e.g.
Google) and academic institutions (e.g. UCSF,
Castilleja School) use RideAmigos.
Ride-Hail Services (Lyft, Uber, etc.) To be a successful first and last mile solution, a ride-hail service needs to find balance in its driver supply and
customer demand, coordination with transit agencies,
and effective marketing. This may be an expensive
Beginning August 17, 2016, riders within the
Centennial (CO) City Call-n-Ride (dial-a-ride) service
area are now able to summon free shared Lyft rides
(known as “Lyft Line”) to and from the Regional
Transportation District’s (RTD) Dry Creek light-rail
station southeast of Denver. Riders have the option of
1095
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 19
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples first/last mile solution for transit riders to use on a regular basis.
Driver supply: Achieving balance between driver supply
and customer demand is the most critical key to success when formalizing a last-mile ride-hail service program.
While targeting the use of ride-hail services for last-mile trips is a growing phenomenon, a program that does not
offer sufficient driver supply to meet demand will likely correspond to a lack of perceived reliability from the
user’s standpoint.
Coordination with transit agencies: Instead of viewing
ride-hail services as competition, transit agencies are beginning to partner with this type of service to fill in service gaps and improve the transit experience.
Effective marketing: Education and promotion are critical to ensure transit users understand how ride-hail services can support transit trips. While the Federal Transit
Administration is still assessing whether federal funding can be appropriated through transit agencies and
directed to ride-hail services, active marketing and
promotion will be critical to incentivize operational
changes to meet last-mile needs.
putting in their request on the Lyft app or on Go
Denver, a mobile platform developed by Xerox that
integrates scheduling and payment information for
transit and ride-hailing services around the metro
area. The six-month pilot project is expected to end in February 2017. Free Lyft rides are available 5:30 a.m.
to 7 p.m. on weekdays only.
Also in 2016, the Livermore Amador Valley Transit
Authority (LAVTA) proposed Wheels on Demand, a
partnership with the private sector to provide service
to low-density suburban areas in Dublin, CA where
existing fixed-route LAVTA Wheels service is
underperforming. Wheels on Demand is an extension
of a traditional user side subsidy program, which is
used by transit systems nationwide to partner with
taxicab companies, but this partnership would
extended to ride-fail services such as Uber or Lyft.
Conventional Taxi Service As evidenced by the presence of taxi stands outside of many BART stations (including Richmond), taxis have
been a last-mile solution for decades. However, there
are limitations to depending on taxis as a last-mile
solution. Primarily, many individuals may not be able to afford routine taxi rides, the probability of hailing a cab on the street is very low outside of city centers, and even when one expects to find a taxi at a location like a BART station, there is no guarantee it will be waiting.
Nevertheless, opportunities exist to make taxis more
appealing, easier to access, and more affordable.
Under a taxi-sharing program, cab drivers can pick up
multiple passengers at the same time, provided each
passenger is headed in the same direction.
Under a taxi-sharing program, cab drivers can pick up
multiple passengers at the same time, provided each
passenger is headed in the same direction. Taxi sharing Following are best practice examples that facilitate the use of taxis as a last-mile solution:
Dedicated taxi phones at rail stations and major bus
stops, currently in use by the London Underground.
Advance taxi dispatch service available from transit
vehicles, currently used in several German cities.
Integrated transit-taxi fare payment, potentially using “smart card” technology. The Hong Kong Oyster Card
enables users to pay for multiple means of
transportation, as well as transactions in many
convenience stores and markets located adjacent to
rail stations.
Streetside taxi stand infrastructure (shelters, lighting, emergency call boxes). Outdoor advertising
companies often subsidize the capital and
1096
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 20
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples allows passengers to pay lower fares for door-to-door
journeys than they would if travelling alone. A taxi-
sharing program is especially beneficial when
passengers have a common destination, such as from a
transit station to downtown. These arrangements not
only benefit customers, but the trade and local
communities too. Sharing taxis results in fewer taxi trips overall, which reduces traffic congestion and pollution. maintenance costs of transit shelters and associated
infrastructure as part of their franchise agreement.
Development of enhanced reservation system (online,
text messages, etc.). For example, Flywheel in San
Francisco uses a unique taxi hailing mobile app and
fleet management software.
Development of a “taxi pool” system to allow
passengers with similar origins/destinations to “share
the fare.” Precedent: New York City shared taxi pilot programs
(
http://home2.nyc.gov/html/tlc/downloads/pdf/pass_inf
o_card.pdf); online carpool matching systems.
Development of a “flat fare” pricing structure for
targeted areas (such as downtown and near transit
stations) to simplify customer experience. Atlanta, for example, establishes “flat rate zones” for all taxi rides originating and ending within a defined area
surrounding three of the region’s busiest transit station areas (Downtown, Midtown, and Buckhead).
Car Sharing Organizations Car share programs allow for 24/7 on-demand access to a shared fleet of vehicles on an as-needed basis.
Members to reserve a car for a short period of time –
typically a number of hours or a day. Car share vehicles reduce the need for people to need to own their own
vehicle, and therefore can reduce the need to build
parking. In 2011, a survey coordinated between
Nelson\Nygaard and City Carshare (now Carma),
demonstrated that 65% of respondents with car share
memberships rode transit multiple times in a given week, while only 41% of respondents without memberships did
the same.
In early 2008, the Emeryville, CA TMA negotiated with
Zipcar to initiate and help fund car sharing services at several locations throughout Emeryville. The TMA is
under a license fee agreement with Zipcar to provide
free membership and corporate rates to TMA
members, and helps advertise the services to
employees at commercial properties near the Zipcar
Pods. Any business that pays into the TMA (including
residential complexes) can join Zipcar for free, and
users receive a discount on the standard usage rate
(subsidized by the TMA). Other residents of
Emeryville can join Zipcar and use the cars at the
Emeryville pods at the regular Zipcar rates. All
members of Zipcar can also use their services
elsewhere at the standard rate. The Emeryville TMA is
no longer subsidizing car sharing pods. Zipcar has
expressed appreciation for the support the TMA has
provided in helping them expand their market.
In the Washington, DC area, WMATA contracts with
Zipcar; shared cars are available at almost half of
1097
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 21
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Metrorail Park & Ride lots. Zipcar does not pay for
parking spaces. WMATA informally monitors trends in
car share usage through their partnership with Zipcar.
They know that Zipcars at Metro stations are used
about 30-40% over a typical 24-hour weekday period,
and demand “skyrockets” on weekends. In addition,
DDOT has reserved several on-street parking spaces
for car share vehicles, typically located near Metro
and/or residential locations. The City of Berkeley and
the City of Oakland are currently seeking car share
providers that will offer one-way car sharing. This
concept has been successfully implemented in
locations like Boston (with Zipcar), Portland
(ReachNow), and Austin (Car2Go)
Car sharing can also be used for the purposes of
efficient fleet management. In 2009, Washington, D.C.
partnered with Zipcar to launch the first FastFleet
system. Unlike Zipcar’s normal service, FastFleet
allows an organization to use its own vehicles and
pick storage locations. Using GPS data provided by
the service, managers can then optimize their system
and track vehicles using real-time GPS information.
Such tracking can facilitate the ability of employees to coordinate rides between off-campus facilities and the
main campus, thus reducing the overall parking
demand generated by these remote workers on the
main campus parking supply. The city government
reduced its fleet size from 360 to 58 vehicles. The
installation of the technology cost $1,200 per vehicle, plus an additional $115 fee per month per vehicle to
maintain it and operate the technology. Within the first four months of the pilot project, the city saved more
than $300,000. It was estimated to save the city $6.6
million over five years.
Car Sharing from Traditional Car Rental Agencies
(Short-Term and Hourly Car Rental)
Since car sharing services may not be successful in all contexts, existing national rental car companies might be able to provide some of the same benefits (i.e. short-
term car rental with convenient pick-up and low rates) in lieu of or in addition to traditional membership-based car- sharing organizations.
Enterprise (www.enterprisecarshare.com) and U-Haul
(www.uhaulcarshare.com) are currently active in the
short-term and hourly car rental market. Among other
locations, Enterprise CarShare is set up throughout
San Francisco, including in garages owned by the City
and County.
1098
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 22
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Car sharing and short-term car rental can exist side-by- side, and programs can be designed to provide multiple
types of membership or rentals, including hourly, daily, and “shared lease” monthly rates, depending on need
and demand.
A lesson learned from both successful and failed
programs (such as the first iteration of U-Haul’s
service and a program from Hertz), is that
convenience, cost, and availability trump nearly
everything else. People like fun and attractive cars,
but will stop using a service if it becomes inconvenient or unavailable.
Personal Car Sharing or Peer-to-Peer Car Sharing A number of companies are enabling individuals to rent out their cars (similar to other car sharing operations) when not in use. Companies provide in-car technology to enable borrowing and provide insurance when the car is
being used by other members. Owners have the ability to set their own price and schedule for their cars.
Peer-to-peer car sharing could serve an important
supportive function for employees who use transit in
Richmond by providing them with access to vehicles
during the day for errands and work trips.
Turo, JustShareIt, and Getaround are some of the
companies that are enabling individuals to share their
vehicles with others for a profit. Currently, these
companies only operate in a few locations; however,
they are expanding to other areas based on demand.
Google employees use Turo to share their personal
vehicles while they are parked at work. This enables
employees who did not drive to work to use other
employees’ cars (who did drive) for trips during the
day.
Autonomous Vehicle Governing Policies Governing policies now primarily are dealing with the legal definition of AVs, the necessary safety
prerequisites, and the extent to which car occupants may be required, if not, responsible for operation. Many
interested governments are partnering with technology
entities to test out AVs on streets. As knowledge
becomes more prevalent and mainstream, a more
widespread adoption of AV policies may emerge.
The District of Columbia officially defines AVs as “a vehicle capable of navigating District roadways and
interpreting traffic-control devices without a driver
actively operating any of the vehicle’s control
systems." Provisions that were removed included
alternative fuel requirements and a vehicle-miles-
travelled (VMT) tax.
In 2016, the State of California authorized AV testing on public roads by the Contra Costa Transportation
Authority (AB 1592). If the vehicle is not operating at “specified locations” and “at speeds of less than 35
miles per hour,” then the vehicle must be equipped
with a steering wheel, brake pedal, an accelerator,
and a driver “seated in the driver’s seat and is capable of taking immediate manual control of the vehicle.” In
partnership with Honda, the CCTA is prioritizing
testing in two locations: and Gomentum Station, a
research and testing facility in Concord, and the
Bishop Ranch business district in San Ramon.
Commercial vehicles, including freight and shuttle
buses, are also being tested at these locations.
1099
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 23
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Autonomous Vehicle Curbside Management, Land
Use, and Parking
Although there is little agreement on the order and timing of the rollout of autonomous vehicles, its potential impact on the design of streets, land uses, and parking is
noteworthy. To that end, it will be important to pay
attention to how AV’s interact with these elements.
The Nashville region’s transit master plan “recognizes
that autonomous vehicles will very likely have a
connection to future transit service and infrastructure. In particular, fully autonomous vehicles could jointly use “managed lanes” with BRT and emergency vehicles.
Neighborhood and regional transit centers could serve
as the connecting points between localized, autonomous
circulation and the regional mass transit system.
Recommendations will continue to be responsive to
changes in the industry as these vehicles make their way onto our roads.”
