February 13, 2018

TO: Members of the Transportation Policy Committee

FROM: Mayor Kenneth Weise, Avondale, Chair

SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION OF MEETING AND TRANSMITTAL OF TENTATIVE AGENDA

Meeting - 12:00 noon Wednesday, February 21, 2018 MAG Office, Suite 200 - Saguaro Room 302 N. First Avenue, Phoenix

A meeting of the Transportation Policy Committee is scheduled for the time and place noted above. Members of the Committee may attend the meeting either in person, by videoconference, or by telephone conference call. As determined at the first meeting of the Committee, proxies are not allowed. Members who are not able to attend the meeting are encouraged to submit their comments in writing, so that their view is always a part of the process.

For those attending in person, please park in the garage under the building. Bring your ticket to the meeting, parking will be validated. For those using transit, the Regional Public Transportation Authority will provide transit tickets for your trip. For those using bicycles, please lock your bicycle in the bike rack in the garage.

Pursuant to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), MAG does not discriminate on the basis of disability in admission to or participation in its public meetings. Persons with a disability may request a reasonable accommodation, such as a sign language interpreter, by contacting Valerie Day at the MAG office. Requests should be made as early as possible to allow time to arrange the accommodation.

Refreshments and a light luncheon will be provided. If you have any questions, please contact Dennis Smith, MAG Executive Director, or Eric Anderson, MAG Transportation Director, at (602) 254-6300. c: MAG Regional Council MAG Management Committee Transportation Policy Committee -- Tentative Agenda February 21, 2018

TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE TENTATIVE AGENDA February 21, 2018

COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED 1. Call to Order

2. Pledge of Allegiance

3. Call to the Audience 3. Information.

An opportunity will be provided to members of the public to address the Transportation Policy Committee on items not scheduled on the agenda that fall under the jurisdiction of MAG, or on items on the agenda for discussion but not for action. Citizens will be requested not to exceed a three minute time period for their comments. A total of 15 minutes will be provided for the Call to the Audience agenda item, unless the Transportation Policy Committee requests an exception to this limit. Please note that those wishing to comment on agenda items posted for action will be provided the opportunity at the time the item is heard.

4. Approval of Consent Agenda 4. Recommend approval of the Consent Agenda.

Prior to action on the consent agenda, members of the audience will be provided an opportunity to comment on consent items that are being presented for action. Following the comment period, Committee members may request that an item be removed from the consent agenda. Consent items are marked with an asterisk (*).

ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONSENT*

*4A. Approval of the November 15, 2017, Meeting 4A. Review and approval of the November 15, 2017, Minutes meeting minutes.

*4B. Project Changes - Amendment and Administrative 4B. Recommend approval of amendments and Modification to the FY 2018-2022 MAG administrative modifications to the Fiscal Year (FY) Transportation Improvement Program and 2040 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement MAG Regional Transportation Plan, as Appropriate Program and 2040 MAG Regional Transportation Plan, as appropriate. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), and 2040 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) were approved by the MAG Regional Council on June

2 Transportation Policy Committee -- Tentative Agenda February 21, 2018

28, 2017. Since then, additional changes and modifications have been requested by member agencies. Project changes include updates from the Arizona Department of Transportation and other general project changes. The requested project changes were recommended for approval on February 1, 2018, by the MAG Transportation Review Committee. This item is on the February 14, 2018, MAG Management Committee agenda. An update will be provided on action taken by the Committee. Please refer to the enclosed material.

ITEMS PROPOSED TO BE HEARD

5. Loop 202/South Mountain Freeway Construction 5. Information and discussion. Update

Construction on the 22-mile Loop 202/South Mountain Freeway began in February 2017. In the past year significant progress has been made on meeting the schedule to deliver the new freeway by the end of 2019. Representatives from the Arizona Department of Transportation will provide an update on the construction progress and also will discuss the next construction activities (including potential closures) expected over the next few months. The Committee will also be presented the latest video illustrating the proposed construction of Loop 202/South Mountain.

