Outreach Report Appendix 1. Fact Sheet 2. Comment Matrix 3. Community Meeting Press Release, blog posts, Newsletters, El Sol ad 4. Community Meeting email notices 5. Community Meeting Sign-in Sheets 6. Community Meeting Comment Cards 7. Community Meeting Poster Boards 8. Comments on Aerial Maps (sticky notes) 9. Community Meeting PPT Presentation 10. CSUN Letter

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 1 of 4

North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Facebook Comments Comment No. Name Date of Comment Time Commenter Category Meeting Post Full Comment Notes It takes too long to go by bus from Chatsworth to the North Hollywood subway station. They need to have 1 Gilbert Duran 09/12/18 6:05 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post express buses as well as local buses. 2 Alvin J Waters 09/12/18 12:20 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Northridge Meeting Post Walter Berry Where will it be

3 Luz De Leon 09/12/18 9:48 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Northridge Meeting Post That's great we need more metros

4 Juanita Palm 09/12/18 5:13 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post 5 Jaime Terrazas 09/12/18 1:46 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post Metro, we need more SECURITY!!! How can I buy the daily passes by bus again? The technology no longer takes them and the tap system fails I've 6 Jose Mejia 09/12/18 8:37 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post lost money and then the tourniquet will no longer exist." 7 Felix Romero Jr. 09/12/18 6:57 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post Why not extend the red line? It’s going to start from North Hollywood anyways. Gilbert Duran I agree.....1 1/2 hours total from Chatsworth to Union Station is ridiculous. Also, the orange line is Diane Mac Lachlan‐ packed, standing room only any given time of the day...... maybe add a few more for now...... 8 Aguirre 09/13/18 8:27 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post Why have a meeting SO early on a Saturday morning? Those of is who USE rapid transit need an hour just to 9 Marvin Moskowitz 09/13/18 1:40 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post make connections to Panorama City 10 Jon Soto 09/13/18 12:10 PM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post Where? NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting That is great 11 Nelvia Machado 09/14/18 9:12 PM Facebook Comment Post 12 Gilbert Duran 09/14/18 3:46 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post Why not take a bus? 13 Brad Franklin 09/14/18 1:06 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post Need a train. I'll never take a bus Diane Mac Lachlan‐Aguirre have you looked into the Metrolink it’s only 40 minutes. I used to take the orange line 14 Melika Pineda 09/14/18 7:54 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post to the red line from Tampa to union station. 15 David Goldstein 09/14/18 8:58 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post I drive directly to the Universal City Red Line station. Orange line takes too long. 16 Mercedes Moreno 09/14/18 10:05 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post The Orange Line is not to bad! 17 Joe Lee 09/14/18 3:00 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Northridge Meeting Post Do you have American Sign Language interpreter there? 18 VS Montoya 09/14/18 9:44 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post Yes bring back transfers !!! Tokens too wtf.. (laughing emoji) 19 Lowell A. Caratay 09/14/18 11:43 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post Where is your office I am interested NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting That's is great for everyone 20 Nelvia Machado 09/15/18 3:22 AM Facebook Comment Post NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting Isn't that the 501 that I am already taking to Pasadena? 21 Bruce Chambers I 09/15/18 7:31 PM Facebook Comment Post NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting Isn't that the 501 that I am already taking to Pasadena? 22 Bruce Chambers 09/15/18 7:31 PM Facebook Comment Post NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting AMEN. It was supposed to be but that *lovely* NIMBY crowd killed it in the 90s. Such petty, small‐minded 23 Jill Ford 09/15/18 12:03 AM Facebook Comment Post behavior! 24 Robin Skov 09/15/18 2:55 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post There is a train... Metrolink has a station at Chatsworth

Page 6 Page 2 of 4

North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Facebook Comments Comment No. Name Date of Comment Time Commenter Category Meeting Post Full Comment Notes Melika Pineda used to take it from Chatsworth to North Hollywood, it took an hour and it was jam‐packed. It only Diane Mac Lachlan‐ cost a dollar 75. It cost $4 to go from Chatsworth to Union Station and the availability is next to nil. 25 Aguirre 09/15/18 3:24 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post They need more EXPRESS buses. Electric express buses room for 10. Programmed to move the most people the 26 Gilbert Duran 09/15/18 9:26 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post fastest. Swarm Save big money on existing fuel sources or buying new zero pollution electric buses if we partner with KEYOU 27 Leroy Essek 09/15/18 8:40 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post GmbH & Joi Scientific. This idea will also apply to shipping, trucks, cars and trains. The Orange Line used to be great, but now it's too crowded, standing room only and it's packed. It's dangerous. 28 Robin Skov 09/15/18 2:57 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post You are their biggest fan!!! (heart emoji) 29 Sandy Recia 09/15/18 8:39 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post Kick the smelly violent homeless off the trains, they don’t pay to ride and just take up an entire row. Plus they 30 Danny Chase 09/15/18 6:59 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post are using it as a house and ride it from NoHo to Union Station back and forth all day. NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting For seniors which is 62+ the TAP card is $20 a month for unlimited rides on buses and rails. 31 James Prather 09/16/18 11:16 AM Facebook Comment Post actually as someone whose been taking the bus for almost a decade , Chatsworth to NoHo literally is almost 45min 50max depending on the hour and they don't take long to arrive maybe a 10 min wait or less. honestly the orange line is really good if you don't like waiting that long then there is uber or drive. its all about timing really. you get used to it. wait they need to really do is update the local buses because those take forever, as someone who goes to LA often, you miss a bus in LA and the next one is in a few min while you miss a bus in Reseda you are stuck there for about an hour. so you really need to think the bigger picture that the valley buses need to 32 Edgar Sanjuan 09/16/18 8:15 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post improve (drops mic) Edgar Sanjuan I want to hear more from actual riders like yourself. Thank you for your input. What about smaller buses that take you to your final destination nonstop? Picks you up from home, takes you to the nearest subway station, and later picks you up from the subway station to take you home. I think they call that Micro Transit. 33 Gilbert Duran 09/16/18 8:25 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post America if you support our president God bless America God bless you and God bless your family your children and all your friends you need to do something we got great president in the White House making your life better make your family feel secure is got to be the best president America ever heard of Donald Trump‘s please tell all your friends fake news to shut off the television not to buy Nike not to watch football when people do not respect United States of America you have the voice of this country you need to tell your family your friends everybody to go and vote for Republican Senate and Congress for November your voice is important don’t let it other people to take it away from you American hero I just got Facebook block me because I write nice things about president of United States we need to sue Facebook class action Please send this message to everybody we need to file a class action suit against Facebook 34 David Dadon 09/16/18 7:35 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Northridge Meeting Post NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting The Orange line needs to be turned into a rail line that connects from the Gold Line to the upcoming Sepulveda 35 JP Bennett 09/17/18 7:36 PM Facebook Comment Post Line. The current bus line is slow and overcrowded.

Page 7 Page 3 of 4

North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Facebook Comments Comment No. Name Date of Comment Time Commenter Category Meeting Post Full Comment Notes Train diagonally across from the new Porter Ranch shopping center they will open in 2019 to Burbank, with a connection to the train across the Sepulveda Pass toward LAX, and a connection to the Red line toward 36 Ciacco Chiappelli 09/17/18 7:22 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post Hollywood & Union Station Ricardo Sarabia Not the canosci 37 Fernandez 09/17/18 3:17 PM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post The Orange line needs to be turned into a rail line that connects from the Gold Line to the upcoming Sepulveda 38 Adam G. Linder 09/17/18 7:36 PM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post Line. The current bus line is slow and overcrowded. NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting Adam G. Linder in 40 years, 100 years later than it should have taken. 39 JP Bennett 09/18/18 11:02 AM Facebook Comment Post NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting That's is great for senior citizens and us too 40 Nelvia Machado 09/18/18 3:37 PM Facebook Comment Post Nancy Eugenia This is something very unpleasant and sometimes these people are aggressive. 41 Munoz Hernandez 09/18/18 9:51 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post Nancy Eugenia By Parthenia heading towards Balboa, there is no bus (crying emoji) not event a Dash. A bus line is really 42 Munoz Hernandez 09/18/18 9:53 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post necessarily in this area" 43 Adam G. Linder 09/18/18 8:25 AM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post Yes, but potentially a dedicated bus lane with additional stops similar to the Orange Line. 44 Adam G. Linder 09/18/18 11:03 AM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post JP, agreed. I blame the SFV and its residents. 45 Adam G. Linder 09/18/18 8:37 AM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post It's coming! ... eventually Change the 233 Short Line’s name/number thanks! It’s very confusing and absolutely messed up my commute NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting and that of a bunch of high schoolers trying to get home today, since none of us were aware there even WAS a 46 Jill Ford 09/19/18 10:23 PM Facebook Comment Post short line! 47 Virginia Hipp 09/19/18 6:18 AM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post Yes because there are a lot of people traveling by bus Its good that there is service since many people need it. I don't travel much but I'm glad this happening. 48 Chayo Cortes 09/20/18 4:04 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post 49 Maria Schwartz 09/20/18 8:59 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Northridge Meeting Post (In response to David Dadon's comment) David Dandon AMEN 50 Martha Baeza 09/20/18 2:23 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Northridge Meeting Post laughing emoji I love the metro I take often with my friends gone to a Long Beach Dodgers etc. that is the way to go now 51 Maria Schwartz I 09/20/18 8:58 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Northridge Meeting Post Hi 52 Eli Ramirez 09/20/18 1:10 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting And, I wouldn't ride on public transportation anyway. Some of the people are rude. I don't want to sit 53 Norma L Mir 09/21/18 7:20 PM Facebook Comment Post somewhere that someone put their dirty shoes. $20 is too much on what I get from Social Security. Not cost effective because I don't go out that much. And NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting where I do go, it's not easy to get on a bus, too many packages. Maybe for someone who takes the bus everyday 54 Norma L Mir 09/21/18 7:15 PM Facebook Comment Post and doesn't have a lot of stuff to carry that would be good though. wow. 55 Juana Franco 09/21/18 8:31 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post where will it be 56 Carmen Orellana 09/21/18 11:43 AM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post

Page 8 Page 4 of 4

North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Facebook Comments Comment No. Name Date of Comment Time Commenter Category Meeting Post Full Comment Notes I like this a lot, now we can transfer 2 hours its super" 57 Stacy Zamorano 09/21/18 7:57 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Panorama City Meeting Post The community does not know how dangerous metro is and how the deceive the population. He only wants the 58 Gonzalo Gonzalez 09/22/18 10:19 AM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post millions of dollars he receives from taxes. With deceit promising benefits. NSFV & NoHo to Pasadena Meeting Hi guys this is scheduled the same date and time as the Sylmar Neighborhood council meeting. Will there be 59 David Steve Gonzales 09/23/18 11:03 PM Facebook Comment Post another meeting to accommodate Sylmar residents that want to attend both? 60 John Lopez 09/23/18 6:19 PM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post Union 661/818 Carpenters are ready to build Ur stations and bridges Germany built a hydrogen powered fuel cell train that is now in operation. Any diesel engine can be retrofitted to be fueled by hydrogen. The safest way to store hydrogen is inside ocean, fresh or polluted water. The exhaust of using gaseous hydrogen is distilled water vapor. Check out these companies to free ourselves from expensive, polluting and dangerous gasoline, diesel, natural gas, coal, nuclear energy with www.joiscientific.com & KEYOU 61 Leroy Essek 09/24/18 4:07 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post GmbH, & 2G Energy with CHP technology. I'd go, but I doubt that I would get any answers as to the rest of LA gets rail lines and the valley is still stuck in the dark ages with antiquated diesel bus lines. And that line only serves one side of the valley. I guess that our tax 62 Dave Tackett 09/24/18 10:34 PM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post dollars only count when they are collecting them. 63 Waltz Baldonado 09/25/18 7:20 PM Facebook Comment NSFV Chatsworth Meeting Post bus I used to ride for more than a year, lot of experience on it Perfect is very important because always take the bus on time I get my job late soon is possible god bless you. 64 Jose Franco 09/26/18 8:06 AM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post 65 Vite Joshua 09/27/18 6:26 AM Facebook Comment NSFV San Fernando Meeting Post ‘The bus is always late

Page 9 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Wufoo and Email Comments

Comment No. Name Agency/ Organization City Mail/Email Phone Date of Comment Subject Full Comment Notes Hi, Karen, Thank you for sharing my comments with the Metro Orange Line technical team, and I have been looking at and studying the 3 route options for the North SFV BRT.

Of the 3 route options, I find option 2 the poorest. It is not just for having the lowest potential ridership of the 3 by a wide margin, but I also fear that the eastern part of the option 2 route is going to result in the cannibalization of both it and the ESFV corridor that has just been finalized for light rail due to extreme close proximity.

On option 1, I find the Nordoff to Roscoe junction using Reseda or Lindley the weakest link in the route due to the sharp diversion in the route it creates. I know that it was listed in the report as the "most direct" and has highest potential ridership, but do not find the route direct from that key junction from Nordoff to Roscoe. Reseda already has both a Metro Rapid and Metro Local route in operation, and I find it better to improve the existing bus routes on Reseda than add BRT to the mix. Lindley I find a far better bet, but I still find the sharp turns to get on Roscoe and Nordoff problematic and compromising the rest of the route. Option 3 is the route I like the best due to heading due straight on Nordoff all the way to Sun Valley, and the turns are fewer making for a more direct route than option 1 in my opinion. Its ridership is slightly less than option 1, but my gut feeling is that it will work best. When both Options 1 and 3 terminate at the same places as the Orange Line, the greater distance from the Orange Line on the parallel portion with option 3 compared to option 1 will be less likely to cannibalize the existing Orange Line ridership. Option 3 creates a circular BRT loop paired with the Orange Line around the SFV that leaves open greater opportunities for transit expansion in the SFV and the upcoming ESFV corridor. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Benjamin Verheiden

1 Verheiden, Benjamin CSUN Student 08/02/18 Route Options Forwarded by K Swift That map is a little inaccurate. Valley Presbyterian Hospital is on Vanowen near Sepulveda- definitely not on Parthenia 2 LRM 09/10/18 Map error between Sepulveda and Van Nuys. The Source How about just having better service on the Ventura County Metrolink line? The Source with Replies: (1) Red:I think they tried but they encountered a setback with the double tracking in a small community. About a mile worth of I remember.(2) Pat:They also can’t double track in the tunnels, which were built for a single track. Widening them would be prohibitively expensive, from what 3 Richard Bourne 09/10/18 Metrolink option I’ve read. Look to Mexico City. The way they do BRT is excellent and would work well in L.A. Many of the stations are enclosed in the center of the road and are easy and comfortable to wait in. Buses are given their own dedicated lanes in the center of the road. If you go outside rush hour, the trip is really pleasant and easy. 4 James 09/10/18 Mexico City BRT The Source Is there a reason why there isn’t a freeway section to this (looking specifically at the Lankershim route)?If it’s gonna take more than an hour to get from NoHo to CSUN this line is already a bust, as there won’t be anything “rapid” about that. 5 Dave 09/10/18 Freeway option The Source Hi i would like to be added to the mailing list for the North San Fernando Valley Corridor Project.

6 Jackson Hurst 09/10/18 Add to Email List Metro email/ Add to list

Page 10 Page 1 of 7 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Wufoo and Email Comments

Comment No. Name Agency/ Organization City Mail/Email Phone Date of Comment Subject Full Comment Notes I would like to provide some suggestions regarding the North San Fernando Valley transit project. I am resident of Hollywood, and a frequent visitor to the San Fernando Valley (by the way, I graduated from Cal. State University Northridge, years ago!), and am thrilled that Metro is considering major transit improvement in the area. Firstly, I am open -- as far as the specific corridor / street(s) selected for the route, as the SF Valley is getting more and more popular and dense, and therefore - nowadays any street can qualify for a Rapid transit project.However, what I do strongly suggest -- is for Metro to consider LIGHT-RAIL Transit / L.R.T., instead of the proposed BRT. The BRT has serious limitations: speed, capacity, Alek Friedman attractiveness, and quality of ride. Considering the fact that the San Fernando Valley is getting increasingly popular and dense, Light-Rail should be *THE LEAST* that Metro should consider -- to meet the demand of growing population! So, dear Metro: please don't make the same mistake that you did with the Orange line BRT -- the line that is so overwhelmed and overcrowded, that now Metro will have to pay a signifcant price -- to upgrade to LRT (as planned). Please implement LRT (or at least, -- the Streetcar) -- for the North San Fernando Valley Rapid Transit project.

7 Hollywood, CA 09/10/18 LRT not BRT Metro email Will there be a livestream/webcast option, especially at noho meeting with the extra presentation? Not everyone can attend 8 Kaja Bowman 09/10/18 Livestreaming? in person at these scheduled times. Metro email I would like to provide some suggestions regarding the North San Fernando Valley transit project. I am resident of Hollywood, and a frequent visitor to the San Fernando Valley (by the way, I graduated from Cal. State University Northridge, years ago!), and am thrilled that Metro is considering major transit improvement in the area. Firstly, I am open -- as far as the specific corridor / street(s) selected for the route, as the SF Valley is getting more and more popular and dense, and therefore - nowadays any street can qualify for a Rapid transit project. However, what I do strongly suggest -- is for Metro to consider LIGHT-RAIL Transit / L.R.T., instead of the proposed BRT. The BRT has serious limitations: speed, capacity, attractiveness, and quality of ride. Considering the fact that the San Fernando Valley is getting increasingly popular and dense, Light-Rail should be *THE LEAST* that Metro should consider -- to meet the demand of growing population! So, dear Metro: please don't make the same mistake that you did with the Orange line BRT -- the line that is so overwhelmed and overcrowded, that now Metro will have to pay a signifcant price -- to upgrade to LRT (as planned). Please implement LRT (or at least, -- the Streetcar) -- for the North San Fernando Valley Rapid Transit project.

9 Alek Friedman Hollywood 09/10/18 Consider LRT email to Metro Northridge East NC Email to Metro 10 Glenn Bailey President 09/11/18 Add to Email List Stephany add two email addresses to stakeholder list I have forwarded the meeting information to the Northridge East NC Board members as well as to our local Nextdoor Northridge East NC members since the first meeting is located within our boundaries. The announcement will also be agendized for our NENC 11 Glenn Bailey President 09/11/18 Spreading the word Board meeting next week. email to Metro As a resident within your study area, I would like to mention that I believe the proposed Roscoe route provides more benefit than the proposed Nordhoff routes. The Roscoe route connects more employers and multi-family homes that border the street versus a Nordhoff route (which is largely single family residential). Van Nuys airport, Home Depot, Anheuser Busch Mike Milos brewery, Galpin Ford car dealership, and potential for access to Northridge Hospital are some businesses that would have direct access to the BRT if the Roscoe route is selected. I believe the Roscoe route makes more sense given the higher ridership potential with greater density of businesses and multi-family properties along Roscoe Blvd. 12 09/12/18 Prefers Roscoe email to Metro It takes too long to go by bus from Chatsworth to the North Hollywood subway station. They need to have express buses as 13 Gilbert Duran 09/12/18 well as local buses. facebook 14 Luz De Leon 09/12/18 Where will it be facebook 15 Juanita Palm 09/12/18 That's great we need more metros facebook 16 Jaime Terrazas 09/12/18 Metro, we need more SECURITY!!! facebook 17 Felix Romero Jr. 09/12/18 Why not extend the red line? It’s going to start from North Hollywood anyways. facebook Diane Mac Lachlan- Gilbert Duran I agree.....1 1/2 hours total from Chatsworth to Union Station is ridiculous. Also, the orange line is packed, 18 Aguirre 09/13/18 standing room only any given time of the day...... maybe add a few more for now...... facebook 19 Jon Soto 09/13/18 Where? facebook

Page 11 Page 2 of 7 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Wufoo and Email Comments

Comment No. Name Agency/ Organization City Mail/Email Phone Date of Comment Subject Full Comment Notes Greetings! I'm unable to make any of the Northern SFV Transit Corridor project meetings, since I currently live across the state. But I am a native Valley Boy, I grew up with GRID and have seen many reorgs of transit over the years (some good, some not so good). I do pride myself as the one who suggested the 236 go up and over Foothill to eventually terminate at San Fernando Metrolink; I passed along my idea to one of the members of the Regional Council (whom I knew) when it was mentioned that Planning had no idea what to do with the 236/7 to eliminate the turnaround and issues with the Dam Basin. I was never named publicly, but, yes, that was my idea, and thanks were passed along to me privately. For the most part, I like the changes over the past 4 decades that have been made; I do have some gripes, some service related, some at the peeve level. Looking at the map of the study area, I have some suggestions and comments, which I hope you will accept and add to the record. I like the Nordhoff/Glenoaks route. That gives a lot of coverage to areas not currently served by any rapid bus routes. I assume this would replace 364 service. (There's one of my peeves, that should be 366, or use the 9 00 series and roll the Orange Line into the 800 series with the rail.) For a North Hollywood connection…this is a bit tougher. It's not 100% clear, but it appears that the Nordhoff and Roscoe routes are not mutually exclusive. I'll address from that point. For the Roscoe route, stick with Reseda, not Lindley, as Lindley can't handle the traffic. Yes, the 239 does use it, but I don't see Lindley as a good way to get from Roscoe to Nordhoff. Lindley is still residential in this area, so you'll get pushback from residents. Also, you lose the traffic generator of Roscoe & Reseda. For the Nordhoff route, stay off of Parthenia. Yes, you have that old PERy stretch between Sepulveda and Van Nuys. But you'll miss the traffic generator of Nordhoff & Van Nuys. Here's one of my gripes, and the main reason why I feel this way: consistency. Parthenia always is overlooked for local service. During GRID planning, it was rightly overlooked because the portion west of Mason had some two-lane stretches. But those were fixed by 1980. Yet it was never considered again, despite it being the only street between Victory and Devonshire without service, but had ridership. (Lassen now shares that burden, which many still feel that cancelling the 168 was a bad mistake.) It may seem counterintuitive, but I'd rather not add partial coverage to a street that deserves full coverage. I consider the Valley (not Los Angeles) my home town. It's taken way too long to get service improvements into the Valley, but I am glad to see something being done.

Likes Nordhoff-Sylmar, for Roscoe route use Reseda, Nordhoff route 20 M. Ray Mullins 09/14/18 avoid Parthenia 21 Nelvia Machado 09/14/18 That is great facebook 22 Gilbert Duran 09/14/18 Why not take a bus? facebook 23 Brad Franklin 09/14/18 Need a train. I'll never take a bus facebook 24 Nelvia Machado 09/15/18 That's is great for everyone facebook 25 Bruce Chambers I 09/15/18 Isn't that the 501 that I am already taking to Pasadena? facebook 26 Robin Skov 09/15/18 There is a train... Metrolink has a station at Chatsworth facebook Diane Mac Lachlan- Melika Pineda used to take it from Chatsworth to North Hollywood, it took an hour and it was jam-packed. It only cost a 27 Aguirre 09/15/18 dollar 75. It cost $4 to go from Chatsworth to Union Station and the availability is next to nil. facebook 28 Robin Skov 09/15/18 The Orange Line used to be great, but now it's too crowded, standing room only and it's packed. It's dangerous. facebook Kick the smelly violent homeless off the trains, they don’t pay to ride and just take up an entire row. Plus they are using it as 29 Danny Chase 09/15/18 a house and ride it from NoHo to Union Station back and forth all day. facebook actually as someone whose been taking the bus for almost a decade , Chatsworth to NoHo literally is almost 45min 50max depending on the hour and they don't take long to arrive maybe a 10 min wait or less. honestly the orange line is really good if you don't like waiting that long then there is uber or drive. its all about timing really. you get used to it. wait they need to really do is update the local buses because those take forever, as someone who goes to LA often, you miss a bus in LA and the next one is in a few min while you miss a bus in Reseda you are stuck there for about an hour. so you really need to think the bigger picture that the valley buses need to improve (drops mic) 30 Edgar Sanjuan 09/16/18 facebook Edgar Sanjuan I want to hear more from actual riders like yourself. Thank you for your input. What about smaller buses that take you to your final destination nonstop? Picks you up from home, takes you to the nearest subway station, and later picks 31 Gilbert Duran 09/16/18 you up from the subway station to take you home. I think they call that Micro Transit. facebook The Orange line needs to be turned into a rail line that connects from the Gold Line to the upcoming Sepulveda Line. The 32 JP Bennett 09/17/18 current bus line is slow and overcrowded. facebook Train diagonally across from the new Porter Ranch shopping center they will open in 2019 to Burbank, with a connection to the train across the Sepulveda Pass toward LAX, and a connection to the Red line toward Hollywood & Union Station 33 Ciacco Chiappelli 09/17/18 facebook The Orange line needs to be turned into a rail line that connects from the Gold Line to the upcoming Sepulveda Line. The 34 Adam G. Linder 09/17/18 current bus line is slow and overcrowded. facebook

Page 12 Page 3 of 7 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Wufoo and Email Comments

Comment No. Name Agency/ Organization City Mail/Email Phone Date of Comment Subject Full Comment Notes Nancy Eugenia Munoz By Parthenia heading towards Balboa, there is no bus (crying emoji) not event a Dash. A bus line is really necessarily in this 35 Hernandez 09/18/18 area" facebook 36 Adam G. Linder 09/18/18 Yes, but potentially a dedicated bus lane with additional stops similar to the Orange Line. facebook KPCC has inquired about Metro’s planned community meetings for North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor Project. A series of five community meetings are now scheduled through the end of September to provide community members with an opportunity to learn about and provide input into the BRT project’s current planning and environmental study. Staff reported that this $180 million Measure M-funded project is intended to build a high-quality BRT line in the North Valley to connect major activity centers, employment sites, education and regional Metro and Metrolink transit connections. Metro is now evaluating potential BRT alignments and station locations as part of an Alternatives Analysis process. The project is scheduled to be completed in the 2023-2025 timeframe, providing a faster, more reliable and convenient service for Valley commuters. A story highlighting the new project is expected to run later today. 37 Dave Sotero Metro 09/20/18 KPCC Story Forwarded by K Swift Hi, I was looking at the PowerPoint from yesterday's meeting presentation. I really like the new Nordhoff-NoHo proposal with the variation going from Nordhoff down Woodman and then Ventura Cyn. to Roscoe for the Kaiser Hospital station. I actually live right by there in my childhood home. I think this version would accomplish the main project objectives and have the least negative construction impact in an already super-congested area on Roscoe between Kaiser and the 405 and Woodman between Roscoe and Van Nuys Blvd. Adding a BRT lane on Roscoe west of Kaiser, especially at the same time as the light rail is being constructed and Panorama City is being redeveloped would be... hellish, to say the least. For a dedicated BRT lane, Nordhoff also gets super-busy but is much wider, Woodman is wider, and utilizing that little bit of Ventura Cyn would be a good repurposing of what has become an awkward feeder street. So, just from a construction and land-use standpoint, this alternative seems really viable. Also, utilizing Webb to cut from Roscoe to Lankershim seems wonderful. The layouts of Ventura Cyn and Webb are similar to the Orange Line's Woodman Station to Valley College Station segment. Regardless, I vote for a NoHo Red Line terminus option rather than Sylmar. My alma mater CSUN is known as primarily a commuter school, so having a direct link to the Red Line (and the Chatsworth Metrolink and Orange Line) will be enormously helpful for students who live elsewhere throughout the greater region. I'm sure it would be a very popular draw to the school! Same with having a link between Kaiser and the Red Line. A BRT line just makes it so much more convenient to reach both of these important destinations from just about anywhere. Since the timeframe is for an opening by 2023-2025, it would make sense to utilize a NoHo terminus option rather than Sylmar because it would address where there is currently very high demand. Down the road when the rail lines near Sylmar become more developed, perhaps a different new BRT line could be conceived. But for now, the light rail is already scheduled to be going there and that will connect with this NSFVBRT as well. Anyway, I just noticed that there was the new proposed variation utilizing Woodman and Ventura Cyn and I thought, hey, that's an awesome idea! It would circumvent a lot of rush-hour parking-lot-style traffic with less impact than the other variations, so getting the project constructed on schedule seems easier to achieve with this option. And please don't tweak Metro Line 158 because of this, other than to dramatically increase its frequency of service. It's my favorite local line because it connects with just about everything! It needs to get with the times and run more often!) Thanks for reading my really long comment! And also thanks for doing this project. It's going to be awesome! (PS - It would highly influence my staying in the area to age in place since it will be so convenient and I could actually go car-less. I'm a lifelong Valley Girl and would rather stay where I have roots... like, totally.) 38 Kaja Bowman ( 09/21/18 Likes Nordhoff-NoHo email to Metro I was notified of the meetings to discuss this issue only a few days ago. Unfortunately, with my commitments to the Northridge South Neighborhood Council & the Sherwood Forest HOA, I have been unable to fit an open time to attend. Additionally, my presence at our NSNC booth at this Saturday’s Disaster Fair makes it impossible to attend this last meeting. Will there any future meetings? If so, could I be notified of that schedule. My email for Council business is: 39 Marilyn Meyer Northridge South NC 09/27/18 Future meetings? [email protected]. email to Metro 40 Vite Joshua 09/27/18 ‘The bus is always late facebook I would like this route to be very cosmetically appealing. The Orange train that runs through the chandler section of the valley glen and Sherman oaks area is beautiful with a walking/biking trail and low maintenance plants. Areas where it is primarily residential like most of upper wooodman (Plummer and Van Nuys) would benifit from something like that. Modern 41 Marilyn Zecena 09/30/18 Make it like MOL European trains with thinner tracks would be ideal as well. email to Metro

Page 13 Page 4 of 7 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Wufoo and Email Comments

Comment No. Name Agency/ Organization City Mail/Email Phone Date of Comment Subject Full Comment Notes I support this project as long as it has more grade separation and Metro takes more responsibility for dealing with the possible gentrification and displacement of communities along the line. On the first point, to go at grade for all the route is ludicrous. We know what happens when there is a blockage. Trains are delayed like crazy. Sure, you could put more switchovers but you could minimize or eliminate these problems with some degree of grade separation or fencing. It doesn't have to be like the Green Line, it could be like the Expo Line at Sepulveda Station near the 405. It doesn't go all the way to street-level but it's elevated. Parts of Van Nuys are wide enough to build a ROW wide enough for higher speed operations, from what it looks like. We can't have this train slowed down like the Gold Line in East LA or Highland Park. I could see the line run at- grade through Panorama City north of Parthenia or Nordhoff, through Arleta, and through Pacoima to San The North SFV BRT Comments Form Fernando. Expecting the line to run completely at-grade south of of that is ridiculous. 42 Lorenzo Mutia 09/30/18 [#5] wufoo Hello,

I would like this route to be very cosmetically appealing. The Orange train that runs through the chandler section of the valley glen and Sherman oaks area is beautiful with a walking/biking trail and low maintenance plants. Areas where it is The North SFV BRT Comments Form primarily residential like most of upper wooodman (Plummer and Van Nuys) would benifit from something like that. Modern 43 Marilyn Zecena 09/30/18 [#6] European trains with thinner tracks would be ideal as well. wufoo Tavern Service and Please don't build this line along either Roscoe or Nordhoff. East-West traffic in the west Valley will just stop if you take away Northridge South Don't take travel lanes on Roscoe or lanes on either street. That includes Saticoy, Roscoe, Parthenia, Nordhoff and Plummer. Lassen Street between the 405 and 44 John Aitchison Neighborhood Council 10/01/18 Nordhoff CSUN would be a much better alternative. email to Metro Please don't build this line along either Roscoe or Nordhoff. East-West traffic in the west Valley will just stop if you take away Tavern Service and lanes on either street. That includes Saticoy, Roscoe, Parthenia, Nordhoff and Plummer. Lassen Street between the 405 and Northridge South The North SFV BRT Comments Form CSUN would be a much better alternative. 45 John Aitchison Neighborhood Council 10/01/18 [#7] wufoo I'd like to attend meetings to discuss where the bike routes will be located in this system.

46 Matt Weintraub Chatsworth NC 10/02/18 Bike routes email to Metro I'd like to attend meetings to discuss where the bike routes will be located in this system. Chatsworth The North SFV BRT Comments Form 47 Matt Weintraub Neighborhood Council 10/02/18 [#8] wufoo I want to know more about this project on the 22nd I missed the community meeting and all the neighborhood council meetings. Thanks I hope I get updates of the project in Panorama and neighbors volunteer. Thank you saber mas de este proyecto el dia 22 que toco en mi comunidad no asisti tuvimos Reunion de TODOS los consejos vecinales y. No me fue posible llegar a la hora marcada pero bueno por la comunidad lo que sean. Gracias espero me den actualizacion del 48 Severiana Pablo 10/02/18 I'm Interested/Me interesa avanze soy Panorama y vecinos Voluntaria.gracias email to Metro saber mas de este proyecto el dia 22 que toco en mi comunidad no asisti tuvimos Reunion de TODOS los consejos vecinales y. Couldn't attend but supports the No me fue posible llegar a la hora marcada pero bueno por la comunidad lo que sean. Gracias espero me den actualizacion 49 Severiana Pablo 10/04/18 project del avanze soy Panorama y vecinos Voluntaria.gracias email to Metro To Metro:

Good morning, I am e-mailing you is what is the latest status & information you have on the North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor BRT project.

If you have any information including a map that you can e-mail me, my e-mail address is [email protected]

I would greatly appreciate to hear back from you in regards to this project.

In addition, since this project wasn't part of the Measure M, will this BRT be converted to rail in the forseeable future.

Sincerely, 50 Michaello Follo 10/05/18 Information. Michael Follo email to Metro

Page 14 Page 5 of 7 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Wufoo and Email Comments

Comment No. Name Agency/ Organization City Mail/Email Phone Date of Comment Subject Full Comment Notes Good morning, I am e-mailing you is I never received a reply back from you in regards to my e-mail that I send to you back on October 5, 2018.