The Center for Automotive Research acknowledges
the potential to “retrofit” all curbsides (including on- street parking, street frontage, transit stops).
http://greaterannarborregion.org/prosperity/wp-
content/uploads/2016/11/CAR-RPI-Presentation-
Draft-16Nov2016.pdf
Table 5 Multimodal Policy and Program Tools
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Integrated and Interactive Wayfinding
Station area signage and maps
Local area signage for bicyclists and pedestrians
Guidelines and standards
Wayfinding signage helps orient visitors, shoppers, and residents alike, pointing them to area parking facilities, retail establishments, pedestrian and bicycle access
routes, and other important destinations. A wayfinding
program can be tailored to specific groups depending on contextual factors and desired outcomes; however, these tools are most relevant and important for those unfamiliar with an area. Wayfinding informs people of the best way to access an area, depending on their mode of travel.
A successful wayfinding system provides integrated,
consistent and user-friendly information to confirm that chosen routes are efficient, safe, and ultimately lead
directly to one’s destination. Wayfinding particularly
helps new users and visitors feel comfortable in an
unfamiliar environment.
The City of Portland has a comprehensive pedestrian
wayfinding system that combines with transit and
bicycle wayfinding. Additionally, TriMet, Portland’s
regional transit agency has incorporated the use of
“quick response” (QR) codes into its transit signage:
http://trimet.org/qrcodes/index.htm.
The West Contra Costa Transit
Enhancement Strategic Plan
And the West Contra Costa/Albany Transit Wayfinding
Plan were prepared by WCCTAC in October 2011 to
generate increased transit ridership by identifying
specific strategies that improve access to transit
centers and routes.
Real-Time Information
Transit information (arrival/departure)
Real-time arrival information gives passengers the
comfort of knowing exactly when the next bus will arrive.
Passengers can look online, on their cell phones, or at a In 2004, TriMet – Portland, Oregon’s regional transit service – launched its real-time arrival information
system TransitTracker. ™ Using satellite tracking on
1100
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 24
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples digital sign at the station to know exactly how long they have to wait – or they can choose to stay at home or at work a little longer and catch the bus just in the nick of time. Communicating when the bus will arrive in real-time makes transit more dependable. Open sourcing transit
agency data is a key to the success of real-time systems, as the private sector can often take these applications to the next level. AC Transit and BART have a real-time
information available for passengers.
buses and sensors in the train tracks, TransitTracker
estimates when the next vehicle will arrive based on
its scheduled speed and last reported location. In
2005, it was among the nation’s first transit agencies
to open source its data. Today, over 50 on-line
applications from the private developer community
help area residents and commuters plan their transit
trip in real time. In addition to a strong on-line
resource, TriMet has installed over 15 real-time arrival information displays at major transit stations. Open
source data can encourage technology companies
and universities to develop innovative products that a
transit agency would not have the expertise or
capacity to develop.
https://trimet.org/tools/transittracker.htm
Marketing and Promotion Marketing is an important component of implementing first-/last-mile strategies. From a customer perspective, marketing is important for two reasons: 1) What you
don’t know can’t help you, and some auto commuters
may be predisposed to take transit but don’t know or
understand their options; 2) First impressions really do matter, and no program will succeed if first-time users have a negative experience because of technical failure, unclear operating instructions, or even inflated
expectations that the service can’t meet.
One of the most effective forms of marketing for
“choice” transit riders can be personalized marketing
programs (sometimes called “personal travel
encouragement” or “high touch marketing”).
Several online apps also make the marketing process
easier for potential participants in TDM programs.
− Scoop is a mobile app that connects commuters
who are driving to work with those who are not.
With a growing following in the Bay Area (in
locations like Hacienda Business Park and San
Jose State University), a user-friendly interface, a
streamlined registration process, and the capability
to integrate with Luum (see below), Scoop can help
to hasten a company-wide shift toward carpool
commuting.
Commute gamification creates a fun way of tracking
one’s own travel patterns while simultaneously
providing useful data to the user’s employer. It can
also help to inform users on other available
transportation options and lead to tangible user
benefits down the road. Luum is an online platform
that encourages users to take sustainable modes of
transportation by employing the aforementioned
approach. Luum can integrate with Automatic License
1101
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 25
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Plate Reader (LPR) and radio-frequency identification
(RFID) technologies, making it easier to track user
parking behavior and patterns, and thus help to inform
parking data collection efforts in the future
Transportation Management Association (TMA) TMAs can take on a variety of functions, depending on the reasons they were formed and their financing
structures. Some TMAs are task driven. A TMA designed
solely to manage and run a shuttle service would be a
task driven TMA. TMAs are also “mission driven.” A
mission-driven TMA might be set up to address
transportation access in a specific area and will develop its tasks and programs based on this mission. Following is a list of the many functions a TMA can perform:
Transit pass sales and subsidies
Vanpools – promotion, van formation, administration,
van provision, and/or subsidies
Shuttle services
Parking management
Bicycling programs – advocacy, bike commuter clubs,
bike lockers, showers, etc.
Bicycle parts/repair/locker discount programs
Guaranteed Ride Home - Free Ride for Employees
Rideshare matching service for carpools and vanpools
(can be done through the 511 Regional Rideshare
program, but customized to TMA members)
Prizes & financial incentives to employees who use
alternatives to driving alone (A commuter club for
employee members)
Discounts & promotions geared toward increasing
alternate commute participation
Transportation information through a website,
brochures, on-site transportation fairs, promotional
events, an on-site information center, and employer or
employee newsletters
Information to employers about transportation and air quality legislation.
Programs to reduce commuter parking demand can
have significant impacts on the overall cost to develop downtown, reduce congestion and better allocate
existing and future built parking to resident, visitor, and employee needs. TMAs have provided the vehicle
through which downtowns and business districts have
successfully addressed this issue in other areas of the United States. As an example, Downtown Vancouver,
WA recently completed a TMA feasibility study and
concluded that reducing its current employee
commute rate of 88% to 65% (over 20 years) could
result in parking development cost savings of
approximately $67 million.
The Emeryville (CA) TMA Board of Directors, which
also serves as the official representative of property
owners for the business improvement district, sets the
service parameters for the Emery Go-Round, provides
fiscal oversight, approves the annual operating budget
and sets organizational policy.
In Portland, OR, the GoLloyd TMA reduced the drive-
alone rate from 86 percent to 41 percent between
1994 and 2009 through a comprehensive package of
business-based programs for transit, biking, walking,
and business/employee assistance. GoLloyd
employers meet the requirements of the state-
mandated Employer Commute Options (ECO) rule
that requires employers with more than 100
employees to track mode split every two years. The
TMA assists over 75 employers and 9,000 employees
adhere to ECO requirements.
Some TMAs (GoLloyd, for example) have voluntary
membership. Others, including Emeryville TMA and
Irvine Spectrum TMA, require membership for new
development and businesses in their service area.
The policy process by which membership is required
1102
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 26
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Advocate for transportation projects or employer
transportation interests
Networking meetings for area employers to discuss
transportation issues.
Employer training and consulting about setting up on- site employer programs
Telecommuting consulting
There is no single method of forming a TMA, but
they typically rely on these programming strategies:
Regional or local governments, chambers of
commerce, or the management of a major facility
(such as a mall or hospital) can help create a TMA
and provide seed funding.
Developers or facility managers may be required to
establish a TMA to mitigate local congestion and
parking problems.
TMAs are typically staffed by a mobility coordinator
who administers and actively markets local
transportation demand management programs.
Through the TMA, a mobility coordinator will serve as a facility-wide concierge, providing personalized
information on transit routes and schedules,
ridesharing information, bicycle routes and facilities, and other transportation options available to residents, employees and customers. They may also negotiate
with transit agencies for low-cost transit passes.
Initial funding to establish TMAs normally comes from local governments, highway or planning authorities,
major private businesses, etc. Federal funds, such as
the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ)
program can be used to support TMA start-up costs
and up to three years of operating assistance.
Later, TMAs are typically funded through dues paid by member businesses and government grants.
TMAs can also charge a certain amount in fees for
their services, such as shuttles, parking management,
etc.
varies. The Irvine Spectrum TMA was formed when
the property was initially developed, and thus new
tenants and property owners must also join the TMA.
The Emeryville TMA is citywide and funded by a
Property-Based Business Improvement District, which
assesses a property tax for all commercial land uses
in the city.
The Santa Cruz Metropolitan TMA was started by the
area’s Chamber of Commerce, but is now a
freestanding organization financed solely through
membership dues.
1103
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 27
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Business Improvement Districts (BID) can also
provide funding for businesses to implement tailored
TDM strategies.
Foundation funding is also sometimes available for
TMAs to fund specific projects and programs. The
TMA can either take the lead in responding to
foundation opportunities or work with area partners on
a joint application.
Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) The National Safe Routes to School Program provides the following eight-step process to create a Safe Routes to School Program:
Bring together the right people: Identify the people in your community who want to make walking and
bicycling to school safer and more appealing for
children and families (parents, teachers, law
enforcement, etc.).
Hold a kick-off meeting: The kick-off meeting creates a vision and generates next steps.
Gather information and identify issues: Assess the
walking and bicycling conditions for students to
understand what the barriers and opportunities are.
Identify solutions: Solutions will include a combination of education, encouragement, engineering, and
enforcement strategies.
Make a plan: A Safe Routes to School plan should
include a description of tasks and programs from step
4, a schedule, and an explanation of how the program
will be evaluated.
Fund the plan: Work with local, regional, and/or state partners and the private sector to help fund the plan.
Act on the plan: Hold a kick-off event to initiate the plan, such as Walk to School Day.
Evaluate, make improvements, and keep moving:
Carefully monitor whether or not identified strategies, The National Center for Safe Routes to School
(http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/) has a comprehensive
database of best practices, collected data on various
SRTS programs, and standard guides, forms, and
questionnaires for implementing a program at a
school.
1104
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 28
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples programs, and investments are increasing the number
of children safely walking and bicycling to school. 7
Land Use Controls Transportation options should be considered at the very beginning of the planning process, not just as a
mitigation tool. There is a need to articulate how
transportation options benefits can be better included in planning processes. Guidance, recommendations,
impact fees, and potential credits to integrate
transportation options into the land development process should also be considered. Developing planning and
design guidance on transportation options requirements
and incentives for development to be implemented at the local level can be beneficial.
The Transit Impact Development Fee (TIDF) is a
reliable source of operating and capital revenue for
the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
(SFMTA), which operates San Francisco’s entire
surface transportation network including the transit
system, Muni. TIDF has generated about $120 million
(including interest) since 1981. Originally a $5 per
square foot fee on office developers in the downtown
area, it was expanded in 2004 to encompass most
non-residential projects citywide. Fees were also
raised and indexed to inflation, and are now $9.07 or
$11.34 per square foot depending on land use type. 8
http://www.newportbeachca.gov/Home/ShowDocume
nt?id=11819
The San Diego Municipal Code uses transit
infrastructure as the primary basis for reductions in
minimum parking requirements, though it also
recognizes the lower rates of auto ownership and use
in lower income communities. The Code allows
reduced minimum parking requirements for
residential, office, retail, institutional, and industrial uses in designated transit areas and for residential
uses in designated very low-income areas. For
residential uses, the minimum parking requirements
can be reduced in multi-family residential
developments, generally depending on the number of
bedrooms. For non-residential uses, reduction factors
generally depend on nearby transit infrastructure.