6. Quarterly Status on the Implementation of the 6. Recommend approval of material changes Regional Freeway and Highway Program and requested by the Arizona Department of Material Changes Requests and Amendments to the Transportation in the amount of $16,752,108 in FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement additional program amounts to meet funding Program and 2040 Regional Transportation Plan needed at US-60/Grand Avenue at Bell Road and I-10/Papago at Fairway Drive in the current On April 26, 2017, the MAG Regional Council Regional Freeway and Highway Program, and of approved a tentative scenario for rebalancing the amendments to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Regional Freeway and Highway Program. As this Transportation Improvement Program and 2040 item was developed, MAG staff recommended the Regional Transportation Plan. Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) receive quarterly updates on the implementation of the Program. The last quarterly update was provided to TPC on September 20, 2017, on the status of constructing the 37 projects of the rebalanced program. ADOT, with MAG assistance, continues to refine delivery options and scoping of the projects. Since Regional Council approved the Regional Freeway and Highway Program

3 Transportation Policy Committee -- Tentative Agenda February 21, 2018

modifications in June 2017, ADOT has identified two projects in need of additional funding: (1) US-60/Grand Avenue at Bell Road in the amount of $10,752,108 and (2) Interstate 10, New Traffic Interchange at Fairway Drive in the amount of $6,000,000. In accordance with the Material Change Policy, approved by the MAG Regional Council in December 2017, approval is needed for increases to a project's program amount that is more than five percent overall, but not less than $500,000. Please refer to the enclosed material.

7. Amendment to the FY 2018-2022 MAG 7. Recommend amending the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program for Early Transportation Improvement Program to move $60 Right-of-Way Acquisition in the SR-30/Tres Rios million in right-of-way funding for SR-30 from FY Freeway Corridor 2021 to FY 2018 to allow for early right-of-way acquisition in the SR-30/Tres Rios Freeway Early or hardship acquisition of rights-of-way for Corridor. future freeways within the MAG Regional Freeway and Highway Program has been a practice undertaken by the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG). The goal with this practice is to protect future freeway corridors prior to an environmental action in the event the known location causes a financial hardship on a property owner. An early acquisition opportunity has been identified in the proposed SR-30/Tres Rios Freeway right-of-way at 99th Avenue in Phoenix to obtain a residential subdivision prior to its full development before construction of the Phase I (interim) roadway begins in 2022. It is anticipated that early acquisition of this development will actually save the program money and minimize residential relocations for new residents. Before ADOT can begin an early right-of-way acquisition, the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program requires an amendment to allow the process to begin. The Regional Transportation Plan presently identifies right-of-way acquisition funding for SR-30 in FY 2021. On February 1, 2018, the MAG Transportation Review Committee recommended approval of the amendment. This item is on the February 14, 2018, MAG Management Committee agenda. An update will be provided on action taken by the Committee. Please refer to the enclosed material.

4 Transportation Policy Committee -- Tentative Agenda February 21, 2018

8. Transportation Research Board Activities Update 8. Information and discussion.

The Transportation Research Board (TRB), part of the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine, has been the leading agency since 1920 for establishing technical standards and guidelines for constructing and maintaining the nation’s infrastructure. Every January, TRB has its annual meeting to present the latest in transportation research through 3,500 presentations over 850 sessions and 150 workshops, and attracts more than 14,000 attendees worldwide. MAG maintains a continuing presence in the TRB by contributing research papers on our transportation planning activities, annual meeting presentations, and membership and leadership with Standing Committees to establish research agendas. An update will be provided on MAG’s latest efforts with TRB, as well as information for member agencies to consider in their efforts to add and maintain their transportation infrastructure.

9. Legislative Update 9. Information, discussion, and possible action.

An update will be provided on legislative issues of interest.

10. Request for Future Agenda Items 10. Information.

Topics or issues of interest that the Transportation Policy Committee would like to have considered for discussion at a future meeting will be requested.

11. Comments from the Committee 11. Information.

An opportunity will be provided for Transportation Policy Committee members to present a brief summary of current events. The Transportation Policy Committee is not allowed to propose, discuss, deliberate or take action at the meeting on any matter in the summary, unless the specific matter is properly noticed for legal action.