I have the October 5 e-mail that I send to you below.

I would greatly appreciate to hear back from you in regards to this matter.

Sincerely, 51 Michaello Follo 10/15/18 FWD Information Michael Follo email to Metro Bus on Parenthia and Tampa. I work around there and there's also a church where families come and collect benefits for the entire community and receive family counseling. Bus en Partenia-Tampa por nuestor trabajo y por que ahi hay una iglesia y podemos hacer cambios con familias unidas y es u beneficios para todal la communidad benimos del centro de asesoria 52 Ana Maria Guzman 10/17/18 Bus on Parthenia and Tampa familir. Panorama City NC We need a bus on Parenthia its really necessary because there's a lot of work on Chatsworth and we cant get through because of the lack of transportation. Thank you. Necesitmaos el bus en parthenia es muy necesario porque para Chatsworth 53 Doris Rodriguez 8 ( 10/17/18 Parthenia hay mucho trabajo y Tampa y no podemos ir por falta de transport gracias. Panorama City NC As a mother I ask that the that I be able to travel with my family down Parthenia St we really need transportation there. Como madre de familia les pido que la via de Parenthia para poder vigar con mi familia es la via que nesecitamos un 54 Erma Buch ( 10/18/18 Parthenia transporte de bus. Panorama City NC We ask that you consider putting a bus route on Parthenia so I can take my children to their classes and to church. We travel most of the time during the weekdays and we really need public transit here. Estamos pidenido que si es posible poner el bus en parthenia llevo mis hijos a clases de musica y iglesia la mayoria de la semana viajamos en la ruta parthenia y que en 55 Norma ( 10/18/18 Parthenia realidad es es lo que necesitamos. Panorama City NC Hi! My main need is to have public transit on Parenthia and Tampa. There are a lot of people that are traveling from Parenthia to different places. We really appreciate your support in trying to better the services in the community. Hola! Quiero dar las gracias por la oprtunidad de escucharnos pero mi principal necesidad es tener un transporte sobre la Parthenia hasta la Tampa. Hay difrentes personas que van a difernetes lugares sobre la Parenthenia. Muchas gracias! por su 56 Olivia Diaz 10/18/18 Parthenia and Tampa apyou a dar mejor sevico a la comunidad. Panorama City NC 1) we need to balance the needs of motorist with the need of transit users. Transit dependent. 2) Neither on roscoe nor Nordhoff all the bill. Too disruptive also well served by stand busses. Parking and traffic will be negatively impacted by these alignments. 3) Please consider a more Northern East to West orientation that can help alleviate the "transit decisions" Consider routes farther to t he problems in the Northern SFV. Plummer, Chatsworth, Devonshire or Lassen could be interesting alternative alignments. 57 Michelle Klein-Hass 2 ( 10/18/18 North Roscoe and Nordhoff are simply not good candidates. Panorama City NC I would love to see more of a line running on Devonshire or a street that is not in such a dense areas. Parking, Environmental, 58 Chris Martinez ( 10/18/18 Use Devonshire Neighborhood not being save because of the traffic. Please thing if Devonshire it’s the better option. Panorama City NC Thank your listening and for attending our needs. We need public transit that can take us to Parenthia, we don't have any other forms of transportation to take us to different places and we have the need to travel to places like Chatsworth and Van Nuys Blvd. Please have stations here if possible. Gracias por escuacharnos por atender a nuestras necediads nestitamos un medio de transportarnos a diferentes lugares que necesitamos llegar sera de la Van Nuys Blvd a Chatsworth estacion si es 59 Gloria ( 10/18/18 Parthenia posible. Panorama City NC Roscoe and Nordhoff is already a congested. The best streets to run it through should be Lassen St. Plumer St. and/or Consider routes farther to t he Devonshire our low income community will be affected/impacted when residents come form the N. Valley. Who requested 60 Ofeliz Oropeza ( 10/18/18 North this transit corridor, not the mid valley residents. Panorama City NC Roscoe blvd is already congested as is, removing two lanes will render the whole street moot for daily drivers.

The North SFV BRT Comments Form 61 Ivan Chavez 10/25/18 [#9] wufoo The North SFV BRT Comments Form Please don't build on Roscoe Blvd. That would do more harm than good. Thank you. 62 Bryan Bazalar 10/25/18 [#10] wufoo I may have commented before but I'll say that I am generally supportive of this project running on Lankershim, Roscoe, Reseda, and Nordhoff. Roscoe is way too wide in some portions and can handle center-running lanes with parking and turn restrictions. My concerns are based on the possibility that these projects could displace working class communities along the route (whom Metro needs to step up in protecting) and short-sighted neighborhood groups who think that the line shouldn't take away lanes. Nordhoff and Roscoe are perfectly wide enough for lane conversions. Reseda might be a little tricky. Either The North SFV BRT Comments Form way, if transit isn't made fast through priority treatments then people won't take it over their cars. There are no freeways to 63 Lorenzo Mutia 10/25/18 [#11] compete directly with Roscoe, transit should win. wufoo

Page 15 Page 6 of 7 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Metro Project Wufoo and Email Comments

Comment No. Name Agency/ Organization City Mail/Email Phone Date of Comment Subject Full Comment Notes I like the Freeway Option for the proposed BRT between Pasadena and NoHo. The concept of the northern spur to Burbank airport would be extremely useful. All of this needs to dovetail with the proposed North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor. When you put the plans for both lines together, I see an area for improvement. Itook the liberty of overlaying the potential routes of the North Valley and NoHo-Pas buslines. You’ll see that there is a gap in the planning. To get from the “north valley” to Burbank airport requires swinging around through NoHo. You’d probably get more ridership (And it would be more useful to people like me) if you added a short jaunt connecting the “north valley” line to the “Burbank airport” option line. Both of the dashed red lines in my picture below attempt to demonstrate the concept. Both lines are within the “Study area” and probably wouldn’t break your budget. I hope your planners will consider adding this to your design trades 64 Makan Mohageg 10/30/18 Serve Hollywood Burbank Airport for both transit studies. Thank you! email to Metro Hi guys this is scheduled the same date and time as the Sylmar Neighborhood council meeting.Will there be another meeting 65 David Steve Gonzales Meeting Conflict to accommodate Sylmar residents that want to attend both? facebook - send eblast with meeting times 66 Mitchell Pumar wants trains Stop with the busses we need trains facebook 67 Brad Franklin wants trains Need a train. I'll never take a bus facebook

Through these forums, many critical questions and concerns were raised with some being addressed and others yet to be answered. The university understands that not all the remaining issues can be solved at this moment, yet we are confident LA Metro will address our concerns in the future. However, I do want to take this opportunity to provide you with some clarity on the outstanding concerns that warrant additional clarification. These issues include:

• Determining the proposed connection times between the Van Nuys Light Rail Corridor and the Nordhoff – Sylmar/San Fernando option if someone were to switch transportation modes. This unknown wait time is critical to assessing the need for this route. If the wait time exceeds what a person is willing to endure to connect again, the Nordhoff – Sylmar/San Fernando route should remain as a viable option. If the wait time is minimal then a strong case can be made to remove the Nordhoff – Sylmar/San Fernando route due to redundancy. The university understands and appreciates that LA Metro will explore potential redundancies in determining a final route. We look forward to that discussion in the future when the appropriate time arises.

• CSUN’s approved Master Plan Enrollment ceiling, which was established in 2006, is 35,000 full-time equivalent students (FTES). Over the past decade, the campus has grown to a current enrollment of approximately 32,000 FTES, which equates to a student headcount of nearly 37,000. By 2025, California is projected to face a shortfall of one million college graduates needed to support the State’s economy with a qualified workforce. Therefore, future policy decisions and actions by the Governor or State Legislature are likely to promote enrollment growth across the CSU, potentially expanding CSUN’s headcount upwards toward a student headcount of 50,000. I highlight this data to show these numbers reflect the complexity of using future projections to determine current policy decisions and how we, as an institution, navigate uncertainty. This uncertainty is a common thread that runs between our two institutions and we are sensitive to this reality. We have high confidence in LA Metro’s ability to factor in all the pertinent data we can provide and determine how best to apply it.

Diana F. Harrison, We understand that not all the information we are seeking clarity on may be known at this time. Specifically, engineering 68 President of CSUN CSUN 12/21/19 data, as well as bus travel times and frequency of bus stop locations that are disproportionately used by CSUN students. This email to Metro

Page 16 Page 7 of 7 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Community Meetings Comment Cards

Community Mtg. Name Agency/ Organization Full Comment The purple route would seem to make the most sense since it cross-crosses the new route and hits the Van Nuys Airport. The blue route would seem to be redundant with the N-S San Fernando to Van Nuys LR. Don't have any feelings about the Chatsworth 9.26.18 David Goldstein Resident pink route. Us students at CSUN Sustainability major or not are very pleased to hear that Metro is considering adding light rail here in our very own SFV. I love how the rail runs from Chatsworth through Northridge and Van Nuys. If it were up to me I would pick for you to extend to the North Hollywood Station instead of Sylmar. I think that would make it a lot easier for people in the SFV to make it to LA cheaper (thank Metrolink) and its' more sustainable. The bridge/dot connection in the middle would go best at Lindley Ave instead of Reseda Blvd. because of congestion. I also think more marketing and community outreach is needed dot spread the word about this. I hope Metro gives adequate funding for the project. It would benefit us Chatsworth 9.26.18 Nicole Aleman CSUN Student all especially students. Chatsworth 9.26.18 Teresa Glass Great presentation everything was clean and concise. I liked the quest about safety. Thank you for taking time to take interest in the public and for listening to our concerns. The presentation was very good Chatsworth 9.26.18 Ubaldo Jasso and we would like you to continue keeping us informed about the project and come to a good decision. I would like to more vigilance and safety on/near the Metro bus stations. We need machines designed with bus schedules Chatsworth 9.26.18 Jose Jasso that give us real time bus arrivals on Wilshire and Normandie. Thank you. It may be a good idea to have a digital video that outlines the new lines. Like a kind of a point-of-view video, so it is clear to CSUN Focus Group see what the what the vision is, rather than just a picture of a map. One more thing: I highly encourage you to make a short 10.19.18 Rose Merida CSUN presentation to the Associated Students Senate Meeting on Monday at 9am.

Page 1 of 6 Page 17 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Community Meetings Comment Cards It would be great to have bike paths near the dedicated bus lane where cyclists can travel safely,. Going down Roscoe and CSUN Focus Group the part of Reseda Blvd between there and Parthenia, there is no safe way to ride a bike. If there is going to be a 10.19.18 Jennifer Thompson CSUN reconfiguration of the lanes anyway for the BRT line, please also add safe bike lanes. CSUN Focus Group I missed the entire presentation because I couldn’t find this room! It's not on the printed map and there are no signs or 10.19.18 N/A CSUN directions in the Plaza, so most students didn't know where it was. CSUN Focus Group I would strongly recommend choosing the Nordhoff to Sylmar/San Fernando option because of ridership density and 10.19.18 N/A CSUN access/opportunity. CSUN's $30 million parking structure on Zelzah/Plummer and luxury hotel project on Zelzah/Orange Grove are the wrong CSUN Focus Group priorities and are counter to successful transit. CSUN shuttle is underfunded. Too much student parking reduces the 10.19.18 Ben V. CSUN demand for transit. CSUN Focus Group As a cyclist, I greatly appreciate vehicles and routes that accommodate multi-modal transit. The ability to pay easily with 10.19.18 Nikhil Schneider CSUN multiple methods of payment could also remove perceived barriers to taking transit. CSUN Focus Group Are the buses/light rail pet friendly? 10.19.18 Lyn Doster CSUN Consider double bike racks in the BRT. They have them on both front and back of the buses in San Luis Obispo to accommodate 6 bicycles per bus. We've had to wait 2-3 buses with our bicycles on the Orange line which really discourages us from taking Metro to events like CicLAvia. Please prioritize connecting station stops to bicycle lanes. It is imperative for CSUN Focus Group people form low-density neighborhoods such as the Valley who have to travel several miles to access rapid transit . 10.19.18 Kayla Kaiser CSUN CSUN Focus Group Use Plummer St to bring in all of the East Valley students and staff. It would save 10-15 minutes if they had a station at 10.19.18 Bob Luszczak CSUN Plummer/Zelzah.

Page 2 of 6 Page 18 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Community Meetings Comment Cards 1) Adequate seating at stations for disabled -- subway seating inadequate. 2) Access to dedicated lanes by users such as taxis, Uber(multiple occupants) and in electric/hybrid vehicles. --otherwise resources are wasted 90% of this time. All professional drivers -- use of uniform, interchangeable buses is more important Joint Meeting 9.29.18 Ken Murray than 'line branding' which wastes money. Must have bus dedicated lanes. Should pass through on Roscoe between Sepulveda and Van Nuys. Sylmar Connection looks redundant with ESFUV project coming on board. Freeways should be avoided unless 1st mode/last mode connections are Joint Meeting 9.29.18 Zachary Rynew LACBC vastly improved. No I-5 alignment. Metro ought to have a grammar school outreach program showing the same 'propaganda' that you gave us. For future patrons indoctrinating open minds. That advice could include safety measures as well as behavioral disciplines. Points of the Joint Meeting 9.29.18 EJS usual Metro stops such as museums, ballparks, beaches, colleges, views of natural beauty etc., etc. Utilize existing lines rather than build new lanes. If you're going to construct, great. But in the meantime, to lessen traffic and further transport use what's there. Orange line, utilize what doesn't disrupt. Cost effective on both initiatives. Joint Meeting 9.29.18 Paul Long Metro Patron Please expand parking for those whom walking to a stop is neither safe nor practical. Please, switching to mass transit won't happen just because you built the line; people still need to get to their houses (and maybe run an extra errand along the way). As cars diminish, the property can be repurposed. But you have to have the lot/property to start with. (That is, give us Joint Meeting 9.29.18 Paula Humerick Community Member Uber/Lyft service!) Joint Meeting 9.29.18 Tommy Wu Community Member The original proposal route looks good. We do need BRT from SFV to Pasadena. Great job! I feel the Orange Line needs to stay BRT. Electric bus infrastructure is already being built and will be more resilient than rail Northridge 9.20.18 Benjamin Verheiden CSUN with climate change. Why are you looking at Roscoe? It's extremely congested and buses are going to get stuck in traffic with cars trying to get on Northridge 9.20.18 N/A N/A the 405 freeway. CSUN connection is needed by the students. That makes Nordhoff -North Hollywood the most useful route. The Roscoe- Northridge 9.20.18 Craig O. CSUN North Hollywood route is not a good connection. I look forward to having this built.

Page 3 of 6 Page 19 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Community Meetings Comment Cards Prefer either route that terminates at North Hollywood. I am concerned that removing existing lanes of traffic will create Northridge 9.20.18 Don Brownlee CSUN/Community monumental congestion much of the day. One of the people asking questions said he was very concerned that this project would take away the right-of-way of existing car streets. I strongly disagree. Priority should go to the bus service that serves the community. If car lanes need to be taken, it will be worthwhile! Frequency of buses is a key priority. Will this full BRT be the most cost-effective way to Northridge 9.20.18 Matthew d'Alessio CSUN increase the frequency the buses come? Consider transportation and the need for community participation. Will you provide webcams/livestreaming for the meetings? Consider Periscope (live stream using phone) with Mevo camera ($600 investment), which allows for live feedback. Also, consider using an official Metro app to capture rider data from surveys, etc. The post it/red sticker map data Northridge 9.20.18 Veronica Belerra CSUN collection can easily be done online, allowing for more participation. An option with a Metrolink station link would really help link the Santa Clarita Valley with this BRT line. A seamless transition/transfer to the proposed light rail is important. If there is no right of way for this bus, will it really be BRT? I would Northridge 9.20.18 Aiden Flores CSUN prefer dedicated lanes for this bus. Only this way would I give up my car. Transportation Liaison How are yoyo going to pursue public input? Some bus riders may not have access to meetings like this where you have to for Sylmar Neighborhood come in a car. I'm thinking about students in Sylmar needing to get to SCUN or Olive View patients. Northridge 9.20.18 Penelope McMillan Council Nordhoff/Sylmar line would cut ridership from the East SFV transit corridor. That area is also served by that train line while the Sun Valley's southeast side of the Valley is underserved by any lines. Panorama City is the densest neighborhood in the Valley, 22nd densest in LA, and soon to be even denser with housing projects popping up in the neighborhood. Roscoe/Woodman is in very close proximity to Kaiser Pan City facility as well as major Filipino businesses that see a lot of foot traffic. A station there would provide transit access to those two. High density of apartments and people on east side of Panorama City 9.22.18 Angelo De la Cruz Community member Panorama City to the Nordhoff, Parthenia, and Roscoe areas.

Page 4 of 6 Page 20 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Community Meetings Comment Cards As a CSUN student who relies on public transit to get to/from school and around the region, this planned BRT line traversing the San Fernando Valley will make my commute to CSUN much easier. I support the alignment as follows: from North Hollywood Station to Chatsworth Station, via Lankershim Blvd, Webb Ave, Roscoe Blvd, Woodman Ave, Nordhoff St, and Canoga Ave. Also, there should be a station at Nordhoff St and Lindley, near Cal State Northridge. I've noticed many CSUN students boarding/alighting Metro buses at this intersection. Having the line end at North Hollywood is a great idea because Panorama City 9.22.18 Kenny Uong CSUN riders can connect to Metro Red, Orange, and future NoHo-Pasadena BRT Line. High curbs on Tobias and Rayen St are a challenge for senior residents in the study area. We need more curb cuts. Panorama City 9.22.18 Diana Dow Community member Willis/Rayen-senior apartment complex. Bus #233-Van Nuys. Regarding terminating at NoHo vs. San Fernando: should access to Downtown be the priority or is this an opportunity to Panorama City 9.22.18 Miles Orr Community member spur new investment along transit corridors in the Valley? (1) Please put maps on your site that are easily downloadable showing the three routes. (2) Only part of the Nordhoff- Sylmar route actually travels in Sylmar along Hubbard St from the Metro station to Glenoaks. Will you be doing traffic studies to take into account how the BRT would fit? Hubbard has a lot of traffic during morning and evening commuter Transportation Liaison times. (3) According to one map on your site, Sylmar has 4 or 5 places where Metro gets 1,000 boarding a day (Mission for Sylmar Neighborhood College, Olive View, Glenoaks/Hubbard, and SF Road/Hubbard). Are you doing any onsite polling of where these people are Panorama City 9.22.18 Penelope McMillan Council going, and if this BRT would be useful? I'm concerned about my local street access to Nordhoff Street. Will I be able to turn left onto Nordhoff? Will I be able to turn left off of Nordhoff? I'm concerned about limited bike access on Nordhoff and that this project would make bike access worse. I'm concerned about access during construction. If seems like it will be difficult to get home during construction. San Fernando 9.27.18 Jeremy Resident I think the best alternative for the BRT would be the one going through San Fernando as it offers a lot of amenities to the San Fernando 9.27.18 Yaz Emrani riders and addresses the urgent transit needs of our residents. San Fernando 9.27.18 Anonymous Need lighted bust shelters and restrooms at major bus stops.

Page 5 of 6 Page 21 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Alternatives Analysis Community Meetings Comment Cards Using a heavy traffic street (i.e. Nordhoff) is route for BRT will potentially negative impact surrounding communities when San Fernando 9.27.18 Rosa M. Echaveste Community commuters look for alternative routes. San Fernando 9.27.18 Nick Put it through San Fernando to connect an undeserved community.

Page 6 of 6 Page 22 Upcoming meetings for North San Fernando Valley Bus Rapid Transit project

BY STEVE HYMON , SEPTEMBER 10, 2018

(//s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/media.thesource.metro.net/wp- content/uploads/2018/09/20095202/NSFV_BRT_MAP-REFISED.jpg)

A key Measure M project in the San Fernando Valley is a new bus rapid transit line that would run across the northern part of the Valley. Public meetings for the project are scheduled later this month — dates and times are below. The North San Fernando Valley Bus Rapid

Page 23 Transit project’s home page is here (//www.metro.net/projects/north-sfv- brt/).

Some main points:

•The project seeks to create an 18- to 20-mile long route that would serve key destinations such as CSUN and Kaiser Permanente, enable people to spend less time traveling and connect with other transit lines, including the Chatsworth Metrolink/Amtrak station and Metro’s future light rail line between the Van Nuys Orange Line Station and the Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink station.

•Potential routes could connect Chatsworth to North Hollywood or Chatsworth to Sylmar/San Fernando. Nordhoff Street and Roscoe Boulevard are busy streets that could be used for parts of the route. See the above map.

•What is bus rapid transit, also known as BRT? BRT is a high-quality bus service that provides faster and more reliable, equitable and convenient service. Features might include fewer stops, frequent service, bus lanes, high quality stations, transit signal priority, all- door boarding, off-bus fare payment, zero-emission vehicles and more prominent branding.

•The project is scheduled to begin service by 2025 with $180 million in funding from the Measure M sales tax approved by L.A. County voters in 2016.

•Metro is in the midst of an Alternatives Analysis (AA) for the project. The AA will narrow the list of potential projects to be further studied in a more detailed Draft Environmental Impact Report.

The meetings will provide an update on the project and allow you to ask questions and provide input. Content will be the same at all meetings:

Page 24 Thursday, September 20, 6 – 8 p.m. Congregational Church of Northridge, 9659 Balboa Boulevard Northridge, CA 91325 (//goo.gl/maps/sUAf5mheEiw)

Saturday, September 22, 10 a.m. – noon Sepulveda Recreation Center, 8825 Kester Avenue Panorama City, CA 91402 (//goo.gl/maps/LxcfMshUSBE2)

Wednesday, September 26, 6 – 8 p.m. Our Community Charter School, 10045 Jumilla Avenue Chatsworth, CA 91311 (//goo.gl/maps/PyTTrbDDyvF2)

Thursday, September 27, 6 – 8 p.m. San Fernando Aquatic Center – Banquet Hall 300 Park Avenue, San Fernando, CA 91340 (//goo.gl/maps/MVuZRea8Vvz)

Saturday, September 29, 10 a.m. – noon* East Valley High School Auditorium, 5525 Vineland Avenue North Hollywood, CA 91601 (//goo.gl/maps/h9uLvdkBFtm)

All Metro meetings are held in ADA accessible facilities and are accessible by transit. Spanih translation provided. ADA accommodations and other translations are available by calling 323.466.3876 or California Relay Service at 711 at least 72 hours in advance. For questions or to share your feedback, call us at 213.418.3082 or via email at [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]).

*This meeting will include an overview of the North San Fernando Valley and NoHo to Pasadena BRT projects that may interface at the

Page 25 North Hollywood Station. For more information about the NoHo to Pasadena BRT project, please visit metro.net/brt (//metro.net/brt).

Related Upcoming public Planning continues meetings to discuss for East San East San Fernando Fernando Valley Valley Transit Transit Corridor, Draft study released for BRT or rail project between Van Corridor project to another Measure R Nuys and Sylmar/San improve north-south project Fernando Metrolink station September 1, 2017 travel Planning continues for East In "Projects" San Fernando Valley Transit Upcoming public meetings to Corridor, another Measure R discuss East San Fernando project Valley Transit Corridor project July 24, 2012 to improve north-south travel In "Policy & Funding" March 8, 2013 In "Projects"

 CATEGORIES: Policy & Funding (//thesource.metro.net/category/policy_funding/), Projects (//thesource.metro.net/category/projects/)

 TAGGED AS: Alternatives Analysis (//thesource.metro.net/tag/alternatives-analysis/), BRT (//thesource.metro.net/tag/brt/), community meetings (//thesource.metro.net/tag/community-meetings/), CSUN (//thesource.metro.net/tag/csun/), Measure M (//thesource.metro.net/tag/measure-m/), North San Fernando Valley bus rapid transit (//thesource.metro.net/tag/north-san-fernando-valley-bus-rapid-transit/), public meetings (//thesource.metro.net/tag/public-meetings/), San Fernando Valley (//thesource.metro.net/tag/san-fernando-valley/), study (//thesource.metro.net/tag/study/)

Page 26  13 replies ›

That map is a little inaccurate. Valley Presbyterian Hospital is on Vanowen near Sepulveda- definitely not on Parthenia between Sepulveda and Van Nuys.

How about just having better service on the Ventura County Metrolink line?

I think they tried but they encountered a setback with the double tracking in a small community. About a mile worth of I remember.

They also can’t double track in the tunnels, which were built for a single track. Widening them would be prohibitively expensive, from what I’ve read.

Metrolink’s reasoning whenI asked about weekend service on the VC line is its already served by the surfliner and the Valley residents killed their preposition to double track the valley.

they need to pay for that and arent willing to. Its the county…. not metrolink. The county needs to either find funds to pay for it or they need to pass a transportation tax to pay for it.. two such proposals have been rejected by VC voters. its too bad. it would be great to have weekend service on the line.

Page 27 Look to Mexico City. The way they do BRT is excellent and would work well in L.A. Many of the stations are enclosed in the center of the road and are easy and comfortable to wait in. Buses are given their own dedicated lanes in the center of the road. If you go outside rush hour, the trip is really pleasant and easy.

Is there a reason why there isn’t a freeway section to this (looking specifically at the Lankershim route)?

If it’s gonna take more than an hour to get from NoHo to CSUN this line is already a bust, as there won’t be anything “rapid” about that.

The only way it’s gonna take less than hour from NoHo to CSUN is if LA lets Metro really push for dedicated lanes and potentially higher-speed limits for BRT at the street level. Bypassing Lankershim via the 170 would deprive folks there of a convenient service. Metro could experiment with a bus that goes express from Roscoe or Osborne to North Hollywood Station. The 170 isn’t particularly as bad as the 5, the 101, or the 405. Our freeways are fairly underutilized by the bus system- largely because of car traffic. The bulk of it is political- an unwillingness to properly allocate lanes for 3+ HOVs- the 101 and 405 being the freeways that could really benefit from something like that.

Than a “Rapid Express” version of this has to exist as well. I get the Metro Rapid Express (less 920 and more 940) failed, but I still believe they can actually work on Page 28 actual BRT routes that have their “identity” (for lack of a better term). This is why I can’t help but to bash on Metro.

They can experiment with some sort of express variant on the Orange Line and Silver Line yet EVERY bus has to make EVERY stop on those routes. While I get that the Orange Line may have limitations, I really hope Metro will be willing to Experiment with “Rapid Express” on Vermont, Colorado and Nordhoff BRT because the rapid routes are now becoming so ridiculously slow it’s a shame to call them rapid routes.

Regarding freeway bus service, the Valley was served by freeway express bus service prior to the opening of the North Hollywood Red Line extension in 2000, many of those routes truncated at the Red Line station after its opening. The predecessor agency, SCRTD operated many of the same routes, many from drive-in theaters during its heyday. Some routes were taken over by LADOT for their Commuter Express service.

 […] Concepts For Metro’s North Valley BRT (Urbanize, The Source) […]

 […] Thursday 9/20 and Saturday 9/22 (with additional meetings through 9/29)- Metro will host a series of Page 29 community meetings on the North San Fernando Valley Bus Rapid Transit project. Metro anticipates that the project may ultimately span 18 to 20 miles and will travel east-west across the northern San Fernando Valley, potentially connecting to the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor Project, the Chatsworth Metrolink Station, and either the North Hollywood Metro Orange/Red Line Station or the Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink Station. The first meeting will be Thursday 9/20 from 6-8 p.m. at the Congregational Church of Northridge at 9659 Balboa Boulevard. Meetings continue Saturday 9/22 from 10 a.m. to noon at Sepulveda Recreation Center at 8825 Kester Avenue in Panorama City. Next week there will be three more meetings: 9/26 in Chatsworth, 9/27 in San Fernando, and 9/29 in North Hollywood. Details at Metro’s The Source. […]

Page 30 LOS ANGELES

NORTHRIDGE METRO LOS ANGELES LA TRANSPORTATION 10 Metro moving forward with new rapid bus line in the Valley It will connect to the Valley’s planned light rail line By Elijah Chiland Sep 12, 2018, 10:56am PDT

A stop on the Orange Line, an existing rapid bus route in the San Fernando Valley. | Dan Reed | Flickr creative commons

Metro is holding community meetings this month to discuss plans for a rapid bus line through the northern San Fernando Valley, and the agency has revealed a bit more detail about what the route could eventually look like.

Largely planned as a transit option for students and staff at Cal State Northridge, the bus route would also provide a key connection between the planned East San Fernando Valley light rail line and the northern end of the Orange Line in Chatsworth.

A route for the new bus line has yet to be determined, but Metro has outlined a few proposals:

Page 31 In one option the line would begin at the North Hollywood station and run mainly along Roscoe Boulevard before cutting up to Nordhoff Street via Reseda Boulevard.

A similar proposal would bring the line up to Nordhoff sooner, passing by Valley Presbyterian Hospital along the way.

A third possible route would begin at the Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink station. The bus would then travel south to Nordhoff via Glenoaks Boulevard and Osborne Street.

Regardless of which option the agency chooses, the bus line will cover a lot of ground. The shortest route Metro is studying would travel 18 miles—twice the length of the under-construction Crenshaw/LAX Line.

A map of the possible bus routes. | Via Metro

Because it’s a rapid line, similar to Metro’s Orange and Silver lines, the bus will travel in dedicated bus lanes, ensuring it’s not slowed down by traffic. According to a technical study of the project, stops will be placed along the route at intervals of roughly one mile.

Planned to start service in 2023, the bus is one of 28 major projects that Metro aims to complete in time for the 2028 Olympics. In 2016, when LA County voters approved the Measure M sales tax initiative, $180 million in funding was set aside for the bus route.

Page 32 Metro’s blog, The Source, has details on the community meetings the agency is holding for the project this month.

Metro considering rapid bus line in northern San Fernando Valley [Curbed LA]

Metro greenlights new light rail line in the San Fernando Valley [Curbed LA]

Can the Valley’s Orange Line—the nation’s most successful BRT—get any respect? [Curbed LA]

Page 33 Page 34 7/1/2019 Community meetings in the San Fernando Valley, Sept. 24-Oct. 1 – Daily News

LOCAL NEWS Community meetings in the San Fernando Valley, Sept. 24-Oct. 1

By HOLLY ANDRES || [email protected] || DailyDaily NewsNews PUBLISHED: September 24, 2018 at 10:36 am || UPDATED:UPDATED: September 24, 2018 at 10:36 am

Neighborhood Council Valley Village board meeting on Sept. 26 at Faith Presbyterian Church on Colfax Avenue. (Google Street View)

Page 35 https://www.dailynews.com/2018/09/24/community-meetings-in-the-san-fernando-valley-sept-24-oct-1/ 1/7 7/1/2019 Community meetings in the San Fernando Valley, Sept. 24-Oct. 1 – Daily News Community meetings bring people together for exchange of ideas and memorable shared experiences plus the potential for positive personal and community enrichment. Here are this week’s, and upcoming, get-togethers.

ADVERTISING

John F. Kennedy High School class of 1978 reunion: TheThe reunionreunion committeecommittee isis lookinglooking forfor GranadaGranada HillsHills classmatesclassmates fromfrom 19781978 forfor aa reunionreunion onon Oct.Oct. 13.13. ConnieConnie Roark Hastler: [email protected]

Open house meetings for the Palmdale to Burbank Section of the California High-Speed Rail Authority: FourFour areaarea meetings:meetings: 5:305:30 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 2424 (Angeles(Angeles National Golf Course, 9401 Foothill Blvd., Sunland); 5:30 p.m. Sept. 26 (English, 6 p.m. and Spanish, 7 p.m.; Hubert H. Humphrey Recreation Center, 12560 Filmore St., Pacoima); 5:30 p.m. Sept. 27 (Chimbole Cultural Center, 38350 Sierra Highway, Palmdale); 10 a.m. Sept. 29 (High Desert School, 3620 Antelope Woods Road, Acton). 800-630-1039. www.hsr.ca.gov

Tarzana Neighborhood Council: 77 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 25.25. TarzanaTarzana ElementaryElementary School,School, auditorium, 5726 Topeka Drive. 818-921-4992. www.tarzananc.org

Channel Islands Chapter of the Embroiderers’ Guild of America: BringBring youryour current project to discuss and work on, 9:30 a.m. Sept. 26. United Methodist Church, 291 Anacapa Drive, Camarillo. 805-484-9056. psrega.org

Page 36 https://www.dailynews.com/2018/09/24/community-meetings-in-the-san-fernando-valley-sept-24-oct-1/ 2/7 7/1/2019 Community meetings in the San Fernando Valley, Sept. 24-Oct. 1 – Daily News

Classics Book Club at Granada Hills Branch Library: DiscussesDiscusses “Dreaming“Dreaming inin Cuban” by Cristina Garcia, 1:30-3 p.m. Sept. 26. 10640 Petit Ave. 818-368-5687. www.lapl.org

Caltrans Community Open House for the I-5 Widening Project in Burbank and Glendale: PresentationPresentation includesincludes updatesupdates andand questionsquestions andand answersanswers aboutabout thethe improvements,improvements, 6-86-8 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 26.26. BurbankBurbank CommunityCommunity ServicesServices Building,Building, 150150 N. Third St. 213-897-9372. Email: [email protected]. my5la.com

Community meetings on Metro’s study for high-quality Bus Rapid Transit in thethe northnorth SanSan FernandoFernando Valley:Valley: LosLos AngelesAngeles CountyCounty MetropolitanMetropolitan AuthorityAuthority isis seeking community input on alternate routes from Chatsworth Metrolink Station to either North Hollywood or the city of San Fernando: Meetings: 6 p.m. Sept. 26 (Our(Our CommunityCommunity CharterCharter School,School, 1004510045 JumillaJumilla Ave.,Ave., Chatsworth);Chatsworth); 66 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 27 (Aquatic Center, 300 Park Ave., San Fernando). A third meeting explores options for the BRT service from the North Hollywood Orange/Red Line station to connect with the north San Fernando Valley BRT to the Pasadena Gold Line, 10 a.m. Sept. 29 (East Valley High School, auditorium, 5525 Vineland Ave., North Hollywood. bit.ly/2pr9RCj

North Hollywood West Neighborhood Council: 6:306:30 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 26.26. SaticoySaticoy Elementary School, 7850 Ethel Ave. 818-446-6469. ohowest.org

Canoga Park Neighborhood Council: 77 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 26.26. CanogaCanoga ParkPark CommunityCommunity Center, 7248 Owensmouth Ave. 818-856-1060. www.canogaparknc.org

Encino Neighborhood Council: 77 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 26.26. EncinoEncino CommunityCommunity Center,Center, 4935 Balboa Blvd. 818-971-6996. www.encinonc.org

Neighborhood Council Valley Village: 77 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 26.26. FaithFaith PresbyterianPresbyterian Church, 5000 Colfax Ave. 818-759-8204. www.myvalleyvillage.com

Woodland Hills Homeowners Association: Discussion on bike lanes and traffic congestion, 7:30 p.m. Sept. 26. American Legion Hall, 5320 Fallbrook Ave. 818- 719-9181. www.whho.com

Northridge South Neighborhood Council: 6:306:30 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 27.27. NorthridgeNorthridge Middle School, 17960 Chase St. orthridgesouth.org

Panorama City Neighborhood Council: 6:306:30 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 27.27. MissionMission CommunityCommunity Hospital, 14850 Roscoe Blvd. 818-714-2133. www.panoramacitync.org

Sylmar Neighborhood Council: 6:306:30 p.m.p.m. Sept.Sept. 27.27. SylmarSylmar CharterCharter HighHigh School,School, 13050 Borden Ave. 818-833-8737. sylmarneighborhoodcouncil.org

Page 37 https://www.dailynews.com/2018/09/24/community-meetings-in-the-san-fernando-valley-sept-24-oct-1/ 3/7 7/2/2019 L.A. METRO TO HOLD SEPTEMBER COMMUNITY MEETINGS FOR NEW NORTH SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BUS RAPID TRANSIT P…

L.A. METRO TO HOLD SEPTEMBER COMMUNITY MEETINGS FOR NEW NORTH SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT

Monday September 10, 2018

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) invites the public to a series of community meetings for the North San Fernando Valley Bus Rapid Transit Project in September. Interested members of the public can learn about the project and provide input into the project’s current planning and environmental study.