Although the potential minimum reductions depend on
multiple factors in both residential and non-residential cases, reductions generally amount to around 85
percent of the original, baseline parking requirement.
7 National Safe Routes to School “Steps to Creating a Safe Routes to School Program” 8 City of Seattle “Transit Master Plan,” http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/tmp/final/TMPFinalSummaryReportandAppendices.pdf, p. 6-16 1105
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 29
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Successful transit-oriented development requires the coordination of multiple partners, including the transit agency, the city, the community, and the developer.
Nevertheless, TOD plans and guidelines may come from
a variety of partners with a vision placed on the long- term growth and accessibility of the urban and suburban areas surrounding transit hubs and corridors.
In June 2016, the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
Board approved an updated TOD Policy. There are
many goals and strategies incorporated in the Policy,
but of particular importance are the “Sustainable
Communities” and “Transportation Choice” goals.
Additional, a major component of the strategy to
“Increase Sustainable Transportation Choices using
Best Practices in Land Use and Urban Design”
includes the objective of BART to “ensure that
combined TOD/parking/access improvements on and
around each BART station encourage net new BART
ridership, utilizing corridor-level, shared, and off-site approaches to parking replacement as appropriate.”
BART’s TOD Guidelines are “currently being updated
to reflect the new TOD Policy.”
In September 2014, the City of El Cerrito adopted the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan to guide
development in the corridor. The plan and associated
form-based development code are intended to enable
San Pablo Avenue to transition from an auto-oriented
corridor, to a mixed-use district, with housing and
shops, served by a truly multimodal corridor.
The Richmond Bay Specific Plan (2015) was
designed around reuniting auto-oriented areas
presently separated by auto-oriented land uses and
corridors. Context-sensitive land use planning and
designs for safer multimodal access across over 10
corridors were created. Additionally, standards for
actual developments were also built around a form-
based code. Both the San Pablo Avenue corridor and
Richmond Bay area were located within Priority
Development Areas (PDAs) set by the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission, a broader regional policy
that identifies responsible sites and contexts for
responsible TOD planning—rather than increasing
population density in greenfields and other areas not
served by any public transportation.
There are many examples of TOD planning from the
perspective of different government agencies:
1106
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 30
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples − At the regional level, Portland Metro developed a
TOD Strategic Plan in 2011:
http://reconnectingamerica.org/resource-
center/browse-research/2011/metro-tod-
program-transit-oriented-development-
strategic-plan/
− From the perspective of a transit agency, Translink
in Vancouver, BC released a primer on transit-
oriented development design guidelines that
maximize access to transit:
http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Up
loads/20120718TransitOrientedCommunitiesD
esignGuidelines.pdf
− In 2013, the City Council of Charlotte, NC,
approved a transit station area plan for urban and
suburban transit stations. The plans address
conceptual land uses, propose new mobility and
accessibility for bicycles and pedestrians, and set
critical land use and community design policies for
each station area, as well as the surrounding rail
corridor and right-of-way:
http://ww.charmeck.org/Planning/Land%20Use
%20Planning/Transit_Station_Area_Plans/Nort
heast_Corridor/BLE_AdoptedPlan.pdf
Although it is difficult to fulfill every promise made in a TOD plan for a variety of reasons, there are
successful implementations of transit-oriented plans
and developments, if success is measured in the form
of increasing density, accessibility, and overall activity in a formerly underutilized urban land use. Such sites
include Fruitvale Station in Oakland, CA, Olympic
Village in Vancouver, WA, and several locations along
the Red Line in Los Angeles, CA.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Across the United States, communities, cities, regions
and employers have used TDM as part of other
strategies to help manage growth, alleviate congestion, and encourage economic development. In many regions,
the main objective is to increase the accessibility of
Cambridge, MA has long included TDM measures in
development review, with a formal TDM Ordinance
adopted in 2006. The ordinance identifies a series of
TDM measures and defines thresholds for when they
take effect and become effective requirements of
1107
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 31
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples employment, much of which is located in suburban areas
and is inaccessible due to a lack of regional transit
service and poor (or nonexistent) pedestrian
infrastructure. Providing greater access helps both
potential employees by opening up economic
opportunities and employers by enlarging their potential labor pool and minimizing costs. In many cases, there
are direct tax benefits or available funding for the
implementation of existing TDM strategies. TDM
strategies are designed to work together, with the most significant impact on creating options and changing
travel behaviors arising from implementing different
combinations of strategies.
Many TDM strategies are designed to be implemented
by employers but can be established or supported
through partnerships at a municipal or regional level.
Employers around the country, recognizing that difficult or costly commutes is one of the primary reasons
employee leave their jobs, have demonstrated an
interest and willingness to develop these strategies
because they have proven effective at helping employers attract and retain a quality workforce.
development. Mandated use of a TDM program is
triggered by an increase in off-street parking (as little as one space), with development adding twenty
spaces requiring a more involved level of
commitment.
Faced with both a shortage of parking for customers
and citizens’ aversion to additional traffic, the City of Boulder developed a program that combines reduced
subsidies for downtown parking with aggressive
transportation demand management. All downtown
parking revenue, including more than $1 million per
year from meters and over $2 million per year from
garages, is returned to the community for area
improvements, including streetscape enhancements
and bicycle parking.
Among major TDM programs, Contra Costa
Guaranteed Ride Home Program (GRH) already
serves Richmond. Additionally, there are many
resources, including carpool/vanpool matching
services, trip planning tools, and information for
employers provided by the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC) at
www.511.org.
Like all TDM programs, the use of such resources
depends on whether employers are aware of the
programs, their ease of use, and their applicability to the context of each home and work location.
Richmond adopted a TDM Ordinance (see RMC
Section 15.04.612) that requires projects of a certain
size to incorporate measures to reduce single-
occupancy vehicle use.
TransForm GreenTrip certifies residential projects that apply strategies to reduce vehicle trips, excessive
parking and greenhouse gases, while making
transportation more affordable.
Parking Management With decentralized management, each department or authority manages parking to achieve its own goals.
Working together and establishing consolidated and
documented parking goals will make the system work
together, instead of competing against one another.
In 2010, the Seattle (WA) City Council approved
criteria to allow SDOT to manage on-street parking
with a goal of maintaining each block face at 75-88%
occupied. The SDOT Director has authority to adjust
rates (ranging between $1 and $4) within zones by
1108
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 32
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples location and time of day. Data collected in 2011
indicates that price increases created availability and price decreases had little impact.
Berkeley, California coordinates their on-and off-street parking prices to both simplify information for drivers and to set rates for off-street facilities that are lower than nearby on-street rates.
(
http://www.goberkeley.info/)
In-lieu fees may be used to finance the construction
and management of parking spaces in centrally
located public garages that serve various
developments, including ones that opt for in-lieu fees
instead of providing on-site parking. Locations from
Santa Monica, CA to Montgomery County, MD have
in-lieu fees established.
Situations arise where the minimum parking
requirements interfere with the ability of the
owner/occupant to change the use of their property.
As discussed above, often the minimum parking
requirements set out in the zoning code require more
off street parking than is feasible within the constraints of the property. In mid- to high-density town centers
where lots are small and available space is limited,
this can become a serious obstruction to sensible
redevelopment.
The designation of curbsides --for reasons including
freight loading and maintaining traffic flows and
visibility-- also affect parking. The city of San
Francisco has a “Color Curb Program” in which not
only are all curbs given one of five colors denoting
parking regulations, but also that residents or
businesses can apply for a new curbside color on a
monthly basis.9
9 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, “Color Curb Program,” https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/2017/ColorCurbBrochure_2017%20Eng_0.pdf 1109
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 33
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples Per the code of Providence, RI, any spaces reserved
for car share facilities “may count toward minimum
parking requirements.”10
Employer-Based Incentives and Support
Priority parking for carpools/vanpools
Parking cash-out programs
Information and assistance with transportation options Guaranteed or emergency ride home (GRH) programs
Subsidies or other incentives such as the commuter
pre-tax transit benefit program and deep discount bulk
transit pass programs
Flexible work schedules (to facilitate ridesharing
arrangements)
On-site amenities or vehicles (bicycles or cars)
available to run errands during the day
Lockers and showers for those who bicycle to work as
well as secure and convenient bicycle parking
Per City Ordinance, all businesses in Richmond with at
least 10 employees are required to offer a pre-tax
election of transit, vanpool, or bicycle commuting costs, a paid transit pass (or equivalent reimbursement for
vanpools), employer furnished transit at no cost to the employee, or an alternative benefit pre-approved by the City. The threshold for this requirement (10 employees) is much lower than a similar measure required for all Bay Area employers to register with a commuter benefits
program (50 employees).
Priority parking recognizes that parking is a finite
resource and should be managed to assure maximum
access for patrons. It reserves the most convenient
parking spaces to support customer, client, vendor, and visitor access and to promote ridesharing in the form or carpool/vanpool or car sharing (also sometimes used to
promote electric vehicles and motorcycles).
Parking cash out is a policy whereby employees who
may be offered parking as a benefit of their job are
offered monthly cash benefits or free transit passes in exchange for giving up their free or employee paid
parking. Often, revenues from paid parking facilities will pay for the free employee transit passes and other
related benefits. A parking cash out policy reduces
employee parking demand through financial incentives or free alternative transportation.
GRH programs provide an occasional subsidized ride to
commuters who use alternative modes, for example, if a
bus rider must return home in an emergency or a
carpooler must stay at work later than expected.
Employers can offer a wide range of incentives to
encourage the use of commute alternatives among
employees, including selling transit passes on site,
The Community Transportation Association provides a
comprehensive Transportation to Work Toolkit for the
business community
(
http://web1.ctaa.org/webmodules/webarticles/an
mviewer.asp?a=1442), including a number of
profiles of employer-sponsored transportation
programs
(
http://www.ctaa.org/webmodules/webarticles/arti
clefiles/ProfilesofEmployer-
SupportedTransportationPrograms.pdf).
The Moving to Work in the Bay Area report in 2013
provides greater context of the jobs and housing
balance challenges in the Bay Area (and the important
role of transportation solutions):
http://reconnectingamerica.org/resource-
center/books-and-reports/2013/moving-to-work-
in-the-bay-area/
Major employers throughout the Bay Area have taken
strides to support employees who commute to work
by means other than single-occupant vehicles:
− Adobe provides employees with a monthly subsidy
of $100 for transit commuters and $20 for bicycle
commuters.
The Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory provides a
dedicated web page listing all pertinent commute trip
planning information. LBL also permits bicycles to be
parked indoors within an individual’s workspace.
Additional an advisory group of staff and faculty is
empowered to assess current transportation and
parking conditions and propose needs for the campus
“in support of science.” http://commute.lbl.gov/TPSS
10 Providence Municipal Code of Ordinances, 1402.D.1, accessed July 7, 2017. 1110
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN INVENTORY OF MODERN PRACTICES |JULY 2017
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 34
First-/Last-Mile Improvement Description Case Study Examples providing transit subsidies and establishing pre-tax
spending accounts to pay for commuting expenses.