Adjournment

5 MINUTES OF THE MARICOPA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING

November 15, 2017 MAG Office, Saguaro Room Phoenix, Arizona

MEMBERS ATTENDING

* Mayor Kenneth Weise, Avondale, Chair Mr. Charles Huellmantel, Huellmantel and Mayor Jenn Daniels, Gilbert, Vice Chair Affiliates Mr. Roc Arnett, Roc Arnett Consulting Mayor Georgia Lord, Goodyear * Mr. Dave Berry, Swift Transportation * Mayor Mark Mitchell, Tempe * Councilmember Bridget Binsbacher, Peoria Mayor Lana Mook, El Mirage * Mr. Doug DeClusin, Sunland Asphalt # Mayor Christian Price, City of Maricopa Councilmember Nora Ellen, Chandler Mr. Mark Reardon, Vulcan Materials Mayor John Giles, Mesa Company # Vice President Martin Harvier, Salt River Mr. Jack Sellers, State Transportation Board Pima-Maricopa Indian Community * Councilmember David N. Smith, Scottsdale * Supervisor Clint Hickman, Maricopa County * Mayor Greg Stanton, Phoenix Mayor Jerry Weiers, Glendale Mayor Sharon Wolcott, Surprise

* Not present # Participated by telephone conference call + Participated by videoconference call

1. Call to Order

A video on public input opportunities was played.

The meeting of the Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) was called to order by Vice Chair Jenn Daniels, Gilbert, at 12:02 p.m.

2. Pledge of Allegiance

The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

Vice President Martin Harvier and Mayor Christian Price joined the meeting by teleconference.

3. Call to the Audience

An opportunity was provided to members of the public to address the Transportation Policy Committee on items not scheduled on the agenda that fall under the jurisdiction of MAG, or on

1 items on the agenda for discussion but not for action. Citizens will be requested not to exceed a three minute time period for their comments. A total of 15 minutes is provided for the Call to the Audience agenda item, unless the Transportation Policy Committee requests an exception to this limit. Those wishing to comment on agenda items posted for action will be provided the opportunity at the time the item is heard.

No public comment cards were received.

4. Approval of Consent Agenda

Vice Chair Daniels stated that agenda items #4A, #4B, and #4C were on the Consent Agenda.

Vice Chair Daniels stated that on November 8, 2017, the MAG Management Committee recommended approval of items 4B and 4C that are on the TPC Consent Agenda.

Vice Chair Daniels stated that public comment is provided for consent items.

No public comment cards were received.

Vice Chair Daniels asked members if they would like to remove or have a presentation on Consent Agenda items #4A, #4B, and #4C. No requests were noted.

Mr. Charles Huellmantel moved to recommend approval of Consent Agenda items #4A, #4B, and #4C. Mayor Jerry Weiers seconded, and the vote on the motion passed unanimously.

4A. Approval of the September 20, 2017, Meeting Minutes

The Transportation Policy Committee, by consent, approved the September 20, 2017, meeting minutes.

4B. Project Changes - Amendment and Administrative Modification to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program, 2040 MAG Regional Transportation Plan, and FY 2018 Arterial Life Cycle Program

The Transportation Policy Committee, by consent, recommended approval of the proposed project changes for the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program, 2040 MAG Regional Transportation Plan, and FY 2018 Arterial Life Cycle Program, as appropriate. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), and the FY 2018 Arterial Life Cycle Program (ALCP) were approved by the MAG Regional Council on June 28, 2017, with the last modification approved at the September 27, 2017, MAG Regional Council meeting. Since then, additional changes and modifications have been requested by member agencies. Project changes requested include changes to the Arterial Life Cycle Program, changes from the biannual Project Status Report, and other general and administrative changes. The proposed project changes were recommended for approval

2 on October 26, 2017, by the MAG Transportation Review Committee and on November 8, 2017, by the MAG Management Committee.

4C. Arterial Life Cycle Program Project Change Request: Shea Boulevard at 125th Street

The Transportation Policy Committee, by consent, recommended approval of a proposed amendment to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 Arterial Life Cycle Program, FY 2018 - FY 2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program, and 2040 Regional Transportation Plan to change the project limits of the Shea Boulevard at 125th Street to Shea Boulevard at 124th Street. The Arterial Life Cycle Program (ALCP) is the financial management tool for the arterial street component of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Management of the program is guided by the ALCP Policies and Procedures, which were approved by the MAG Regional Council on June 24, 2015. The Policies and Procedures require agencies to present proposed substitute projects or changes in project scope to the MAG Street Committee for a technical review and recommendation for approval. The City of Scottsdale has requested a minor change in location to the Shea Boulevard at 125th Street intersection improvement project (RTP ID ACI-SHA-20-03-E). The proposed change was recommended for approval on October 10, 2017, by the MAG Street Committee, on October 26, 2017, by the Transportation Review Committee, and on November 8, 2017, by the MAG Management Committee.