The $180-million project is funded by the Measure M half-cent sales tax approved by voters in 2016. Metro will build a high-quality Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line in the North Valley that will connect major activity centers, employment sites, education, and regional transit connections.

Content will be the same at all meetings:

Thursday, September 20, 2018, 6 – 8 p.m., Congregational Church of Northridge, 9659 Balboa Boulevard, Northridge, CA 91325

Saturday, September 22, 2018, 10 a.m. – 12 p.m., Sepulveda Recreation Center, 8825 Kester Avenue, Panorama City, CA 91402

Wednesday, September 26, 2018, 6 – 8 p.m., Our Community Charter School 10045 Jumilla Avenue, Chatsworth, CA 91311

Thursday, September 27, 2018, 6 – 8 p.m., San Fernando Aquatic Center - Banquet Hall, 300 Park Avenue, San Fernando, CA 91340

Saturday, September 29, 2018, 10 a.m. – noon, East Valley High School Auditorium, 5525 Vineland Avenue, North Hollywood, CA 91601

All Metro meetings are held in ADA accessible facilities and are accessible by transit. Spanish translation will be provided. ADA accommodations and other translations are available by calling 323.466.3876 or California Relay Service at 711 at least 72 hours in advance.

Metro is now evaluating potential BRT alignments and station locations through an Alternatives Analysis process and is collaborating with cities where the project may be located. Once the Alternatives Analysis has been completed, Metro will identify a proposed project and advance to the next phase of the study. Page 38 https://www.metro.net/news/simple_pr/l-metro-hold-september-community-meetings-new-nort/ 1/2 7/2/2019Metro anticipatesL.A. METRO that TO HOLDthe project SEPTEMBER may COMMUNITY ultimately MEETINGS span FOR18 toNEW 20 NORTH miles SAN and FERNANDO will travel VALLEY east-west BUS RAPID acrossTRANSIT P… the northern San Fernando Valley, potentially connecting to the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor Project, the Chatsworth Metrolink Station, and either the North Hollywood Metro Orange/Red Line Station or the Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink Station. The planning study will also identify potential opportunities to benefit communities through high quality urban design, green/sustainable infrastructure, and transit-oriented communities. The project is scheduled to open between 2023 and 2025.

For questions or to share feedback on this project, call the project hotline at 213-418-3082 or email at [email protected].

For additional project information, visit the North SFV BRT Project website at https://www.metro.net/projects/north-sfv-brt/ (https://www.metro.net/projects/north-sfv-brt/).

About Metro

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is unique among the nation’s transportation agencies. Created in 1993, Metro is a multimodal transportation agency that transports about 1.3 million passengers daily on a fleet of 2,200 clean air buses and six rail lines. The agency also oversees bus, rail, highway and other mobility-related building projects and leads transportation planning and programming for Los Angeles County.

Stay informed by following Metro on The Source and El Pasajero at metro.net, facebook.com/losangelesmetro, twitter.com/metrolosangeles and twitter.com/metroLAalerts and instagram.com/metrolosangeles.

Stay Connected Receive email alerts when this info changes.

(/rss/news_rss/) (/rss/news_atom/) (http://facebook.com/losangelesmetro) (http://twitter.com/metrolosangeles)

Return to Current News Releases (/news/archive/2019/07)

Page 39 https://www.metro.net/news/simple_pr/l-metro-hold-september-community-meetings-new-nort/ 2/2 Wednesday, October 3, 2018 Agenda 6:30PM SAN FERNANDO VALLEY SERVICE COUNCIL Regular Meeting Marvin Braude San Fernando Valley Constituent Center 6262 Van Nuys Boulevard Van Nuys, CA 91401 All Metro meetings are held in ADA accessible facilities. Meeting location served by Metro Local Lines 164, 233, 236/237, Metro Rapid Lines 744, 788, and Metro Orange Line. Call to Order Council Members: Officers: Yvette Lopez-Ledesma, Chair Gary Spivack, Deputy Executive Officer Jess Talamantes, Vice Chair Dolores Ramos, Council Admin. Analyst Carla Canales Israel Marin, Principal Transportation Planner Jenny Freese Daniels Karen Swift, Community Relations Manager Robert Gonzales Carlos Rico, Transportation Associate Rosalba González David Perry Dennis Washburn Donald Weissman For Metro information in English, please call the following phone number: 213-922-1282. Para más información de Metro en español, por favor llame al número que aparece a continuación: 213-922-1282

Մետրոյի մասին հայերեն լեզվով տեղեկություններ ստանալու համար, խնդրում ենք զանգահարել այս հեռախոսահամարով՝ 323-466-3876

Для получения информации о Metro на русском языке, пожалуйста, позвоните по указанному ниже телефонному номеру: 323-466-3876

需要都会运输局的（语言名称）资料, 请拨打以下电话号码: 323-466-3876

Metroに関する日本語での情報は、以下の電話番号でお問い合わせください：323-466-3876

ส ำหรับข้อมูลเกี่ยวกับรถโดยสำรเมโทรเป็นภำษำ [ไทย] กรุณำติดต่อที่หมำยเลขโทรศัพท์ด้ำนล่ำง: 323-466-3876

ដ ើ插បីនិ架យᾶ插ួយ诒នកបកប្រប Metro ម្ននក់ សូ插ទូរស័寒ទ㾶插ដេខ 323.466.3876។

메트로(Metro) 정보를 [한국어]로 알아보시려면, 아래 번호로 전화하십시오: 323-466-3876

Để biết thông tin về Metro bằng tiếng Việt, vui lòng gọi số điện thoại dưới đây: 323-466-3876

Page 40 Service Council Decorum Policy

A. Requests to Address the Service Council on Agenda Items. All requests, from members of the public, to address the Council on either agenda or non-agenda items shall be submitted to the Service Council staff in writing. Requests to speak shall be taken in the order received. The Service Council shall reserve the right to limit redundant or repetitive public comment.

B. Addressing the Service Council. No person shall address the Service Council until he/she has first been recognized by the Chair. All persons addressing the Service Council shall give their name for the purpose of the record.

C. Removal from the Service Council Meeting Room. At the discretion of the Chair or upon vote of the Service Council, the Chair may order removed (or censure a speaker) from the meeting any person who commits any of the following acts of disruptive conduct in respect to a regular, adjourned regular or special meeting of the Service Council:

1. Disorderly, contemptuous or insolent behavior toward the governing board or any member thereof, or staff member, or member of the public which disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the meeting;

2. A breach of the peace, boisterous conduct or violent disturbance, which disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the meeting;

3. Disobedience of any order of the Chair, which shall include an order to be seated or to refrain from addressing the Service Council or staff member; and/or,

4. Any other interference with the due and orderly course of said meeting. Any person so removed shall be excluded from further attendance at the meeting from which he/she has been removed, unless permission to attend is granted by a motion adopted by a majority vote of the Service Council, and such exclusion shall be executed by the Sergeant-at-Arms, or designee, upon being so directed by the Chair. It is at the discretion of the Service Council to allow the individual to remain at the meeting after censure. The motion to censure may, at the Chair’s direction, also include a prohibition from further public comment at the meeting, except as in writing and in accordance with the spirit of this policy, submitted to the Service Council staff for consideration and inclusion in the record.

D. Sergeant-at-Arms – The Sergeant-at-Arms duties shall be performed by the designated ranking Metro Security personnel, or sworn law enforcement personnel, as directed by the Chair, and in attendance at the meeting. In the absence of sworn personnel to act as the Sergeant-at-Arms, the Chair may direct that all public comment from a censured individual be received in writing. Said censure shall remain in effect until the next regularly scheduled Service Council meeting.

Adopted February 1, 2017

Page 41 Please turn off cell phones or place them on silent.

1. PLEDGE of Allegiance

2. SWEAR In Jess Talamantes as San Fernando Valley Service Council Member

3. APPROVE September 5, 2018 Minutes, Councilmembers

4. CHAIR’S Remarks

5. RECEIVE Overview of Metrolink Rail Safety Education Program, Metrolink Safety Director Mike Rock, Alex Davis, Government Relations Manager

6. RECEIVE North Hollywood to Pasadena and North San Fernando Valley Bus Rapid Transit Update, Robert Machuca, Senior Director, Countywide Planning & Development

7. RECEIVE Service Updates, Israel Marin, Principal Transportation Planner

8. RECEIVE NextGen Working Group Update, Councilmember Canales

9. RECEIVE Line Ride Report, Councilmember Rosalba González, and APPROVE Line Ride Schedule for the remainder of FY2019, Councilmembers

10. RECEIVE Regional Service Performance Report, Gary Spivack, Deputy Executive Officer [HANDOUT]

11. PUBLIC Comment for items not on the agenda

12. CHAIR and Council Member Comments Consideration of items not on the posted agenda, including: items to be presented and (if requested) referred to staff; items to be placed on the agenda for action at a future meeting of the Council; and/or items requiring immediate action because of an emergency situation or where the need to take immediate action came to the attention of the Council subsequent to the posting of the agenda.

ADJOURNMENT

ADA and Title VI Requirements: Upon request, sign language interpretation, materials in alternative formats and other accommodations are available to the public for Metro sponsored meetings and events.

Limited English Proficiency: Upon request, interpreters are available to the public for Metro sponsored meetings and events. Agendas and minutes will also be made available in other languages upon request.

All requests for reasonable accommodations, interpretation services and materials in other languages must be made at least three working days (72 hours) in advance of the scheduled meeting date. Please submit requests by calling (213) 922-4600 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. Our TDD line is (800) 252-9040. Individuals with hearing or speech impairment may use California Relay Service 711 + Metro phone number.

Page 42 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA

NORTHRIDGE (/NEIGHBORHOOD/NORTHRIDGE) Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line Proposed east-west bus rapid transit line would connect with Cal State Northridge with the Orange Line and Metrolink.

Page 43 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 1/10 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA (mailto:? subject=Someone has shared an article from Urbanize LA with you&body=I just read this on Urbanize LA and thought you'd find it interesting:%0D%0DMetro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San (https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?Fernando text=Metro+Previews+Conceptual+Alignments+for+North+San+Fernando+VValley alley+BRT+Line (http://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?via (https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?BRT u=http%3A%2F%2Furbanize.la%2Fpost%2Fmetro-@UrbanizeLA&url=http%3A%2F%2Furbanize.la%2Fpost%2Fmetro-mini=true&url=http%3A%2F%2Furbanize.la%2Fpost%2Fmetro-Line%0Dhttp%3A%2F%2Furbanize.la%2Fpost%2Fmetro- previews-previews-previews-previews- conceptual-conceptual-conceptual-conceptual- alignments-alignments-alignments-alignments- north-north-north-north- san-san-san-san- fernando-fernando-fernando-fernando- valley-valley-valley-valley- brt- brt- brt- brt- line) line) line&title=Metro+Previews+Conceptual+Alignments+for+North+San+Fernando+V line) alley+BRT+Line&source=LinkedIn)

SEPTEMBER 11, 2018, 9:55AM STEVEN SHARP 24 COMMENTS

Page 44 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 2/10 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA

GALLERY 1

At a series of upcoming meetings, Metro will offer a chance for public input on a proposed east- west bus rapid transit line that would run across the North San Fernando Valley (https://urbanize.la/post/proposed-bus-rapid-transit-line-would-serve-cal-state-northridge).

The project, which could run as far as 20 miles end-to-end, would connect with destinations like Cal State Northridge and connect with other transit lines including the Orange Line (https://urbanize.la/tags/orange-line), Metrolink, and the planned light rail line along Van Nuys Boulevard.

There are currently three primary alignments under consideration, all of which would originate at the Chatsworth Metrolink Station in the west and begin by traveling down the Orange Line right of way. Buses would then turn east at Nordhoff Street toward Cal State Northridge. From Page 45 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 3/10 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA there, the proposed route could either continue east along Nordhoff or veer south to travel along Roscoe Boulevard.

After connecting with the proposed Van Nuys Boulevard light rail line (https://urbanize.la/post/metro-staff-recommends-light-rail-van-nuys-boulevard), buses would continue toward an eastern terminus at either the Sylmar Metrolink Station or North Hollywood Station.

Metro hopes to begin service on the North San Fernando Valley BRT line by 2025, with $180 million in funding earmarked through the Measure M sales tax approved by Los Angeles County voters in 2016. The project is currently in its alternatives analysis phase, which will determine what options receive more detailed study in an environmental impact report.

Community meetings are planned from September 20 through September 29 at the following locations:

Thursday, September 20, 6 – 8 p.m.

Congregational Church of Northridge, 9659 Balboa Boulevard Northridge, CA 91325 (http://goo.gl/maps/sUAf5mheEiw)

Saturday, September 22, 10 a.m. – noon Sepulveda Recreation Center, 8825 Kester Avenue Panorama City, CA 91402 (http://goo.gl/maps/LxcfMshUSBE2)

Wednesday, September 26, 6 – 8 p.m. Our Community Charter School, 10045 Jumilla Avenue Chatsworth, CA 91311 (http://goo.gl/maps/PyTTrbDDyvF2)

Thursday, September 27, 6 – 8 p.m. San Fernando Aquatic Center – Banquet Hall 300 Park Avenue, San Fernando, CA 91340 (http://goo.gl/maps/MVuZRea8Vvz) Page 46 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 4/10 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA Saturday, September 29, 10 a.m. – noon* East Valley High School Auditorium, 5525 Vineland Avenue North Hollywood, CA 91601 (http://goo.gl/maps/h9uLvdkBFtm)

Proposed Bus Rapid Transit Line Would Serve Cal State Northridge (https://urbanize.la/post/proposed-bus-rapid-transit-line-would-serve-cal-state-northridge) (Urbanize LA)

NORTH SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BUS RAPID TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS (/TAGS/NORTH-SAN-FERNANDO-VALLEY-BUS-RAPID-TRANSIT-IMPROVEMENTS)

METRO (/TAXONOMY/TERM/997)

FROM THE WEB

Fox Men's Ranger Gel Mapping the Future of House of Skewers Bike Gloves L.A. Transit Ad REI urbanize.la Ad House of Skewers

Metro Staff Recommends Clay Oven Restaurant - Serving Metro Board Advances Light Rail for Van Nuys... Dinner & Lunch Buffet Study of a Vermont... urbanize.la Ad clayovensf.com urbanize.la

COMMENTS

14 Comments Urbanize LA 1 Login

 Recommend t Tweet f Share Sort by Best

Join the discussion…

LOG IN WITH OR SIGN UP WITH DISQUS ?

Name Page 47 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 5/10 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA

Ben Phelps • 10 months ago • edited Electrification and improvement of Metrolink service through the valley should be a much higher priority (not necessarily than this bus line, just really both are needed) 4 △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Kevin • 10 months ago The North Hollywood alignment seems to be the best option of the three as it covers more areas of interest ( 2 hospitals, university, orange line, and red line stops), also goes right through Panorama City which is in the midst of a construction boom, which will densify the region, and surrounding areas even more in the near future. 2 △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Patrick Jackson • 10 months ago I feel like a N-S Reseda line would be more valuable than this. Or a reallocation of funds towards RER style Metrolink service in the SFV. Or a better ESFV LINE. Regardless, I'm not impressed with the options presented. 1 △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

jannos • 10 months ago I think they should do the Chatsworth to Sylmar Line AND a different line thats Red Line to Sylmar. Metrolink has plans to upgrade service on the Ventura line. If that can be electrified and a couple stops added, it would make the whole valley better served by Transit. 1 △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Michael > jannos • 10 months ago I agree, I think connecting as many people as possible to the Red Line should be a priority. △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Richard • 10 months ago I'd like to know how improved metrolink service on the Ventura County line could serve the transportation need. Even if it was just from Chattsworth to Burbank/Glendale. 1 △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

JDRCRASHER • 10 months ago • edited Here’s a wild idea guys:

Why not send it to sun valley station, through shadow hills and into Sunland, Montrose, La Cresenta, LCF, maybe even a brief detour through Altadena and down into Pasadena?

Obviously it certainly won’t EVER become rail. But at least it serves an entirely different area of the county. :) △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

B.P.S. • 10 months ago Cal State Northridge and Burbank Airport certainly need to be at the top of the list for stations. Sylmar/San Fernando need to be close at hand as well. Especially if the high speed rail ever comes to be. △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Richard > B.P.S. • 10 months ago It doesnt look like the HSR is going to Sylmar/San Fernando anymore but the ESFV line is. I think it makes more sense to keep it more E-W through Panorama City and go to the airport. 1 △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

B.P.S. > Richard • 10 months ago Page 48 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 6/10 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA I tend to think the N/S trajectory is somewhat questionable, but at the same time Sylmar does seem to need some love with transit. One line may be sufficient, today, but is it enough for future growth? △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Show more replies

Ben Phelps > B.P.S. • 10 months ago if the line were to cross and connect with the future North Valley light rail line down Van Nuys, it's priority shouldn't be to head North also and reconnect with that line in Sylmar. The main benefit for that would be people trying to get from the West Valley / Chatsworth to Sylmar and North via Metrolink- surely only a small number of people would be making that journey, and willing to make that many transfers to traverse such a distance to do it. Seems more important to connect to North Hollywood and the Redline or to continue heading east to cross the Palmdale / Sylmar line and then continue on to Burbank / Glendale (not proposed) △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Upslope • 10 months ago Not sure I understand why Metro would consider terminating at the NoHo Red line station. All that does is duplicate the Orange line via a different, longer route. Isn't the obvious choice to stay north and either terminate at Sylmar or just clip it at the Van Nuys Blvd light rail line? Why duplicate existing, very expensive, infrastructure? △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Richard > Upslope • 10 months ago It's 4 miles north of the Orange line, not duplicative any more than the Expo and Purple lines.

Heading to Sylmar would be a duplicate of the ESFV line 1/2 mile away. 3 △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Upslope > Richard • 10 months ago Yes it is parallel to the Orange line and serves a very valuable purpose enabling E-W transit in the North Valley. What I"m questioning is why they to turn south and nearly double the length of the line with a terminus at NoHo. You would have a line that starts and ends in the exact same place as another BRT, even if it takes a different route to get there. Seems like it would be much cheaper and more efficient to continue east along Nordhoff until the ESFVTC or the Metrolink Antelope Valley line. Otherwise you're just adding distance to the line in areas that already have alternative means of transit. △ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Show more replies

✉ Subscribe d Add Disqus to your siteAdd DisqusAdd  Disqus' Privacy PolicyPrivacy PolicyPrivacy

Page 49 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 7/10 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA

price drop price drop

price drop price drop

Page 50 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 8/10 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA

Two homes. Under one roof.

Ad Lennar

Mapping the Future of L.A. Transit

urbanize.la

Metro Staff Recommends Light Rail for Van Nuys... urbanize.la

Metro Board Advances Study of a Vermont Avenue... urbanize.la

Study Explores How Metro Could Convert the Proposed... urbanize.la

Metro Considers New Location for Northridge... urbanize.la

ABOUT URBANIZE LOS ANGELES

From the Westside to Hollywood to the DTLA to the Valley, Urbanize LA is there providing quality commercial real estate development coverage.

EXPLORE

Neighborhoods Regions

CONTACT

Leave a Tip (mailto:[email protected]) Advertise With Us (http://mediakit.urbanize.la/) Contact Us (mailto:[email protected]) Terms of Use (/terms-of-use)

Page 51 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 9/10 7/10/2019 Metro Previews Conceptual Alignments for North San Fernando Valley BRT Line | Urbanize LA URBANIZE YOUR INBOX

Your email SIGN UP

Daily

Weekly

Design Partners

(http://cpursuits.com) (http://www.facilitydesignco.com/)

Copyright © Urbanize Media LLC 2019.

Page 52 https://urbanize.la/post/metro-previews-conceptual-alignments-north-san-fernando-valley-brt-line?fbclid=IwAR1fKlGgbHZQ8IVMm2E-bZ-rnhzfHhIZx… 10/10 CITY OF LOS ANGELES California Executive Committee Board Members Glen Bailey — President Philip Dagort YJ Draiman ​n ​ st Don Dwiggins — 1 ​ VP Loraine Lundquist Carl Petersen ​ nd Ari Shapess Resident; (vacant) Diedra Greenaway — 2 ​ VP ​ Stephanie Mills — Secretary Property Owner: (vacant) Mike Kaiser — Treasurer Rafael De La Rosa — Appointed CSUN Faculty/Staff Tracy Johnson — Appointed CSUN Student Adam Brown — Appointed Youth Alternates: Roland Faucher, Joseph Seoane (and 1 vacant)

Northridge East Neighborhood Council Making Northridge a Better Place to Live, Work, Play and Learn ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

NENC Board Meetings are held third Wednesday of each month ​ ​ at Northridge Woman’s Club, 18401 Lassen Street, Northridge, CA 91325

​Board Meeting Agenda for Wednesday, September 19, 2018 - 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order (President), Pledge of Allegiance, and Welcome to Stakeholders; Introductory Comments 2. Roll Call, Determination of Quorum, Voting Eligibility (Ethics,Funding,Code of Conduct), Abstentions=“No” 3. Agenda Setting Meeting 9/10/18 Participation: Bailey, Dwiggins, Kaiser, Mills 4. Approval of Minutes – August 15, 2018, July 18, 2018, June 20, 2018, and any other prior Board meetings 5. Treasurer’s Report and Financial Items - Mike Kaiser a. Approval of August 2018 Monthly Expenditure Report (MER) (available on NC Funding System online portal: ​https://cityclerk.lacity.org/NCFundPortal/Dashboard.html​) b. MOTION to authorize up to $50 for copying Council File compilations and related information for distribution at Neighborhood Council Alliance meetings during Fiscal Year 2018-19. 6. Special Presentations ​(3 minutes each except as noted) a. Congress of Neighborhoods 9/22/18 at City Hall ​- register at ​www.nccongressla.com b. Valley Disaster Preparedness Fair 9/29/18 at Northridge Fashion Center ​- register at www.valleydisasterfair.com/​; NENC exhibit volunteers - Stephanie Mills c. Metro North San Fernando Valley Bus Rapid Transit Project ​- community meetings during September including in Northridge on Thursday, 9/20/18 at Congregational Church of Northridge, 9659 Balboa Bl. Other meetings listed here: ​www.metro.net/projects/north-sfv-brt/ d. NENC Neighborhood Watch Yard Signs ​- distribution update - Roland Faucher e. NC 2019 Election update (Region 2 Election Date Saturday 5/4/19) ​- City Clerk Election Division - ​Robertino Salgado (10 minutes) i. Online voting and possible change of NENC Election date (possible MOTION) [related to agenda item 11a. ​CF 15-1022-S3​ 2019 Pilot Online Voting Program / 10 Neighborhood Council Elections / Funding] 7. Public comments on non-agenda items (two minutes per speaker, ten minutes total) 8. Comments/Presentations from Public Officials/Departments/Agencies (3 minutes each unless advance arrangements made): Mayor (Tanaz Golshan), City Attorney (​Elise Ruden/Alin Sahagian)​, CD 12 (Myrka

Page 53 Martinez), BONC (Susan Avakian-Koroghlyan), LAPD (SLO Patti Peteque/C-PAB), LAFD, DONE (Jasmine Elbarbary), LAUSD, Metro, County, State (SD 18, 27, AD 38, 45, 46), Federal (CD 25, 29, 30) a. BONC: Community Interest Stakeholder participation [​CF 15-1022​ ​ordinance​] (possible MOTION) b. City Clerk NC Funding Program i. New Funding Representative is Janet Hernandez ii. Website services proposal - draft contract (possible MOTION) c. Northridge Vision 9/12/18 report; next meeting 10/10/18, 2 pm d. CSUN updates including Matadors Day of Service 9/8/18 and ​60th Anniversary Grand Reunion 10/13/18 (Rafael De La Rosa) and Big Politics event in October (Tracy Johnson) e. NC Budget Advocates report; website ​http://ncbala.com/ 9. NENC President and Liaison Reports including, but not limited to: a. President’s Report i. Appointment by President to fill Property Owner, Resident, and/or one vacant Alternate seats subject to Board approval ii. Phishing emails received by NENC Board members must be forwarded to NC Support iii. October 17 Board meeting: presentation by the South Coast Air Quality Management District on their health study on the impacts of the Aliso Canyon gas leak per the settlement with the Southern California Gas Company is tentatively scheduled iv. Liaison Reports: Animal Services (Mills); Film (Dagort); Homelessness (Greenaway/ Littrell); Legal (Mills); Public Works (Bailey); Purposeful Aging (Greenaway); Resilience (Lundquist) - Civic U: Resilient LA - 10/30/18 meeting b. NC Liaisons: Approval of additional or replacement NENC Liaison(s) 10. Committee Reports – Standing: Education (Petersen); Environment/Sustainability (Dwiggins/Kaiser); Executive (Bailey); Finance (Kaiser/Bailey); Homelessness (Greenaway/Littrell); Outreach (Dwiggins/Mills); Planning and Land Use (Dagort/TBD); and Public Safety (Faucher). Ad Hoc: Bylaws, Joint CSUN Parking; Election (Mills); Goodwill Store. a. Appointment by President of Co-Chair of Planning and Land Use and/or Chair/Co-Chair of Public Safety and/or Chair/Co-Chair of Homelessness Committees subject to Board confirmation b. Approval of Committee members (if changes or to ratify): Education; Environment/Sustainability; Finance; Homelessness, Outreach; Planning & Land Use; Public Safety. Ad Hoc: CSUN Parking; Election; Goodwill Store. c. Planning: Update on planning cases previously considered by the NENC or new/pending cases i. Design Review Board: New patio and canopy at restaurant located at 17068 Devonshire St. (Case No. 2018-840-DRB-SPP) ii. Proposed telecommunication facility (12 antennas in faux church steeple) located at 18420 Kinzie St. (Case No. ZA-2018-2947-CUW) Applicant: Verizon Wireless iii. Continued sale of beer and wine for off-site consumption in conjunction with existing gas station/mini-mart located at 18473 Devonshire St. (Case No. ZA 2007-4096-CUB-PA3) Applicant: Genuine Petroleum Company Inc. iv. Proposed telecommunication facility (monopine in chain link enclosure) located at 17700 Plummer St. (Case No. ZA-2018-4022-CUW) Applicant: Sprint d. Reports by other Committees listed above 11. New Council Files (CF) and City Council Motions - Community Impact Statements (CIS) a. CF 15-1022-S3​ 2019 Pilot Online Voting Program / 10 Neighborhood Council Elections / Funding b. CF 15-1138-S27​ Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) / Comprehensive Homeless Strategy / Recreational Vehicle Waste Pumping c. CF 12-1681-S3​ Neighborhood Council Subdivision Reforms Page 54 d. CF 18-0786​ Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) / Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Supply Cache Pilot Program e. CF 17-0878-S6​ Chinese Recycling Ban / RecycLA Program / Private Solid Waste Collection Firms f. CF 14-1302-S1​ ​ ​Abate Pools of Stagnant Water / Various Locations in Council District 12 / Precautions of Mosquito Infestations g. CF 18-0467​ Neighborhood Council System Reforms, including the following topics: i. Recommendations and next steps for amending City Charter Article IX to change the name of the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment (DONE) to the Neighborhood Councils Department (NCD), the Board of Neighborhood Commissioners (BONC) to the Neighborhood Councils Commission (NCC), and phasing out the use of the term/branding ‘EmpowerLA’ due to the confusion reported by the public and the perception of Neighborhood Council members that DONE’s role should be primarily to support Neighborhood Councils, which the name Neighborhood Councils Department would better reflect. ii. Recommendations and next steps for amending the Los Angeles Administrative Code to remove the “Community [Interest] Stakeholder,” which has caused substantial confusion and disputed elections, and recommendations and next steps for including specific additional definitions by ordinance of eligible voters and board members of Neighborhood Councils, such as student or parent/guardian of a student. iii. Recommendations and next steps for amending City Charter Article IX Section 901.d and 904.f to remove any reference to “selections” and clarify that Neighborhood Council board members will be elected. Neighborhood Council “selection” processes are utilized by a limited and decreasing number of councils and are not viewed by the public as being as democratic as elections as they do not provide for a secret ballot or equitable participation. iv. Recommendations and next steps for creating a one-time review process, overseen by the Board of Neighborhood Commissioners, to evaluate Neighborhood Council bylaws to determine if board seats are equitably allocated amongst stakeholder types and provide formal suggestions to Neighborhood Councils on ways to adjust board seats as needed to increase equity. v. Recommendations and next steps for adopting regulations to provide a uniform minimum voting age and board member age to allow consistent participation across the City, and what that age should be. vi. Recommendations and next steps for developing and adopting a planning and land use training required for all Chairs and Vice-Chairs of Neighborhood Council planning and land use committees. vii. Recommendations and next steps on a process for Neighborhood Councils to be able to roll-over a non-cumulative maximum of $10,000 in any given fiscal year. viii. Recommendations and next steps for removing Section 5.485.h of Chapter 88 of Division 5 of the Los Angeles Administrative Code (Ordinance 179545; see ​Council File 03-1260​), and recommendations for other amendments to that Chapter, in order to remove the expiration of the ability for Neighborhood Councils to accept in-kind or monetary donations. ix. On the costs and other implications of holding all Neighborhood Council elections on the same day in order to provide for a uniform citywide advertising and outreach campaign. x. Develop a process, with the assistance of GSD and the City Clerk, to assist Neighborhood Councils with accessing shared space in City facilities, as envisioned in ​Council File 16-0298​.