1111
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN | FINAL REPORT City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
Appendix B Existing Conditions and
Needs Assessment
1112
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | i
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE
TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment
September 2017
1113
Table of Contents
Page
1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 Key Findings ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Report Structure ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2 Service, Plan, Policy, and Program Review ........................................................................ 4 Transit Service ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Ferry Service............................................................................................................................................. 13 Recent Plans and Policies ....................................................................................................................... 15 3 Inventory of Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment ................................................. 30 Mobility Hubs and Areas of Connectivity ........................................................................................... 30 Bicycle and Pedestrian Demand ........................................................................................................... 43 Pedestrian and Bicycle Access .............................................................................................................. 45 Transit and Shuttle Access ...................................................................................................................... 57 Transit-Oriented Development .............................................................................................................. 67 Shared Mobility ....................................................................................................................................... 82 Transportation Demand Management ................................................................................................. 86 Autonomous Vehicle Assessment ............................................................................................................ 88 4 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 93 Next Steps ................................................................................................................................................. 94 Appendix A Detailed Summary of Existing Plans and Policies ............................................... 96 City of Richmond Programs and Plans................................................................................................. 96 AC Transit ............................................................................................................................................... 109 County and Regional Programs and Plans ...................................................................................... 111 Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) .......................................................................................................... 114 Amtrak/Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority ........................................................................... 116 Water Emergency Transportation Authority ................................................................................... 116 Appendix B Zoning Details for Transit-Oriented Development ............................................. 118 Appendix C Mobility Hub Urban Design and Pedestrian Experience Analysis ...................... 125
Table of Figures
Page
Figure 1 Existing Transit Service in Richmond ...................................................................................... 5 Figure 2 Richmond Ferry Terminal Site Plan and Parking .............................................................. 14 Figure 3 Richmond Ferry Terminal Site Plan Detail .......................................................................... 14 Figure 4 Contents of Recent Plans and Policies ................................................................................. 15 Figure 5 Improvements Recommended in Relevant Plans and Policies......................................... 16 Figure 6 Profile of Recommended Improvements for Mobility Hubs and Areas of Connectivity .............................................................................................................................. 17 Figure 7 Profile of Recommended Improvements for Additional Vital Transportation Nodes ........................................................................................................................................ 22 Figure 8 Designation of Corridors in Richmond Plans ...................................................................... 28 Figure 9 Profile of Important Statistics on Mobility Hubs and Areas of Connectivity .............. 31 1114
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | ii
Figure 10 City of Richmond Transportation Hubs and Population/Employment Density ........... 33 Figure 11 Sign Outside Richmond BART Station Facing 19th Street ............................................... 34 Figure 12 Richmond BART Station ADA Passenger Loading ............................................................. 35 Figure 13 Existing Bus Stop Near Future Richmond Ferry Terminal ................................................ 37 Figure 14 Ohlone Greenway Approach to El Cerrito del Norte BART Station from the North ......................................................................................................................................... 38 Figure 15 Bus Bays on Western Side of El Cerrito del Norte BART Station .................................. 40 Figure 16 Major Employers in Richmond .............................................................................................. 43 Figure 17 Bicycle and Pedestrian Propensity Index (Estimated Demand) .................................... 44 Figure 18 Mode of Access to Home Origin Stations (2008-2015) ............................................... 45 Figure 19 Median Distance Travelled from Home Origins to Home BART Station (2008- 2015) ........................................................................................................................................ 45 Figure 20 Pedestrian Barriers, Facilities, and Walkshed at El Cerrito del Norte BART Station ....................................................................................................................................... 46 Figure 21 Intersection of Hill Street, Eastshore Boulevard, and San Pablo Avenue .................... 47 Figure 22 Pedestrian Barriers, Facilities, and Walkshed at Ferry Terminal .................................. 48 Figure 23 Missing Crosswalks at Hall Avenue and Marina Way South ....................................... 49 Figure 24 Pedestrian Barriers, Facilities, and Walkshed at Richmond BART Station .................. 50 Figure 25 Pedestrian Barrier at Macdonald Avenue and 20th Street ......................................... 51 Figure 25 Bike Facilities and Bikeshed around El Cerrito del Norte BART Station ..................... 52 Figure 26 Bicycle Rider on Sidewalk along Cutting Boulevard (at I-80 On-Ramp) .................... 53 Figure 27 Bike Facilities and Bikeshed around the Future Richmond Ferry Terminal ................... 54 Figure 28 Markings and Obstructions along Bay Trail Outside Ford Building ............................. 55 Figure 29 Bike Facilities and Bikeshed around Richmond BART Station ......................................... 56 Figure 30 Nevin Avenue and 23rd Street ............................................................................................ 57 Figure 31 Transit and Shuttle Access - Richmond BART Station ...................................................... 59 Figure 32 Transit and Shuttle Access - El Cerrito del Norte BART Station .................................... 60 Figure 33 Transit and Shuttle Access - Contra Costa College ........................................................ 61 Figure 34 Transit and Shuttle Access - El Cerrito Plaza BART ......................................................... 62 Figure 35 Transit and Shuttle Access - Richmond Ferry Terminal (future) ..................................... 63 Figure 36 Transit and Shuttle Access - Richmond Parkway Transit Center and Hilltop Mall .... 64 Figure 37 Home Origin Cities for Riders Who Start their BART Trips at Richmond BART Station (2015) ......................................................................................................................... 65 Figure 38 Home Origin Cities for Riders Who Start their BART Trips at El Cerrito del Norte BART Station (2015)............................................................................................................... 66 Figure 39 Home Origin Cities for Riders Who Start their BART Trips at El Cerrito Plaza BART Station (2015)............................................................................................................... 66 Figure 40 Vision Plan from Livable Corridors Plan for Macdonald Avenue ................................. 69 Figure 41 Vacant Parcels and Opportunity Sites at Richmond BART Station .............................. 70 Figure 42 Vision Plan from Richmond Bay Specific Plan ................................................................... 73 Figure 43 Vision Plan from Livable Corridors Plan for Ferry Terminal ......................................... 74 Figure 44 Vacant Parcels and Opportunity Sites at Richmond Ferry Terminal ............................ 75 Figure 45 Vacant Parcels and Opportunity Sites at the RPTC/Hilltop Mall Areas ..................... 77 Figure 46 Zoning Summary from San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (2014) ................................. 78 Figure 47 Opportunity Site Study from SCS by Strengthening Public Health Plan ..................... 81 Figure 48 Opportunities for Improving Mobility Hubs and Areas of Connectivity ...................... 93 1115
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | iii
Figure 49 Place-Based Circulation Classification System .................................................................. 98 Figure 50 Pedestrian Shed Definitions ............................................................................................... 102 Figure 51 Planned Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements Map with Pedestrian Improvement Districts, 2030 General Plan..................................................................... 106 Figure 52 Richmond Ferry Terminal Site Plan and Parking ........................................................... 117 Figure 53 Richmond Ferry Terminal Site Plan Detail ....................................................................... 117 Figure 54 Richmond BART Station Zoning Map from Richmond Livable Corridors .................. 118 Figure 55 Zoning Details Surrounding Richmond BART Station ..................................................... 119 Figure 56 Richmond Ferry Terminal Zoning Map from City Zoning Update and Richmond Bay Specific Plan ................................................................................................................. 120 Figure 57 Zoning Details Surrounding Richmond Ferry Terminal .................................................. 120 Figure 58 Richmond Parkway Transit Center / Hilltop Mall Zoning Map from City Zoning Update ................................................................................................................................... 121 Figure 59 Zoning Details Surrounding Richmond Parkway Transit Center / Hilltop Mall ........ 122
1116
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 1
1 INTRODUCTION
First mile and last mile strategies provide importa nt connections to public transportation.
Although a transit (bus and rail) system often make s up the core of a transpor tation network, how someone accesses that system can determine whether someone chooses to ride transit or travel another way. Even when the physical distance is sho rt, issues of comfort, safety, convenience, and cost affect an individual’s travel choices. Efforts to improve any of these characteristics alo ng key routes to transit stops and stations can have a wid er influence on a community’s quality of life ; areas where people are walking, biking, and taking transit are often more vibrant and pleasant than auto -oriented areas . Providing convenient, affordable, and safe options to access transit and other modes reduce s traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions a nd supports economic and physical health.
Richmond’s residents, businesses, and visitors rely on several transit systems including Amtrak, BART, and AC Transit to access services, amenities, and opportunities both regiona lly and locally.
The City has already made strides towards greater sustainability and mobility through recent planning and polic y efforts, such as the South Richmond Transportatio n Connectivity Plan, the Livable Corridors Form -Based Code, and the 2012 General Plan. Described further in Chapter 2 , these efforts reflec t the City’s desires to support Richmond’s opportun ities and commu nities through multimodal, integrated transportation. The Richmond First Mile/ Last Mile Strategic Transportation planning effort aims to leverage the work done to d ate to enhance connections to existing transit hubs and support multimodal connectivity city wide.
Laying the groundwork for recommended strategies to create these connections, t his report evaluates and documents opportunities and barriers related to accessibility and connectivity within the City of Richmond. It draws on a thorough review of rele vant planning documents, meetings with key stakeholders, in -person observations , field data collection, and GIS analysis.
KEY FINDINGS
Nelson \ Nygaard’s research and analysis yielded several key findings, included below:
Due to its location in the Bay Area and connect ion s with multiple major transportation networks, Richmond is well positioned to take advan tage of ongoing innovations in mobility.
However, the city’s access to transit is complicated by its topography, administrative boundaries, and proximity to major regional freeways. Rail rights of way and Interstates 80 and 580 are barriers for pedestrians and bicyclists, and they a lso complicate designing transit routes for effective coverage.
Richmond is characterized by a mix of moderate and low-density development served by a few primary mobility hubs that facilitate both re gional and local access via multiple transportation systems. Mobility hubs include:
− Richmond BART Station
1117
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2
− Richmond Ferry Terminal (future)
− El Cerrito del Norte BART Station
In additio n to these hubs, several other sites also provide connections between different transit services but with lower levels of transit s ervice. These areas of connectivity often include an activity center of smaller scale commerc ial development and/ or major emp loyment providers. These sites include:
− Richmond Parkway Transit Center/ Hilltop Mall
− El Cerrito Plaza BART Station
− Contra Costa College
The density of intersections, population , and employment in central downtown Richmond are highly conducive to sustainabl e transportation behavior and leveraging existing access to transit. However, many of the mo bility hubs possess physical barriers to walking and biking.
− Although a large amount of bike infrastructure has been proposed, the existing facilities vary in their coverage and connectivity. This is most notable in the future Richmond Ferry Terminal area, where gaps in the bik e network hinder access to several prime bike facilities — the San Francisco Bay Trail and the Richmond Greenway.
− Almost all mobility hubs have multiple crossing barriers in the immedia te vicinity.
For instance, nearly all intersections around El Ce rrito del Norte BART station have multiple legs requiring pedestrians to cross up to twelve lanes of traffic. Richmond BART station has the fewest walking obstacles, but there are still important corridors missing sidewalks on one side.
− The quality of the pedestrian experience is also affected by def iciencies in infrastructure (inaccessible curb ramps, crumbling sidewalks, missing lighting) and the surrounding environment (empty parcels, high -volume streets, and the perception of safety).
There are multiple development opportunities throug hout Richmond; however, activation of these areas is often conditional on p roportional investment in transportation programs and infrastructure.
− For example, the future Richmond Ferry Terminal presents an importan t opportunity to establish convenient, safe, and intuitive links between the waterfront and other major activity centers in the city. Without strategic investment in sustainable transportation options, the area is at risk of cont inuing to be an isolated commercial and recreational node.
− Many of the other mobility hubs and areas of connec tivity have nearby vacant parcels or unused areas within their site that may be repur posed for transportation connections.
