Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTY PASSENGER RAIL STATIONSALTERNATIVES ANALYSISOTHER PUBLIC INFORMATION MECHANISMSDesign concepts, status, issues and public input were regularly presented to policy boards and advisorycommittees and as public outreach to interested parties within the community. These public forumpresentations included:• May 10, 1999 – Caltrain Extension Task Force Meeting with VTA, City of Salinas, San BenitoCounty, Caltrain JPB, City of Watsonville, Santa Cruz County Regional TransportationCommission (SCCCRTC), MST, AMBAG, Caltrans District 5, and TAMC to discuss goals andcurrent plans.• August 26, 1999 – Caltrain Extension Task Force Meeting to discuss preparation of businessplan, equipment capacity, Salinas layover facility.• August 15, 2000 – Meeting with JPB and VTA staff to discuss Extension of Caltrain CommuterService to Monterey County Business Plan.• October 6, 2000 – Meeting with City of Salinas Council Facilities Committee, RedevelopmentAgency and staff to discuss Caltrain Extension implementation and action plan.• February 25, April 23, and June 25, 2001 – Meetings with Monterey County, City of Watsonville,Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District, Monterey–Salinas Transit, and Caltrans staffrepresentatives to discuss Pajaro Valley Station project development.• March 29, 2001 – VTA/TAMC coordination meeting regarding Salinas layover facility, funding,unknown UPRR capacity improvements, TAMC funding, initial train service schedules.• May 24, 2001 – Meeting with JPB staff to discuss Caltrain Extension project.• May 30, 2001 – Caltrain Extension project discussed with three members of the Santa ClaraCounty Board of Supervisors who sit on the VTA Board.• June 7, 2001 – Formal presentation of Caltrain Extension project to JPB Board (publicmeeting).• June 11, 2001 – Presentation on TCRP funding application to Rail Policy Committee (publicmeeting).• November 1, 2001 – TAMC presentation to PCJPB Board regarding Caltrain extension toSalinas.• April 4, June 6, and October 22, 2002 – Caltrain Extension project and proposed stationsdesign discussed with UPRR staff.• May 8, 2002 – Meeting with JPB staff to discuss Caltrain Extension project and MontereyIntercity Passenger Rail project.• May 16, 2002 – Meeting with Caltrans environmental staff to scope Caltrain Extension NEPAenvironmental document.• June 10, 2002 – Presentation on qualifying Caltrain Extension to Monterey County for federalfunding and additional public outreach to Rail Policy Committee (public meeting).• January 22 and 30, 2003 – Caltrain Extension project discussed with UPRR staff.• May 5, 2003 – Rail Policy Committee tours Salinas project site (public meeting).• June 9, 2003 – Presentation on Salinas Station and Pajaro Station to MST Board (open topublic).• June 25, 2003 – Presentation to the TAMC Board (public meeting).parsons CHAPTER 7: FINDINGS FROM PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS ON ALTERNATIVES 171
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTY PASSENGER RAIL STATIONSALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS• June 26, 2003 – Caltrain Extension project discussed with UPRR staff.• August 28, 2003 – Caltrain Extension project discussed with Federal Transit Administration(FTA) staff.• September 2, 2003 – Notice of Preparation for the Caltrain Extension to Monterey CountyProject Draft Environmental Impact Report.• September 15, 2003 – Caltrain Extension project presented to MST Board and Facilities Subcommittee(public meeting).• December 9, 2003 – Presentation on Pajaro station and Caltrain Extension to Watsonville CityCouncil (public meeting).• April 19, 2004 – JPB, VTA and TAMC Caltrain Extension to Monterey County coordinationmeeting.• April 26, 2004 – Federal Transit Administration staff tour of project sites.• May 3, 2004 – Presentation on Salinas site to Rail Policy Committee (public meeting).• June 23, 2004 – Castroville Community Plan Citizens Advisory Committee on Castrovillestation. Approximately 30 members of public in attendance.• June 30, 2004 – Caltrain Extension project discussed with Coastal Commission staff.• August 2004 through December 2005 – Affected property owners in Salinas met individuallywith TAMC (dates and minutes available for review at TAMC office).• October 12, 2004 – Study session with Marina City Council regarding Monterey County FixedGuideway Alternatives.• November 4, 2004 – Presentation to Oldtown Salinas Association on Salinas ITC (publicpresentation).• November 8, 2004 – Presentation to MST Facilities Committee on Salinas project site (opento public).• December 13, 2004 – MST Board presentation on Salinas project site (open to public).• January 18, 2005 – Meeting with concerned citizens on the Salinas freight building. Organizedby Salinas Redevelopment Agency. Public meeting – approximately 50 people attended toask questions. The group expressed that they did not want the freight building removed orrelocated.• February 1, 2005 – Salinas project site on agenda for Salinas City Council at a regularlyscheduled City Council meeting (open to the public). Public input was received on the projectand entered into the record. American Supply Company (a business within the project area)opposed the project, and City Council members stated their opinions for the record. CityCouncil approved Salinas ITC Expansion Configurations 17 and 18 for environmental review.• February 18, 2005 – Meeting with Coastal Commission staff to discuss footprint of CastrovilleStation parking supply.• March 3, 2005 – Presentation to Seaside City Council of Monterey County Fixed GuidewayAlternatives (open to public).• March 15, 2005 – Presentation to Monterey City Council of Monterey County Fixed GuidewayAlternatives (open to public).• March 23, 2005 – Presentation to TAMC Board on Salinas ITC Expansion Options 17 and 18(open to public).parsons CHAPTER 7: FINDINGS FROM PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS ON ALTERNATIVES 172
Page 4 and 5:
DRAFTCALTRAIN EXTENSIONTO MONTEREY
Page 6 and 7:
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155: CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
show all

Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?