5. Revised Material Change Policy for the MAG Regional Freeway and Highway Program

Mr. Bob Hazlett, MAG staff, stated that the revised Material Change Policy for the MAG Regional Freeway and Highway Program was on the agenda for action. He noted that the revised Material Change Policy was recommended for approval on October 26, 2017, by the Transportation Review Committee, and on November 8, 2017, by the MAG Management Committee.

Mr. Hazlett stated that the current Material Change Policy was approved in May 1998. Since this policy was approved, the Transportation Policy Committee, who takes the lead on Material changes, was formed; to define the term “program amount”; to further define that a material change is cumulative, not individual; to identify an annual schedule for material changes to be heard and acted upon, unless a project’s schedule dictates otherwise; and to update the name of the program to “Regional Freeway and Highway Program,” which is its legal name.

Vice Chair Daniels thanked Mr. Hazlett and his team for their work and asked if there were questions.

Mr. Dennis Smith asked Mr. Hazlett to clarify the cumulative amount for a material change.

Mr. Hazlett stated that a material change is an increase to the project’s program amount that is more than five percent cumulatively, not individually. For example, if project change #1 is less than five percent, but then change #2 brings the total (cumulative) amount to more than five percent of the project's program amount, then that constitutes a material change and is brought back to the Transportation Policy Committee and Regional Council for action.

3 Mr. Roc Arnett moved to recommend approval of the revised Material Change Policy for the MAG Regional Freeway and Highway Program. Mr. Charles Huellmantel seconded, and the motion passed unanimously.

6. 2017 Annual Report on the Status of the Implementation of Proposition 400

Mr. John Bullen, MAG staff, noted that state legislation requires an annual report on Proposition 400. He stated that the report addresses project status, financing, and the outlook for implementation. Mr. Bullen stated that a public hearing on the report, required by state statute, was held November 14, 2017, in the MAG Saguaro Room. Mr. Bullen noted that no public comments were received.

Mr. Bullen first reported that the revenue projections for 2018 to 2026 from the half-cent sales tax show a slight decrease of 3.1 percent from the 2016 report, due to the administrative fee that goes to the Arizona Department of Administration and a lower base year collection. Mr. Bullen stated that revenue projections for Federal funding total approximately $2.5 billion for 2018 to 2026.

Mr. Bullen reported on the Freeway/Highway Life Cycle Program for FY 2017. He stated that in FY 2017, five projects were completed, three projects were advertised for bid or under construction, and construction on Loop 202/South Mountain Freeway continued. Mr. Bullen stated that the Freeway/Highway Program rebalance was approved September 27, 2017. He added that the ending cash flow balance was $194.1 million.

Mr. Bullen reported on the Arterial Life Cycle Program for FY 2017. He indicated that two projects, one in Chandler and one in El Mirage, were completed, and additional funding was approved for the Gilbert Road Bridge over the Salt River and the Gilbert Road light rail extension projects. Mr. Bullen noted that during FY 2017, more than $88 million was distributed to agencies and $746 million has been reimbursed to date. He added that the ending cash fund balance totals approximately $27 million.

Mr. Bullen reported on the Transit Life Cycle Program for FY 2017. He said that service improvements were made on three routes and new service or service improvements were planned on nine routes. Mr. Bullen stated that construction efforts continued on the 50th Street light rail station and the Gilbert Road light rail extension. He noted that the ending cash fund balance totals approximately $284 million.

Mr. Bullen stated that future challenges for Proposition 400 include the changing nature of revenue sources, such as the gas tax or federal transportation funding, and project and program adjustments.

Vice Chair Daniels thanked Mr. Bullen for his work. No questions from the Committee were noted.

4 7. Planning for Autonomous Vehicles

Mr. Eric Anderson, MAG staff, stated that the Transportation Policy Committee first heard a presentation on autonomous vehicles and connected vehicles at the February 2016 meeting. He stated that the technology has been developing rapidly. Mr. Anderson stated that Waymo just announced that it will pursue testing fully autonomous vehicles in this region. He added that this testing program puts this region in the worldwide spotlight.