REPORT STRUCTURE
This report contains the following sections:
Plan , Po licy, an d Pro gram Re vie w . Chapter 2 presents an overview of existing plans, policies, and other documents prepared by the City of Richmond, Contra Costa County, AC Transit, BART, and other key stakeholder entitie s. This overview focuses on 1118
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3
observations and recommendations for improving mult imodal access and connec tivity, particularly around the mobility hubs and other are as of connectivity. This section also summarizes the existing transit service to, from, a nd within Richmond. In ve n to ry o f Exis tin g Co n ditio n s . Chapter 3 describes existing conditions for accessing central mobility hubs by multiple modes o f transportation, as well as the quality of connectivity for the larger Richmond area. This chapter identifies barriers and potential opportunities for enhancing access through physical infrastructure an d programs.
Acces s ibility Ne eds As s es s m e n t. Chapter 4 summarizes the key t akeaways from the prior chapters and lays the groundwork for developi ng strategies to improve access and connectivity in Richmond.
1119
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 4
2 SERVICE, PLAN, POLICY, AND
PROGRAM REVIEW
The City of Richmond has a solid foundation of transit service with various ways to access thes e services by non -motorized means. As noted in the City’s 2011 Pedestrian Plan, Richmond “was originally developed around pedestrian travel and t he streetcar, and persists to this day as a transit- rich, transit -oriented community.” 1 However, the vibrancy of Richmond’s public realm is challenged by auto -oriented street design, poor maintenance of roads , gaps in the sidewalk network, a non- linear street grid, hilly topography, and a historic perception of crime and other threats to personal safety. 2
However, the City has developed many plans over the l ast two decades to address these challenges. The concentrated transit -oriented development surrounding Richmond BART Station and the plans to implement regional ferry s ervice at Ford Point have focused attention on the city’s crucial mobility hubs and the need to create strong connect ions between them with access design guidelines, bicycle connections, and street design. City policies and plans reflect efforts to regulate Richmond’s sidewalks and str eets , from applying form- based codes to establishing pedestrian plans that prioritize complete streets a nd formalize the consideration of bicyclists and pedestrians in the planning, design and constructio n of all transportation projects. 3 From a citywide p erspective, much of the recent planning activity focuses on Richmond’s freeway and rail corridors, as well as on the Bay’s shoreline.
This chapter summarizes recent plans and policies r elevant to improving multimodal mobility and access to Richmond’s trans it network , beginning with a summary of the existing transit networks serving Richmond . The remainder of the chapter reviews existing plans, policies, and other documents prepared by the City of Richmond, C ontra Costa County, BART, and other key stakeholde r entities. This overview focuses on observations a nd recommendations for improving multimodal access and connectivity, particularly ar ound mobility hubs. Additional detail is provided in Appendix A.
1 City of Richmond, Richmond Pedestrian Plan, 2011, p. 16 2 Other challenges include “unemployment, blight and decay, beleaguered and underfunded schools, little access to healthy foods, persistent health problems including asthma and obesity, high levels of violent crime, dangerous streets, and hopelessness.” City of Richmond, Yellow Brick Road Iron Triangle, 2016, p. 7 3 As defined by MTC Resolution number 3765.
1120
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5
Figure 1 Existing Transit Service in Richmond
1121
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6
TRANSIT SERVICE
The transit service profiled is a “snapshot” of exi sting service as presented from each transit provider’s publicly posted spring 2017 schedules and maps. Since the new fiscal year start ed J uly 1, 2017, t here may be small changes in the particular schedul ed times listed as many transit agencies make small adjustments to existing routes and sched ules when starting a new fiscal year (in the case of AC Transit, a slight fare increase was enacted at the start of the 2017/ 2018 fiscal year ).
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
Richmond has been served by a terminal station of t he BART system since 1973, when the second segment of direct BART service to Oakland opened. 4 Today, trains serving the Rich m o n d BART Statio n provide:
Direct service to Fremont via Oakland, 365 days a y ear (this line extends to Warm Springs/ South Fremont after 6:00 p.m. on weekdays a nd all day on weekends). Direct service to Daly City and Millbrae via San Fr ancisco and the Transbay Tube is provided on weekdays until the afternoon rush hour ends and on Saturdays . Collectively, these trains serve Richmond with a fr equency of every seven to eight minutes during morning peak, midday, and evening peak perio ds on weekdays, every nine to 11 minutes on Saturdays during the day, and every 20 minutes on all evenings, Sundays, and holidays.
On weekdays, trains depart Richmond 4:12 a.m. throu gh 12:17 a.m. On Saturdays, trains depart Richmond 5:55 a.m. thro ugh 12:17 a.m. On Sundays and holidays, trai ns depart Richmond 7:55 a.m. through 12:17 a.m.
Ridership at Richmond reached record highs in BART’s fiscal year of 2016, with an average of 4,434 station exits per weekday 5. Although this is an increase of over 50% from sta tion exits in fiscal year 1999, Richmond’s BART ridership is low relative to that of other BART stations . Only South Hayward Station ha d a lower number of average station exits among Ric hmond- Fremont line stations in fiscal 2016.
However, the next two stations on the line — El Ce rrito de l N o rte and El Cerrito Plaza — play a critical role in Richmond’s transit service. With 9,229 and 5,131 average weekday station exits, respectively, El Cerrito del Norte and El Cerrito P laza BART Stations function as key transit gateways to Contra Costa Co unty and provide direct service to Richmond’s southwestern neighborhoods.
4 https://web.archive.org/web/20131013054420/. http://www.bart.gov/docs/BARThistory.pdf. 5 Although BART does collect data on station entries as well, in BART’s Station Access Surveys, average weekday ridership per station over a fiscal year is shown in station exits. There are multiple benefits from showing this figure, including the fact that it represents one-half of a round-trip journey, reducing the likelihood that individual riders are double-counted. Additionally, in the case of stations outside of regional cores (like the Market Street stations in San Francisco), the number of station exits are typically higher than entries (as they were for the Richmond station as recently as April 2017), which captures more individuals choosing to ride BART. This may be because many carpool passengers only take a carpool in the morning and take transit in the evening. As tolling for the Bay Bridge only occurs for westbound traffic into San Francisco, there is less incentive for forming carpools in the evening outbound trips. The higher afternoon demand for outbound transit is reflected most prominently in AC Transit’s Transbay schedules, many of which schedule more buses in the afternoon.
1122
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 7
AC Transit
AC Transit is the largest bus transit service in th e East Bay and the City of Richmond , primarily serving Alameda and Contra Costa Counties . In total, the City is served by 10 regular local buses (one of which, the 72R, operates with limited stops ), and five Transbay express buses with direct service to San Francisco (one of which operates ove rnight). Outside of the BART stations, the major termini for AC Transit routes in Richmond include the Richmond Parkway Transit Cente r (RPTC) and Hilltop Mall. Contra Costa College , which is located in San Pablo between the downtown and Hilltop areas of Richmond, is also a major transfer point and transit center for Richmond bus riders .
Transbay Routes
Lin e H runs from the intersection of Barrett Avenue and San Pablo Avenue in Richmond to the Transbay Terminal in San Francisco via El Ce rrito, Kensington, and Berkeley. It runs in peak direction only (toward San Francisco i n the morning peak period and toward Richmond during the evening peak) on weekday s (departing from 6:10 to 8:16 a.m. and arriving from 5:12 to 8:17 p.m.). Local passengers are permitted on Line H. Lin e L runs from Princeton Plaza in San Pablo to the Tran sbay Terminal in San Francisco via San Pablo Avenue , Central Avenue , and Pierce Street in Richmond (as well as El Sobrante, El Cerrito, and Albany). It departs Cutting and San Pablo approximately every 15 to 20 minutes from 5:50 a.m. to 8:34 a.m., and arrives at the same location from 3:41 p.m. to 7:36 p.m. – all on weekdays only. The route is only for Transba y riders. o LC is a part -time extension of Line L. It runs only from the Tra nsbay Terminal in San Francisco to Hilltop Mall (via Central Avenue, Cutting Boulevard, and the RTPC) during weekday evenings. It arrives at the RP TC at 8:21 p.m., 8:51 p.m. and 9:51. Local passengers are permitted to ride Li ne LC. Lin e LA runs from Park Central at Hilltop Drive to the Tra nsbay Terminal in San Francisco via Parkway Drive, Park C entral, Hillton Drive, Richmond Parkway, and the RPTC. It departs Hilltop Mall every 20 -30 minutes from 5:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and arrives at the same location from 4:23 p.m. to 8:06 p.m. – all on weekdays only. Local passengers are permitted to ride Line LA.
Lin e 8 0 0 is an “all -nighter ” bus providing overnight Transbay service from Richmond BART Station to Mission 24 th Street BART in San Francisco via El Cerrito, Alban y, Berkeley, and Oakland. It generally follows the sam e BART corridor, but with far more frequent stops. Line 800 is considered an essential piece of the regional transit network, as the BART system does not operate overnight. Line 800 is also notable in that it is the only AC Transit late night line to actually serve S an Francisco; connectio ns to all other routes are made in Downtown Oakland. On weekdays, b uses depart Richmond BART Station every 60 minutes from 12:52 a.m. (35 minutes after the last BART train) to 4:52 a.m. On weekend nights, buses depart Richmond BART Station every 30 minutes from 12:33 a.m. (16 minutes after the last BART train) t o 7:03 a.m. Local passengers are permitted to ride Line 80 0.
Local Routes
Lin e 7 runs from El Cerrito del Norte BART to Downtown Ber keley BART via San Pablo Avenue and Barret Avenue in Richmond (as w ell as El Cerrito and Kensington). It runs 1123
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 8
approximately every 30 minutes, departing El Cerrit o from 6:05 a.m. to 8:05 p.m. on weekdays and 7:55 a.m. to 6:25 p.m. on weekends.
Lin e 70 runs from Richmond BART Station to RPTC via 18 th Street, Rheem Avenue , and 29 th Street in Richmond, San Pablo, El Sobrante, and Pinole. O n weekdays, Line 70 runs approximately every 30 minutes, departing Richmond BART Station from 5:58 p.m. to 7:58 p.m. On weekends, Line 70 runs approximately e very 60 minutes, departing Richm ond BART Station from 6:38 p.m. to 8:38 p.m .
Lin e 71 runs from El Cerrito Plaza BART to RPTC via Carlson Boulevard, Hartnett Avenue , 47th Street, Potrero Avenue , Macdonald Avenue , Richmond BART Station , Harbour Way, and 13 th Street in Richmond, the City of San Pablo, and then Phanor Drive, J enkins Way, Williams Drive, the United Parcel Serv ice (UPS) center on Atlas Road, and Richmond Parkway in Richmond again. On weekdays, Li ne 70 runs approximately every 30 minutes, departing the RPTC from 5:45 a.m. to 7: 45 p.m. On weekdays, Line 70 runs approximately every 30 minutes, departing the RPTC from 6:43 a.m. to 8:43 p.m. On weekends, Line 71 runs approximately every 60 minut es, departing the RPTC from 6:21 a.m. to 8:21 p.m.