Page 55 xi. Develop an ongoing compendium of best practices generated from Neighborhood Councils and share those on a periodic basis with all Neighborhood Councils and include ‘how-to guides’ for accomplishing those best practices. xii. Develop point of contact lists for key city departments and agencies, including DCP, DOT, Public Works’ Bureaus, Aging, Disability, HCID, DCA, LADWP, Port, Airport, Cannabis Regulation, Emergency Management, Animal Services, LAPD, LAFD, Recreation and Parks, Zoo, Finance, Library, Economic and Workforce Development and BIDs, with assistance from those listed departments and agencies, and share those lists with Neighborhood Councils, facilitate the training of those points of contact at those relevant departments on the most fruitful ways to assist and communicate with Neighborhood Council members, and coordinate with Neighborhood Councils to formally appoint a point of contact at each NC to communicate between each NC and the point of contact at each department, thus creating a single line of communication. (60 minutes) 12. Alliance and Coalition Reports: VANC, DWP MOU/Advocacy, LANCC, PlanCheckNC, Emergency Preparedness Alliance, NC Sustainability Alliance 13. Upcoming NC or NENC Co-sponsored Events: Congress of Neighborhoods 9/22/18; Valley Disaster Preparedness Fair 9/29/18 14. Public comments on non-agenda items and requests for reconsideration of any motions 15. Adjournment by 9:30 p.m. (Next NENC Board meeting: Wednesday, October 17, 2018, 7 pm)

All items on this agenda are considered action items, and a vote may be taken on any item listed on this agenda. A reasonable effort will be made to end the meeting no later than 9:30 pm; any items not discussed will be carried over to the next Board meeting. Public comments​: Comments from the public on matters relating to the Northridge community, but not appearing on the Agenda, will be heard during the Public Comment period. Public comment is limited to two minutes per speaker, unless waived by the presiding officer of the Board. The public is requested to fill out a "Speaker Card" to address the Board on any item of the agenda prior to the Board taking action on an item. Agenda Items:​ All items on this agenda are considered action items, and a vote may be taken on any item listed on this agenda. Comments from the public on Agenda items will be heard only when the respective item is being considered. The regular month's agenda is posted for public review at least 72 hours before the meeting. Current posting sites are: Northridge Recreation Center and the Northridge Branch Library. Public access to records:​ In compliance with Government Code Section 54957.5, non-exempt writings that are distributed to a majority of all of the board members in advance of a meeting, may be viewed at ​http://nenc-la.org​, or at the scheduled meeting. In addition, if you would like a copy of any record related to an item on the agenda, please contact the Secretary, or other Executive Board member. ADA Compliance:​ As a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of Los Angeles does not discriminate on the basis of disability and upon request, will provide reasonable accommodation to ensure equal access to its programs, services, and activities. Sign language interpreters, assistive listening devices, or other auxiliary aids and/or services may be provided upon request. To ensure availability of services, please make your request at least three business days prior to the meeting you wish to attend by contacting the Secretary, or other Executive Board member, using the contact information below. The Council is always looking for volunteers to fill various roles. If you are interested in volunteering, please email us at: [email protected]. Events and calendar postings should be sent to [email protected]. The NENC monthly agenda setting (Executive Committee) meeting is held on the Monday nine days prior to the third Wednesday (unless otherwise announced) at 4:30 pm in the Multipurpose Room at the Northridge Recreation Center located at 18300 Lemarsh Street, Northridge 91325. If you want to request that an issue be placed on the agenda, please make sure the request is submitted in writing to the board prior to the agenda setting meeting. Mailing Address: 18401 Lassen St., Northridge, CA 91325 ● (818) 527-2913 ● www.nenc-la.org ● Email: ​[email protected]

Page 56 Item TIME TOPIC RESPONSIBLE PERSON 1 6:30pm • Call to Order Paul Storiale, President

2 1 minute • Roll Call Joanna Stein, Secretary

3 2 minutes • President’s Opening Comments. Paul Storiale, President PUBLIC OFFICIALS 1. Nigel Sanchez - U.S. Rep. Tony Cardenas 2. Vanessa Carr - Asm. Adrin Nazarian (D-46) 3. Jude Hernandez -Asm. Luz Rivas (D-39) 4. Jacqueline Serrano - Mayor Eric Garcetti 1 minute 4 each 5. Sahag Yedalian - Councilman Paul Krekorian (CD2) 6. Vanessa Serrano – D.O.N.E. 7. John Catalano – LAPD Senior Lead officer 8. Ann Bowman – North Hollywood Library

Congratulations to all recently elected public officials.

5 • Public Comments on Non-Agenda Items. Joanna Stein, Secretary • Public Presentation: The Widening of Magnolia Blvd. Up to 30 between Vineland Ave. and Cahuenga Blvd. This is an 6 minutes information only presentation. The NoHo NC will Andy Rodriguez total. consider writing a letter regarding this project at a future date.

Page 57 • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Metro Up to 30 Lilian DeLoza-Gutierrez 7 minutes Presentation North Hollywood to Pasadena and North Scott Hartwell total. San Fernando Valley bus rapid transit projects. • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: To Up to 10 provide a letter of support for a conditional use permit 8 Paul Storiale, President minutes for Whole Foods Market 5101 Lankershim Blvd. North Hollywood, Ca. 91601 • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: To move Up to 5 the Day of the NoHoHo Holiday Community Mixer 9 Paul Storiale, President minutes from Saturday December 8th to Sunday December 9th Times will be the same. 4pm-6pm. • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Approve Up to 5 10 Mary Garcia as Stakeholder Committee Member on Paul Storiale, President minutes the Arts and Parks Committee. Up to 5 • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Approve 11 Paul Storiale, President minutes Laura Laskay as the Outreach Committee Chair. • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Approve Up to 5 Jeff Brown (1st Alternate) and Michelle MacKinnon (2nd 12 Paul Storiale, President minutes Alternate) as alternate members of the Planning Land- Use and Transportation Committee. FUNDING ITEM Up to 5 13 • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: James Askew, Treasurer minutes Treasurers Report. Approve and adopt monthly MER. FUNDING ITEM • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: up to Brian Allman, Chair Up to 5 $1500 to spend on the Annual North Hollywood 14 Arts and Parks minutes Recreation and Parks Holiday Party on December 15th Committee for advertising, pizza, water, coffee, napkins, plates, cups, paint, brushes and promotional items. FUNDING ITEM • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Up to 5 15 James Askew, Treasurer minutes Neighborhood Purpose Grant of up to $1500 to the Simin foundation in support of their 5th Annual Winter Festival on December 16th. FUNDING ITEM • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Up to Up to 5 16 Paul Storiale, President minutes $50 per month to pay for LAPD North Hollywood Division COMMUNITY ALERT flyers to distribute to local businesses. FUNDING ITEM • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Up to Up to 5 17 Paul Storiale, President minutes $170 to gotprint.com for business cards for recently appointed board members of the NoHo Neighborhood Council.

Page 58 FUNDING ITEM • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Up to Up to 5 18 James Askew, Treasurer minutes $500 to promote the removal of derelict newspaper boxes through an Instagram/Facebook campaign to businesses and residents FUNDING ITEM • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Up to Up to 5 $500 to share printing costs of updated homeless 19 Stephanie Jaeger, VP minutes resources booklet originally developed by Studio City Neighborhood Council and now co-sponsored by both with each individual logo. • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Review Up to 3 20 and Adopt Minutes from September and October 2018 Paul Storiale, President minutes Meetings. • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: Up to 20 21 Paul Storiale, President minutes Committee Member and Chair Training by President, Paul Storiale and Vice President, Stephanie Jaeger. • Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Action: New Standing Rule that ‘Chairs of Committees must email committee agendas to all board members and Up to 5 stakeholder committee members previous to the 22 Paul Storiale, President minutes meeting as legally required by the Ralph Brown Act.’ (72 hours for a regular meeting, 48 hours special meeting, 24 hours Emergency meeting.) This is separate from the ENS system. Up to 1 23 minute • Committee Chair Announcements. Paul Storiale, President each Up to 1 24 • President’s Closing Comments. Paul Storiale, President minute • Meeting Adjourned. Have a Great Holiday Season. 25 1 minute Paul Storiale, President Next Meeting is on January 8, 2019

REMOVAL WARNING: ANY PERSON WHO INTERFERES WITH THE CONDUCT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL MEETING BY WILLFULLY INTERRUPTING AND/OR DISRUPTING THE MEETING IS SUBJECT TO REMOVAL. A PEACE OFFICER MAY BE REQUESTED TO ASSIST WITH THE REMOVAL BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL. ANY PERSONS WHO RESISTS REMOVAL BY A PEACE OFFICER IS SUBJECT TO ARREST AND PROSECUTION. Penal Code Section 403, Penal Code Section 602.1(b)

THE FOLLOWING IS IN REGARDS TO ALL BOARD MEETINGS AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS

PUBLIC INPUT AT ALL MEETINGS – The public is requested to fill out a “Speaker Card” to address the Board on any agenda item before the Board takes an action on an item. Comments from the public on agenda items will be heard only when the respective item is being considered. Comments from the public on other matters not appearing on the agenda that are within the Board’s jurisdiction will be heard during the General Public Comment period. Please note that under the Brown Act, the Board is prevented from acting on a matter that you bring to its attention during the General Public Comment period; however, the issue raised by a

Page 59 member of the public may become the subject of a future Board meeting. Public comment is limited to 1 minute per speaker, unless adjusted by the presiding officer of the Board.

PUBLIC POSTING OF AGENDAS - MTNHNC agendas are posted for public review as follows:

• North Hollywood Regional Library - 5211 Tujunga Blvd. North Hollywood • Senior Citizens Center - 5301 Tujunga Blvd. North Hollywood. • www.NoHoNC.org • You can also receive our agendas via email by subscribing to L.A. City’s Early Notification System at http://www.lacity.org/government/Subscriptions/NeighborhoodCouncils/index.htm

THE AMERICAN WITH DISABILITIES ACT - As a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of Los Angeles does not discriminate on the basis of disability and, upon request, will provide reasonable accommodation to ensure equal access to its programs, services and activities. Sign language interpreters, assistive listening devices and other auxiliary aids and/or services, may be provided upon request. To ensure availability of services, please make your request at least 3 business days (72 hours) prior to the meeting you wish to attend by contacting Paul Storiale, Board President, via email: [email protected]

PUBLIC ACCESS OF RECORDS – In compliance with Government Code section 54957.5, non-exempt writings that are distributed to a majority or all of the board in advance of a meeting may be viewed at our website: NoHoNC.org or at the scheduled meeting. In addition, if you would like a copy of any record related to an item on the agenda, please contact Paul Storiale, Board President, via email [email protected]

RECONSIDERATION AND GRIEVANCE PROCESS – For information on the MTNHNC’s process for board action reconsideration, stakeholder grievance policy, or any other procedural matters related to this Council, please consult the NoHo NC Bylaws. The Bylaws are available at our Board meetings and our website www.NoHoNC.org.

Page 60 TRANSPORTATION

TUESDAY, November 6, 2018 8 – 10 a.m. • The Garland 4222 VINELAND AVE., NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CA 91602 Chair: Francine Oschin, Oschin Partners Co-Chairs: Coby King, High Point Strategies; Steven Kats, WSP USA

1 Welcome & Self-Introductions

2 VICA Announcements & Updates

3 Updates from Elected Officials’ Staffers

Metro North San Fernando Valley and NoHo to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit Projects: David 4 Mieger, Countywide Planning Executive Officer, Metro – Presentation

5 NextGen Metro Bus Study: Robert Calix, Community Relations Manager, Metro – Presentation

LADOT Transit Services Analysis Report: Kari Derderian, Head of Planning Division, LADOT – 6 Presentation

7 Legislative Priorities for 2019: Discussion

8 New/Old Business

9 Upcoming Transportation Committee Meetings: 2019 Dates TBA

Page 61 SAN FERNANDO VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS A Joint Powers Authority

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING AGENDA

Thursday, October 18, 2018 — 2 p.m. Santa Clarita City Hall 23920 Valencia Blvd. Santa Clarita, CA 91355

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Chair: Councilmember David Ryu, 4th District, City of Los Angeles Vice-Chair: Councilmember Joel Fajardo, City of San Fernando Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, 3rd Supervisorial District, County of Los Angeles Supervisor Kathryn Barger, 5th Supervisorial District, County of Los Angeles Councilmember Jess Talamantes, City of Burbank Councilmember Ara Najarian, City of Glendale Councilmember Paul Krekorian, 2nd District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, 3rd District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Paul Koretz, 5th District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Nury Martinez, 6th District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, 7th District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Mitchell Englander, 12th District, City of Los Angeles Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean, City of Santa Clarita

STAFF SFVCOG Fiscal Agent: Rachelle Anema, County of Los Angeles SFVCOG Secretary: Los Angeles County Commission's Office John Bwarie, Executive Director, San Fernando Valley COG Norayr Zurabyan, Deputy County Counsel, County of Los Angeles

OPEN SESSION

1. CALL TO ORDER — David Ryu, Chair

2. ROLL CALL

Page 62 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

CONSENT CALENDAR All items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and may be enacted by one motion. Prior to the motion to consider any action by the Board, any public comments on any of the Consent Calendar items will be heard. There will be no separate action unless members of the Board request specific items to be removed from the Consent Calendar.

4. MINUTES (page 4) Review and Approve July 19, 2018 Board of Directors Meeting Minutes. Recommended Action: Approve Minutes.

5. FINANCIAL REPORT (page 15) Review FY 2018-19 Financials through September 30, 2018. Recommended Action: Receive and File Financial Report

REGULAR CALENDAR At the discretion of the SFVCOG, all items appearing on this Agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be deliberated and may be subject to action by the SFVCOG.

6. CHAIR REPORT Chair's Report - David Ryu, Chairman of the Board. Updates, remarks and recommendations from the Board Chair.

7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT a. Updates, remarks and recommendations from the Executive Director b. Updates, remarks and recommendations from Homelessness Coordinator

8. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSITION 6 (Page 17) Recommended Action: Consider a position on CA Proposition 6 as recommended by the Transportation Committee

9. CONSIDERATION OF 2019 SFVCOG TRANSPORTATION PRIORITIES (Page 24) Recommended Action: Adopt Transportation Priorities as recommended by the Transportation Committee

10. SCAG UPDATE ON THE 2020 RTP/SCS RHNA PROCESS Recommended Action: Discussion and possible action

Page 63 11. BOARDMEMBER ANNOUNCEMENTS

12. NEXT MEETING: January 17, 2019 at 2pm at the Valley Municipal Building, Council Chambers (14410 Sylvan Street, 2nd Floor, Van Nuys, California 91401)

13. PUBLIC COMMENTS

14. ADJOURNMENT

Public Comments: At this time members of the public can address the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Board of Directors (Board) regarding any items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the agency that are not separately listed on this agenda, subject to time restrictions, by filling out a Public Comment Card and submitting that card to the Secretary. Members of the public will have an opportunity to speak on agendized items at the time the item is called for discussion. No action may be taken on items not listed on the agenda unless authorized by law. Whenever possible, lengthy testimony should be presented to the Board in writing and only pertinent points presented orally.

Notices: Meetings of the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments are recorded. Minutes of each meeting are available at http://sfvcog.org/ after the Board approves them. A person with a disability may contact the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments before the scheduled meeting to request receipt of an agenda in an alternative format or to request disability-related accommodations, in order to participate in the public meeting, requests will be met to the extent feasible. Email [email protected] for accommodation. The entire agenda package and any meeting related writings or documents provided to a majority of the Board of Directors after distribution of the agenda package, unless exempt from disclosure pursuant to California Law, are also available.

Page 64 SAN FERNANDO VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

A Joint Powers Authority

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES Thursday, July 19, 2018 — 2:00 p.m. Valley Municipal Building, Council Chambers 14410 Sylvan Street, 2nd Floor Van Nuys, California 91401

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

MEMBERS Chair: Chair: Councilmember David Ryu, 4th District, City of Los Angeles Vice-Chair: Councilmember Joel Fajardo, City of San Fernando Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, 3rd Supervisorial District, County of Los Angeles Supervisor Kathryn Barger, 5th Supervisorial District, County of Los Angeles Councilmember Jess Talamantes, City of Burbank Councilmember Ara Najarian, City of Glendale Councilmember Paul Krekorian, 2nd District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, 3rd District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Paul Koretz, 5th District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Nury Martinez, 6th District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, 7th District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Mitchell Englander, 12th District, City of Los Angeles Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean, City of Santa Clarita

STAFF SFVCOG Fiscal Agent: Rachelle Anema, County of Los Angeles SFVCOG Secretary: Estevan Padilla, County of Los Angeles Executive Office John Bwarie, Executive Director, San Fernando Valley COG Norayr Zurabyan, County Counsel, County of Los Angeles

Page 65 OPEN SESSION

1. CALL TO ORDER — Councilmember Jess Talamantes, Chair

The meeting was called to order by Chair Councilmember David Ryu at 2:08 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL

QUORUM ESTABLISHED (13 Members): Chair Councilmember David Ryu, Vice-Chair Councilmember Joel Fajardo, Jarrod DeGonia for Supervisor Kathryn Barger, Councilmember Jess Talamantes, Councilmember Ara Najarian, Doug Mensmen for Councilmember Paul Krekorian, John Popoch for Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, Jay Greenstein for Councilmember Paul Koretz, Jim Dantona for Councilmember Nury Martinez, Humberto Quintana for Councilmember Monica Rodriquez, and Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean

Absent: Supervisor Sheila Kuehl and Councilmember Mitchell Englander

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The Pledge was led by Councilmember Jess Talamantes.

CONSENT CALENDAR All items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and may be enacted by one motion. Prior to the motion to consider any action by the Board, any public comments on any of the Consent Calendar items will be heard. There will be no separate action unless members of the Board request specific items to be removed from the Consent Calendar.

Page 66 4. MINUTES (Page 4) Review and Approve May 24, 2018 Board of Director's Meeting Minutes Requested Action: Approve Minutes. On motion of Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean, seconded by Councilmember Jess Talamantes, duly carried by the following vote, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) approved the May 24, 2018 Board of Director’s Meeting Minutes: Ayes: Chair Councilmember David Ryu, Vice-Chair Councilmember Joel Fajardo, Jarrod DeGonia for Supervisor Kathryn Barger, Councilmember Jess Talamantes, Councilmember Ara Najarian, Doug Mensmen for Councilmember Paul Krekorian, Jay Greenstein for Councilmember Paul Koretz, Jim Dantona for Councilmember Nury Martinez, Humberto Quintana for Councilmember Monica Rodriquez, and Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, and Councilmember Mitchell Englander

5. FINANCIAL REPORT (Page 18) Review FY 2017-18 Financials through December 30, 2017. Recommended Action: Receive and File Financial Report. On motion of Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean, seconded by Councilmember Jess Talamantes, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) received and filed the Financial Report.

6. 2018 MOBILITY WORKSHOP REPORT (Page 21) Recommended Action: Receive and File Mobility Workshop Report On motion of Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean, seconded by Councilmember Jess Talamantes, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) received and filed the Financial Report.

REGULAR CALENDAR At the discretion of the SFVCOG, all items appearing on this Agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be deliberated and may be subject to action by the SFVCOG.

Page 67 7. CHAIR REPORT Chair's Report – David Ryu, Chairman of the Board. Updates, remarks and recommendations from the Board Chair.

Chair Councilmember David Ryu provided a brief overview of his priorities for the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) collaboration, bridge building, and communication among the members of the SFVCOG, staff, cities, regional representatives, and state representatives.

Successfully execute the SFVCOG Workplan and continue to advocate for Measure M projects in the SFVCOG region. As well as addressing the issue of homelessness by promoting high quality interaction among all stakeholders and the SFVCOG.

8. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Updates, remark and recommendations from the Executive Director.

John Bwarie, Executive Director, reported:

 Fall Mobility Academy will launch September 19, 2018.

 The renewal of the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) Strategic Plan is nearing. The process will take approximately nine months to complete. The goal is to present the Strategic Plan for the SFVCOG’s consideration at the third or fourth meeting of Fiscal Year 2018-2019.

By Common Consent, there being no objection, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments received and filed the Executive Director’s Report.

9. HOMELESSNESS UPDATE

a. Homeless Coordinator Report Updates, remarks and recommendations from Homelessness Coordinator Recommended Action: Discussion and possible action

Maureen Richey, LeSar Development Consultants, provided a homeless coordination report affecting the San Fernando Valley region. Ms. Richey also provided information related to the homelessness initiative throughout the County of Los Angeles. Homeless coordination efforts continue throughout the San Fernando Valley region by facilitating monthly meetings with representatives from the cities of Santa Clarita, San

Page 68 Fernando, Glendale, Burbank, and the City of Los Angeles. The monthly meetings provide a forum to share and collaborate on issues pertaining to homelessness.

Ms. Richey highlighted other recent activities, such as the creation of a regional needs document, which addresses the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) first attempt in consolidating the homelessness activities from all the member cities of the SFVCOG. The regional needs document addresses many of the homelessness continuum such as prevention, diversion, street outreach, engagement, interim housing, landlord engagement, etc. Ultimately, the goal is regional coordination and partnership between cities in the implementation phase of homelessness initiative plans.

By Common Consent, there being no objection, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments received and filed the report. b. Update from LAHSA on Homelessness Point-in-time Count Recommended Action: Discussion and possible action

Clementina Verjah, The Los Angeles Homeless Service Authority (LAHSA), provided an overview on the 2018 results for Service Planning Area 2 (SPA) homeless count conducted by LAHSA. Ms. Verjah noted there were four components utilized towards the homeless count; such as, a street visual numeration of individuals and families in vehicle or dwellings utilized as homes, shelter count, demographic survey, and a youth count. Over 300 volunteers assisted with the homelessness count throughout the SFVCOG region. Additionally, LAHSA added enhanced clarification of the statistical differences used towards the homeless count. Ms. Clementina stated that the City and County experienced overall decreases in homelessness; however, for SPA 2 there were increases in homelessness.

Measure HHH and Measure H will continue to assist in combating homelessness. Nonetheless, one the major contributing factors to homelessness is lack of affordable housing. Ms. Clementina noted that the median rent amount in Los Angeles County has increased by over 33% and the median household income has decreased by 3%. Unfortunately, the County has the highest poverty rate throughout the state of California of approximately 25%.

Ivet Samvelyan. City of Glendale, provided a brief summary of the homelessness count affecting the City of Glendale. On January 23, 2018, the City of Glendale identified over 260 homeless individuals dwelling in

Page 69 the City of Glendale. In 2017, there were approximately 168 homeless individuals. Ms. Samvelyan noted that the dismantling of encampments within the City of Glendale as well as Propositions 57 and 47 have contributed to the increases in homelessness in the City of Glendale.

By Common Consent, there being no objection, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments received and filed the report. c. Update from LA County on Measure H Funding and Operations Recommended Action: Discussion and possible action

Meredith Berkson, Los Angeles County Initiative, briefly discussed the Measure H outcomes and the pivotal roles of local municipalities and council of governments (COGs) in preventing homelessness throughout the County of Los Angeles. According to Ms. Berkson, there are several key major outcomes to Measure H since July 2017 through March 2018. For example, over 7,200 individuals have been engaged by outreach teams, 6,352 individuals have been enrolled in disability benefit advocacy programs, over 10,000 individuals have entered crisis, bridge, and interim housing programs and 5,239 families have secured permanent housing via Measure H specific strategies.

Ms. Berkson stated that Measure H is committed to the following funding allocations: Prevention $17 million annually; Outreach $30 million; Permanent Supportive Housing $49 million; Rapid Re-Housing $73 million; and Shelter/Interim Housing $120 million. Ms. Berkson highlighted the important roles that cities can play in combating homelessness throughout the County. Cities can promote community engagement and legislative advocacy as well as committing to permanent supportive housing for the chronically homeless.

Ms. Berkson further stated that the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved the funding recommendations for FY 2018-19 on May 15, 2018. Additionally, the Homeless Initiative is working with the United Way to administer the Request for Proposals (RFP) which addresses increasing the supply of Supportive and Interim Housing and expanding the service system to help those experiencing homelessness. Mr. Bwarie noted that the SFVCOG received $30,000 in April of 2018 for municipal homelessness coordination within the SFVCOG region.

By Common Consent, there being no objection, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments received and filed the Executive Director’s Report.

Page 70 10. SFVCOG APPOINTEE REVIEW (Page 22)

a. Update from SFVCOG’s Current Appointees Recommended Action: Reaffirm current Appointees to external bodies as presented.

John Bwarie, Executive Director, discussed the current San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) appointees who are serving on committees, subcommittees, working groups, etc. representing the SFVCOG. As of fiscal year 2018-19, all appointees are reviewed annually and reaffirmed by the SFVCOG.

Current appointees and memberships are as follows:  Metro Technical Advisory Committee- Jason Smisko, City of Santa Clarita  Metro Technical Advisory Subcommittee- Edward Hitti, City of Glendale  Metro Policy Advisory Council – John Bwarie, SFVCOG  Los Angeles County Homeless Task Force – Jerrid Mckenna, City of Santa Clarita  League of California Cities Los Angeles Division- Mayor Emily Gabel-Luddy, City of Burbank  Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Transportation Policy Committee- Mayor Pro-Tem Marsha McLean (North County Representative) and Councilmember Jess Talamantes (Regional Council Representative)  Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Community and Economic Development Committee- Councilmember Bill Miranda, City of Santa Clarita

On motion of Chair Councilmember David Ryu, seconded by Vice Chair Councilmember Joel Fajardo, duly carried by the following vote, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) reaffirmed all current appointees to external bodies representing the SFVCOG:

Page 71 Ayes: Chair Councilmember David Ryu, Vice-Chair Councilmember Joel Fajardo, Jarrod DeGonia for Supervisor Kathryn Barger, Councilmember Jess Talamantes, Councilmember Ara Najarian, Doug Mensmen for Councilmember Paul Krekorian, John Popoch for Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, Jay Greenstein for Councilmember Paul Koretz, Jim Dantona for Councilmember Nury Martinez, Humberto Quintana for Councilmember Monica Rodriquez, and Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean Noes: None Absent: Supervisor Sheila Kuehl and Councilmember Mitchell Englander b. Appointment of Councilman Ara Najarian to SCAG Transportation Policy Committee Recommended Action: Appoint Councilman Ara Najarian to the SCAG Transportation Committee

John Bwarie, Executive Director, discussed the vacancy on the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Transportation Policy Committee. Mr. Bwarie noted that Councilmember Ara Najarian has expressed interest in serving on the SCAG Transportation Policy Committee representing the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG). Mr. Bwarie further clarified that there is also one vacancy on the SCAG Energy and Environment Committee representing the SFVCOG. Chair Councilmember David Ryu urged SFVCOG Board Members to consider serving on the Committee.

Members of the public; Coby King addressed the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments.

On motion of Chair Jared DeGonia for Supervisor Kathryn Barger, seconded by Doug Mensmen for Councilmember Paul Krekorian, duly carried by the following vote, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) appointed Councilmember Ara Najarian to the

Page 72 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Transportation Policy Committee:

Ayes: Chair Councilmember David Ryu, Vice-Chair Councilmember Joel Fajardo, Jarrod DeGonia for Supervisor Kathryn Barger, Councilmember Jess Talamantes, Councilmember Ara Najarian, Doug Mensmen for Councilmember Paul Krekorian, John Popoch for Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, Jay Greenstein for Councilmember Paul Koretz, Jim Dantona for Councilmember Nury Martinez, Humberto Quintana for Councilmember Monica Rodriquez, and Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean Noes: None Absent: Supervisor Sheila Kuehl and Councilmember Mitchell Englander

11. UPDATE FROM METRO ON SFVCOG MEASURE M PROJECTS Recommended Action: Discussion and possible action

David Mieger, Countywide Planning and Development-Metro, presented an update on five of the major transit projects approved that will be in development since the passing of Measure M. The five projects include the Orange Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) improvements, East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor, North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT Corridor, Northeast San Fernando Valley BRT, and the Sepulveda Transit Corridor. Metro is actively planning and nearing the process of project delivery for all five major developments in the SFVCOG region.

Mr. Mieger indicated that Metro has target groundbreaking dates and target grand opening dates for each of the five transit projects in the SFVCOG region. Measure M and Senate Bill (SB) 1 funding will not cover the entire costs for all major projects, but will significantly contribute towards a substantial portion of all expenses. Community outreach meetings began in June of 2018, which took place in the valley and the Westside of Los Angeles. Additionally, Metro is also committed to developing and completing the San Fernando Valley LA River Greenway Project. The project addresses several gaps along 12-mile path of the LA River and is expected to break ground in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 and an opening date of FY 2025.

Page 73 By Common Consent, there being no objection, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments received and filed the report.

12. METRO ORANGE LINE BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS GRANT APPLICATION (Page 24) Recommended Action: Support Metros’ grant application for Cycle 4 of the State Active Transportation Program for the Metro Orange Line Bus Rapid Transit Improvements Bikeway and direct staff to send a letter of support.

John Bwarie, Executive Director, introduced Metro’s Orange Line Bikeway improvements grant application for Cycle 4 of the State Active Transportation Program. Mr. Bwarie recommended the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) issue a letter of support for Metro’s San Fernando Bike Master Plan as the project will provide multimodal options and connections to residents of the SFVCOG region.

On motion of Councilmember Ara Najarian, seconded by John Popoch for Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, duly carried by the following vote, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) directed the Executive Director to send a letter to the California Department of Transportation in support of Metro’s Orange Line Elevated Bikeway application for Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 4:

Ayes: Chair Councilmember David Ryu, Vice-Chair Councilmember Joel Fajardo, Jarrod DeGonia for Supervisor Kathryn Barger, Councilmember Jess Talamantes, Councilmember Ara Najarian, Doug Mensmen for Councilmember Paul Krekorian, John Popoch for Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, Jay Greenstein for Councilmember Paul Koretz, Jim Dantona for Councilmember Nury Martinez, and Humberto Quintana for Councilmember Monica Rodriquez Noes: None Absent: Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, Councilmember Mitchell Englander, and Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean

Page 74 13. BOARDMEMBER ANNOUNCEMENTS Requested Action: Review and adopt the SFVCOG FY2018-19 Annual Work Program.

Jarred DeGonia, for Supervisor Kathryn Barger, announced that the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted to place an initiative on the November 2018 ballot regarding storm water and storm tax fees. Mr. DeGonia offered his assistance and the assistance of Supervisor Kathryn Barger’s office if there are any concerns or questions by any of the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) Board Members.

14. NEXT MEETING: October 18, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. at Santa Clarita City Hall (23920 Valencia Blvd. Santa Clarita, CA 91335)

John Bwarie, Executive Director, announced the next meeting is scheduled for October 18, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. at the Santa Clarita City Hall. The meeting locations are rotating among different cities in the San Fernando Valley region.

15. PUBLIC COMMENT

Members of the public; Don Larsen and Joe Phillips addressed the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments.

16. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 4:02 p.m.

Page 75 SAN FERNANDO VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Budget vs Actual Report FISCAL YEAR 2018-2019

2018-2019 Actuals Adopted as of Budget 9/30/2018 Difference REVENUES Member Dues $ 120,000 $ 107,500 $ (12,500) Sponsorships/Donations 5,000 1,500 (3,500) Interest - 832 832 Grants 30,000.00 5,542.00 24,458 TOTAL REVENUE $ 155,000 $ 115,374 $ 9,290

EXPENDITURES Audit $ 6,000 $ 6,000 Computer Supplies 250 250 Events - Mobility Workshop 6,500 6,500 Mobility Academy 1,000 1,000 Mobility Academy 2.0 1,000 Incidental Expenses 500 500 Management Services Contract 100,000 16,667 83,333 Meeting Costs 500 500 Membership Dues 250 250 Office Supplies 250 250 Parking fees 400 400 Postage 50 50 Printing 3,000 3,000 Travel 250 250 Website 500 500 Regional Homeless Coordination Services 30,000 3,638 26,363 Miscellaneous (Contingency Reserve) 4,550 4,550

TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 155,000 $ 20,304 $ 133,696

Page 76 SAN FERNANDO VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY FUND V54 STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS JULY 1, 2018 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2018

Fund V54/Org 55665

Cash Balance, July 1, 2018 $ 156,940.95

Receipts:

Interest Earnings 7/1/2018 346.83 Interest Earnings 8/1/2018 316.11 Interest Earnings 9/1/2018 169.22

DP AC 19000000353 - CNTR AO-18-610 Service April 2018 7/23/2018 1,904.00 JVCT-AC-CMSF19*11 SFVCOG $35K Membership Dues-Charge the GF 8/8/2018 35,000.00 DP AC 19000000735 - Metro 8/14/2018 500.00 DP AC 19000000735 - SCAG 8/14/2018 1,000.00 DP AC 19000000810 - AO CEO-Client 8/17/2018 3,638.00 DP AC 19000000927 - Membership - City of Los Angeles 8/24/2018 35,000.00 DP AC 19000000938 - Membership - San Fernando 8/27/2018 12,500.00 DP AC 19000001367 - Membership - City of Glendale 9/20/2018 12,500.00 DP AC 19000001367 - Membership - City of Burbank 9/20/2018 12,500.00

Total Beginning Cash Balance and Receipts $ 272,315.11

Disbursements: AD AU A1900106831 - Lesar Development Company 7/22/2018 $ 3,637.50 AD AU A1900188599 Stratiscope - July 2018 8/7/2018 8,333.33 AD AU A1900407584 Stratiscope - August 2018 9/16/2018 8,333.33

Total Disbursements $ 20,304.16

Cash Balance, September 30, 2018 $ 252,010.95

Prepared by Los Angeles County Department of Auditor-Controller Accounting Division ML 10/2/18

H:\Special Funds\Special Funds Unit\JOINT POWERS AUTHORITIES\SFVCOG\SFVCOG - Reports\Reports FY18-19\FY19 SFVCOG Quarterly Reports.xlsx1st Qtr Page 77 San Fernando Valley Council of Governments

DATE: October 12, 2018

TO: SFVCOG Board of Directors

FROM: John Bwarie, Executive Director

RE: CA Proposition 6

RECOMMENDATION Adopt a position on Proposition 6, as recommended by the Transportation Committee (without a recommended position)

BACKGROUND The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to pass a tax with a two-thirds vote of each house and defines what types of charges are considered taxes for this two-thirds vote requirement. Under this definition, some charges referred to by other names can be considered taxes. For example, fees that pay for services beyond those provided directly to the fee payer can be considered taxes.

In April 2017, the Legislature passed by a two-thirds vote of each house, and the Governor signed, SFVCOG-supported SB I (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017), which increased funding for the State transportation system and transportation infrastructure by increasing taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel and creating two new vehicle taxes. The provisions of SB 1 phase in the various tax increases and fees beginning on November 1, 2017, and mandates that the funding generated by these new fees and taxes be evenly split between State and local investments.

SB1 is estimated to invest $54.0 billion statewide over the next 10 years to fix roads, freeways, and bridges throughout the State, as well as transit and safety programs.

Proposition 6 — Gas Tax Repeal If approved by the voters, Proposition 6 would repeal the motor vehicle gasoline tax increases and new vehicle fees enacted in 2017, pursuant to SB 1, and require voter approval of these tax increases and new fees. Proposition 6 would also prohibit the Legislature from imposing, increasing, or extending any tax on the sale, storage, use or consumption of motor vehicle gasoline or diesel fuel, or on the privilege to operate a vehicle or trailer on public highways without voter approval.

Page 78 If approved by the voters, this measure would become effective on November 7, 2018. California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) indicates that, if approved by the voters, this measure would reduce transportation tax revenues authorized under SB 1. Specifically, the LAO estimates that passage of Proposition 6 would reduce transportation tax revenues by $4.3 billion in Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19. Beginning in FY 2019-20, the measure would eliminate all SB 1 transportation tax revenues, resulting in a loss of $4.9 billion annually by FY 2020-21. The funding reductions would primarily affect State highway maintenance and rehabilitation, local streets and roads, and mass transit.