Mr. Anderson recommended reading the Waymo safety report issued last month that he thought was very useful. He quoted a few statistics from the report, for example, 94 percent of U.S. crashes involve human error, such as driving under the influence, distracted driving, or speeding. Mr. Anderson stated that 1.2 million traffic deaths occurred worldwide in 2013 – that is ten per day. He also pointed out that autonomous vehicles might contribute to mobility and quality of life, for example, the nation's first driver’s license was issued to a person with disabilities for an autonomous vehicle. Mr. Anderson noted that autonomous vehicles might be beneficial to Baby Boomers as they age in keeping them connected and mobile.

Mr. Anderson described different levels of autonomous vehicles. One level has the human driver monitoring the road and another level has an automated system monitoring the road. Mr. Anderson stated that Tesla is developing a vehicle with conditional automation. He said that Waymo decided about five years ago that it would not pursue this approach and would develop a fully autonomous vehicle because they feel people do not pay full attention if they are driving a vehicle with some technology assist. He noted that General Motors has stated that it expects to have a fully autonomous vehicle for sale by 2020 or 2021. Mr. Anderson stated that Waymo has stated its intentions to meet an aggressive schedule in getting autonomous vehicles on the street.

Mr. Anderson described Automated Vehicle Technology as consisting of radar sensors, video cameras, and LIDAR (laser mapping) combined with Predictive Artificial Intelligence. He noted that the software learns as you drive. Mr. Anderson stated that Waymo has developed its own hardware and sensor technology. He said that the mapping capability is approximately 600 feet around a vehicle and is able to sense things a human driver cannot, such as children running between cars, and at a much faster rate. Mr. Anderson stated that Waymo has videos on this posted on its website.

Mr. Anderson stated that a shared mobility fleet and convenience could add personal mobility and a household might not need two vehicles . He indicated that one benefit to shared fleets such as Uber or Lyft is a driverless vehicle that reduces their operating costs. Mr. Anderson stated that they are promoting this highly because of the economic incentive. He said that personal ownership of a car probably will not end because owners feel their vehicle expresses who they are.

Mr. Anderson stated that autonomous vehicles are projected to comprise 25 to 30 percent of the fleet by 2030. He noted that this is important because MAG’s planning horizon is 2040 to 2045 and we need to understand the implications of autonomous vehicles on the transportation system.

5 Mr. Bob Hazlett continued the presentation. He noted that autonomous vehicles still need a road to drive on. Mr. Hazlett pointed out that a New York Times article said that Arizona is leading the nation in autonomous vehicle testing. He added that Arizona taking the lead on autonomous vehicles has been noted in podcasts he has heard.

Mr. Hazlett stated that the four largest metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) in California conducted a survey of opportunities and risks resulting from autonomous vehicles. He said that autonomous vehicles will impact travel choices, land use, travel safety, public transportation, cyber security, and privacy concerns. Mr. Hazlett stated that the survey showed that fully driverless vehicles are anticipated to be ready for purchase within a three-year to 13 year timeframe. He noted that General Motors has stated that vehicles with some autonomous features will be available in 2020. Mr. Hazlett stated that the survey also found autonomous vehicles could result in a 40 to 90 percent increase in driving safety, an increase in roadway capacity of up to 45 percent, and a change in greenhouse gas emissions. Mr. Hazlett stated that autonomous vehicles could increase demand in vehicles miles traveled because an autonomous vehicle could carry out multiple jobs instead of remaining parked like a traditional vehicle. He said that we currently do not model for a zero-driver car.

Mr. Hazlett stated that a briefing document on autonomous vehicles written by the Transportation Research Board, which assists agencies on transportation, was included in the agenda packet. He further described how the briefing document for leaders noted how policy could be impacted by driverless vehicles. Mr. Hazlett noted that the State of Nevada just issued its first autonomous vehicle driver’s license to a blind man.

Mr. Hazlett added that the impacts to traffic congestion and land use are still unknown factors as planning for driverless vehicles begins. Mr. Hazlett stated that policy at the federal, state and local levels will be important to our planning. He indicated that land use might change as a result of autonomous vehicle use and gave as an example parking garages that might be used for other purposes. Mr. Hazlett stated that autonomous vehicles also could affect transportation infrastructure investments and MAG’s core business in planning.