With the two local 72 corridor lines co mbined, local bus service along San Pablo Avenue to Richmond runs with a frequency of 15 minutes, seven days a week. − Lin e 72 runs from Oakland’s J ack London Square to Contra Co sta College, with an extension to Hilltop Mall (when the mall is in oper ation), via the San Pablo Avenue corridor running through Oakland, Emeryville, Berke ley, Albany, El Cerrito (including El Cerrito del Norte BART), and Richmond . Line 72 runs approximately every 30 minutes, departing Contra Costa College fr om 5:10 a.m. to 12:20 a.m. on weekdays, from 5:21 a.m. to 12:40 a.m. on Saturdays , and from 5:21 to 12:31 a.m. on Sundays and holidays.
− Lin e 72 M runs from Oakland’s J ack London Square to Point Ric hmond. From Oakland, Line 72M generally follows the same corrid or and makes the same stops as Line 72, but upon entering the City of Richmond, it runs along Macdonald Avenue instead of San Pablo, and also serves Richmond BART Station . Line 72M runs approximately every 30 minutes, departing Castro St reet & Tewksbury Avenue from 4:45 a.m. to 11:21 p.m. on weekdays, 5:03 a.m. to 1:0 2 a.m. o n Saturdays, and 5:03 a.m. to 12:51 a.m. on Sundays and holidays.
Lin e 72 R is a limited stop route (branded as “San Pablo Rapi d”) that runs from Oakland’s J ack London Square to Contra Costa Colleg e. Line 72R follows the same corridor as Line 72, but with limited stops and no extension to Hilltop Mall. Within Richmond, the only stops made are along San Pablo Avenue at Macdonald Avenue and at Garvin Avenue (Line 72R also stops at El Cerrito del Norte BART). Line 72R runs approximately every 12 minutes on weekdays, departi ng Contra Costa College from 6:04 a.m. to 7:16 p.m. On weekends and holidays, Line 72 R runs approximately every 15 minutes from 6:55 a.m. to 6:55 p.m.
Lin e 74 runs from Richmond Harbour to Castro Ranch Road in El Sobrante (with a part time extension to Hilltop Mall on weekends) via Har bour Way South, Regatta Boulevard, Marina Bay Parkway, 23 rd Street, Macdonald Avenue , Richmond BART Station , and 23 rd Street in Richmond, San Pablo, El Sobrante, and May Road again in Richmond. Line 76 runs approximately every 30 minutes, departing Harb our Way South & Ford Point from 5:28 a.m. to 8:58 p.m. on weekdays, and from 7:00 a .m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekends. 1124
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 9
Lin e 76 runs from El Cerrito del Norte BART to Hilltop Mall via Cutting Boulevard, Macdonald Avenue , Richmond BART Station, 7 th Street, Fred J ackson Way, in Richmond, North Richmond, San Pablo, and Lancaster Drive, Abe rdeen Way, Birmingham Drive, and Shane Drive in Richmond again. Line 76 runs app roximately every 30 minutes, departing Hilltop Mall from 5:41 a.m. to 8:41 p.m. on weekdays, and from 6:29 a.m. to 7:29 p.m. on weekends.
Lin e 3 76 runs from El Cerrito del Norte BART to Pinole via C utting Boulevard, Macdonald Avenue , 7th Street, and Fred J ackson Wa y in Richmond, North Richmond, San Pablo, and then runs along a one- way loop going through Phanor Drive, J enkins Way, Williams Drive, the United Parcel Service (UPS ) center on Atlas Road, Richmond Parkway, Fitzgerald Drive in Pinole, then back thro ugh RPTC , Klose Way, Hilltop Mall, and Robert H. Miller Drive before connecting back w ith the two -way route at Contra Costa College. Line 376 runs approximately every 30 minutes, departing Richmond BART Station from 8:35 p.m. to 2:45 a.m. 7 days a week.
AC Transi t also operates four s cho o l ro ute s in and around Richmond. These routes, intended for K-12 student commutes, only operate on school days:
Line 607
Line 667
Line 668
Line 675
Amtrak
The National Railroad Passenger Corporation, also k nown as Amtrak, provide s intercity rail service to Richmond. Located on a platform along th e historic Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad (now BNSF) right- of-way, Richmond’s Amtrak station is virtually adjacen t to the Richmond BART Station and can be accessed by the same und erground network of passageways.
There are three Amtrak lines serving Richmond BART Station :
The Capito l Co rrido r (operated by Amtrak California, a joint enterprise of Amtrak and Caltrans) provides service from San J ose to Auburn via Sacramento. With 7 we ekday trains to San J ose and 15 weekday trains to Sacrame nto, the Capitol Corridor is by far the most frequent Amtrak route serving Richmond.
The San Jo aqu in (operated by Amtrak California) provides service fr om Oakland to Bakersfield via Stockton. There a re 5 weekday trains headed to Bakersfield from Richmond. At Bakersfield, many riders will connect to a thruway bus to Los Angeles Union Station.
The Califo rn ia Ze ph yr (operated by Amtrak) provides long -distance service from Emeryville to Chicago, IL with one train per day.
The Co as tal Starligh t is an active long -distance train also serving the East Bay, but it no longer stops at Richmond.
The Richmond BART Station is the closest direct connection between an y BART station and Amtrak. The next closest conn ection is an 800 -foot walkway at the Coliseum Station in Oakland – approximately 15 miles southeast of Richmond. Also unlike Coliseum Station, which only serves local train routes between Oakland and San J ose, Ri chmond ’s Amtrak s tation also directly connec ts to routes to and from Sacramento and Auburn.
1125
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 10
Fairfield and Suisun Transit (FAST)
Fairfield and Suisun Transit (FAST) is a public tra nsit entity based in Solano County along with Soltrans (which services primarily Vallejo). Both s ervices operate expres s bus routes under the “SolanoExpress” banner. FAST operates one of these express routes, which is pertinent to Richmond:
Ro u te 9 0 (So lan o Expre s s ) is an express route connecting the Fairfield Transportation Center and Suisun City Amtrak Statio n with the El Cerrito del Norte BART Station. Running in both directions, Route 90 departs El Cerrito del Norte on weekdays from 5:00 a.m. through 7:30 p.m. and on Sa turdays from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (WestCAT)
Western Contra Co sta Transit Authority, or WestCAT, provides public transportation to the western portion of Contra Costa County, primarily f ocused around Hercules, Richmond, Pinole, and Martinez (among other communities), with express Transbay service to San Francisco. Ro u te 17 connects the RPTC with the Bayview neighborhood in San Pablo via Fitzgerald Drive and Appian Way. It runs only on weekdays, dep arting RPTC approximately every 60 t0 70 minutes during morning and evening hours ( 6:21 a.m. to 10:01 a.m. and from 1:11 p.m. to 6:01 p.m.)
Ro u te 18 connects the RPTC with the Tara Hills neighborhood in San Pablo via Hilltop Drive and San Pablo Avenue . It runs only on weekdays, departing RPTC approxim ately every 60 t0 70 minutes during morning and evening h ours (6:15 a.m. to 9:51 a.m. and from 1:11 p.m. to 5:55 p.m.)
Ro u te 19 connects the Hilltop Mall in Richmond with the Herc ules Transit Center. It runs on Saturdays only, departing the Hilltop Mall approximately every 45 minutes from 8:38 a.m. to 8:21 p.m.
Ro u te JR and Ro u te JL are express routes connecting Hercules Transit Cent er with El Cerrito del Norte BART via San Pablo Avenue in Pinole. The J R stops at RPTC, while the J L stops at Hilltop Mall. On weekdays, the buses co llectively depart El Cerrito del Norte every 15-30 m inutes from 5:16 a.m. to 11:56 p.m. On Saturdays, t he buses run every 40 - 60 minutes from 6:36 a.m. to 10:16 p.m. On Sundays, the buses run every 40- 60 minutes from 7:56 a.m. to 8:36 p.m.
Ro u te JX and Ro u te JPX are express routes connecting Hercules Transit Center with El Cerrito del Norte BART (the J PX includes a local extension through Pinole with a part - time midday extension to RPTC). They run on weekday s only, and collectively depart at El Cerrito del Norte approximately every 15 -60 minutes from 5:41 a.m . to 7:54 p.m.
Golden Gate Transit
Golden Gate Transit is a service operated by the Go lden Gate Bridge, Highway, and Transportation District. It primary serves the Nort h Bay, with limited service crossing the Bay to both San Francisco and Contra Costa Co unties.
Ro u te s 4 0 an d 4 0 X run from El Cerrito del Norte BART Station to the S an Rafael Transit Center in Marin County via Cutting Boulevar d and I-580. From San Rafael, one 1126
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 11
can transfer to local, regional, and intercity buse s and, in the future, to Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) trains. Routes 40 and 40 X depart El Cerrito del Norte from 5:46 a.m. to 10:55 p.m. on weekdays, and from 6:49 a.m. to 9:52 p.m. on we ekends and holidays. They run approximately every 5 to 25 minu tes during peak hours (depend ing on the direction), and 60 minutes during off peak hour s, weekends, and holidays. Although Golden Gate Transit service no longer stops at Richmond BART Station (formerly Route 44), the City of Richmond is still served by Golden Gate Transit’s direct link to Marin County. Along Cutting Boulevard, Rout es 40 and 40X stop along four major cross streets (49 th Street, Carlson Boulevard, 23 rd Street, and Harbor Way). Additionally, Route 40 stops in Point Richmond (Tewksbury Avenue at Castro Street). However, the loss of a connection at Richmond BART Station means that there is no direct t ransfer available to Golden Gate Transit from Amtrak Capitol Corridor services.
Paratransit Services
Paratransit services supplement or substitute fixed -route bus and rail se rvices for people with disabilities. These services are sometimes operated by public tra nsit agencies or other public entities.
With coverage similar to that of AC Transit, Eas t Bay Paratran s it (jointly provided by AC Transit and BART) provides A mericans w ith Disabilities Act (ADA)-standard dynamic paratransit services in Richmond among other cities throughout the East Bay. The agency also provide s paratransit service s that can originate in Richmond and terminate in San Francis co. This service is designed a s a substitute for regular bus or BART service; as such, pick -ups and drop-offs are only available within 0.75 -miles of an AC Transit bus route or within 0 .75 -miles of a BART station during the same hours of operation as those fixed -route services. Trips a re sometimes shared among passengers with similar origins and destinati ons. Reservations must be made at least a day in advance.
Provided by the City of Richmond and h eadquartered at the Richmond BART Station, R-Tran s it has been providing door -to-door dyna mic paratransit services for seniors and people with disabilities since 1976. R -Transit operates on weekdays from 8:30 am to 5:00 p m (excluding holidays). The service area includes the Richmond C ity Limits, as well as El Cerrito, San Pablo, North Richmond, El Sobrante, Kensington, and Pinole. Trips made be shared, and reservations must be made at least one day in advance.
Private and Public Shuttles
Kaiser Permanente provides complimentary shuttle se rvice from Richmond BART Station and El Cerrito del Norte Station to the Richmond Medical C enter. The Richmond BART Station shuttle runs weekdays from approximately 6:00 a.m. to 7:15 p.m. and is available for visitors. The El Cerrito del Norte BART Station shuttle only runs in peak direction during morning and afternoon rush hours, and is available to just employees.