SFVCOG Region Impact: SB1 has provided additional funds for road repair to all member jurisdictions, which would be eliminated if Proposition 6 passes. Further, SB1 funds have been allocated to the Orange line Improvements, the East San Fernando Valley LTR project, and the 1-5 improvements in the Santa Clarita Valley. These funds, if not disbursed, would be eliminated.

CURRENT POSITIONS The in 2017 SFVCOG voted to support SB1 as follows: “The San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Supports SB 1 (Beall), with a caveat that it be amended to provide an exemption from the diesel sales tax to commuter rail providers that are not direct recipients of STA and that the funds be protected from use on High Speed Rail projects.”

Attachment: Proposition 6 - State LAO Description ​

Page 79 Proposition 6 Eliminates Recently Enacted Road Repair and Transportation Funding by Repealing Revenues Dedicated for Those Purposes. Requires Any Measure to Enact Certain Vehicle Fuel Taxes and Vehicle Fees Be Submitted to and Approved by the Electorate. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.

Yes/No Statement A YES vote on this measure means: Fuel and vehicle taxes recently passed by the

Legislature would be eliminated, which would reduce funding for highway and road maintenance and repairs, as well as transit programs. The Legislature would be required to get a majority of voters to approve new or increased state fuel and vehicle taxes in the future.

A NO vote on this measure means: Fuel and vehicle taxes recently passed by the Legislature would continue to be in effect and pay for highway and road maintenance and repairs, as well as transit programs. The Legislature would continue not to need voter approval for new or increased state fuel and vehicle taxes in the future.

Summary of Legislative Analyst’s Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact • Reduced ongoing state revenues of $5.1 billion from the elimination of fuel and vehicle taxes passed by the Legislature in 2017. These revenues mainly would have paid for highway and road maintenance and repairs, as well as transit programs. • The requirement that voters approve new or increased fuel and vehicle taxes passed by the Legislature in the future could result in lower revenues from such taxes than otherwise would have been available.

Ballot Label Fiscal Impact: Reduced ongoing revenues of $5.1 billion from state fuel and vehicle taxes that mainly would have paid for highway and road maintenance and repairs, as well as transit programs.

Page 80 BACKGROUND

Approval of State Taxes Legislative Requirements. Under the State Constitution, the Legislature can only pass a new tax or increase an existing tax with a two-thirds vote. (The Legislature can pass most other types of laws with a simple majority.) Some state charges referred to as fees (such as vehicle license fees) fall under the constitutional definition of a tax.

Voter Approval Requirements. The Legislature does not need to get voter approval for new or increased taxes that it passes. The voters—through the initiative process—can pass new taxes or increase existing taxes without the Legislature’s involvement.

State Fuel and Vehicle Taxes Fuel Taxes. The state charges excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel. These taxes are set on a per-gallon basis. The state also charges sales taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel. These taxes are set as a percent of the price of the fuel. The State Constitution generally requires that the revenues from these fuel taxes be spent on highways, roads, and transit.

Vehicle Taxes. State law requires vehicle owners to pay two specific taxes for the privilege of operating a vehicle on public highways. These are (1) vehicle license fees and (2) recently enacted transportation improvement fees, both of which are based on a vehicle’s value. The State

Constitution requires that the transportation improvement fee revenues be spent on highways, roads, and transit.

Transportation Funding in California Transportation funding in California currently is estimated to total $35 billion. Of this amount, $16 billion comes from local sources, $12 billion from state sources, and $7 billion from federal sources. Local funding mainly comes from sales taxes, transit fares, and city and county

Page 81 general funds, while federal funding mainly comes from federal fuel taxes. State funding mainly comes from state fuel and vehicle taxes. State funding has increased by about three-quarters over the last two years mainly due to recent legislation.

Recent State Transportation Funding Legislation. In 2017, the Legislature enacted Senate

Bill (SB) 1 to increase annual state funding for transportation through various fuel and vehicle taxes (shown in Figure 1). Specifically, SB 1 increased the base gasoline excise tax (by 12 cents per gallon) and the diesel sales tax (by 4 percent). It also set fixed rates on a second (add-on) gasoline excise tax and the diesel excise tax, both of which previously could change each year based on fuel prices. Further, SB 1 created the transportation improvement fee (which ranges from $25 to $175 per year) and a fee specifically for zero-emission vehicles (set at $100 per year for model years 2020 and later). It also provides for inflation adjustments in the future. This fiscal year, the state expects the taxes to raise $4.4 billion. Two years from now, when all the taxes are in effect and the inflation adjustments have started, the state expects the taxes to raise

$5.1 billion. The State Constitution requires that nearly all of these new revenues be spent on transportation purposes. Senate Bill 1 dedicates about two-thirds of the revenues to highway and road repairs, with the remainder going to other programs (such as for mass transit).

Page 82 PROPOSAL Requires Legislature to Get Voter Approval for Fuel and Vehicle Taxes. Proposition 6 amends the State Constitution to require the Legislature to get voter approval for new or increased taxes on the sale, storage, use, or consumption of gasoline or diesel fuel, as well as for taxes paid for the privilege of operating a vehicle on public highways. Thus, the Legislature would need voter approval for such taxes as gasoline and diesel excise and sales taxes, vehicle license fees, and transportation improvement fees.

Eliminates Recently Enacted Fuel and Vehicle Taxes. Proposition 6 also eliminates any such fuel and vehicle taxes passed by the Legislature after January 1, 2017 and up to the date that

Proposition 6 takes effect in December. This would eliminate the increased fuel taxes and the transportation improvement fees enacted by SB 1.

Page 83 Fiscal Effects Eliminates Tax Revenues From SB 1. In the current fiscal year, Proposition 6 would reduce

SB 1 tax revenues from $4.4 billion to $2 billion—a $2.4 billion decrease. (The $2 billion in remaining revenues would be from taxes collected prior to Proposition 6 taking effect in

December.) Two years from now, the revenue reduction would total $5.1 billion annually. The funding reductions would mainly affect highway and road maintenance and repair programs, as well as transit programs.

Makes Passage of Specified Fuel and Vehicle Taxes More Difficult. Proposition 6 would make it more difficult to enact specified fuel and vehicle taxes because voters also would have to approve them. As a result, there could be less revenue than otherwise would be the case. Any reduction in revenues is unknown, as it would depend on future actions by the Legislature and voters.

Page 84 San Fernando Valley Council of Governments

DATE: October 12, 2018

TO: SFVCOG Board of Directors

FROM: John Bwarie, Executive Director

RE: 2019 Transportation Priorities

RECOMMENDATION a. Review and adopt its 2019 Transportation Priorities as recommended by the Transportation Committee

BACKGROUND In 2013, the SFVCOG adopted its first transportation Priority list when all votes had to be unanimous. In July 2016, the SFVCOG Board adopted a strategic plan that called for the creation and annual review of a SFVCOG Transportation Priority list. This was first done in 2017 to prepare at 2018 Priority list with the formation of a Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of member jurisdiction’s staff.

This year, we engaged stakeholders at our annual Mobility Workshop to help shape the future transportation priorities for the SFVCOG. The feedback elicited from the June workshop was presented to the TAC to inform its work in updating the 2019 SFVCOG Transportation priority list for Board consideration.

This year’s list refines what was done last year with a continued focus on projects and positions that are regionally significant and, when possible, cross-jurisdictional. The TAC spent time discussing specific projects, as listed, but also overarching transportation policy issues like high-frequency bus service and support for Tier-2 Transit Operators.

On September 19, 2018, the Transportation Committee reviewed and adopted the Priority list as presented with the following change: the addition of the last line in the first paragraph calling out double-tracking for Metrolink service in our region.

The attached Transportation Priorities are the result of the TAC work, with input from the June SFVCOG Mobility Workshop, and with the recommendation of the Transportation Committee.

CURRENT POSITIONS The SFVCOG’s current transportation priorities have been the guiding document for 2018. This document would be a replacement of the current “transportation priority” list. The priority list does not replace policies the SFVCOG Board has established related to transportation.

Attachment: 2019 Transportation Priorities ​

Page 85 San Fernando Valley Council of Governments 2019 Transportation Priorities *Final Draft for Board Review* October 12, 2018

1. Increased Metrolink Service on the Antelope Valley and Ventura Lines: 25% of 2018 Mobility Workshop attendees indicated improved Metrolink service is a regional priority. A common theme was increased service. The SFVCOG recognizes that frequency and reliability are critical to ensuring Metrolink’s success in providing reliable rail transit in the region. The Ventura and Antelope Valley Lines currently provide the broadest coverage of rail transportation serving the entire SFVCOG region. For this reason, we call for these lines in our region to be double-tracked.

In order for this system to provide frequent, reliable transportation, the SFVCOG supports capital and operational improvements to Metrolink to provide train service in both directions on weekdays every 15 minutes between SFVCOG stations and LA Union Station during peak periods and throughout the day, and trains every 30 minutes in both directions during the evening (7pm - Midnight) and on weekends from 6am to 12midnight (which aligns with the Metrolink SCORE plan). ​ ​

This service frequency would result in a combined headway of about 7 minutes during peak periods and 15 minutes during evening periods on the trunk line where both the Ventura and Antelope Valley lines run between LA Union Station and Downtown Burbank. With Hollywood Burbank Airport stations now located on both lines, the same combined headway would apply to connections between LA Union Station and Hollywood Burbank Airport. This headway goal is a starting point; reducing headways beyond these benchmarks could result in service more similar to local bus and rail, which has been shown to dramatically increase utility and resultant ridership of commuter rail lines in other cities around the world. Additionally, providing some owl service (late night and early morning, resulting in 24 hour operation), could be of value.

2. Enhanced Bicycle Connectivity Providing a network of separated bicycle lanes and paths to facilitate bicycling, especially as a first mile/last mile solution, can improve access to transit, improve health, and reduce vehicle miles traveled. The SFVCOG supports efforts to close gaps between existing separated bicycle lanes/paths and those facilities and key destinations such as transit hubs, retail, commercial, and residential activity centers that are a short distance away. Furthermore, the SFVCOG supports the completion of the Measure M-funded LA River Bike Path Gap ($60M) and San Fernando Bike Master Plan ($5M),

2019 Transportation Priorities 1 Page 86 which support this goal. In addition to these projects, the SFVCOG prioritizes projects that close gaps called out by Metro in their Bicylce Strategic Plan: http://media.metro.net/board/Items/2006/02_february/20060215P&PItem6%20Atta.p df. ​ 3. Focused First-Mile / Last-Mile Connectivity The need for enhancing connections between fixed-route transit stations and their surrounding and nearby activity centers was called out during our 2018 Mobility Workshop by almost a third of respondents. From connecting bus and train schedules to enhanced active transportation options to connect to fixed-route systems, this first-mile/last-mile connection is needed. The SFVCOG supports projects and programs that support the closing of this first-mile/last-mile gap, particularly around the existing Red Line, Orange Line, and Metrolink Lines, and proposed transit routes funded by Measure M.

4. Increased Transit Options and Operations Since 2010, the SFVCOG has taken a number of positions and created transportation priority lists. In this 2018 Priority List update, previously taken positions remain in place. It is important to reaffirm the Board’s support for these priorities in this updated list, while extending support for important improvements to the region’s transit operations. Previous priorities include the following: a. Measure M-Funded Transit Projects i. Sepulveda Pass Corridor ii. East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor as at grade LRT with 14 stops iii. NoHo to Pasadena BRT iv. Orange Line Upgrades (speed and crossings) v. Orange Line Conversion from BRT to LRT b. Additional Support for Tier 2 Transit operators Taken together, BurbankBus, Glendale Beeline, LADOT Dash, and Pasadena Transit carry nearly 5 million rides per year, yet these agencies receive no state or federal transit operations funding through Metro, and instead rely solely on local funding to operate. Recognizing the importance these Tier 2 operators play in the SFVCOG region’s mobility, the SFVCOG will advocate for increased funding from Metro to support these “Tier 2 Eligible Operators” including support for transit operations as well as transit vehicle capital funds. c. 15-Minute Bus Network The SFVCOG region relies on bus transit to service most corridors with the region, but many corridors lack frequent service. High frequency is critical to ensuring bus transit meets the mobility needs of SFVCOG region residents and employees. The SFVCOG will advocate for bus headways no greater than 15 minutes on its major arterial corridors from 6am until 11pm. The SFVCOG will engage with Metro as part of its NextGen Bus Study to ensure that the SFVCOG

2019 Transportation Priorities 2 Page 87 region receives necessary transit operations resources to support this service standard. d. Support permanent, high-capacity transit connections to Hollywood Burbank Airport from the NoHo Transit Center As part of the Interstate 5 HOV North / Empire Interchange Project, Metro provided four years of funding for a pilot project to provide all-day BurbankBus service between the North Hollywood Red Line Station and the Hollywood Burbank Airport. This funding expires when the I-5 Project is complete in 2019. Given the importance of this connection, the SFVCOG will advocate for funding to continue this important connection after 2019 and to ensure that the line is integrated into Metro’s maps, planning, outreach, and communications to advertise this connection to the public. Further, service should be extended to include weekend service, as well.

2019 Transportation Priorities 3 Page 88 CITY OF LOS ANGELES

PANORAMA CITY CALIFORNIA NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL PANORAMA CITY NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL Directors Gregory Wilkinson, Chair POSTAL MAIL Viviano Montes, Vice Chair 14500 Roscoe Blvd, Suite 425 John DiGregorio, Treasurer Panorama City, CA 91402 Cheryl Compton, Secretary Maricar Summer Bernardo • Jan Brown TELEPHONE Martha Cortez, VP • Pamela Gibberman (818) 714-2133 Michael Hasz • Michelle Klein-Hass, VP Chris Q. Martinez • Saúl Mejía, VP ELECTRONIC MAIL Gurgen Mkrtchyan, VP • Marisa Persaud, VP [email protected] Ryan Reich, VP • Tony Wilkinson, VP Danny Succar ALTERNATES Vacant seats: ERIC GARCETTI Alt1 Nathan Bouldin Alt2 Salvador Ortega Homeowner Center-West (2018) MAYOR Alt3 Dante Harris Alt4 (vacant) Renter Center-West (2020) Alt5 (vacant) Business (2019) x2 Youth Representative: Pedro Saavedra & Melissa Esparza

PANORAMA CITY NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL SPECIAL Public Safety & Land Use Committee

Joint Meeting with the Board of Directors Thursday, October 18 2018, 6:30 p.m.

Plaza Del Valle, Liz Galan Community Room, Building G, Unit #62 8600 Van Nuys Boulevard, Panorama City, CA 91402

The quorum for Panorama City Neighborhood Council committees is three. Public comments on agenda items will be heard when the item is considered. Public comments on other matters within the committee's jurisdiction may be made during the Public Comment period. Public comments are limited to two minutes per speaker. Action may be taken on any agenda item except Public Comment, announcements and reports. You may request a copy of printed materials that are distributed at the meeting. You may record the meeting by audio, video or photographic means as long as it is not disruptive. Meeting notices and agendas are posted at Plaza del Valle, Community Room (see below). If you need translation, or accommodation for a disability, please call the city Department of Neighborhood Empowerment at least three business days in advance (213-978-1551, or toll-free 3-1-1). The city is a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you believe the council is not following the law or its own rules you may file a grievance in writing with copies to both the Chair and the Secretary. Please be respectful of others, even when you differ with them.

6:30 1. Call to Order and opening remarks (Tony Wilkinson, Land Use Chair, Martha Cortez, Public Safety Committee Chair) [2m]

6:32 2. Roll Call of committee members or alternates (the quorum is three). [1m]

6:33 3. Introduction of Committee Members, LAPD and elected officials and staff.  Crime Stats, Questions and Answers specifically directed to elected officials. LAPD Senior Lead Officers: Sean Smith (818)442-3183 /Daniel Ruelas (818)679-2082/Damaris Bonffil (818)634-0718. [10m]

6:43 4. Public Comment and announcements (Please limit to two minutes per speaker.) Comment on agenda items will be heard at the time the item is considered. [2m]

6:45 5. Special Guest: Stephen Corona, from Los Angeles Metro will be providing an update on the plans for the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) North San Fernando Valley project. Discussion on project route plans, funding, projected completion dates and study area. How it impacts Panorama City community. [30 min] 7:15 6. Adjournment

Page 89 Council Process: The council gained its official city role upon certification by the Board of Neighborhood Commissioners on March 15, 2007. Everyone who lives, works or owns real property within the boundaries of the Panorama City Neighborhood Council, or who declares a Community Interest in the area and the basis for it, is a "stakeholder". All stakeholders are members of the Council. Stakeholders elect a Board of Directors to represent them. This Board is recognized as the decision-making entity by the City of Los Angeles. The current Board was elected on April 2, 2016. While the Board is the official decision-making entity, meetings are conducted as much as possible in a town hall spirit. Committees are open to anyone with an interest in Panorama City. Panorama City's neighborhood council is much more than its Board, and it depends on public participation for its success.

Posting Sites: California's open meetings law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, requires that meeting notices be physically posted at a regular location 72 hours in advance for regular meetings and 24 hours in advance for special meetings. The location must be accessible to the public seven days a week, 24 hours a day. That location is the outside steel doors of the Plaza Del Valle Community Room, Building G, 8700 Van Nuys Boulevard, Panorama City, CA 91402. This council is also required to follow the City of Los Angeles posting policy for Neighborhood Councils. That policy additionally requires that councils post agendas through the city's Early Notification System (ENS), post the agendas on the council's website (if one exists), and make an effort to send agendas by electronic mail (if such a list exists). This council posts agendas on its website, panoramacitync.org. This council uses the city's ENS mailing list as its agenda email list. You may sign up for the ENS agenda system at: http://lacity.org/government/Subscriptions/NeighborhoodCouncils/index.htm.

In addition to the Plaza Del Valle posting location, this council MAY post agendas at other locations within Panorama City. These may include: (1) Panorama City Branch Library, 14345 Roscoe Boulevard; (2) Panorama Recreation Center, 8600 Hazeltine Avenue; (3) Sepulveda Recreation Center, 8801 Kester Avenue; and (4) Casa Esperanza, 14705 Blythe Street. In addition to the ENS agenda list, this council MAY include agendas in its occasional informational emails. You can subscribe to the council's informational email list by sending your request to '[email protected]'. You can also sign up on the council's website. In order to respect our stakeholders' inboxes, messages to the informational email list will be sent at most once or twice a month. The only way to assure that you will receive emailed agendas is through the ENS list.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): As a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of Los Angeles does not discriminate on the basis of disability and upon request, will provide reasonable accommodation to ensure equal access to its programs, services, and activities. Sign language interpreters, assistive listening devices, or other auxiliary aids and/or services may be provided upon request. To ensure availability of services, please make your request at least 3 business days prior to the meeting you wish to attend by contacting the city Department of Neighborhood Empowerment at least three business days in advance (213-978-1551, or toll-free 3-1-1).

Agenda-related written materials: The council may occasionally prepare supplementary information to the agenda ("agenda packets"). When this is done, the agenda packets are normally made available both to Board or committee members and to the general public at the start of the posted meeting. In compliance with Government Code section 54957.5, non-exempt writings that are distributed to a majority or all of the Board or committee in advance of a meeting may be viewed by appointment at the Panorama City Neighborhood Council office, 14500 Roscoe Boulevard, Suite 400, Panorama City, CA 91401, (818-714-2133) during normal business hours, or at the scheduled meeting. In addition, if you would like a copy of any record related to an item on the agenda, please contact Cheryl Compton, PCNC - Secretary, 14500 Roscoe Boulevard, Suite 400, Panorama City, CA 91402 ([email protected]).

For more information about the Panorama City Neighborhood Council visit our website at www.panoramacitync.org

Page 90 NORTH HOLLYWOOD BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT CORPORATION (NOHO BID)

Meeting Agenda Wednesday, October 10th @ 11:00 a.m. NoHo BID Office, 5026 Lankershim Blvd.

1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER (B. Akhavan)

2. PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS

3. PRESENTATION- Metro Bus Rapid Transit Projects

4. APPROVAL OF BOARD MINUTES ACTION a. The Board will decide whether to approve the minutes of its meetings on 9/19/18.

5. FINANCIAL REPORT (A. Aulenta) ACTION a. The Board will review and decide whether to accept the current financial report.

6. MARKETING REPORT (N. Bianconi) a. NoHo Card update

7. OPERATIONS REPORT (A. Aulenta) a. Clean/Safe updates b. Kiosk update c. November meeting date

8. NEW BUSINESS

9. ADJOURN

As a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, The North Hollywood Business Improvement District does not discriminate on the basis of disability and upon request will provide reasonable accommodation to ensure equal access to its programs, services, and activities. To ensure availability of services, please make your request at least 3 business days (72-hours) prior to the meeting by contacting (562)773.5852.

Page 91 SAN FERNANDO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

SEPTEMBER 4, 2018 – 6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING

City Hall Council Chambers 117 Macneil Street San Fernando, CA 91340

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL

Mayor Sylvia Ballin called the meeting to order at 6:11 p.m.

Present:

Council: Mayor Sylvia Ballin, Vice Mayor Antonio Lopez, and Councilmembers Joel Fajardo, Jaime Soto and Robert C. Gonzales

Staff: City Manager Alexander P. Meyerhoff, Assistant City Attorney Richard Padilla and City Clerk Elena G. Chávez

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Led by Director of Public Works/City Engineer Yazdan (Yaz) Emrani

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Motion by Councilmember Fajardo, seconded by Councilmember Gonzales, to approve the agenda.

Assistant City Attorney Padilla reported that there was a need to add a walk-on item (Item 9a) regarding appointing another delegate to vote on behalf of the City at the League of California Cities conference since neither delegate (Lopez and Fajardo) would be attending. The item came to staff’s attention after the agenda was posted and there is a need for immediate action.

Motion by Councilmember Fajardo, seconded by Vice Mayor Lopez, to approve the agenda as amended. By consensus, the motion carried.

PRESENTATIONS

The following presentations were made:

Page 92 SAN FERNANDO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – September 4, 2018 Page 2 a) CITY OF SAN FERNANDO MARIACHI TESORO (MMAP) AWARDED 1ST PLACE AT THE INAUGURAL CALIFORNIA STATE FAIR YOUTH MARIACHI COMPETITION “MARIACHI PROUD” b) PRESENTATION BY METRO ON THE NORTH SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BUS RAPID TRANSIT

DECORUM AND ORDER

Assistant City Attorney Padilla provided a brief summary of the rules.

PUBLIC STATEMENTS – WRITTEN/ORAL

Gilbert Perez talked about the potholes throughout the City and said he’s tired of having to get wheel alignments on his car.

Dee Akemon said that a hero was buried this week and she read a letter from Mayor Ballin to Senator John McCain dated November 2017.

Rodolfo Salinas began to talk about Public Hearing Item No. 7 but said he would instead wait to speak during the discussion of the item.

Mary Mendoza asked Council to be considerate of audience members present to speak on the public hearing items and not make them wait several hours.

Jaime Soto expressed several concerns including: selling of land should not be done in Closed Session; he believes that City Attorney Rick Olivarez appears to be embroiled in political malfeasance and has failed the City; and Mr. Soto called on the City Council to immediately terminate the contract.

Michael Remenih said he’s been attending the meeting for years and has watched the City come out of the brink of bankruptcy and corruption and he finds it ironic that Mr. Soto is talking about wasting taxpayer money while Mr. Soto has cost taxpayers over $150,000.

City Clerk Chávez read a letter/email (submitted by Katherine Silva) who spoke against agenda Item No. 12.

CITY COUNCIL - LIAISON UPDATES

Councilmember Gonzales gave updates regarding the Independent Cities Association and the Ad Hoc Committees that he serves.

Councilmember Soto also gave updates regarding the Ice Cream Truck and Fire Station Ad Hoc Committees.

Page 93 SAN FERNANDO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – September 4, 2018 Page 3

Councilmember Fajardo also talked about the Ad Hoc Committees and the League of California Cities conference.

Vice Mayor Lopez also gave an update regarding the Fire Station Ad Hoc Committee.

Mayor Ballin reported that the Metropolitan Water District Board would be meeting next week.

CONSENT CALENDAR

Motion by Vice Mayor Lopez, seconded by Councilmember Fajardo, to approve the Consent Calendar Items:

1) CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE WARRANT REGISTER

2) CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE DISPOSITION OF SURPLUS CITY-OWNED VEHICLES

3) CONSIDERATION TO AUTHORIZE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE SAN FERNANDO DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION PROJECT, TRUMAN STREET FROM BRAND BOULEVARD TO SAN FERNANDO MISSION BOULEVARD, FEDERAL PROJECT NO. TCSP-09CA (005), JOB NO. 7579, PLAN NO. P-750

4) CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE A PURCHASE ORDER WITH VERSATILE INFORMATION PRODUCTS, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE OF VOICE RECORDERS

5) CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF WORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE REHABILITATION OF HUBBARD BOOSTER PUMP NO. 2

6) CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LEASE-PURCHASE AGREEMENT TO FINANCE THE ACQUISITION OF PARKING METERS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT

By consensus, the motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARING

7) CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A REQUEST FOR THE APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO SUBDIVIDE A 15,800 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY INTO THREE LOTS – TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2017- 01 (NO. 74153); 927 SEVENTH STREET

Mayor Ballin declared the Public Hearing open.

Page 94 SAN FERNANDO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – September 4, 2018 Page 4

Director of Community Development Timothy T. Hou introduced Associate Planner Gerardo Marquez who presented the staff report. Both replied to questions from Councilmembers.

Discussion ensued amongst Councilmembers and staff.

Mayor Ballin called for public testimony.

Rodolfo Salinas expressed concern regarding the proposed three lots on one parcel, lack of current parking and increased parking issues, the process (only three Commissioners were present to vote on the item), and his attempt to file an appeal and the $1,500 cost to do so.

Motion by Councilmember Fajardo, seconded by Councilmember Gonzales, to close the Public Hearing. By consensus, the motion carried.

Discussion ensued amongst Councilmembers and staff.

Motion by Councilmember Fajardo, seconded by Councilmember Gonzales, to:

a. Introduce for first reading, in title only, and waive further reading of Ordinance No. 1680, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Fernando, California, approving a request for the approval of a tentative parcel map to subdivide a 15,800 square foot property into three lots as follows: Parcel 1 will consist of approximately 3,879 square feet and Parcel 2 will consist of approximately 4,909 square feet and Parcel 3 will consist of approximately 4,910 square feet, each. The project site consists of a 79-foot by 200-foot lot and is located at the corner of Seventh Street and Macneil Street within the single-family residential zone (R-1 Zone)”; and

b. Affirm the City’s determination that the proposed Ordinance is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and that staff has conducted the appropriate environmental analysis in compliance with CEQA requirements. Based on that assessment, staff has adopted a mitigated negative declaration for the project. The environmental analysis notes possible short term impacts during the construction phase of the project which will be mitigated in order to provide less than a significant impact on the environment. The public review period for the Negative Declaration was from December 27, 2017 and ended on January 17, 2018.

The motion carried with the following vote:

AYES: Gonzales, Fajardo, Lopez, Ballin – 4 NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Soto – 1

8) CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SAN FERNANDO MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO SERVING AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CITY FACILITIES

Page 95 SAN FERNANDO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – September 4, 2018 Page 5

Mayor Ballin declared the Public Hearing open.

Director of Recreation & Community Services Julian J. Venegas presented the staff report and replied to questions from Councilmembers.

Mayor Ballin called for public testimony; there were no public comments.

Motion by Councilmember Fajardo, seconded by Councilmember Gonzales, to close the Public Hearing. By consensus, the motion carried.

Discussion ensued amongst Councilmembers.

Motion by Councilmember Fajardo, seconded by Councilmember Gonzales, to:

a. Introduce for first reading, in title only, and waive further reading of Ordinance No. 1681, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Fernando, California, amending Section 54-18 (Intoxicating Liquor Prohibited) of Article I (General) of Chapter 54 (Parks and Recreation) of the San Fernando Municipal Code to authorize the presence and consumption of alcohol at City recreational facilities subject to permit conditions.”;

b. Adopt Resolution No. 7885 adopting a Management Policy/Procedure for regulating the Serving and Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in City Facilities;

c. Adopt Resolution No. 7886 adopting a processing fee for issuing an alcohol use permit; and

d. Include an amendment to implement a 10% surcharge for non-residents provided that such plan is feasible and within the jurisdiction that the Finance Director and City Attorney authorize.

The motion carried with the following vote:

AYES: Gonzales, Fajardo, Soto, Lopez, Ballin – 5 NOES: None ABSENT: None

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS

9) CONSIDERATION TO DETERMINE A CITY POSITION ON THE 2018 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES RESOLUTIONS

9a) DESIGNATION OF A VOTING DELEGATE FOR THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 13, 2018.

Page 96 SAN FERNANDO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – September 4, 2018 Page 6

City Manager Meyerhoff presented the staff report and stated that both voting delegates (Lopez and Fajardo) were unable to attend the League of California Cities Annual Business Meeting to vote on the City’s behalf on the two resolutions.

No other Councilmembers were available to attend; no action taken on either item.

The following item was taken out of order.

11) DISCUSSION REGARDING VIOLATION OF CITY POLICY PERTAINING TO DONATIONS FROM EL SUPER, CITY COUNCIL DIRECTIVES, AND OTHER RULES AND PROCEDURES

Councilmember Fajardo expressed concern whether policies are being broken, if appropriate disciplinary action would be taken, wondered if employees are treated equally, and asked at what point would the City Manager get involved.

Mayor Ballin said these are important policy questions but expressed concern and suggested that the discussion be held off-line in a meeting with the City Attorney, City Manager and Police Chief.

No action taken (a meeting would be held with staff).

By consensus, Council agreed with Councilmember Gonzales’ suggestion to receive an update regarding the labor group and whether the issue had been resolved with El Super.

10) DISCUSSION REGARDING BADGES FOR CITY COUNCILMEMBERS

Councilmember Fajardo explained why he added the item to the agenda and asked if there was a true necessity to provide police-type badges to Councilmembers since they already have identification badges as well and suggested ending the practice.

Police Chief Anthony Vairo added that the badges very much resemble a police badge and suggested, if Council decides to keep them, they be redesigned.

Discussion ensued amongst Councilmembers and staff.

Motion by Vice Mayor Lopez, seconded by Councilmember Gonzales, to keep the Councilmember badges as-is, but if (in the future) they are misused, they are to be removed immediately from all Councilmembers. The motion carried with the following vote:

AYES: Gonzales, Soto, Lopez, Ballin – 4 NOES: Fajardo – 1 ABSENT: None

At this time (8:57 p.m.) Councilmember Fajardo left the Council Chambers.

Page 97 SAN FERNANDO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – September 4, 2018 Page 7

12) DISCUSSION AND REQUEST TO PREPARE AND SUBMIT A LETTER IN SUPPORT OF ISRAEL AND PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU THAT CORRELATES WITH ROSH HASHANAH AND THE SABBATH OF YOM KIPPUR

Councilmember Soto gave a brief presentation and said that he would like to show that the City is in one partnership and has unwavering support for the state of Israel.

Discussion ensued amongst Councilmembers and staff.

Motion by Vice Mayor Lopez that staff work with Councilmember Soto on drafting a letter to be circulated to Councilmembers and each may sign if they choose.

Mayor Ballin seconded the motion with the recommendation that Councilmember Soto draft the letter to be circulated. Vice Mayor Lopez accepted the amendment and the motion carried with the following vote:

AYES: Gonzales, Soto, Lopez, Ballin – 4 NOES: None ABSENT: Fajardo – 1

13) DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ROLE OF CHIEFS OF POLICE WITH RESPECT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS

Councilmember Soto inquired whether Chief Vairo brought the penal code with him (he did not) and suggested tabling the item for the next time. Mayor Ballin asked if Councilmember Soto would include additional information and either submit it to the City Clerk or attach to the report.

14) DISCUSSION REGARDING THE GREATER LOS ANGELES COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT PROGRAM AND SAFETY PROTOCOLS

Councilmember Soto talked about his concerns regarding mosquitos, vector control protocols and regulations, asked about the chemicals being sprayed and whether they’re potentially harmful to wildlife, domestic animals, and children. Staff will contact the County for more information and Mayor Ballin announced that a new representative would be appointed at the upcoming meeting.

STAFF COMMUNICATION INCLUDING COMMISSION UPDATES

Director of Recreation and Community Services Julian Venegas reported that the Recreation and Community Service Commission would be meeting on September 11.

Director of Community Development Hou reported that the Planning and Preservation Commission will be back here tomorrow to discuss a conditional use permit for a restaurant expanding their outdoor dining.

Director of Public Works/City Engineer Emrani reported that the FEMA grant application was

Page 98 SAN FERNANDO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – September 4, 2018 Page 8 submitted for the water tank reservoir and he said there will be a Transportation & Safety Commission meeting next Wednesday.

City Manager Meyerhoff asked that Councilmembers respond to Executive Assistant Julie Fernandez as she was reaching out to them to schedule various Ad Hoc Committee meetings.

GENERAL COUNCIL COMMENTS

Councilmember Soto said that the Mariachi Tesoro band sounded great and wished everyone in the Jewish community a happy Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah.

Mayor Ballin wished everyone a good evening.

ADJOURNMENT (9:25 P.M.)

Motion by Councilmember Gonzales, seconded by Vice Mayor Lopez, to adjourn both special and regular meetings. By consensus the motion carried.

I do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of September 4, 2018, meeting as approved by the San Fernando City Council.