Mr. Hazlett stated that one solution for developing a regional transportation plan is scenario planning, which is developing individual transportation plans based on different scenarios for illustrative use only. He displayed a graph of the cone of uncertainty to reflect how scenario planning fits into the overall MAG planning process. Mr. Hazlett noted that regional transportation plans can always be reassessed and adjusted. Mr. Hazlett stated that in the area of autonomous vehicles, MAG can serve as an information clearinghouse, can evaluate effects on long-range plans, and can develop guidance documents, templates, etc., for use by local governments.

Vice Chair Daniels commented that as a mother, autonomous vehicles cannot be implemented soon enough, but as a policy maker, she was not sure we are totally ready. She asked members if they had questions.

6 Mr. Jack Sellers stated that keeping in mind infrastructure needs for commerce is critical. He said that we concentrate on personal infrastructure needs, but infrastructure for commerce will be significant still. Mr. Sellers commented on the possibility that autonomous vehicles could increase the number of vehicles on the road, but even though there are more vehicles on the road, the roads could carry more capacity.

Mayor Sharon Wolcott stated that she anxiously awaited autonomous vehicles. She said that the one thing that we need to figure out is how to pay for the transportation system we need. Mayor Wolcott stated that the gas tax has not been increased for many years and there is reliance on sales tax, even though this ensures that everyone will pay a share of the transportation costs. She commented that a policy is needed on how to pay for transportation infrastructure in the future and that she thought there would be a substantial increase in roadway capacity in the future. Mayor Wolcott also mentioned dealing with autonomous vehicles that might be approved in one city and that travel to another city.

Mr. Anderson stated that the funding side is important. Another aspect not discussed is electrification of the fleet. With storage improvements and decreasing costs of vehicle batteries, use is doubling about every 18 months. Mr. Anderson stated that this technology is happening faster than people think. He mentioned that Volvo indicated it will discontinue the manufacture of internal combustion engines by 2020. Mr. Anderson noted that even though the gas tax has not changed in Arizona since 1991, no matter the rate no revenue will be collected with an electric fleet. Mr. Anderson stated that MAG staff met yesterday with a member of the Arizona Legislature who understands the issue. Mr. Anderson added that something needs to change about the way we generate transportation revenue.

Mr. Roc Arnett expressed his appreciation that Mayor Wolcott mentioned the transportation tax issue. He indicated that early discussion and decision is needed on the preferred method of taxation and how the payment will take place as part of this long range planning. Mr. Arnett stated that this region could have a lot of electric vehicles and not much revenue to cover activities.

Vice Chair Daniels asked Mr. Arnett if he would like to have this as a future agenda item. Mr. Arnett replied yes.

Mr. Charles Huellmantel expressed his agreement that discussion on our outdated gas tax is needed. He mentioned that the parking garage concept was quite interesting and he wondered when the impacts to parking rates would occur.

Mr. Anderson said that typically, the public sector response lags reality. He said that right now, there is competition with curbside rideshare companies. Mr. Anderson stated that there is some discussion that parking revenues might decrease due to rideshare companies. He added that development companies are taking into consideration when they build parking garages that the floors are level and have certain floor-to-ceiling ratios for potential conversions later. Mr. Anderson stated that financial institutions also have a say in parking ratios in the financing of a project. As we see more autonomous vehicles and ridesharing, there will be a change in the number of parking

7 spaces needed. Mr. Anderson stated that airport planners are already looking at this because why park your car at the airport and pay parking for three days when you can take Uber. He said that how and when it will happen goes back to the cone of uncertainty.

Mayor Wolcott stated that MAG is not authorized to change the law but could engage in discussion with the policy makers who will be charged with changing the law regarding the future needs of transportation. She expressed that it would be interesting to have everyone in that discussion together and she wanted to look at this holistically and not just make a recommendation to the Legislature only to have it fail.

Mr. Anderson stated that a Task Force last year looked at the issue of revenue from those vehicles that do not pay a fuel tax. He said that the Task Force came up with recommendations, including an annual fee. Mr. Anderson commented that he suspected there would be some activity on changing the system at the Legislature in the future, perhaps not this year. He indicated that staff is encouraging behind the scenes because of concern for the current source that maintains roads and streets.