The City of Richmond formerly offered the Richmond Circular Shuttle, a free service connecting BART stations and employment centers. Buses were op erated by transMetro and funded by the Bay Area Air Q uality Mitigation District (BAAQMD) until 2013 , when funding was no longer available . These routes included:
1127
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 12
The main circular route, originating at Richmond BART Station , connected with the Richmond Civic Center, the intersection of Macdonal d Avenue and Garrard Boulevard, Contra Costa County Health Offices, Rumr ill Boulevard and Sutter Avenue , Contra Costa College, the Doctor’s Medical Center on Vale Road, San Pablo Lytton Casino, and the shopping center at San Pablo Avenue and Macdonald Avenue . It ran in both clockwise and counter clockwise directions, departing approxi mately 40 minutes in each direction (or 20 minutes in any direction) on weekday peak ho urs. Routes departed Richmond BART Station from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. and from 2:30 p.m. to 6:20 p.m. A separate branch linked El Cerrito Del Norte BART Station to the intersection of Marina Bay Parkway and Regatta Boulevard. It ran every 15 to 20 minutes during weekday peak hours (Departing El Cerrito Del Norte from 6:34 a.m . to 7:57 a.m. and from 3:34 p .m. to 4:54 p.m.)
Soltrans
Soltrans is the main transit provider for Solano Co unty. Ro u te 8 0 is an express route connecting El Cerrito del Norte BART Station to Vallejo Transit Center, where riders can transfer to other bus routes throughout Solano County and the North Bay. Running in both directions, buse s depart El Cerrito del Norte BART Station approximately every 15 minutes during peak hours, a nd every 30 minutes on all other times, including Saturdays. Service runs from 5:15 a.m. to 10:54 p.m. on weekd ays and from 6:35 a.m. to 11:01 p.m. on Saturdays. 6
Ro u te 8 2 is an express route connecting Vallejo and Sereno Transit Centers with the San Francisco Transbay Terminal via El Cerrito del Nort e BART. This route is a single evening run each weekday intended to provide supplemental service to the Vallejo Ferr y. Buses departing for San Francisco depart El Cerrito del N orte BART at 9:48 p.m., while buses headed towards Vallejo and Sereno depart El Cerrito del BART at 11:01 p.m.
The Vine
The Vine is the main tra nsit provider for Napa County. Ro u te 2 9 is a limited stop bus route connecting El Cerrito d el Norte BART to the Napa Transit Center via the Vallejo Ferry Terminal and A merican Canyon, (with a part- time extension going further north to Yountville, St. He len a, and Calistoga). Running on weekdays only (but in both directions all day), bus es depart El Cerrito del Norte BART Station approximately every 30 to 60 minutes from 5:55 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Although the route technically connects El Cerrito/ Richmond to a ferry terminal to the north, passengers are not permitted to use Route 29 to mak e such a connecting trip “d ue to an agreement with Soltrans .”7
6 On Sunday, Route 80 South connects Vallejo to Walnut Creek BART only. 7 http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/vine-opens-route-to-el-cerrito-bart/article_c6b4f616-3327-11df-8fb9- 001cc4c002e0.html
1128
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 13
FERRY SERVICE
Passenger ferry transit service is one of the oldes t transportation modes serving the San Francisco Bay Area. Today, multiple entities provide ferry service, including Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA as San Francisco Bay Ferry), the Blue and Gold Fleet , and the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation Distr ict (Golden Gate Ferry). The ferries serve many Bay Area cities with a developed waterfront, i ncluding San Franci sco, Oakland, Alameda, Vallejo, South San Francisco, Larkspur, Sausalito, and Tibur on. During weekday peaks, ferries may serve these locations as frequently as every 30 mi nutes. During off- peak and weekend times, frequencies range from 60 to 120 minutes.
There are currently small -scale private water taxi operations serving Richmon d’s Marina Bay Yacht Harbor. Operated by Tideline Marine Group , the service connects the Yacht Harbor and San Francisco’s Pier 1.5 during the peak hours of weekdays. Because the serv ice is private, ferry rides to Richmond are currently limited to riders w ho purchased a pass or ticket online; unlike the ferry services noted above , walk-ons are not p ermitted. Two trips are available in each direction during morning peak hours (6:30 a.m. to 9 :30 a.m.) and one trip is available in each direction in the evening (5:00 p.m. to 6:20 p.m.) T he boats have a capacity of 40 passengers. A similar service is als o in operation at Berkeley’s waterfront.
In 2015, WETA, the Contra Costa Transportation Auth ority (CCTA), and the City of Richmond entered into an agreement to subsidize the first 10 years of operations for ferry service between the San Francisco Ferry Building and Richmond. Programming for the service will primarily come from the half -cent local transportation sales tax in Contra Costa County.
The Richmond Ferry Terminal is planned to be constr ucted at what is current ly a recreational boat launch site al ong Ford Channel (the recreational launch will be r elocated to another location closer to the Richmond Marina). The ferry terminal site is adjacent to where Harbor Way South ends at Ford Channel (also known as Marina Bay Chan nel), and access will be design ed to facilitate passenger movement to the new gangway an d dock from Harbor Way South, the parking lot to the west, and the Ford Assembly Building to the east (see Figure 2 and Figure 3). The newly expand ed ferry service, which may start as early as 2018, was contingent on a grant -funded expansion of capacity at the San Francisco Ferry Te rminal , which began construction in Spring 2017.
1129
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 14
Figure 2 Richmond Ferry Terminal Site Plan and Parking
Figure 3 Richmond Ferry Terminal Site Plan Detail
1130
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 15
RECENT PLANS AND POLICIES
This section presents an overview of existing plans , policies, and other documents pre pared by the City of Richmond, Contra Costa County, BART, and ot her key stakeholder entities. This overview focuses on observations and recommendations for imp roving multimodal access and connectivity, particularly around the mobility hubs and other are as of connectivity.
The following maps and summary tables are a documen tation of all the proposed and planned infrastructure investments that will improve access to transit at mobility hub s, areas of connectivity, and other vital transportation nodes within Richmond. Each relevant plan is identified via a letter and number code as specified in Figure 4.
Figure 4 Contents of Recent Plans and Policies
Jurisdiction Plan Name (Code)
City of Richmond Plans Richmond Zoning Update (A2)
Richmond Bay Specific Plan (A3)
Livable Corridors Form Based Codes (A4)
South Richmond Transit Connectivity Plan (A5)
Richmond Wellness Trail Vision Plan (A6)
Yellow Brick Road Iron Triangle Neighborhood Wellness Plan (A7) Rumrill Boulevard / 13th Street Complete Streets Study (A8) Pedestrian Plan (A9)
Bicycle Master Plan (A10)
23rd Street Streetscaping Project (A11)
AC Transit Plans AC Transit Short-Range Transit Plan (B1) Major Corridors Study (B2)
RPTC Planning and Conceptual Design Study (B3)
AC Transit Bicycle Parking Study (B4)
Contra Costa County Plans Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan (C1) West County High-Capacity Transit Study (C2)
WCCTAC Transit Enhancement and Wayfinding Plan (C3)
BART Plans BART Bike Parking Capital Program (D1)
Station Profile Study (D2)
BART Bicycle Plan (D3)
Richmond BART Station Access Plan (D4)
Capital Corridor Joint Powers Authority
Plans
Capitol Corridor Business Plan (E1)
Water Emergency Transportation
Authority (Ferry) Plans
Richmond Ferry Terminal Design Project (F1)
Appendix A includes further detail on each plan and its proposed policies and transit access improvements and uses the same coding for ease of r eference . Figure 5 summarizes the general types of improvements recommended by these plans an d policies; the size of the circle and line correspond to the number of plans that refer to the site and corridor, respectively. Figure 6 and Figure 7 explain the specific references according to improvement ty pe for each area and corridor .
1131
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 16
Figure 5 Improvements Recommended in Relevant Plans and Policies
1132
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 17
Figure 6 Profile of Recommended Improvements for Mobility Hubs and Areas of Connectivity Mobility Hubs Areas of Connectivity
Location
Richmond BART
Station
Richmond Ferry
Terminal
El Cerrito del Norte
BART Station
Hilltop Mall /Richmond
Parkway Transit Center
El Cerrito Plaza
BART Station
Contra Costa
College
Vehicle
passenger
loading areas
and car share
Relocation of drop-off
area for passengers
with disabilities to be
closer to station
entrance (C3)
Dedicated taxi areas
on site (C3)
New parking structure
and elevated
connection from
Richmond Parkway
(B3)
Car sharing at
the College
(C3)
Dynamic
ridesharing
program at the
College (C3)
Dedicated kiss-
and-ride area
(C3)
Station
amenities
(Lighting,
furniture,
landscaping)
Security cameras,
especially for bike
parking areas (C3,
D4)
Waiting areas (C3)
Streetscaping,
lighting, and other
amenities in local
streets, Nevin
Avenue, and the
transit village (D4)
Richmond Police
substation (D4)
Additional trash bins
and collection shifts
(C3)
Pedestrian-scale
lighting on San Pablo
(A9)
Public restrooms (C3)
On-site vendor (C3)
Pedestrian-
scale lighting
on San Pablo
(A9)
Landscaping
and public art at
San Pablo and
Rumrill (A8)
Security
upgrades (C3)
Restrooms (C3)
1133
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 18
Mobility Hubs Areas of Connectivity
Location
Richmond BART
Station
Richmond Ferry
Terminal
El Cerrito del Norte
BART Station
Hilltop Mall /Richmond
Parkway Transit Center
El Cerrito Plaza
BART Station
Contra Costa
College
Wayfinding and
informational
signage
Map of bicycle
facilities and parking
around station (A10)
Wayfinding signs
along local streets
and in the transit
village (D4)
Bicycle wayfinding
signage for key
access routes,
including Macdonald
Avenue, Harbour
Way, 17th and 19th
Streets(D4)
Improved station area
signage, including
maps of station area
and connections
along San Pablo
Avenue (C3)
Real-time signage for
parking inventory (C3)
Information booth
similar to BART (C3)
Improved
information
and real-time
arrival signs
within station
and along San
Pablo Avenue
(C3)
Upgraded
wayfinding and
information
systems (C3)
1134
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 19
Mobility Hubs Areas of Connectivity
Location
Richmond BART
Station
Richmond Ferry
Terminal
El Cerrito del Norte
BART Station
Hilltop Mall /Richmond
Parkway Transit Center
El Cerrito Plaza
BART Station
Contra Costa
College
Transit capacity
and service
improvements
(Adding a stop,
increasing
frequency,
headways).