______Elena G. Chávez, CMC City Clerk

Page 99 SAN FERNANDO VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

A Joint Powers Authority

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA

Thursday, September 20, 2018 — 1:30 p.m. Valley Municipal Building, Council Chambers 14410 Sylvan Street, 2nd Floor Van Nuys, California 91401

COMMITTEE MEMBERS Chair : Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, 3rd District, City of Los Angeles Supervisor Kathryn Barger, 5th Supervisorial District, County of Los Angeles Councilmember Jess Talamantes, City of Burbank Councilmember Paul Krekorian, 2nd District, City of Los Angeles Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean, City of Santa Clarita

STAFF SFVCOG Fiscal Agent: Rachelle Anema, County of Los Angeles SFVCOG Secretary: Los Angeles County Commission's Office John Bwarie, Executive Director, San Fernando Valley COG Norayr (Noro) Zurabyan , Deputy County Counsel, County of Los Angeles

OPEN SESSION 1. CALL TO ORDER — Bob Blumenfield, Chair

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

REGULAR CALENDAR At the discretion of the SFVCOG Committee Chair, all items appearing on this Agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be deliberated and may be subject to action by the SFVCOG Transportation Committee.

San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Transportation CommitteePage 100 Agenda ­ Thursday, September 20, 2018 4. CONSIDERATION OF JUNE 21, 2018 TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MINUTES (Page 4) Recommended Action: Approve Transportation Committee minutes

5. METRO MEASURE M UPDATE a. LA Riverway Bike Path through SFV region Recommended Action: Discussion and possible recommendation to the Board on the LA River Bikeway Completion Project

b. Measure M Bus Rapid Transit Projects Update Recommended Action: Discussion and possible recommendation to the Board on Measure M Bus Rapid Transit projects in the SFVCOG Region

6. CONSIDERATION OF THE SFVCOG 2019 MOBILITY PRIORITY LIST (Page 9) Recommended Action: Recommend that the SFVCOG Board approve the Mobility Priority list for 2019

7. CONSIDERATION OF A POSITION ON PROPOSITION 6 Recommended Action: Discuss and recommend potential actions to the full Board.

8. FUTURE MEETINGS: AGENDA ITEMS Recommended Action : Discuss potential agenda items.

9. ANNOUNCEMENTS

10. PUBLIC COMMENTS

11. ADJOURNMENT

Public Comments: At this time, members of the public can address the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Committee Members regarding any items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the committee that are not separately listed on this agenda, subject to time restrictions, by filling out a Public Comment Card and submitting that card to staff. Members of the public will have an opportunity to speak on agendized items at the time the item is called for discussion. No action may be taken on items not listed on the agenda unless authorized by law. Whenever possible, lengthy testimony should be presented to the Board in writing and only pertinent points presented orally.

San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Transportation CommitteePage 101 Agenda ­ Thursday, September 20, 2018 SAN FERNANDO VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

A Joint Powers Authority

AD HOC TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Thursday, June 21, 2018 — 1:30 p.m. Valley Municipal Building, Council Chambers 14410 Sylvan Street, 2nd Floor Van Nuys, California 91401

MEMBERS Chair: Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, 3rd District, City of Los Angeles Supervisor Kathryn Barger, 5th Supervisorial District, County of Los Angeles Councilmember Paul Krekorian, 2nd District, City of Los Angeles Councilmember Marsha McLean, City of Santa Clarita Councilmember Jess Talamantes, City of Burbank

OPEN SESSION

1. CALL TO ORDER — Bob Blumenfield, Chair

The meeting was called to order by Chair Councilmember Bob Blumenfield at 1:38 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL

Quorum established (3 Members):

Chair Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, Councilmember Jess Talamantes, and Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean

Absent: Supervisor Kathryn Barger Councilmember Paul Krekorian

San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Ad hoc Transportation Committee Meeting – Thursday, June 21, 2018 Page 102 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The Pledge was led by Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean.

REGULAR CALENDAR At the direction of the SFVCOG Committee Chair, all items appearing on this Agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be deliberated and may be subject to action by the SFVCOG Transportation Committee.

4. CONSIDERATION OF APRIL 19, 2018 TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MINUTES Requested Action: Approve Transportation Committee minutes

On motion of Councilmember Jess Talamantes, and by Common Consent, the SFVCOG Transportation Committee approved the meeting minutes of April 19, 2018:

Ayes: Chair Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, Councilmember Jess Talamantes, and Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Supervisor Kathryn Barger and Councilmember Paul Krekorian

5. TRANSPORTATION APPOINTEES Recommended Action: Review and Advance 2018-2019 transportation appointees

John Bwarie, Executive Director, provided an overview of the current appointees who serve on committees representing the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) and the vacancies on these committees.

By Common Consent, there being no objection, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) tabled the item to a future meeting.

6. METRO MEASURE M UPDATE a. Update Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project Recommended Action: Discussion and possible recommendation to the Board on the Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project

Corey Zelmer, Metro-Project Manager, discussed Metro’s Measure M update and the Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project. Mr. Zelmer elaborated on the project’s current progress, community outreach, transit concepts, and future

San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Ad hoc Transportation Committee Meeting – Thursday, June 21, 2018 Page 103 project expectations. Metro is exploring four rail transit concepts as well as connectivity for each transit concept. Mr. Zelmer also indicated that Metro has begun exploring maintenance facility requirements, but has yet to identify maintenance locations. The purpose of the project is to provide a high-quality transit service that serves today’s demand between the San Fernando Valley region and the Westside.

Mr. Zelmer further discussed the seven steps utilized throughout the feasibility study for the Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project; and Metro continues to study the transit modes under consideration for the Transit Corridor Project. Currently, Metro is considering Heavy Rail Transit, Light Rail Transit, Monorail, and Rubber Tire Transit as transit modes for the Sepulveda Corridor Project. Mr. Zelmer also presented six transit concepts under consideration for the Sepulveda Corridor Project ranging from aerial, underground, and at-grade. Metro is also studying the station opportunities for the Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project, which includes underground alignment, aerial alignment, as well as park and ride opportunities.

Karen Swift, Metro-Community Relations Manager, stated that Metro conducted three community meetings for the study on June 7, 9, and 12. The June 12, 2018 was a live webcast streamed from the Proud Bird Restaurant. Ms. Swift further announced that a project survey has received over 5,000 responses from members of the public. Chair Councilmember Bob Blumenfield inquired on whether Metro has interest in utilizing similar technology and approaches to tunneling as the Boring Company. Mr. Zelmer stated that Metro is mindful of the newer tunneling technology and is always open to exploring other options from traditional practices; nevertheless, the current methods are the best available.

Members of the public; Don Larsen and David Gonzalez addressed the Transportation Committee.

By Common Consent, there being no objection, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) Transportation Committee directed the Executive Director to collaborate with Metro to schedule a future presentation for discussion and possible recommendation to the SFVCOG on the Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project:

Ayes: Chair Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, Councilmember Jess Talamantes, and Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean Noes: None Abstain: None

San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Ad hoc Transportation Committee Meeting – Thursday, June 21, 2018 Page 104 Absent: Supervisor Kathryn Barger and Councilmember Paul Krekorian

b. Other Measure M Project Updates Recommended Action: Discussion and possible recommendation to the Board on Measure M projects in the SFVCOG Region

John Bwarie, Executive Director, provided a brief overview of future Metro projects in the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor. The Program Committee of the Metro Board selected the locally preferred alternative for the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor which is high-capacity light rail transit with fourteen stops. The recommendation will appear before the entire Metro Board for further consideration and possible approval. If approved, the project will transition into the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) phase.

By Common Consent, there being no objection, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) received and filed the report.

7. NEXTGEN BUS STUDY UPDATE Recommended Action: Receive and file oral report

Scott Page, Metro-Service Planning and Operations, discussed the NextGen bus study for Metropolitan Los Angeles. Mr. Page stated it has been 25 years since the last bus route redesign in Metropolitan Los Angeles. Metro has received approximately 4,500 questionnaire response distributed to the general public addressing the needs and routing transit gaps in Los Angeles. Mr. Page noted the surveys identified four types of Metro transit riders; frequent, occasional, infrequent, and the non-rider. Mr. Page noted that only 7% of Los Angeles County residents are frequent riders. In order to recoup the loss in transit ridership; 1 in 4 non-riders must use transit at least two times per month.

Mr. Page further stated that research shows that 31% of transit riders indicated that public transportation is convenient. Current riders have expressed their desire for more frequent service, more reliable services, lower fares, more security, and cleaner buses and stops. According to Mr. Page, transit in Downtown Los Angeles is two times slower than auto and transit competitiveness is low. The NextGen study will continue to work on identifying travel patterns in the East San Fernando Valley, service concepts, capital infrastructure needs, and a service restructuring plan in the fall of 2018.

San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Ad hoc Transportation Committee Meeting – Thursday, June 21, 2018 Page 105 Due to lack of a quorum, no action was taken on this item by the Transportation Committee.

8. REVIEW OF 2018 MOBILITY WORKSHOP (June 14, 2018) Recommended Action: Receive and file oral report

John Bwarie, Executive Director, announced that the 2018 Mobility Workshop took place on June 14, 2018 in the City of Santa Clarita. The event was free of charge and approximately 85 individuals were in attendance. The event was productive and surveys from the event indicated that many of the participants would very likely/mostly likely refer similar events to other colleagues.

By Common Consent, there being no objection, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments received and filed the report.

9. FUTURE MEETINGS: AGENDA ITEMS & DATES Recommended Action: Set next meetings and potential agenda items.

John Bwarie, Executive Director, discussed the frequency of meetings for the Transportation Committee. Mr. Bwarie stated that the Transportation Committee has the option to meet either six or four times per fiscal year. Chair Councilmember Bob Blumenfield suggested convening four regular meetings per fiscal year with the possibility of scheduling two special meetings on an as-needed basis. Mr. Bwarie recommended that the Transportation Committee meet every third Thursday of the month at 1:30 p.m. on the months before each regular meeting of the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG). The meeting dates are scheduled as follows: September 20, 2018; December 20, 2018; March 21, 2019; and June 20, 2019.

On motion of Chair Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, and by Common Consent, the Transportation Committee adopted the meeting schedule for Fiscal Year 2018-2019, and will convene every third Thursday of the month at 1:30 p.m. on the months before each regular meeting of the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG):

Ayes: Chair Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, Councilmember Jess Talamantes, and Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Supervisor Kathryn Barger and Councilmember Paul Krekorian

San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Ad hoc Transportation Committee Meeting – Thursday, June 21, 2018 Page 106 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS

Chair Bob Blumenfield announced the upcoming July 4th Extravaganza event at Warner Center Park in Woodland Hills from 6:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.

John Bwarie noted that the next San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFVCOG) meeting is scheduled for July 19, 2018 and the next Transportation Committee meeting is scheduled for September 20, 2018.

Councilmember Jess Talamantes announced that the City of Burbank is hosting a July 4th Firework Show at Starlight Bowl and invited everyone in attendance at the meeting to attend.

11. PUBLIC COMMENTS

Member of the public; Gregory Wright addressed the Transportation Committee.

12. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 3:14 p.m.

San Fernando Valley Council of Governments Ad hoc Transportation Committee Meeting – Thursday, June 21, 2018 Page 107 DATE: September 12, 2018

TO: SFVCOG Transportation Committee

FROM: John Bwarie, Executive Director

RE: 2019 Transportation Priorities

RECOMMENDATION a. Review and recommend that the Board adopt its 2019 Transportation Priorities

BACKGROUND In 2013, the SFVCOG adopted its first transportation Priority list when all votes had to be unanimous. In July 2016, the SFVCOG Board adopted a strategic plan that called for the creation and annual review of a SFVCOG Transportation Priority list. This was first done in 2017 to prepare at 2018 Priority list with the formation of a Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of member jurisdiction’s staff.

This year, we engaged stakeholders at our annual Mobility WOrkshop to help shape the future transportation priorities for the SFVCOG. The feedback elicited from the June workshop was presented to the TAC to inform its work in updating the 2019 SFVCOG Transportation priority list for Board consideration.

This year’s list refines what was done last year with a continued focus on projects and positions that are regionally significant and, when possible, cross-jurisdictional. The TAC spent time discussing specific projects, as listed, but also overarching transportation policy issues like high-frequency bus service and support for Tier-2 Transit Operators. The attached Transportation Priorities are the result of the TAC work, with input from the June SFVCOG Mobility Workshop.

CURRENT POSITIONS The SFVCOG’s current transportation priorities have been the guiding document for 2018. This document would be a replacement of the current “transportation priority” list. The priority list does not replace policies the SFVCOG Board has established related to transportation.

Attachment: 2019 Transportation Priorities ​

Page 108 San Fernando Valley COuncil of Governments 2019 Transportation Priorities *Final Draft for Transportation Committee Review* September 10, 2018

1. Increased Metrolink Service on the Antelope Valley and Ventura Lines: 25% of 2018 Mobility Workshop attendees indicated improved Metrolink service is a regional priority. A common theme was increased service. The SFVCOG recognizes that frequency and reliability are critical to ensuring Metrolink’s success in providing reliable rail transit in the region. The Ventura and Antelope Valley Lines currently provide the broadest coverage of rail transportation serving the entire SFVCOG region.

In order for this system to provide frequent, reliable transportation, the SFVCOG supports capital and operational improvements to Metrolink to provide train service in both directions on weekdays every 15 minutes between SFVCOG stations and LA Union Station during peak periods and throughout the day, and trains every 30 minutes in both directions during the evening (7pm - Midnight) and on weekends from 6am to 12midnight (which aligns with the Metrolink SCORE plan).

This service frequency would result in a combined headway of about 7 minutes during peak periods and 15 minutes during evening periods on the trunk line where both the Ventura and Antelope Valley lines run between LA Union Station and Downtown Burbank. With Hollywood Burbank Airport stations now located on both lines, the same combined headway would apply to connections between LA Union Station and Hollywood Burbank Airport. This headway goal is a starting point; reducing headways beyond these benchmarks could result in service more similar to local bus and rail, which has been shown to dramatically increase utility and resultant ridership of commuter rail lines in other cities around the world. Additionally, providing some owl service (late night and early morning, resulting in 24 hour operation), could be of value.

2. Enhanced Bicycle Connectivity Providing a network of separated bicycle lanes and paths to facilitate bicycling, especially as a first mile/last mile solution, can improve access to transit, improve health, and reduce vehicle miles traveled. The SFVCOG supports efforts to close gaps between existing separated bicycle lanes/paths and those facilities and key destinations such as transit hubs, retail, commercial, and residential activity centers that are a short distance away. Furthermore, the SFVCOG supports the completion of the Measure M- funded LA River Bike Path Gap ($60M) and San Fernando Bike Master Plan ($5M), which support this goal. In addition to these projects, the SFVCOG prioritizes projects that

1 Page 109 close gaps called out by Metro in their Bicylce Strategic Plan: http://media.metro.net/board/Items/2006/02_february/20060215P&PItem6%20Atta.p df.

3. Focused First-Mile / Last-Mile Connectivity The need for enhancing connections between fixed-route transit stations and their surrounding and nearby activity centers was called out during our 2018 Mobility Workshop by almost a third of respondents. From connecting bus and train schedules to enhanced active transportation options to connect to fixed-route systems, this first- mile/last-mile connection is needed. The SFVCOG supports projects and programs that support the closing of this first-mile/last-mile gap, particularly around the existing Red Line, Orange Line, and Metrolink Lines, and proposed transit routes funded by Measure M.

4. Increased Transit Options and Operations Since 2010, the SFVCOG has taken a number of positions and created transportation priority lists. In this 2018 Priority List update, previously taken positions remain in place. It is important to reaffirm the Board’s support for these priorities in this updated list, while extending support for important improvements to the region’s transit operations. Previous priorities include the following: a. Measure M-Funded Transit Projects i. Sepulveda Pass Corridor ii. East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor as at grade LRT with 14 stops iii. NoHo to Pasadena BRT iv. Orange Line Upgrades (speed and crossings) v. Orange Line Conversion from BRT to LRT b. Additional Support for Tier 2 Transit operators Taken together, BurbankBus, Glendale Beeline, LADOT Dash, and Pasadena Transit carry nearly 5 million rides per year, yet these agencies receive no state or federal transit operations funding through Metro, and instead rely solely on local funding to operate. Recognizing the importance these Tier 2 operators play in the SFVCOG region’s mobility, the SFVCOG will advocate for increased funding from Metro to support these “Tier 2 Eligible Operators” including support for transit operations as well as transit vehicle capital funds. c. 15-Minute Bus Network The SFVCOG region relies on bus transit to service most corridors with the region, but many corridors lack frequent service. High frequency is critical to ensuring bus transit meets the mobility needs of SFVCOG region residents and employees. The SFVCOG will advocate for bus headways no greater than 15 minutes on its major arterial corridors from 6am until 11pm. The SFVCOG will engage with Metro as part of its NextGen Bus Study to ensure that the SFVCOG

2 Page 110 region receives necessary transit operations resources to support this service standard. d. Support permanent, high-capacity transit connections to Hollywood Burbank Airport from the NoHo Transit Center As part of the Interstate 5 HOV North / Empire Interchange Project, Metro provided four years of funding for a pilot project to provide all-day BurbankBus service between the North Hollywood Red Line Station and the Hollywood Burbank Airport. This funding expires when the I-5 Project is complete in 2019. Given the importance of this connection, the SFVCOG will advocate for funding to continue this important connection after 2019 and to ensure that the line is integrated into Metro’s maps, planning, outreach, and communications to advertise this connection to the public. Further, service should be extended to include weekend service, as well.

3 Page 111 Page 112 Subscribe Past Issues Translate

View this email in your browser

Dear East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor Project Stakeholders: The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Authority (Metro) appreciates that you requested updates on the East San Fernando Valley Light Rail Transit (ESFV LRT) Project. Metro is now studying implementing high-quality Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service in the North San Fernando Valley. The study area extends from North Hollywood to the City of San Fernando and west to Chatsworth, largely overlapping the study area for the ESFV LRT Project. The potential alternatives would interface with the East San Fernando Valley LRT Project on Van Nuys Boulevard. Since you were interested in that project, Metro thinks you may also be interested in this complementary study. If not, you can unsubscribe below.

Join us for Community Meetings Metro invites you to attend one of five community information meetings about the North San Fernando BRT Project to learn more and share your feedback.

Thursday, September 20, 2018 6:00 – 8:00PM Congregational Church 9659 Balboa Blvd Northridge, CA

Saturday, September 22, 2018 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM Sepulveda Recreation Center 8825 Kester Ave Panorama City, CA

Wednesday, September 26, 2018 6:00 – 8:00 PM Our Community Charter School 10045 Jumilla Ave. Page 113 Chatsworth, CA Subscribe Past Issues Translate

Thursday, September 27, 2018 6:00 – 8:00 PM Aquatic Center 300 Park Avenue San Fernando, CA

The fifth community meeting will be a joint meeting in North Hollywood with the staff working on the North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT Project. That project will consider options for BRT service from the North Hollywood Red/Orange Line station, potentially interfacing with the North San Fernando Valley BRT, to the Pasadena Gold Line. The meeting specifics are below:

Saturday, September 29, 2018 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM East Valley High School Auditorium 5525 Vineland Ave North Hollywood, CA

If you are not interested in remaining on the stakeholder database for this project, click on the link at the bottom of the email and ask to be removed from the database.

To Learn More

Phone: 213.418.3082 Email: [email protected] Web: www.metro.net\NSFVBRT

All Metro meetings are held in ADA accessible facilities and are accessible by transit. Spanish translation will be provided. ADA accommodations and other translations are available by calling 323.466.3876 or California Relay Service at 711 at least 72 hours in advance.

Estimado interesado en el Proyecto del corredor de transporte público del este del Valle de San Fernando:

Page 114 La autoridad de Transporte Metropolitano del Condado de los Ángeles (Metro) Subscribe Past Issues Translate agradece que haya solicitado información sobre las novedades del proyecto de transporte público para el tren ligero al este del Valle de San Fernando. Metro está estudiando la implementación de un servicio de autobús de tránsito rápido de primera calidad al norte del Valle de San Fernando. El área de estudio se extiende desde North Hollywood hasta la ciudad de San Fernando y al oeste hacia Chatsworth superponiéndose, en gran medida, al área de estudio para el proyecto de transporte público para el tren ligero al este del Valle de San Fernando. Las alternativas posibles se interconectarían con el proyecto de transporte público para el tren ligero del este del Valle de San Fernando sobre Van Nuys Boulevard. Ya que usted mostraba interés en dicho proyecto, Metro considera que también le puede interesar este estudio complementario. En caso de no ser así, puede cancelar su suscripción debajo.

Acompáñenos a las reuniones comunitarias Metro lo invita a asistir a una de las cinco reuniones informativas comunitarias sobre el proyecto de autobús de tránsito rápido del norte del Valle de San Fernando para que conozca más y comparta sus opiniones.

Jueves, 20 de septiembre de 2018 De 6:00 a 8:00 p. m. Iglesia de congregación [Congregational Church] 9659 Balboa Blvd Northridge, CA

Sábado, 22 de septiembre de 2018 De 10:00 a. m. a 12:00 p. m. Centro Recreativo Sepúlveda [Sepulveda Recreation Center] 8825 Kester Ave Panorama City, CA

Miércoles, 26 de septiembre de 2018 De 6:00 a. m. a 20:00 p. m. Escuela Autónoma de Nuestra Comunidad [Our Community Charter School] 10045 Jumilla Ave. Chatsworth, CA

Thursday, September 27, 2018 De 6:00 a. m. a 20:00 p. m. Centro acuático [Aquatic Center]

Page 115 300 Park Avenue Subscribe Past Issues Translate San Fernando, CA

La quinta reunión comunitaria será una reunión conjunta en North Hollywood con el personal que trabaja en el proyecto de autobús de tránsito rápido de North Hollywood a Pasadena. En el proyecto se considerarán opciones para el servicio de autobús de tránsito rápido desde las líneas Roja y Naranja de la estación North Hollywood, posiblemente interconectándose con el autobús de tránsito rápido del norte del Valle de San Fernando, hasta la línea Dorada [Gold] de Pasadena. Los detalles de la reunión son los siguientes:

Sábado, 29 de septiembre de 2018 De 10:00 a. m. a 12:00 p. m. Auditorio de East Valley High School 5525 Vineland Ave North Hollywood, CA

Si no desea permanecer en la base de datos de interesados de este proyecto, haga clic en el siguiente enlace para solicitar que lo excluyan de ella.

Para obtener más información:

Teléfono: 213 418 3082 Correo electrónico: [email protected] Página web: www.metro.net\NSFVBRT

Todas las reuniones de Metro se llevan a cabo en instalaciones accesibles según la ADA y son accesibles mediante transporte público. Se brindará traducción al español. Se encuentran disponibles traducciones y adaptaciones según la ADA llamando al 323 466 3876 o al servicio de retransmisión de California al 711, al menos, con 72 horas de anticipación.

Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.

Page 116 Tra

View this email in your browser

A key Measure M project in the San Fernando Valley is a new bus rapid transit line that would run across the northern part of the Valley. Public meetings for the project are scheduled later this month — dates and times are below. The North San Fernando Valley Bus Rapid Transit project’s home page is here.

Some main points:

•The project seeks to create an 18- to 20-mile long route that would serve key destinations such as CSUN and Kaiser Permanente, enable people to spend less time traveling and connect with other transit lines, including the Chatsworth Metrolink/Amtrak station and Metro’s future light rail line between the Van Nuys Orange Line Station and the Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink station.

•Potential routes could connect Chatsworth to North Hollywood or Chatsworth to Sylmar/San Fernando. Nordhoff Street and Roscoe Boulevard are busy streets that could be used for parts of the route. See the above map.

•What is bus rapid transit, also known as BRT? BRT is a high-quality bus service that provides faster and more reliable, equitable and convenient service. Features might include fewer stops, frequent service, bus lanes, high

Page 117 quality stations, transit signal priority, all-door boarding, off-bus fare payment, Tra zero-emission vehicles and more prominent branding.

•The project is scheduled to begin service by 2025 with $180 million in funding from the Measure M sales tax approved by L.A. County voters in 2016.

•Metro is in the midst of an Alternatives Analysis (AA) for the project. The AA will narrow the list of potential projects to be further studied in a more detailed Draft Environmental Impact Report.

The meetings will provide an update on the project and allow you to ask questions and provide input. Content will be the same at all meetings:

Thursday, September 20, 6 – 8 p.m. Congregational Church of Northridge, 9659 Balboa Boulevard Northridge, CA 91325

Saturday, September 22, 10 a.m. – noon Sepulveda Recreation Center, 8825 Kester Avenue Panorama City, CA 91402

Wednesday, September 26, 6 – 8 p.m. Our Community Charter School, 10045 Jumilla Avenue Chatsworth, CA 91311

Thursday, September 27, 6 – 8 p.m. San Fernando Aquatic Center – Banquet Hall 300 Park Avenue, San Fernando, CA 91340

Saturday, September 29, 10 a.m. – noon* East Valley High School Auditorium, 5525 Vineland Avenue North Hollywood, CA 91601

All Metro meetings are held in ADA accessible facilities and are accessible by transit. Spanih translation provided. ADA accommodations and other translations are available by calling 323.466.3876 or California Relay Service at 711 at least 72 hours in advance. For questions or to share your feedback, call us at 213.418.3082 or via email at [email protected].

*This meeting will include an overview of the North San Fernando Valley and NoHo to Pasadena BRT projects that may interface at the North Hollywood Page 118 Station. For more information about the NoHo to Pasadena BRT project, please Tra visit metro.net/brt.

Uno de los proyectos clave de la Medida M en San Fernando Valley es un nuevo autobús rápido que correrá en la parte norte de esa zona. Para actualizar al público sobre el proyecto se han programado para fines de este mes varias reuniones comunitarias, cuyas fechas y horarios están abajo. La página del proyecto en internet se encuentra aquí.

Algunos puntos destacados:

• El proyecto busca crear una ruta de 18 a 20 millas que sirva a destinos clave como CSUN y Kaiser Permanente, permita a las personas gastar menos tiempo viajando y conectarse con otras líneas de transporte, incluida la estación Chatsworth de Metrolink / Amtrak, así como la futura línea de tren ligero de Metro entre la estación Van Nuys de la Orange Line y la estación Sylmar / San Fernando de Metrolink.

• Las rutas potenciales podrían conectar Chatsworth con North Hollywood o Chatsworth con Sylmar / San Fernando. Nordhoff Street y Roscoe Boulevard son calles congestionadas que podrían usarse para partes de la ruta. Vea el mapa de arriba.

• ¿Qué es el autobús de transporte rápido, también conocido como BRT? Se trata de un servicio de autobús de alta calidad que brinda un servicio más

Page 119 rápido, confiable, equitativo y conveniente. Las características pueden incluir Tra menos paradas, servicio frecuente, líneas de autobús, estaciones de alta calidad, prioridad de la señal de transporte, abordaje en todas las puertas, pago de tarifas fuera del autobús y vehículos con cero emisiones.

• El proyecto está programado para comenzar a funcionar en el año 2025 con $180 millones en fondos del impuesto a las ventas de la Medida M aprobado por los votantes del Condado de L.A. en 2016.

• Metro está en medio de un Análisis de Alternativas (AA) para el proyecto. El AA reducirá la lista de posibles proyectos que se estudiarán más a fondo en un Borrador de Informe de Impacto Ambiental más detallado.

Las reuniones proporcionarán una actualización del proyecto y le permitirán hacer preguntas y proporcionar comentarios. El contenido será el mismo en todas las reuniones:

Jueves 20 de septiembre de 6 a 8 p.m. Congregational Church of Northridge, 9659 Balboa Boulevard Northridge, CA 91325

Sábado 22 de septiembre de 10 a.m. –12 p.m. Sepulveda Recreation Center, 8825 Kester Avenue Panorama City, CA 91402

Miércoles 26 de septiembre de 6 – 8 p.m. Our Community Charter School, 10045 Jumilla Avenue Chatsworth, CA 91311

Jueves 27 de septiembre de 6 – 8 p.m. San Fernando Aquatic Center – Banquet Hall 300 Park Avenue, San Fernando, CA 91340

Sábado 29 de septiembre de 10 a.m. –12 p.m.* East Valley High School Auditorium, 5525 Vineland Avenue North Hollywood, CA 91601

Todas las reuniones de Metro cuentan con servicios especiales para las personas discapacitadas. Cualquier ayuda especial se puede pedir al 323.466.3876 o al California Relay Service en el 711, por lo menos 72 horas antes de la reunión. Page 120 Para más información se puede llamar al 213.418.3082 o escribir Tra a [email protected].

*Esta reunión incluirá una presentación de los proyectos BRT en North San Fernando Valley y en NoHo a Pasadena que se pueden enlazar con la estación North Hollywood. Para más información por favor consulten metro.net/brt.

Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.

Page 121 Tra

View this email in your browser

Dear CSUN student:

Thanks for taking the time to stop by Metro’s booth this past Saturday at CSUN’s 60th Anniversary celebration to learn more about the proposed North San Fernando Valley Bus Rapid Transit (NSFV BRT) study. Your input is invaluable to us as we work together to design this project to improve transit in the North Valley.

You might also be interested in attending a meeting CSUN is hosting tomorrow for students to hear more about this project. The meeting will be held from 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM this Friday, October 19 at the University Student Union – Thousand Oaks Room, where CSUN students will be invited to participate in an interactive exercise with Metro’s NSFV BRT team. Refreshments will be provided and Metro will be providing some giveaways!

Attached is a flyer with more information about the meeting. We hope to see you there!

We appreciate your interest in the NSFV BRT.

Page 122 Tra

Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.

Page 123 3%h1B'(h0 @1)ÿv11%01 ' 17)0

ÿÿ ÿÿÿ

 !ÿ#$%ÿ&$'ÿ#$%'ÿ( )0'01)ÿ( ÿ)0ÿ2$')ÿ3 ÿ40'  5$ÿ6770#ÿ89 @'$A0B)Cÿÿ ÿ DEFGÿ ÿ ÿHIPÿ ÿÿQIÿÿRSIÿÿÿI TÿU SQÿ Pÿ ÿVÿÿÿV ÿ ÿÿI ÿ Pÿ Qÿ I Wÿ Qÿ PÿÿVQ IXÿ QÿQ ÿÿÿÿÿY`aÿRSIÿI   bWÿ ÿÿÿcÿ Tÿÿ ÿ dÿÿ ÿQeÿÿ ÿÿÿWPÿÿI ÿ QÿVQ IXÿ Q ÿIÿÿII ÿ  ÿÿVÿÿbSIÿVÿÿHÿb ÿV W  ÿWTÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ

f70B)05ÿ$&&(B(71gÿ1)&&ÿh'(0&( iÿ)ÿ)0ÿÿ r$ss% ()#ÿs0sh0'1ÿt'$u(5( iÿ( t%)ÿ$ ÿ)0 3 ÿ40'  5$ÿ6770#ÿ901B%0ÿp(11($ ÿ( '0ÿstÿ)ÿ)0ÿ30t%7u05ÿ90B'0)($ ÿB0 )0' 2$')'(5i0q ( ÿ@ $'sÿr()#

v &$'s)($ ÿh$$)ÿ)ÿ)0ÿw)( $ÿfxt$ÿyÿ€(ÿ50 r32ÿ3)%50 )1‚ÿ1)&&ÿ 5ÿB$ss% ()# w$1ÿp%0')$1ÿ401)(u7ÿ)ÿ)0ÿ@ $'sÿr()# s0sh0'1ÿt'$u(5( iÿ( t%)ÿ 5ÿ1'( iÿ(501 s77q $ ÿ)0ÿ'0ÿstÿ)ÿ)0ÿ (u0'1()#ÿ3)%50 )  ($ ÿ$ ÿ)0ÿ2$')'(5i0ÿBst%1q

ÿ ÿ

Page 124 ÿ ÿ ÿÿ ÿÿÿÿÿ ÿ!"ÿ#$%ÿ bFYB@8AYI R9BHÿ—BBFIB U89GBQ9HI &ÿ'(ÿ ÿÿÿ)0ÿ((ÿ0ÿ'ÿ)ÿ'0ÿÿ( ÿ ÿ ÿÿ12345 ÿ ÿ

6789@A9BÿDE8ÿBFÿAGHI8PBÿIGÿIQÿR8ESI@HEÿTIÿU8VGBAHEÿWVDATEÿTIÿXFHEYFBIB TIQÿ`E8HIÿTIQÿa9QQIÿTIÿb9GÿcI8G9GTEÿdeWUfgÿ ÿ 123hÿ ÿ ÿiÿpÿÿ(ÿ)ÿÿÿ)ÿp 00% q( p(ÿ0ÿ (ÿÿp (ÿ0ÿ (0(ÿ(ÿiÿÿ ((  (ÿp (ÿÿr(ÿÿ( ÿ( (ÿp(ÿÿ0( (sÿtpÿ(ÿ rÿÿ0ÿ(ÿ 0ÿp$ÿ)ÿpr)00ÿÿ) ÿ0)ÿr))ÿ0ÿÿ0%ÿ ÿ u)ÿpÿ)ÿivÿ (ÿw ÿ(xÿr(0ÿ( (ÿp(ÿÿ( ÿ p(ÿ (ÿx)((ÿyÿÿÿ)ÿÿÿ0ÿ( ÿ)ÿt€pÿ(ÿ0ÿr(tÿp0ps)%

bIBAGÿAG‚E8ƒ9HAa9ÿ@EGÿQEBÿIQI@HEBÿS AIƒY8EBÿTIÿQ9ÿ@EƒFGAT9TÿD98HA@AD9GTE ‚FG@AEG98AEBÿTIÿQ9ÿ@AFT9TÿIGÿIQÿb9GÿcI8G9GTE IGÿ9‰9TA8ÿBFBÿBF‡I8IG@A9BÿBEY8IÿIQÿƒ9D9ÿTI „9QQISÿWIB@FIÿ ABBAEGÿIGÿ`E8H†8AT‡Iˆ V8I9ÿIGÿIQÿbIDFQaIT9ÿWI@8I9HAEGÿIGHI8 IGÿR9GE89ƒ9ÿAHS

ÿRFIBHEÿTIÿAG‚E8ƒ9@AGÿIGÿIQÿ‘9HAGEÿ’“DE ’BHFTA9GHIBÿTIÿb•`–ÿDI8BEG9QÿSÿƒAIƒY8EB Sÿ”A9ÿTIÿ‘EBÿ FI8HEBÿ‚IBHAa9QÿIGÿIQÿR9GE89ƒ9 TIÿQ9ÿ@EƒFGAT9TÿD8EDE8@AEG9GTEÿS AHSÿƒ9QQˆ @EƒD98HAIGTEÿATI9BÿIGÿIQÿƒ9D9ÿTIÿV8I9ÿIG IQÿ•GAaI8BAHSÿbHFTIGHÿ•GAEGÿIGÿQ9ÿ•GAaI8BAT9T TIÿ`E8H†8AT‡Iˆ

Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Page 128 Page 129 Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 Page 147 Page 148 Page 149 Page 150 Page 151 Page 152 Page 153 Page 154 Page 155 Page 156 Page 157 Page 158 North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor

Namc/Nombre Atliliation/Afiliaci6n Addrcss/Dircccion

',: •\c '(__ GCS'Y\t.A re 2-..