Indicator for Capitol
Corridor trains of
approaching BART
trains to streamline
transfers (E1)
BRT treatments and
upgrades along
Macdonald Avenue
and Marina Way
South (C2)
Feasibility study for
a municipal shuttle
(electric bus or
streetcar)
connecting the
Ferry to Downtown
and other key
destinations (A1)
Peak hour
extension of BRT
service (C2)
Simplified bus route
designs along San
Pablo Avenue (B1)
BRT treatments and
upgrades along San
Pablo Avenue (B2,
C2)
Consolidated frequent
Golden Gate and AC
Transit service along
Cutting Boulevard
(A5)
Circulator shuttle to
Berkeley Global
Campus from del
Norte (A5)
BRT, light rail, or
streetcar line serving
Cutting Boulevard,
terminating at del
Norte (A9)
Minimize the number
of boarding areas (B3)
Potential BART
extension station
location (C2)
Simplified bus
route designs
along San
Pablo Avenue
(B1)
BRT
treatments and
upgrades
along San
Pablo Avenue
(B2, C2)
Relocated
layover spots at
outermost
bays/islands
(C3)
Improved signal
timing at El
Portal and
Mission Bell
Drives (C3)
Potential BART
extension
station location
(C2)
1135
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 20
Mobility Hubs Areas of Connectivity
Location
Richmond BART
Station
Richmond Ferry
Terminal
El Cerrito del Norte
BART Station
Hilltop Mall /Richmond
Parkway Transit Center
El Cerrito Plaza
BART Station
Contra Costa
College
Bicycle facilities
and parking
Bike station (C3)
Bike stair channels
at station entrances
(D4)
Class I bike parking
on site (A10, D4)
Class II bike parking
as demand warrants
(D4)
Continuous bike
facility along Nevin
Avenue through
BART property (A9)
Protected path to the
north of Barrett
Avenue (C3)
Bike Boulevards
along Marina Way,
15th Street, and 19th
Street (C3)
On-street bike lanes
for key access
routes, including
Macdonald Avenue,
Harbour Way, and
17th and 19th Streets
(D4)
Left turning lane into
the station from 19th
Street (D4)
Class I Multi-Use
paths along Regatta
Boulevard and 23rd
Street (C3)
Class I Bike Storage
(A10, C3)
Connection between
Richmond and
Ohlone Greenways
(A1, A10)
Class II lanes on San
Pablo Avenue (A9)
On-street bike lanes
along Blume Drive
(B3, C3)
On-street bike lanes
along Garrity Way,
Park Central, and
Hilltop Drive (C3)
Shared-use path
along Richmond
Parkway (C3)
On-site Class I bicycle
lockers (B3)
On-site Class II
bicycle racks (C3, B3)
Bike station (B3)
Connecting
Class I and II
bike facilities
along Central
Avenue past
freeway
overpasses to
Bay Trail (C3)
Class II lanes
on San Pablo
(A9)
Two-way Class
II bike facilities
along Rumrill
Avenue just
west of San
Pablo Avenue
(A1, A8, C3)
Bike parking on
site (C3)
1136
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 21
Pedestrian
facilities
(Sidewalks and
crossing
treatments)
Improved crossing
and signals at
Intersection of 22nd
Street, Broadway,
and Carlson
Boulevard (A10)
Continuous sidewalk
along Nevin Avenue
through BART
property (A9)
Crossing
improvements along
Barrett Avenue at
Marina Way and 19th
Street (C3)
Improved crossings
surrounding the I-
580 interchanges
along Harbour Way
and Cutting
Boulevard (C3)
Widened medians
and/or curb
extensions along San
Pablo Avenue (A9)
Plaza and direct multi-
use path connecting
RPTC and the
intersection of
Richmond Parkway
and Blume Drive (B3)
Clear marked walking
routes between
parking, boarding
areas, and pick-
up/drop-off zones (B3)
Sidewalks for
Richmond Parkway
(B3, C3)
Sidewalks for Blume
Drive, Garrity Way,
Park Central, and
Hilltop Drive (C3)
Improved crossings on
the west and south
edges of the RPTC
facility (C3)
Improved crossings
surrounding I-80
interchanges (C3)
Formal crossing to
Hilltop Plaza (B3)
Traffic signals at
Blume Drive
intersections at RPTC
and Hilltop Plaza
access roads (B3)
Improved
pedestrian
linkages to El
Cerrito
Shopping
Center (C3)
Widened
medians
and/or curb
extensions
along San
Pablo (A9)
Reduced
crossing
distance at San
Pablo and
Rumrill
Avenues (A8)
New sidewalks
surrounding the
transit center
(C3)
1137
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 22
Figure 7 Profile of Recommended Improvements for Additional Vital Transportation Nodes Location
Cutting Boulevard (and
Carlson Boulevard)
7th Street at
Pennsylvania
Avenue (and
Overpass)
23rd and 24th Street
Underpass (at Ohio)
Marina Way and
Ohio Avenue
Barrett and San
Pablo Avenues I-80
off-ramp
37th Street and
Roosevelt Avenue
Vehicle
passenger
loading areas
and car share
Grade separation of the
railroad (A1)
Traffic circle /
roundabout (A1, A9)
Two-way traffic
circulation on both
streets (A1)
Traffic circle /
roundabout (A9)
Station
amenities
(Lighting,
furniture,
landscaping)
Pedestrian-scale
lighting (A7)
Pedestrian-scale
lighting (A9)
Wayfinding
and
informational
signage
Directional
signage (A10)
Transit capacity
and service
improvements
(Adding a stop,
increasing
frequency,
headways).
Consolidated frequent
Golden Gate and AC
Transit service along
Cutting Boulevard (A5)
Study options for
converting excess
capacity on Cutting
Boulevard to bus rapid
transit or rail (A9)
BRT treatments
and upgrades
along 23rd Street
(C2)
1138
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 23
Location
Cutting Boulevard (and
Carlson Boulevard)
7th Street at
Pennsylvania
Avenue (and
Overpass)
23rd and 24th Street
Underpass (at Ohio)
Marina Way and
Ohio Avenue
Barrett and San
Pablo Avenues I-80
off-ramp
37th Street and
Roosevelt Avenue
Bicycle
facilities and
parking
Class II bicycle lanes
along Carlson
Boulevard (A9)
Class II bike lanes
along 7th (A7)
Class I bike lanes
along
Pennsylvania
Avenue overpass
(A10)
Class I spur path
along Carlson
Boulevard to
connect the
Richmond
Greenway and
Broadway (A10)
Class II lanes
along Carlson
Boulevard (A10)
Two-way cycle
track along 23rd
Street railroad
underpass (A10)
Two-way Class II
bike lanes along
23rd (A9)
Two-way Class I
bicycle lanes on
the west side of
Marina Way South
(A6)
Bike boulevard
treatments along
Marina Way north
of the Greenway
(A10)
Class II lanes
along Marina Way
south of Greenway
(A10)
Pedestrian
facilities
(Sidewalks and
crossing
treatments)
Widened medians along
Carlson or relocated
curb further away from
railroad tracks (A9)
Curb extensions at
crossings (A7)
Extended
sidewalks along
the west side of 7th
Street (A7)
High-visibility
(“yellow brick
style”) crosswalks
(A7)
Upgraded plaza in
front of Richmond
Greenway on-
ramp on the
corner of Ohio
(A6)
Pedestrian signals
for crossing off-
ramps along
Barrett (A10)
Traffic calming,
curb extensions,
and high-visibility
crosswalks to
reduce the use of
37th as a shortcut
for vehicles (A1,
A9)
1139
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 24
Summary of Transit Access Policies and Plans by Station Area Additional information about each of these policies and plans are found in Appendix A.
Overarching Citywide and Regional Policies
Throughout the City ’s overarching planning documents and p olicies , strategies that address affordability, access, and safety are marked as a p riority. Key documents and policies include the General Plan, the City Zoning Code, and the West Contra Costa County Technical Advisory Committee ( WCCTAC) Transit Enhancement and Wayfinding Plan. P riorities articulated in these documents include access to mobility, equitable access, expanded information on transit access, additional non -motorized connections, and new development standard s that shift focus away from automobil es toward more sustainable modes of transportation. The plans and policies address improvements to connectivity and access fro m both a citywide and regional perspective.
For example, closing gaps on the Bay Trail are important to creating access for the fu ture Ferry Terminal as well as c ompleting a piece of the Bay Area’s region -wide transportation infrastructure.
Richmond BART Station Policies
The area around the Richmond BART Station area is a Priority Development Area (PDA) , as identified by the Metropo litan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Assoc iation of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) in Plan Bay Area . This regional transportation and land use plan call s on cities and other planning agencies to implement measures to ensure the ease of access to tran sit via walkable and bikeable infrastructure in these areas . BART’s transit -oriented development policy classifies this stations as a “B alanced Intermodal” station ,8 indicating its users access the station by a variety of modes, inc luding driving, walking, biking, and transit . The City also mandates reduced parking requirements for developme nts within this station area , which contributes to the area’s emphasis on non- auto modes . In recognition of the continued importance of the station’s connectivity to the cen tral Richmond transportation network, the General Plan calls for a future Station Area Plan f or the Richmond BART Station.
Ferry Terminal Policies
The future Richmond Ferry Terminal will be located in a PDA as well , and as such, the surrounding a rea is considered integral to the Bay Area ’s region al growth plans . Access to transit through sidewalk connections, safe pedestrian cross ing, and established bike facilities are critical to supporting this growth. In acknowledging the dem and for transportation and access that will come with future residential and commercial growth in the area around the terminal , the City of Richmond ’s plans and policies have singled out the area for improved link s to downtown , from the creation of the Wellness Trail to a futu re Station Area Plan as directed by the General Pla n.
Richmond Parkway Transit Center/Hilltop Mall Policies
Although the Richmond Parkway Transit Center is alr eady supported and accessible via the regional road network, it is isolated from surround ing nei ghborhoods due to barriers making
8 From the Station Access Typology Map in BART TOD Guidelines, 2nd edition, 2017, p. 57 1140
RICHMOND FIRST MILE/LAST MILE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Richmond
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 25
walking and bicycling undesirable, if not unsafe. T he chief policy priority regarding the Transit Center area is ensuring connections with immediate neighbo rhoods. Hilltop Mall is located approximately a mile away along Bl ume Drive; it is another focal point in the Hilltop area of Richmond yet is not integrated with the Transit Center . The General Plan does call out the need for continued station area planning efforts specific to Hilltop Mall.
El Cerrito Del Norte BART Station Policies
This station area is also designat ed as part of a PDA, which indicates its role in the Bay Area ’s region al growth plans . The City supports the region’s directives on improvements to bike and pedestrian infrastructure in these types of areas by prioritizing pedestrian connections to the station in its zoning code, as it does with all BART station areas. As in the Richmond BART Station area, the City mandates reduced parking req uirements for developments within this station area. The prominence o f El Cerrito del Norte BART Station in the regional transportation network has also led to traffic congestion on the p rimary roadways that feed into the station, which the County seeks to address over a long -term timeframe.
El Cerrito Plaza BART Station Policies
Also within a PDA , the El Cerrito Plaza area plays a key role in regional growth . As such, efforts to improve station access via walkable and bikeable infrastructure have been identified as priorities .
Unlike El Cerrito del Norte station , the El Cer rito Plaza BART station is designated by BART as “balanced intermodal,” meaning that mode split of users accessing the station of balanc ed, as opposed to more auto -reliant stations (as the El Cerrito del Norte Stati on is categorized).
Contra Costa College Policies
Contra Costa College is located within a PDA in San Pablo adjacent to Ri chmond. Reaffirming the role of walking and bicycling for accessing transit in this area , the City of San Pablo designated the nearby intersection s along San Pablo Avenue — overlaying Richmond between Rumrill Boulevard and 23 rd Street — as part of a “Pedestrian Priority Zone .” This label indicates an area where high volumes of pedestrian traffic are encouraged and sh ould be accommodated by the street design.
Relevant Corridors Highlighted in Key Plans
Several key City plans, including the Richmond General Plan’s C irculation element (2012), the South Richmond Transportation Connectivity Plan (20 15), an d the 2011 Pedestrian Plan , also identify several specific corridors surrounding t hese mobility hubs as priority areas for a range of improvements . The various plans have bestowed specific designat ions on these corridors, indicating each corridor’s significance to the ci ty’s transportation network and highlighting potential opportunitie s for critical multimodal improvements. This section defines the different types of corridors and identifies where they have b een designated in Richmond. Figure 8, at the end of this section, specifies how these designatio ns apply to major roadways across the city. This section provides additional detail about the corrid ors shown in Figure 5 and summarized in Figure 7.