,\,'--\\\_ t\h\r1 (\ 7rA- ftl(re �{:rrloza l-O�s0ha �i,chcn 1

\()\(1 JI C, 1' \, v I .;Lil ,, ,,, • � . tf1' ;;;, '-5 ,]--: I f: I ( ' '.\ �: ., ., /,.1/ Ii (/

,-,,.,J.- /"-1 -· r :> �� v' N,_) "') I l ----

Y \'-\-"i�l L ( v'1 €t.I}:l:_

©MetroPage 159 me...

AvtD Cw-otJ

LA-POl

Page 160 ---1-s�=...;;.O "'-�'.____--=ea.�-r.-=-=a. "'-"--- J ��O\ G, �u,tr lat VI ell¥ LA j)c,p � tc-N[k:l.A. �

----H-�____,;;,,.,;_�6...,_\�....._- __._...,,�!,___------11-1-'-'-"()'-=b...;;;_e >'-'-. f'--'-h-=a--'v t:.-:::..e1__ ___.____ _ VtcTD" TV crns L-A&SL

ct\-a L� foint l'B\

Page 161 SIGNATURE December 6, 2018 2:00 - 4:00 PM Amissah,· Kate Andrews, Rachelle l "-----Ti Born, Monica fiY"' 'I r V"\ Chen, Steven u Chow, David �� - Corona, Stephen en Cristales-Cevallos, Jenny V. Daniels, Clint � Davis, Walter V Diaz, R Edmonson, Miya Edmonson, Miya - Emrani, Yazdan ,rt/3'7f::::. - Faaola, Tuere � " - I r<,,� V I T (}. J -, Fabiyi, Emmanuel \ � p Farley, Robert ✓ � ,r:::- Hartwell, Scott /�- Hou, Timothy Jefferson,Zeron Joshi, Milind Lee, Derrick �,t'#'�- Leung, Chun '/' Liang, Gina Liban, Emmanuel

Litvak, Jody � Machuca, Robert ✓/) -- Marin, Israel

Oishi, La nee ,.... Olivo, David I-Ji-� bW Owen, Brad V7Thr\ ffr,� Page, Scott Ranu, Manjeet Saghafi, Abdi

Saleh, Jinous n Shen, Jeannie c:-M,� Sheridan, Georgia {./ Swift, Karen ��"""- Syed, Sarah �/ - " Torres, Jennifer \ N�J�\J\.l( I��_) \./ Tran, Curtis &� ::JI Tunell, Eric '\/ Turcios, Victor Wang, Paul Weber, Craig Yamakawa, Katrina Young,Ken ('\� �f5 Ifn-b //;I I L\ I',.,/AA_., ";f"�e:IAC-�LU--\-:E: 'J - - / I / ,- V ./_/ I I La P;1n+ , Lud ,·a I( ...,T"",. r;-,, ,. ,

l 'JltNf\JE,H {lrfll G- __, 7Z:::t7.:b_. ' ,.- , ·� ,AIAn+ANPr�I T '.f'.>r.:1l

North s�n Fernando Valley Bus Rapid Transit Technical Working Group MeetingPage 163#2 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 Page 169 Page 170 Page 171 Page 172 Page 173 Page 174 Page 175 Page 176 Page 177 Page 178 Page 179 Page 180 Page 181 Page 182 Page 183 Page 184 Page 185 Page 186 Page 187 Page 188 Page 189 Page 190 Page 191 Page 192 Page 193 Page 194 Page 195 Page 196 Page 197 Page 198 Page 199 Page 200 Page 201 Page 202 Page 203 Page 204 Page 205 Page 206 Page 207 Page 208 North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor �Metro Question Card/Tarjeta de Preguntas Name/Nombre: 7- �-;r o,J Organization/Organlzaci6n:

Question/Pregunta: 1) f/(f[,.) Cft;rJ ;>tow 1 ,;c/Ll51 t t;,e PU8 LI C✓ P/1-/2,1IC I flf11 DJ() ? -z.) HO:U Wt'-'--· 8�1 Pt 1 oj} CUR.£et,Y( ST/2.EeTS L-1 Ke �o/2,)f/-oFP ? "j{ iAF �-=- 1� (?: rvlt /:::1 TO C---R..D- �elc) £ . , / - ) s ,-1-\ W/L-1.__ Yoo U5e t:?t11/Jt:f/J( lx>!vtft/V'. 7i> A-'cq,V!� V Please '11mit your comments to two minutes. You can submit written comments. /'1{)/1{� Por favor limite sus comentarios a dos minutos. Puede enviar comentariospor escrito.

9/20/18

Page 209 North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor ©Metro Question Card/Tarjeta de Preguntas Name/Nombre:

Organization/Organizaci6n: _j3I� CC"A-✓10, 7 Question/Pregunta:

w�� d�s 01"\� 0V\.� 6 Df+i 1,,,. .,.Q,,� r1 �r.s C\.c10.H �- J f wY � I O n..Jt.. f o.Rt 'f � o� v fw - o °f' "h"15\.v, � __?______v-- _e_,.:_lll._� .._'i'.. _C-._+_°"_'�__� __ � d_q� f ...,� � I ---"-JJ,�iono--1--- - ______J

Pleaselimit your comments to two minutes. You can submit written comments. Par favor limlte sus comentariosa dos minutos. Puede enviar comentariospar escrlto.

9/20/18

Page 210 North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor ©Metro Question card/Tarjetade Preguntas Name/Nombre:

Organization/Organlzadon:

Questlon/Pregunta: ouwn

Please limityour commentsto two minutes. You can submit writtencomments. Por favor llmlte sus comentariosa dos minutos. Puede enviar comentorlospor escrito.

9/20/18

Page 211 North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor ©Metro Question Card/Tarjeta de Preguntas Name/Nombre:

Organization/Organizacion:

Question/Pregunta: {Z.6Sv6e Cj()�s L L l /Ve_ .f-YD � 1/....--e.{1.."' 7 K O !:> C.. 0 � CJ O ftIA S _j AR. --� . V4'Ll e 7. Pleaselimit your comments to two minutes. You can submit written comments. Por favor limitesus comentorios a dos mlnutos. Puede envlar comentorios par escrito.

9/20/18

Page 212 North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor �Metro Question card/Tarjeta de Preguntas Name/Nombre: Organization/Organizacion: C <; \J N Question/Pregunta: Vvh � <\ \'" � � � C I' V c_ f\'j � I'-e e \ p -tt' L � \JJ � � i°' "tV' �- � p (J "� U .\ � C\C... \<,,. ,' '\ "t V\� � Q M � p !'0 b \ � fl\ \JJ � kQ.� � -r� �s r \ f'IJ � \ � f'�\N� � � --f\ � -+-o� � :h::t,p � o1NI) vJV\ \"'< \f'J� /\o

Please limityour commentsto two minutes. You can submit written comments. Par favor limitesus comentariosa dos minutos. Puede envfar comentarios por escrito.

0\ t- � G � f\ -f'ot:)� °'(\� 'ta.t--� w1�+� 9/20/18 i u Q\ \ f �'\'S � \y � t'rv\'y Page 213 I � North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor ©Metro Question Card/Tarjeta de Preguntas Name/Nombre:

Organlzatlon/Organlzaci6n:

Page 214 North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor ©Metro Question Card/Tarjeta de Preguntas Name/Nombre: t ..\ � .._ ,.�(\ (\[\ff\ \J"2\' V\ �lr �� f\ Organization/Organlzacion: \J (:: ) rJ\ Question/Pregunta:

� (\ � bt'jO(\ci) Y\�\J\) � \ \ \ /'(\ �t-C'J � �<:) � \o{)\} � �V\� � D f\ f'o l' a.c a M r d<:l-\:i I\� { n� 1\·s� b\Bd �0 p \J \Q� tCS(\ �Ct'l�S �l \ Mo��') @f :tt:SlI\ S pC',_'f0\ 1 (�I\

Please limityour comments to two minutes. You con submit written comments. Par /a11or I/mitesus comentariosa dos minutos. Puede en11larcomentarlos por escrlto.

9/20/18

Page 215 North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor ©Metro Question Card/Tarjeta de Preguntas Name/Nombre: M ------,\� K�·Rv ------i Organization/ Organizacion: 13ilu ((,.v'l0\ Question/Pregunta: wk J�s OV\� OV\t. 'j o,o+.::,� .,�.... r, 'ikr.s 4-C.{o.H H...£ tfv-,Y � or\.(_ f� ! 'T� 6��v fwtl or+ilSl-v v-e'i.....,�,('� "' +.,�� �d qi"\, 4-JJN-;'o� fa.y'l�

Please limityour comments to two minutes. You can submit written comments. Porfavor limlte sus comentarlos a dos minutos. Puede enviar comentarios por escrlto.

9/20/18

Page 216 North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor ©Metro Question Card/Tarjeta de Preguntas Name/Nombre: fl olJ.J )Jci � ..... _,, o,) J· -1 Organization/Organizaci6n: l Question/Pregunta: 1 1) H6{,,.) 0t,J 'foev /JJcII eA�t� Pu8l!e,,, Pl!2✓r I c_1 f1rv DJU? HaV w, u- s12- -1 FI r ('IA; c uRPE ;Yr sTR.E:Er s 1-1k.1�: ;Jofi.Jf/oFP ? t-A� �- /)/, t, �:,. e r 1)/} L 1 10 C/2,D jJ e-RSet.7' _ / j( 7 ! 1 ,_/_,,\ W!l-L- if5! (�/'11/Jc'/Jf l'x>M..frlyJ 7i, lt'ctru1e� !'tty\,(es V PleaseYon 'dmit your comments totwo minutes. You can submit writtencomments. Par favor limite sus comentariosa dos minutos. Puede enviar comentarlos por escrlto.

9/20/18

Page 217 I .. • �••- ... ,�_' H�:•:":�!. ♦� •• ,', :��•,:!.�;�•: ·:;9:•j,•-,rl' •: -\11-� -���-;- • ••·.t�:"f-=:��--•1·� .. • --� ltai'ISJ!Olitat,iQn_ futµ,:e. . . ..:;;,f· 1}_::- , .;. ·· , ·u·f �; ::.. ( ,. --�;r ..._ -. .!: .Jl �� .;�.. � ..· /,l •� ·_":._ :_..J���-'- � .. " .. 1 .. �.1!�� �i.t..��

01: wdl 1 s-2- 1;� h��dlfk�lr:.=------�-:? NAME A ______o/ I . -PH O N E :13rcu:Li!n� � /lamt:vef � fbi � : �� ;n,d /4�«�� ______- - - -N-_G A_OO-R-ES_S

�l3£C� CITY, STATE, ZIP

You can also provide input using:

213-418.3082 u [email protected] Iii � G metro. net/nsfabrt "' ta � @metrolosangeles C � 11 losangelesmetro

Page 218 · r •••.J?••,;l��rt•�:tl1";,• ••,. ·,, ��•.,. f•!��� �.... � ...�:.•\•,: . ..-/•:,• •• ; r-1��.�-�14�" �• • :, • •,<; 1 ,. -X�µ.:h_,-.;;���::��i�fl.��p��.' . !r�tjsp;9,f��-��o.91:���ut�:.. _-. \ _ ·: �- .-·.:·�- .. .1..u -•....:.._ ....- -..t.. ---~-' .._,.1•• • -�4.,·--- ' ,._••. 'I :� .. ... ----=-•---=--�..... ,I ...... �._...... -- .....■ •i: .,,,..�� '·-- - . ...:

D�TE: LOCATION:

[email protected] ID metro.net/nsfobrt Cl @metrolosangeles lj losangelesmetro :::.....:3...,.���...e:=,���:!_����A,,..,...�� {J/L,t--

Page 219 DATE: LOCATION: r I

,/ C PHONE

f

€t1.5 5T6/ You can also provide input using:

213.418.3082

:...... [email protected] !) metro.net/nsfabrt CJ @metrolosangeles IJ /osangelesmetro

Page 220 DATE: LOCATION:

NAME

PHONE

EMAIL

MAILING ADDRESS

CITY, STATE, ZIP

You can also provide input using:

213-418.3082 IEij [email protected] IJ metro.net/nsfobrt Cl @metrolosangeles IJ losangelesmetro

Page 221 You have a voice in our transportation future.

DATE: LOCATION:

NAME

PHONE

EMAIL

MAI LINC ADDRESS

CITY, STATE, ZIP

You can also provide input using:

213.418.3238 � [email protected]

Page 222 2 oAu:9/'29/'2018' LoCAr10N: North -Holly W::J;::s:d

.,· You can also provide input using:

213-418.3082

® [email protected] El metro.net/nsfobrt C @meJrolosangeles IJ losangelesmetro

Page 223 You have a voice in our transportation �future. -�-3 DATE: LOCATION: P Q \ C '-- , <.\ ', \: b

I NAME \-'� 's- � (i' D � ? of'?? PHONE (_ OV-...v ,;? -:,'-0,� 0 t \�• .:1 , 0:9:.:.?7 EMAIL

MAI LI NG ADDRESS

CITY, STATE, ZIP

\ ::J\.1..) tZJ "7c'c:1 : , , ,le, c1. ':!::J ??7 ;:, You can also provide input using: ' ,, , f e1 "''- ""c:::::::J I o,'-Cn ,,t. <) 213.418.3238 v 0 \ v"J C D V" I\A ttrV •(' 2 0 t '-"' @� [email protected] metro.net/nohopasbrt µ 0\ _, c..::rc �/() \J ; v\/\.. ¥(Ov\ I ) = CJ @metro/osangeles s� �Z)estY\.Ct,-0 0-c.t-es.s � losangelesmetro ±v

DATE: 9jo2!,f� .

You can also provide input using: 213,418.3238 [email protected] �-��.,.._-4'-J�.LW--...z...;;;.:...:;.::.=.;....-....:::;:,,...,t..-..:=, 0- u,m metro.net/nohopasbrt -',,...C.4L.A�:...c.�____a,l.f.,,...l,fu,,tl�...... l&otl-V.---L.!.�:::!.L...f;r-c-,.,;J= CJ @metrolosangeles · "l) fi losangelesmetro ift

DATE: LOCATION: iJ

P.. h • / .. • L< \� k • +� nl�� 4>J PHONE rJJr,;<+ e , :A , -lk -fr t ....t '" EMAIL

MAILIN

CITY, STATE, ZIP

You can also provide input using: 0 213.418.3238 � [email protected] = metro.net/nohopasbrt C @metrolosangeles fi losangelesmetro

Page 226 DATE: LOCATION:

PHONE

CITY, STATE, ZIP

You can also provide input using: o 213.418.3082 � [email protected] Im metro.net/nsfobrt CJ @metrolosangeles fi /osangelesmetro

Page 227 M

CIT

You can \.\e:. ,....

Page 228

✓ Community Meeting

Page 229 Welcome/Bienvenidos

Meeting Agenda/Agenda de la reunión

10:00 am – 10:15 am Sign-In/Registrarse

10:15 am – 10:40 am Presentation/La Presentación

10:40 am – 11:00 am Questions & Answers/Preguntas y Respuestas

11:00 am – 12:00 pm Open House/Exhibición Abierto

Thank you for joining us. Gracias por estar con nosotros.

Page 230 Welcome/Bienvenidos

Meeting Agenda/Agenda de la reunión 6:00 pm – 6:15 pm Sign-In/Registrarse

6:15 pm – 6:40 pm Presentation/La Presentación

6:40 pm – 7:00 pm Questions & Answers/Preguntas y Respuestas

7:00 pm – 8:00 pm Open House/Exhibición Abierto

Thank you for joining us. Gracias por estar con nosotros.

Page 231 Common BRT Elements

Signal Priority Comfortable Stations Vehicles

Running Ways Branding & Image Off-Vehicle Fare Collection

Page 232 Project Objectives

Objective 1: Improve transit access and connections to major activity centers, employment sites, and the existing and future regional transit system.

Objective 2: Design comfortable, convenient, and reliable rapid transit service that enables people to spend less time traveling.

Objective 3: Provide equitable access and opportunities to benefit communities through urban design, transit oriented communities, and green/sustainable infrastructure.

Objective 4: Deliver an improved transit service that complements Metro’s network and improves accessibility and sustainablility.

Page 233 Study Area

Page 234 SYLMAR Van Norman Bypss Reservoir SAN Metro Red Line & Station SYLMAR-SAN FERNANDO FERNANDO GLENOAKS BL Metro Orange Line & Station Lower Van Norman San Fernando Metrolink Lake HUBBARD ST Middle GRANADA School PORTER Providence Holy Cross 210 Future Light Rail RANCH HILLS Medical Center RINALDI ST WORKMAN ST

San Fernando BRAND BL Mission Catholic 118 Cemetery Mission ALIGNMENT CONCEPT San Fernando SAN FERNANDO MISSION BL Nordhoff - NoHo PACOIMA MISSION Potential Alignment Variation HILLS Hansen Dam CHATSWORTH ST Recreation Center

Granada Hills Charter High School Subject to Change 2018 VAN NUYS BL DEVONSHIRE ST LAKE VIEW CANOGA AV Sharp Avenue Elementary TERRACE CHATSWORTH Chatsworth 405 High School School

Pacoima SAN FERNANDO RD LASSEN ST Arleta Middle High School

TOPANGA CYN BL CHATSWORTH School Sepulveda Ambulatory Beachy Avenue California Care Center Elementary LAUREL CANYON BL NORTHRIDGE State School University Northridge Northridge Fashion Sepulveda Middle Center James Plummer School Elementary Liggett Street Monroe Elementary Vena Avenue High School School OSBORNE ST NORDHOFF ST School Elementary School Nordhoff

5 NORTHRIDGE PARTHENIA ST PANORAMA Limerick Avenue CITY Elementary School Panorama Northridge Mall

Middle School HASKELL ROSCOE BL SUN Roscoe Northridge Kaiser Permanente Mission SUN VALLEY Cleveland Hospital Cantara Street Panorama City Medical VALLEY High School Medical Community Elementary Hospital CANOGA PARK SATICOY Center School

Van Nuys Airport 27 170 VAN NUYS LINDLEY WHITE OAK CANOGA AV DE SOTO AV MASON AV WINNETKA AV TAMPA AV RESEDA BL BALBOA BL SEPULVEDA BL BURBANK AIRPORT NORTH WILBUR AV VAN NUYS BL WOODMAN AV LANKERSHIM BL Sherman SHERMAN WY WOODLEY AV Way WINNETKA RESEDA Valley Presbyterian VANOWEN ST Hospital BURBANK

VAN NUYS VALLEY BURBANK AIRPORT SOUTH GLENN Canoga VICTORY BL De Soto Pierce Balboa Woodley College OXNARD NORTH HOLLYWOOD Tampa Reseda Sepulveda Van Nuys Woodman Valley College

101 CHANDLER BL Valley College TARZANA ENCINO Laurel Canyon North Hollywood

SHERMAN OAKS Potential Alignment Concept: Nordhoff-NoHoSTUDIO CITY

Page 235 SYLMAR Van Norman Bypss Reservoir SAN Metro Red Line & Station SYLMAR-SAN FERNANDO FERNANDO GLENOAKS BL Metro Orange Line & Station Lower Van Norman San Fernando Metrolink Lake HUBBARD ST Middle GRANADA School PORTER Providence Holy Cross 210 Future Light Rail RANCH HILLS Medical Center RINALDI ST WORKMAN ST

San Fernando BRAND BL Mission Catholic 118 Cemetery Mission ALIGNMENT CONCEPT San Fernando SAN FERNANDO MISSION BL Nordhoff - Sylmar MISSION PACOIMA

HILLS Hansen Dam CHATSWORTH ST Recreation Center

Granada Hills Charter High School Subject to Change 2018 VAN NUYS BL DEVONSHIRE ST LAKE VIEW CANOGA AV Sharp Avenue Elementary TERRACE CHATSWORTH Chatsworth 405 High School School

Pacoima SAN FERNANDO RD LASSEN ST Arleta Middle High School

TOPANGA CYN BL CHATSWORTH School Sepulveda Ambulatory Beachy Avenue California Care Center Elementary LAUREL CANYON BL NORTHRIDGE State School University Northridge Northridge Fashion Sepulveda Middle Center James Plummer School Elementary Liggett Street Monroe Elementary Vena Avenue High School School OSBORNE ST NORDHOFF ST School Elementary School Nordhoff

5 NORTHRIDGE PARTHENIA ST PANORAMA Limerick Avenue CITY Elementary School Panorama Northridge Mall

Middle School HASKELL ROSCOE BL SUN Roscoe Northridge Kaiser Permanente Mission SUN VALLEY Cleveland Hospital Cantara Street Panorama City Medical VALLEY High School Medical Community Elementary Hospital CANOGA PARK SATICOY Center School

Van Nuys Airport 27 170 VAN NUYS LINDLEY WHITE OAK CANOGA AV DE SOTO AV MASON AV WINNETKA AV TAMPA AV RESEDA BL BALBOA BL SEPULVEDA BL BURBANK AIRPORT NORTH WILBUR AV VAN NUYS BL WOODMAN AV LANKERSHIM BL Sherman SHERMAN WY WOODLEY AV Way WINNETKA RESEDA Valley Presbyterian VANOWEN ST Hospital BURBANK

VAN NUYS VALLEY BURBANK AIRPORT SOUTH GLENN Canoga VICTORY BL De Soto Pierce Balboa Woodley College OXNARD NORTH HOLLYWOOD Tampa Reseda Sepulveda Van Nuys Woodman Valley College

101 CHANDLER BL Valley College TARZANA ENCINO Laurel Canyon North Hollywood

SHERMAN OAKS Potential Alignment Concept: Nordhoff-SylmarSTUDIO CITY

Page 236 SYLMAR Van Norman Bypss Reservoir SAN Metro Red Line & Station SYLMAR-SAN FERNANDO FERNANDO GLENOAKS BL Metro Orange Line & Station Lower Van Norman San Fernando Metrolink Lake HUBBARD ST Middle GRANADA School PORTER Providence Holy Cross 210 Future Light Rail RANCH HILLS Medical Center RINALDI ST WORKMAN ST

San Fernando BRAND BL Mission Catholic 118 Cemetery Mission ALIGNMENT CONCEPT San Fernando SAN FERNANDO MISSION BL Roscoe - NoHo PACOIMA MISSION Potential Alignment Variation HILLS Hansen Dam CHATSWORTH ST Recreation Center

Granada Hills Charter High School Subject to Change 2018 VAN NUYS BL DEVONSHIRE ST LAKE VIEW CANOGA AV Sharp Avenue Elementary TERRACE CHATSWORTH Chatsworth 405 High School School

Pacoima SAN FERNANDO RD LASSEN ST Arleta Middle High School

TOPANGA CYN BL CHATSWORTH School Sepulveda Ambulatory Beachy Avenue California Care Center Elementary LAUREL CANYON BL NORTHRIDGE State School University Northridge Northridge Fashion Sepulveda Middle Center James Plummer School Elementary Liggett Street Monroe Elementary Vena Avenue High School School OSBORNE ST NORDHOFF ST School Elementary School Nordhoff

5 NORTHRIDGE PARTHENIA ST PANORAMA Limerick Avenue CITY Elementary School Panorama Northridge Mall

Middle School HASKELL ROSCOE BL SUN Roscoe Northridge Kaiser Permanente Mission SUN VALLEY Cleveland Hospital Cantara Street Panorama City Medical VALLEY High School Medical Community Elementary Hospital CANOGA PARK SATICOY Center School

Van Nuys Airport 27 170 VAN NUYS LINDLEY WHITE OAK CANOGA AV DE SOTO AV MASON AV WINNETKA AV TAMPA AV RESEDA BL BALBOA BL SEPULVEDA BL BURBANK AIRPORT NORTH WILBUR AV VAN NUYS BL WOODMAN AV LANKERSHIM BL Sherman SHERMAN WY WOODLEY AV Way WINNETKA RESEDA Valley Presbyterian VANOWEN ST Hospital BURBANK

VAN NUYS VALLEY BURBANK AIRPORT SOUTH GLENN Canoga VICTORY BL De Soto Pierce Balboa Woodley College OXNARD NORTH HOLLYWOOD Tampa Reseda Sepulveda Van Nuys Woodman Valley College

101 CHANDLER BL Valley College TARZANA ENCINO Laurel Canyon North Hollywood

SHERMAN OAKS Potential Alignment Concept: STUDIORoscoe-NoHo CITY

Page 237 SYLMAR Van Norman Bypss Reservoir SAN Metro Red Line & Station SYLMAR-SAN FERNANDO FERNANDO GLENOAKS BL Metro Orange Line & Station Lower Van Norman San Fernando Metrolink Lake HUBBARD ST Middle GRANADA School PORTER Providence Holy Cross 210 Future Light Rail RANCH HILLS Medical Center RINALDI ST WORKMAN ST

San Fernando BRAND BL Mission Catholic 118 Cemetery Mission ALIGNMENT CONCEPTS San Fernando SAN FERNANDO MISSION BL Nordhoff - NoHo PACOIMA MISSION Nordhoff - Sylmar HILLS Hansen Dam CHATSWORTH ST Recreation Center Roscoe - NoHo

Granada Hills Charter Potential Alignment Variation High School VAN NUYS BL DEVONSHIRE ST LAKE VIEW CANOGA AV Sharp Avenue Elementary TERRACE CHATSWORTH Chatsworth 405 High School School

Pacoima SAN FERNANDO RD Subject to Change 2018 LASSEN ST Arleta Middle High School

TOPANGA CYN BL CHATSWORTH School Sepulveda Ambulatory Beachy Avenue California Care Center Elementary LAUREL CANYON BL NORTHRIDGE State School University Northridge Northridge Fashion Sepulveda Middle Center James Plummer School Elementary Liggett Street Monroe Elementary Vena Avenue High School School OSBORNE ST NORDHOFF ST School Elementary School Nordhoff

5 NORTHRIDGE PARTHENIA ST PANORAMA Limerick Avenue CITY Elementary School Panorama Northridge Mall

Middle School HASKELL ROSCOE BL SUN Roscoe Northridge Kaiser Permanente Mission SUN VALLEY Cleveland Hospital Cantara Street Panorama City Medical VALLEY High School Medical Community Elementary Hospital CANOGA PARK SATICOY Center School

Van Nuys Airport 27 170 VAN NUYS LINDLEY WHITE OAK CANOGA AV DE SOTO AV MASON AV WINNETKA AV TAMPA AV RESEDA BL BALBOA BL SEPULVEDA BL BURBANK AIRPORT NORTH WILBUR AV VAN NUYS BL WOODMAN AV LANKERSHIM BL Sherman SHERMAN WY WOODLEY AV Way WINNETKA RESEDA Valley Presbyterian VANOWEN ST Hospital BURBANK

VAN NUYS VALLEY BURBANK AIRPORT SOUTH GLENN Canoga VICTORY BL De Soto Pierce Balboa Woodley College OXNARD NORTH HOLLYWOOD Tampa Reseda Sepulveda Van Nuys Woodman Valley College

101 CHANDLER BL Valley College TARZANA ENCINO Laurel Canyon North Hollywood

SHERMAN OAKS Potential AlignmentSTUDIO CITY Concepts

Page 238 Other BRT Systems in California

Metro Orange Line Metro Silver Line Wilshire BRT

Santa Clara – Alum Rock BRT Station San Bernardino BRT San Bernardino BRT Station

Page 239 Selection Criteria

Page 240 Contact/Contacto

Contact us/Comuníquese con nosotros

Metro invites you to stay involved and share your feedback. Metro los invita a participar y compartir sus comentarios. 213-418-3082 English • 322-466-3876 x2 Espanol [email protected] metro.net/nsfvbrt @metrolosangeles losangelesmetro

Page 241 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Community Meetings Roll-Out Map Comments

Community Meeting Location Comment Format Comment Comment Map Location Alignment Tone

Dot / Post-It East/West Street North/South Street (Nordhoff-NoHo, Nordhoff-Sylmar, Roscoe-NoHo) (Positive, Negative, Refinement Needed) San Fernando Dot Nordhoff Canoga All n/a The new BRT should turn south and San Fernando Post-It integrate into the Orange Line Nordhoff Canoga All Refinement needed San Fernando Dot Nordhoff Lindley All n/a Prefer a stop at Woodley/Nordhoff due to San Fernando Post-It proximity to veterans center Nordhoff Woodley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive San Fernando Dot Nordhoff Woodley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Stop at Woodley Ave to serve the Flyaway San Fernando Post-it Bus Station Roscoe Woodley Roscoe-Noho n/a Safety issues on Roscoe, particularly after San Fernando Post-It dark Roscoe Van Nuys Roscoe-Noho n/a San Fernando Dot Hubbard San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Consider alignment on Foothill Blvds vs San Fernando Dot / Post-it Glenoaks Blvd SR 118 Foothill Blvd Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Glenoaks Blvd has limited ROW in San San Fernando Dot / Post-it Fernando n/a Glenoaks Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative San Fernando Dot / Post-it Consider proximity to Mission College Hubbard Eldridge Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Consider future connectivity south NoHo as San Fernando Dot / Post-it separate alignment Truesdale St San Fernando none n/a What about us way up in North Granada Hills N of Rinaldi - how do we connect to San Fernando Post-It Metro System w/out using own vehicles SR 118 Balboa none n/a Need an option from Chatsworth to NoHo Chatsworth Post-It Orange Line might be great Lassen Canoga All n/a Chatsworth Dot / Post-it Mixed Used Development Nordhoff Corbin / Tampa All n/a Pedestrian bridge/access to Metrolink Chatsworth Post-it Northridge Stop Parthenia Wilbur All n/a Chatsworth Dot / Post-it Stop on Reseda Nordhoff Reseda All Positive Chatsworth Post-It Put a stop on Reseda Roscoe Reseda Roscoe-Noho Positive I prefer the Lindley route rather than Chatsworth Post-It Reseda Roscoe Lindley Roscoe-Noho Positive Chatsworth Dot / Post-it Stop at Balboa Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Chatsworth Dot / Post-it High School Nordhoff Haskell Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Chatworth Post-it Few destinations Roscoe Woodley / Haskell Roscoe-Noho Negative Access to public schools (students and Chatsworth Post-It employees) Osborne Laurel Canyon Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive CSUN employees could take AV line to Chatsworth Dot / Post-it Nordhoff-Sylmar alignment Hubbard San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive More intercept surveys, reach out to riders, how to better target potential Chatsworth Post-It riders? n/a n/a All n/a Love easy way to N Hollywood, Burbank, Chatsworth Post-It and Glendale Chandler Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive

Page 1 of 17 Page 242 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Community Meetings Roll-Out Map Comments Panorama City Post-It Connect to Chatsworth Station Lassen Canoga All Positive Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Nordhoff Winnetka All Positive High activity with some new housing and Panorama City Dot / Post-it other residential nearby neighborhoods Nordhoff Tampa All Positive There should be a station at Nordhoff and Lindley. I've notice many CSUN students boarding/alighting the bus at this Panorama City Dot / Post-it intersection Nordhoff Lindley All Positive Panorama City Dot Good! Hospital Roscoe Reseda Roscoe-Noho Positive Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Haskell not ideal. Better connections with Panorama City Dot / Post-it Sepulveda and Woodley Parthenia Woodley Nordhoff-Noho Negative Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Nordhoff Woodley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Parthenia good option because it doesn't duplicate a loal line. Parthenia lacks a Panorama City Post-It Metro line n/a n/a Nordhoff-NoHo Positive Parthenia better than Nordhoff. Will there be stations on Parthenia and on Nordhoff? Stations at both Parthenia and Nordhoff would be good. They are less than 1 mile Panorama City Dot / Post-it apart but would be ideal Nordhoff Haskell Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Panorama City Dot Bad station no connections Parthenia Haskell Nordhoff-Noho Negative Comment in Spanish: Make connection to NoHo. On Nordhoff alignment have stations on Parthenia and Nordhoff on Panorama City Post-It either of the 3 variations Roscoe Haskell All Positive Sepulveda & Parthenia - Parthenia corridor to Van Nuys has a lot of foot traffic only the LADOT offer service. Corridor could Panorama City Dot / Post-it have more service Parthenia Sepulveda Nordhof-Noho Positive Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Nordhoff Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Panorama City Dot Roscoe Sepulveda Roscoe-Noho n/a Roscoe/Van Nuys is one of the busiest intersections in the Valley and in LA. Panorama City Dot / Post-it Plethora of traffic and businesses nearby Roscoe Van Nuys Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive BRT should stay on Woodman not on Panorama City Dot / Post-it Ventura Canyon Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-NoHo Refinement needed Roscoe/Woodman would also be prime due to its proximity to acces to a major Filipino market, as well as Filipino business nearby. A bus line here would also see lot of traffic and foot-traffic because of the Kaiser facility and the Filipino block Panorama City Dot / Post-it adjacent Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive

Page 2 of 17 Page 243 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Community Meetings Roll-Out Map Comments

Kaiser PanCity would be a hue incentive for this line and would see a lot of ridership. Hospital buildings and facilities are nearer to Roscoe/Woodman and provides easier Panorama City Dot / Post-it access to patients and staff Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Woodman doesn't have sidewalks! Access to stations would be difficult for some Panorama City Post-It people Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-NoHo Negative This area is already being served by the East SFV Transit Corridor. The Nordhoff- Sylmar line can potentially cut ridership Panorama City Dot / Post-it from the train line. It's a redundant line Osborne San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative While transit service in this area is good, building a line here would underserve the Roscoe/Nordhoff-NoHo areas those bus Panorama City Dot / Post-it lines serve Osborne San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative Panorama City Dot Repetitive Glenoaks Van Nuys Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Roscoe Laurel Canyon Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Sherman Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Victory Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive

Having this line terminate at North Hollywood Station is a great idea because riders can connect to the Metro Orange, Panorama City Dot / Post-It Red, and future Noho-Pasadena BRT lines Chandler Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive North Hollywood Dot US-101 De Soto n/a n/a North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff De Soto All n/a North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Tampa All n/a North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Reseda All n/a North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Louise Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Haskell Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Sepulveda Bl + Parthenia St route = best option because it services the most North Hollywood Dot / Post-it apartment buildings and ROW exists Parthenia Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho n/a North Hollywood Dot Rosce Van Nuys Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a North Hollywood Dot Orange Line Alignment Sepulveda n/a n/a North Hollywood Dot Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a North Hollywood Dot Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a North Hollywood Dot Roscoe Viscoy Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a North Hollywood Dot Strathern Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a North Hollywood Dot Vanowen Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a North Hollywood Dot Oxnard Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a

Page 3 of 17 Page 244 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Community Meetings Roll-Out Map Comments Metro will need more service on Red Line (better frequency) when NSFV BRT feeds North Hollywood Post-It more people into NoHo Burbank Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a Northridge Dot / Post-it Acces for people work in the area region Devonshire Winnetka n/a n/a Can overcrossing handle the weight of Northridge Post-it buses? Nordhoff Corbin n/a n/a Northridge Post-it Parking at stations should be considered n/a n/a n/a n/a Stop @ Resed sand Nordhoff is too far for Northridge Post-It students to walk Nordhoff Reseda All Negative Too much traffic on Reseda. Prefers not to run on Reseda. There is already a Rapid Route on this street. Supports at stop at Northridge Dot / Post-it Reseda for transfers Nordhoff Reseda All Needs refinement More frequency, signal priority and bus Northridge Post-It lane on Reseda as part of TSM Roscoe Reseda n/a n/a Northridge Dot Dot on CSUN campus n/a n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Lindley All n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Lindley All n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Lindley All n/a More frequency, signal priority and bus Northridge Post-It lane on Nordhoff as part of TSM Nordhoff Zelzah Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a More frequency, signal priority and bus Northridge Post-it lane on Roscoe as part of TSM Roscoe Balboa Roscoe-Noho n/a Expand study area to put more frequency, signal priority, and bus lane on Sherman Northridge Post-It Way as part of TSM Sherman Balboa n/a n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a A stop at Van Nuys is important for Northridge Dot / Post-it transfers Nordhoff Van Nuys Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a More frequency, signal priority, and bus lane on Sepulveda as part of TSM and to Northridge Post-It provide connection to Sylmar Metrolink Devonshire Sepulveda n/a n/a A stop at Van Nuys is important for Northridge Dot / Post-it transfers Roscoe Van Nuys All Positive Preference for Nordhoff over Roscoe. Feels that Roscoe is too close to Orange Line Northridge Post-It alignments Roscoe Van Nuys Roscoe-Noho Negative Northridge Dot Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a This line is critical to support Metrolink riders from Antelope Valley to CSUN. Additional, CSUN students need to come Northridge Post-It from Sylmar Hubbard Glenoaks Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Bike lane on Glenoaks goes to Burbank- Northridge Post-It Pasadena Glenoaks Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a

Page 4 of 17 Page 245 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Community Meetings Roll-Out Map Comments ESFV rail line - I recommend that the rails be painted white to mitigate heat (similar Northridge Post-It to treatments in Europe) SR 118 San Fernando n/a n/a Concern with Sylmar route that it will cannibalize ridership from the East San Fernando Valley line. Prefers a direct route Northridge Post-It that stays on one street n/a n/a All Needs refinement Northridge Dot / Post-it Connection to existing bus lines Roscoe Laurel Canyon Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive More frequency, signal priority, and bus Northridge Post-It lane on Lankershim as part of TSM Sherman Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a Northridge Dot Osborne Laurel Canyon Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a

Prefers a connection to NoHo station and connection to the Orange Line. Likes a Northridge Dot / Post-it transit ring to set up for future expansion Chandler Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive CSUN Dot Nordhoff Old Dept Road All n/a A lot of employment/school activity. I suggest to add a better connection from the main downtown area to Chatsworth Station. Many residential/business in the CSUN Post-it way with the airport. Martin G. Nordhoff Old Dept Road All Positive CSUN Dot Nordhoff Corbin All n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Tampa All n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Wilbur All n/a CSUN Post-it Implement both Nordhoff and Roscoe bus laNordhoff Reseda All n/a CSUN Post-it Frequent service at least until 10:30pm wee Nordhoff Reseda All n/a CSUN Post-it Hydrogen and/or electric is a good power n/a n/a n/a n/a CSUN Post-It ADVERTISE using something like "Metro is thn/a n/a n/a n/a CSUN Post-It Service need to be frequent enough for CSUNordhoff Reseda All n/a CSUN Dot Roscoe Reseda Roscoe-Noho n/a CSUN Post-It It can't possible get any noisier over here. N Roscoe Reseda Roscoe-Noho Positive CSUN Dot 2x Nordhoff Lindley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Post-It Bikes OK in bus lane :) Nordhoff Louise n/a n/a CSUN Post-It Impacts on SF homes (access, noise) Nordhoff / Roscoe Louise n/a n/a CSUN Dot n/a Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot 2x Roscoe Balboa Roscoe-Noho n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Woodley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot / Comment VA Nordhoff Haskell Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot 2x Nordhoff Van Nuys Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot 4x Roscoe Van Nuys Roscoe-Noho n/a CSUN Post-it Roscoe/Van Nuys is always congested Roscoe Van Nuys Roscoe-Noho n/a CSUN Dot 3x Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a CSUN Dot Raymer Van Nuys n/a n/a CSUN Dot Brand Glenoaks Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a

Page 5 of 17 Page 246 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Community Meetings Roll-Out Map Comments CSUN Post-It Parellel to East Valley line is mile or less - redOsborne San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative CSUN Dot 2x Tuxford Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a CSUN Dot Victory Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a CSUN Dot 2x Chandler Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a

Page 6 of 17 Page 247 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Station Placement Preference

Meeting Location Dot/Post-It Comment E/W Street N/S Street Alignment Application Tone

CSUN Dot Brand Glenoaks Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Metro will need more service on Red Line (better frequency) when NSFV BRT feeds more people North Hollywood Post-It into NoHo Burbank Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a Love easy way to N Hollywood, Burbank, and Chatsworth Post-It Glendale Chandler Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Having this line terminate at North Hollywood Station is a great idea because riders can connect to the Metro Orange, Red, and future Noho- Panorama City Dot / Post-It Pasadena BRT lines Chandler Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Prefers a connection to NoHo station and connection to the Orange Line. Likes a transit ring Northridge Dot / Post-it to set up for future expansion Chandler Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive CSUN Dot 2x Chandler Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a More frequency, signal priority, and bus lane on Sepulveda as part of TSM and to provide Northridge Post-It connection to Sylmar Metrolink Devonshire Sepulveda n/a n/a Northridge Dot / Post-it Acces for people work in the area region Devonshire Winnetka n/a n/a Panorama City Dot Repetitive Glenoaks Van Nuys Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative San Fernando Dot / Post-it Consider proximity to Mission College Hubbard Eldridge Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a This line is critical to support Metrolink riders from Antelope Valley to CSUN. Additional, CSUN Northridge Post-It students need to come from Sylmar Hubbard Glenoaks Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive San Fernando Dot Hubbard San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN employees could take AV line to Nordhoff- Chatsworth Dot / Post-it Sylmar alignment Hubbard San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive

Page 7 of 17 Page 248 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Station Placement Preference

Meeting Location Dot/Post-It Comment E/W Street N/S Street Alignment Application Tone Need an option from Chatsworth to NoHo Orange Chatsworth Post-It Line might be great Lassen Canoga All n/a Panorama City Post-It Connect to Chatsworth Station Lassen Canoga All Positive San Fernando Dot / Post-it Glenoaks Blvd has limited ROW in San Fernando n/a Glenoaks Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative More intercept surveys, reach out to riders, how Chatsworth Post-It to better target potential riders? n/a n/a All n/a Parthenia good option because it doesn't duplicate Panorama City Post-It a loal line. Parthenia lacks a Metro line n/a n/a Nordhoff-NoHo Positive Northridge Post-it Parking at stations should be considered n/a n/a n/a n/a

Concern with Sylmar route that it will cannibalize ridership from the East San Fernando Valley line. Northridge Post-It Prefers a direct route that stays on one street n/a n/a All Needs refinement CSUN Post-it Hydrogen and/or electric is a good power n/a n/a n/a n/a ADVERTISE using something like "Metro is the future of transportation" "Beats the traffic!" LA has a huge population. Take into account on overwhelming the buses with so many new CSUN Post-It people. -Marting G. n/a n/a n/a n/a Chatsworth Dot / Post-it Stop at Balboa Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Northridge Dot Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot n/a Nordhoff Balboa Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a San Fernando Dot Nordhoff Canoga All n/a The new BRT should turn south and integrate into San Fernando Post-It the Orange Line Nordhoff Canoga All Refinement needed

Page 8 of 17 Page 249 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Station Placement Preference

Meeting Location Dot/Post-It Comment E/W Street N/S Street Alignment Application Tone

Northridge Post-it Can overcrossing handle the weight of buses? Nordhoff Corbin n/a n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Corbin All n/a Chatsworth Dot / Post-it Mixed Used Development Nordhoff Corbin / Tampa All n/a North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff De Soto All n/a Chatsworth Dot / Post-it High School Nordhoff Haskell Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive

Parthenia better than Nordhoff. Will there be stations on Parthenia and on Nordhoff? Stations at both Parthenia and Nordhoff would be good. They Panorama City Dot / Post-it are less than 1 mile apart but would be ideal Nordhoff Haskell Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Haskell Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot / Comment VA Nordhoff Haskell Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a San Fernando Dot Nordhoff Lindley All n/a There should be a station at Nordhoff and Lindley. I've notice many CSUN students boarding/alighting Panorama City Dot / Post-it the bus at this intersection Nordhoff Lindley All Positive Northridge Dot Nordhoff Lindley All n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Lindley All n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Lindley All n/a CSUN Dot 2x Nordhoff Lindley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Louise Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Post-It Bikes OK in bus lane :) Nordhoff Louise n/a n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Old Dept Road All n/a

Page 9 of 17 Page 250 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Station Placement Preference

Meeting Location Dot/Post-It Comment E/W Street N/S Street Alignment Application Tone A lot of employment/school activity. I suggest to add a better connection from the main downtown area to Chatsworth Station. Many residential/business in the way with the airport. CSUN Post-it Martin G. Nordhoff Old Dept Road All Positive Chatsworth Dot / Post-it Stop on Reseda Nordhoff Reseda All Positive North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Reseda All n/a Stop @ Reseda and Nordhoff is too far for students Northridge Post-It to walk Nordhoff Reseda All Negative

Too much traffic on Reseda. Prefers not to run on Reseda. There is already a Rapid Route on this Northridge Dot / Post-it street. Supports at stop at Reseda for transfers Nordhoff Reseda All Needs refinement Implement both Nordhoff and Roscoe bus lanes CSUN Post-it across the Valley from the Orange Line to Arleta Nordhoff Reseda All n/a Frequent service at least until 10:30pm weekday CSUN Post-it (CSUN Nordhoff Reseda All n/a Service need to be frequent enough for CSUN bus CSUN Post-It stations (About 5-10 minutes each) Nordhoff Reseda All n/a Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Nordhoff Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Northridge Dot Nordhoff Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a High activity with some new housing and other Panorama City Dot / Post-it residential nearby neighborhoods Nordhoff Tampa All Positive North Hollywood Dot Nordhoff Tampa All n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Tampa All n/a

Page 10 of 17 Page 251 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Station Placement Preference

Meeting Location Dot/Post-It Comment E/W Street N/S Street Alignment Application Tone

Northridge Dot / Post-it A stop at Van Nuys is important for transfers Nordhoff Van Nuys Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot 2x Nordhoff Van Nuys Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Wilbur All n/a Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Nordhoff Winnetka All Positive Prefer a stop at Woodley/Nordhoff due to San Fernando Post-It proximity to veterans center Nordhoff Woodley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive San Fernando Dot Nordhoff Woodley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Nordhoff Woodley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive CSUN Dot Nordhoff Woodley Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Dot Nordhoff Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a More frequency, signal priority and bus lane on Northridge Post-It Nordhoff as part of TSM Nordhoff Zelzah Nordhoff-Noho, Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a CSUN Post-It Impacts on SF homes (access, noise) Nordhoff / Roscoe Louise n/a n/a North Hollywood Dot Orange Line AlignmenSepulveda n/a n/a

Chatsworth Post-It Access to public schools (students and employees) Osborne Laurel Canyon Nordhoff-Sylmar Positive Northridge Dot Osborne Laurel Canyon Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a This area is already being served by the East SFV Transit Corridor. The Nordhoff-Sylmar line can potentially cut ridership from the train line. It's a Panorama City Dot / Post-it redundant line Osborne San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative

While transit service in this area is good, building a line here would underserve the Roscoe/Nordhoff- Panorama City Dot / Post-it NoHo areas those bus lines serve Osborne San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative Parellel to East Valley line is mile or less - CSUN Post-It redundant, better to connect to NoHo Red Line Osborne San Fernando Nordhoff-Sylmar Negative

Page 11 of 17 Page 252 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Station Placement Preference

Meeting Location Dot/Post-It Comment E/W Street N/S Street Alignment Application Tone

North Hollywood Dot Oxnard Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a Panorama City Dot Bad station no connections Parthenia Haskell Nordhoff-Noho Negative

Sepulveda & Parthenia - Parthenia corridor to Van Nuys has a lot of foot traffic only the LADOT offer Panorama City Dot / Post-it service. Corridor could have more service Parthenia Sepulveda Nordhof-Noho Positive Sepulveda Bl + Parthenia St route = best option because it services the most apartment buildings North Hollywood Dot / Post-it and ROW exists Parthenia Sepulveda Nordhoff-Noho n/a Pedestrian bridge/access to Metrolink Northridge Chatsworth Post-it Stop Parthenia Wilbur All n/a Haskell not ideal. Better connections with Panorama City Dot / Post-it Sepulveda and Woodley Parthenia Woodley Nordhoff-Noho Negative CSUN Dot Raymer Van Nuys n/a n/a North Hollywood Dot Rosce Van Nuys Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a More frequency, signal priority and bus lane on Northridge Post-it Roscoe as part of TSM Roscoe Balboa Roscoe-Noho n/a CSUN Dot 2x Roscoe Balboa Roscoe-Noho n/a

Comment in Spanish: Make connection to NoHo. On Nordhoff alignment have stations on Parthenia Panorama City Post-It and Nordhoff on either of the 3 variations Roscoe Haskell All Positive Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Roscoe Laurel Canyon Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Northridge Dot / Post-it Connection to existing bus lines Roscoe Laurel Canyon Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Chatsworth Post-It I prefer the Lindley route rather than Reseda Roscoe Lindley Roscoe-Noho Positive Chatsworth Post-It Put a stop on Reseda Roscoe Reseda Roscoe-Noho Positive Panorama City Dot Good! Hospital Roscoe Reseda Roscoe-Noho Positive

Page 12 of 17 Page 253 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Station Placement Preference

Meeting Location Dot/Post-It Comment E/W Street N/S Street Alignment Application Tone More frequency, signal priority and bus lane on Northridge Post-It Reseda as part of TSM Roscoe Reseda n/a n/a CSUN Dot Roscoe Reseda Roscoe-Noho n/a It can't possible get any noisier over here. Noise should not be a concern. Connect with DASH. Need bike lanes. Will increase property values to CSUN Post-It have good access to transit! Roscoe Reseda Roscoe-Noho Positive Panorama City Dot Roscoe Sepulveda Roscoe-Noho n/a San Fernando Post-It Safety issues on Roscoe, particularly after dark Roscoe Van Nuys Roscoe-Noho n/a Roscoe/Van Nuys is one of the busiest intersections in the Valley and in LA. Plethora of Panorama City Dot / Post-it traffic and businesses nearby Roscoe Van Nuys Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Northridge Dot / Post-it A stop at Van Nuys is important for transfers Roscoe Van Nuys All Positive Preference for Nordhoff over Roscoe. Feels that Northridge Post-It Roscoe is too close to Orange Line alignments Roscoe Van Nuys Roscoe-Noho Negative CSUN Dot 4x Roscoe Van Nuys Roscoe-Noho n/a CSUN Post-it Roscoe/Van Nuys is always congested Roscoe Van Nuys Roscoe-Noho n/a North Hollywood Dot Roscoe Vanscoy Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a Stop at Woodley Ave to serve the Flyaway Bus San Fernando Post-it Station Roscoe Woodley Roscoe-Noho n/a Chatworth Post-it Few destinations Roscoe Woodley / Haskell Roscoe-Noho Negative BRT should stay on Woodman not on Ventura Panorama City Dot / Post-it Canyon Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-NoHo Refinement needed

Page 13 of 17 Page 254 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Station Placement Preference

Meeting Location Dot/Post-It Comment E/W Street N/S Street Alignment Application Tone Roscoe/Woodman would also be prime due to its proximity to acces to a major Filipino market, as well as Filipino business nearby. A bus line here would also see lot of traffic and foot-traffic because of the Kaiser facility and the Filipino block Panorama City Dot / Post-it adjacent Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Kaiser PanCity would be a hue incentive for this line and would see a lot of ridership. Hospital buildings and facilities are nearer to Roscoe/Woodman and provides easier access to Panorama City Dot / Post-it patients and staff Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive Woodman doesn't have sidewalks! Access to Panorama City Post-It stations would be difficult for some people Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-NoHo Negative North Hollywood Dot Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a North Hollywood Dot Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a Northridge Dot Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a CSUN Dot 3x Roscoe Woodman Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a Expand study area to put more frequency, signal priority, and bus lane on Sherman Way as part of Northridge Post-It TSM Sherman Balboa n/a n/a Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Sherman Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive More frequency, signal priority, and bus lane on Northridge Post-It Lankershim as part of TSM Sherman Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a What about us way up in North Granada Hills N of Rinaldi - how do we connect to Metro System San Fernando Post-It w/out using own vehicles SR 118 Balboa none n/a

Page 14 of 17 Page 255 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Task 1.7 - Station Placement Preference

Meeting Location Dot/Post-It Comment E/W Street N/S Street Alignment Application Tone Consider alignment on Foothill Blvds vs Glenoaks San Fernando Dot / Post-it Blvd SR 118 Foothill Blvd Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a ESFV rail line - I recommend that the rails be painted white to mitigate heat (similar to Northridge Post-It treatments in Europe) SR 118 San Fernando n/a n/a North Hollywood Dot Strathern Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a Consider future connectivity south NoHo as San Fernando Dot / Post-it separate alignment Truesdale St San Fernando none n/a CSUN Dot 2x Tuxford Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a North Hollywood Dot US-101 De Soto n/a n/a North Hollywood Dot Vanowen Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a Panorama City Dot Station Proposal Victory Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo Positive CSUN Dot Victory Lankershim Nordhoff-Noho, Roscoe-NoHo n/a

Northridge Post-It Bike lane on Glenoaks goes to Burbank-Pasadena Glenoaks Nordhoff-Sylmar n/a Northridge Dot Dot on CSUN campus n/a n/a

Page 15 of 17 Page 256 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Comments Submitted at SNFV BRT Community Meetings

Nordhoff-NoHo Nordhoff - Sylmar Roscoe - NoHo NoHo Terminus Support 2 3 3 2 Oppose/Express Concerns 4 2 Suggest Stations 2

# Miscellaneous Comments 1 Tobias & Rayan Street senior complex; high curbs cause problems 2 Post easily downloadable maps on website 3 High ridership land uses in Sylmar - Are their needs being polled? 4 Transfers cost money which some cannot afford 5 Add bike carrying capacity on buses 6 Expand study area to Sherman Way 7 Comment on MOL 8 Opposed to removing travel lanes 9 Support for converting travel lanes to bus lanes (3) 10 Frequency of service is important 11 Need Seamless transfer to ESFV LRT (to access metrolink to Santa Clarita) 12 Station suggestion (Roscoe near Tampa development) 13 Ensure good connections to North-South Routes 14 Safety is a concern (2) 15 Increase marketing and community outreach 16 Great presentation (2) 17 Need next bus technoogy 18 Need adequate seating at stations 19 Allow others (taxis, uber, electric vehicles) to use Bus lanes 20 Metro should outreach to youth to foster young transit riders 21 Use Kester or Hazeltine 22 Don't build new facilities; use what's there 23 Provide parking 24 Concerned about left turn and bike lane access on Nordhoff 25 Concern about construction impacts 26 Need lighting at BRT Stations 27 Need restrooms at major bis stops 28 Commuters may shift to parallel routes if RT is on major streets 29 Concerrns about homeless on trains 30 Trash cans are not obvious so people drop trash

Page 16 of 17 Page 257 North San Fernando Valley BRT - Questions Asked at NSFV BRT Community Meetings Question No. of Times Will headways on other routes be affected by implementation of BRT Which is higher priority: Access to Downtown or investment in SFV How can you increase public partcipation, including at CSUN and bus riders, potentially with webcasts that allow feedback 4 How will BRT fit on existing streets Will BRT include grade separations Will you use eminent domain to acquire ROW Will bicycle lanes be removed to accommodate BRT Will the ESFV LRT stop at both Roscoe and Nordhoff Does Roscoe or Nordhoff work better for CSUN students Why electric buses and not alternative fuels Why no TSM alernative How will you accommodate disabled persons Would the Sylmar/SF route preclude a connection from Sylmar to NoHo Why not look at Devonshire What improvements will be made on parallel routes or the freeway ramps Will park and ride lots be provided Where will the stations be located What parameters are used in projecting ridership When will the public see the details of how the BRT will be implemented? How was the study area developed? Based on density? Will this BRT route be converetd to LRT someday as planned on the MOL Will the BRT look like the MOL Will pedesrian improvements be part of the BRT project Will there be bike improvements like the MOL

Page 17 of 17 Page 258 North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT - Supplemental Alternatives Analysis

Eagle Rock Map: Comments Community Meeting Running Options Specific Location Name Comments N Pacific Ave and W East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Glenoaks Blvd Station Request Pioneer Alley and Central East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Ave Station Request S Brand Blvd and W East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Broadway Station Request N Glendale Ave and W East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Broadway Station Request BRT should travel on Central Ave because Glendale wants East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Central Ave to maintain parking along Brand Blvd. Brand has center island ready for center running. Likewise East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Brand Blvd Glenoaks allows for center running. Always include major shopping centers (as in East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Misc. General Comment Burbank/Glendale) 134 Freeway and 2 East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Freeway Option Freeway Leave freeway route to 501 N Verdugo Rd and East East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Broadway Station Request

East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Eagle Rock Plaza Station Request. Connectivity for Grocery/Shopping. Colorado Blvd and Eagle East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Rock Blvd Station Request Townsend Ave and East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Colorado Blvd Station Request Eagle Rock Reservoir and East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Freeway Option 134 Freeway Freeway doesn't help Colorado Blvd and S East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Orange Grove Blvd Station Request

Page 1 of 2 Page 259 North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT - Supplemental Alternatives Analysis

Eagle Rock Map: Comments Community Meeting Running Options Specific Location Name Comments Colorado Blvd and N East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Arroyo Pkwy Station Request N Lake Ave and Colorado East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Blvd Station request N Sierra Bonita Ave and East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Colorado Blvd Station Request N Figueroa and Colorado East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Blvd Station Request Via Union/Green. Due to Tournament of Roses at Colorado East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Union St and Green St Blvd.

Page 2 of 2 Page 260 North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT - Supplemental Alternatives Analysis

North Hollywood-Burbank Map: Comments Community Meeting Alternatives Specific Location Name Comments West Empire & North East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Hollywood Way BRT Station request along rail line Chandler Blvd is best for a fast route--also serves East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Chandler Blvd Magnolia, Burbank's real "High Street" Winona Ave and N Parish Perhaps too far for station but transit to Airport doubles East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Pl to serve Woodbury University

Include all major shopping complexes (Burbank/Glendale). East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Misc. General Comment Especially during Holiday Seasons East Magnolia Blvd and East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option San Fernando Road Station Request W Magnolia Blvd and N East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Front St Station Request

Vineland Ave/Magnolia Blvd and Cahuenga 2 Station Requests. Stops close together because of East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Blvd/Magnolia Blvd apartments.

Vineland Ave/Magnolia Blvd and Cahuenga Comment about 2 station requests on Magnolia. Magnolia East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Blvd/Magnolia Blvd is too narrow. Street and Freeway Lankershim Blvd (NoHo East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Option Arts District) 224 is the most frequent route here anyway

Page 1 of 4 Page 261 North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT - Supplemental Alternatives Analysis

North Hollywood-Burbank Map: Comments Community Meeting Alternatives Specific Location Name Comments

In regards to Lankershim route. It bothers me that is Street and Freeway Lankershim Blvd and considered ON TOP of the Red Line route--a bad idea! Too East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Option Hortense St out of the way for East-West connector route Street and Freeway Lankershim Blvd and East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Option Hortense St Traffic sewer N Hollywood Way and East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Magnolia Blvd Station Request N Buena Vista Street and East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Magnolia Blvd Station Request Please do with center lane! Curb aligned competes so East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Magnolia Blvd much with right turns

My commute is from NoHo to Glendale; I would prefer the street running route on Magnolia to reach Downtown Burbank to Glendale and Pasadena. Prefer median East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Magnolia Blvd running busway like Orange line.

East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option General Comment Prefer street running

W Alameda Ave and 5 Not keen on freeway option; Flower St mostly serves East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Freeway Disney workers; Not many people ride on Alameda 5 and 134 freeway Keep 501 for freeway. Build BRT so it serves the local East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Freeway Option intersection communities.

Page 2 of 4 Page 262 North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT - Supplemental Alternatives Analysis

North Hollywood-Burbank Map: Comments Community Meeting Alternatives Specific Location Name Comments W Olive Ave and W East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Alameda Ave Traffic sewer W Glenoaks Blvd and E East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Alameda Ave Station Request W Glenoaks Blvd and E Affirming W Glenoaks Blvd and E Alameda Ave stop East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Alameda Ave request. Yes, use old PE route on Glenoaks.

Real BRT should include: dedicated row, intersection East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option General Comment priorities, level boarding, more space for bikes, BE FAST Grandview Ave and W East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Glenoaks Blvd Station Request

East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Misc. General Comment Key is to have dedicated row, otherwise not effective. Station Request. There are 3 schools in the area (Keppel Elementary, Toll Middle School, and Hoover High School. N Pacific Ave and W There is a historic landmark, four neighborhoods, a hotel East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Glenoaks Blvd and myriad of businesses.

N Pacific Ave and W Agree with N Pacific Ave and W Glenoaks Blvd Station East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Glenoaks Blvd Request. Central Ave and 5 East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Freeway Station Request

Page 3 of 4 Page 263 North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT - Supplemental Alternatives Analysis

North Hollywood-Burbank Map: Comments Community Meeting Alternatives Specific Location Name Comments Central Ave and W Station Request. Central Ave may be easier to create a East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option Broadway median running bus lane closest to brand.

Potential plan for Glendale to include streetcar proposal to Woodbury University. If approved, share the tracks East Valley HS 9/29/2018 Street Option General Comment with bus lane. P.s.- Think of Westlake Tunnel in Seattle.

Page 4 of 4 Page 264 Community Meeting

Page 265 Meeting Overview

• Sign-In 6:00 pm – 6:15 pm • Presentation 6:15 pm – 6:40 pm • Q & A 6:40 pm – 7:00 pm • Open House 7:00 pm – 8:00 pm

Page 266 San Fernando Valley Projects

Page 267 North San Fernando Valley BRT Project Background

• Measure M funded project ($180 Million) • New bus rapid transit project in the North San Fernando Valley (Twenty-Eight by ‘28) • September 2017 – Completed Environmental Framework Report identifying study area and initial alignment options • Opening Day projected between 2023—2025

Page 268 Existing Transit Network

Page 269 Frequent Transit Network

Page 270 Common BRT Elements

Signal Priority Comfortable Stations Vehicles

Running Ways Branding & Image Off-Vehicle Fare Collection

Page 271 Enhanced Vehicle Technology

Metro Board has committed to operate a 100% zero-emission bus fleet by 2030. These new buses will bring important benefits to San Fernando Valley residents:

• No tailpipe emissions • Quieter operation due to electric drive motors and electric accessories • Better performance • Better ride quality

Page 272 What does BRT look like?

San Bernardino SBX BRT - Center/Side Running

Page 273 What does BRT look like?

Alum Rock Santa Clara BRT - Side Running

Page 274 Study Area

Page 275 Study Area Overview

Kaiser Permanente CSUN Transit Panorama City Center

Low-Density Development Page 276 Nordhoff – North Hollywood

Page 277 Nordhoff – Sylmar/San Fernando

Page 278 Roscoe – North Hollywood

Page 279 Screening Process / Criteria

Page 280 Environmental Planning Process

Page 281 Project Schedule

Environmental Alternatives Study (EIR) & Engineering Construction Operation Analysis Conceptual Engineering

Summer 2018 2025

Continued Public Participation

Page 282 Q & A

Page 283 Upcoming Meetings

Northridge– Thursday, September 20, 2018 Chatsworth– Wednesday, September 26, 2018 6 – 8 pm 6 – 8 pm Congregational Church of Northridge Our Community Charter School 9659 Balboa Bl, Northridge, CA 91325 19945 Jumilla Av, Chatsworth, CA 91311

Panorama City– Saturday, September 22, San Fernando– Thursday, September 27, 2018 2018 6 – 8 pm 10am – 12pm San Fernando Aquatic Center – Banquet Hall Sepulveda Recreation Center 300 Park Av, San Fernando, CA 91340 8825 Kester Av, Panorama City, CA 91402 North Hollywood – Saturday, September 29, 2018

10am – 12pm East Valley High School 5525 Vineland Ave, North Hollywood, CA 91601

Page 284

Contact/Contacto

Page 285 December 21, 2018

Phillip A. Washington, Chief Executive Officer Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority One Gateway Plaza Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952

Dear Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority CEO Phillip A. Washington:

On behalf of California State University, Northridge (CSUN) it is with great enthusiasm that I express our long standing and continued support of the North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor (North SFV BRT) project. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) technical staff, analysts and community liaisons have shown tremendous leadership during the North SFV BRT Planning and Environmental Study phase. The community meetings and information sessions that LA Metro recently completed have served as a valuable opportunity to have a robust discussion with community stakeholders, students and faculty about the future of integrated transportation. LA Metro should be commended for all their hard work and effort surrounding the initial phase of this project.

Through these forums, many critical questions and concerns were raised with some being addressed and others yet to be answered. The university understands that not all the remaining issues can be solved at this moment, yet we are confident LA Metro will address our concerns in the future. However, I do want to take this opportunity to provide you with some clarity on the outstanding concerns that warrant additional clarification. These issues include:

• Determining the proposed connection times between the Van Nuys Light Rail Corridor and the Nordhoff – Sylmar/San Fernando option if someone were to switch transportation modes. This unknown wait time is critical to assessing the need for this route. If the wait time exceeds what a person is willing to endure to connect again, the Nordhoff – Sylmar/San Fernando route should remain as a viable option. If the wait time is minimal then a strong case can be made to remove the Nordhoff – Sylmar/San Fernando route due to redundancy. The university understands and appreciates that LA Metro will explore potential redundancies in determining a final route. We look forward to that discussion in the future when the appropriate time arises.

• CSUN’s approved Master Plan Enrollment ceiling, which was established in 2006, is 35,000 full-time equivalent students (FTES). Over the past decade, the campus has grown to a current enrollment of approximately 32,000 FTES, which equates to a student headcount of nearly 37,000. By 2025, California is projected to face a shortfall of one million college graduates needed to support the State’s economy with a qualified workforce. Therefore, future policy decisions and actions by the Governor or State Legislature are likely to promote enrollment growth across the CSU, potentially expanding CSUN’s headcount upwards toward a student headcount of 50,000. I highlight this data to show these numbers reflect the complexity of using future projections to determine current policy decisions and how we, as an institution, navigate uncertainty. This uncertainty is a common thread that runs between our two institutions and we are sensitive to this reality.

Page 286 Phillip A. Washington, Chief Executive Officer Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority December 21, 2018 Page 2

We have high confidence in LA Metro’s ability to factor in all the pertinent data we can provide and determine how best to apply it.

We understand that not all the information we are seeking clarity on may be known at this time. Specifically, engineering data, as well as bus travel times and frequency of bus stop locations that are disproportionately used by CSUN students. This being said, I know that key members of CSUN staff have been in regular communication with your Metro team regarding how we can be helpful with data analytics relevant to the decision-making process. In addition, I want to reiterate our commitment to the development of a substantial transportation station at CSUN—which is the primary station on the route—given its importance to any line that has been proposed. We look forward to our continued partnership with LA Metro on this once in a generation transportation infrastructure improvement project.

Lastly, a gracious thank you to you and your staff. It is an honor to be in a partnership with those who can see the future and are also willing to shape it for the better.

Sincerely,

Dianne F. Harrison, Ph.D. President

DFH/fv/rr

Page 287