Vice Chair Daniels stated that this is a multi-year conversation. She said that this group needs to coalesce around key points and to do that, best practices should be brought forth, the earlier the better.

Mr. Smith stated that the number one industry in this state is tourism and one issue is revenue from seasonal visitors, who need to be contributing because they are users of the infrastructure.

Mr. Sellers stated that even though we need a longer term solution than the fuel tax, he suggested that perhaps there might be an interim increase to the fuel tax, for example, a ten cents per gallon tax could result in $350 million per year. Mr. Sellers stated that this would cost the average motorist five dollars per month.

8. Update on Proposition 400 Extension Tasks and Discussions

Mr. Anderson stated that Proposition 500 is the informal name for an extension of the Proposition 400 sales tax. He said he would provide a review of how the Proposition 400/Regional Transportation Plan process was conducted. Mr. Anderson stated that it began on a Saturday in the summer of 2000, MAG staff met with a group of MAG consultants to discuss different approaches.

Mr. Anderson said that five expert forums were held in the spring of 2001 on demographics and social change, the New Economy, environmental and resource issues, land use and urban development, and transportation technology. Mr. Anderson noted that the New Economy panel included Tom Horan, Jon Talton, and Joel Kotkin. A keynote speech was given by Anthony Bounds. He stated that MAG also completed subarea studies, which generated ideas for projects.

Mr. Anderson stated that MAG already had a Regional Council Transportation Subcommittee, but in 2002, formed the Transportation Policy Committee, which included the business community.

8 He noted that then-Regional Council Chair, Mayor Skip Rimsza, advised that the support of the business community was essential to receive support for the sales tax extension. Mr. Anderson stated that the TPC membership and responsibility to develop the Regional Transportation Plan were later codified in State legislation. He stated that the TPC first met at a retreat in September 2002 and discussed transportation needs and funding in preparation for the development of the Regional Transportation Plan. Mr. Anderson stated that MAG had to go to the Legislature to be authorized to hold the election. He recalled that MAG was told the legislators wanted to see the plan first before it would authorize the election, which would need to be held by December 31, 2003. He added that legislators did not want the plan to include light rail. Mr. Anderson stated that the TPC proceeded on developing the plan through many two to three hour meetings that included a lot of give and take and discussions of scenarios. He stated that the Regional Transportation Plan was approved by the Transportation Policy Committee in November 2003 and ratified by the MAG Regional Council in December 2003.

Mr. Anderson stated that MAG went to the Legislature in January 2004 with the approved Plan to ask for an election, but legislators were not sure due to light rail. He noted that the elected officials and the business representatives who served on the TPC owned the Plan because they had helped to develop it. Mr. Anderson stated that the business community helped broker the solutions and elements of the final Regional Transportation Plan and so it had their support. Mr. Anderson noted that the TPC and Regional Council votes on the Plan were unanimous, as were the State Transportation Board and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.

Mr. Anderson stated that the bill authorizing the vote was the first bill out of the Legislature in January 2004. He indicated that MAG wanted a May 2004 election, but the Legislature wanted the election to take place during the presidential election year and it was held in November 2004. Mr. Anderson stated that there was 80 percent voter turnout and more than 57 percent of voters cast Yes votes for Proposition 400. He displayed a group photograph of the Governor signing the bill on February 9, 2004, at MAG.

Mr. Anderson stated that Proposition 400 expires December 31, 2025. The total anticipated to be collected is approximately $9 billion, which is approximately 40 percent less than originally projected due to the Great Recession, when the Program lost nine to ten years of growth. Mr. Anderson stated that Proposition 400 collection is projected at $640 million for FY 2026. Proposition 500 could generate roughly $13 billion to $15 billion during a 20-year term.

Mr. Roc Arnett asked for clarification if the $13 billion to $15 billion consisted only of the sales tax funds and not federal and state funds.

Mr. Anderson replied yes. He added that all of the funds were put on the table for the Proposition Regional Transportation Plan, and the challenge is estimating the other revenue streams.

Mr. Anderson reviewed some of the needs of the MAG Regional Freeway/Highway Program, totaling about $13 billion, with approximately $3.5 billion for operations and maintenance. He stated that projects include Pinal County projects, SR-30 from SR-85 to Interstate 17, and Interstate

9 17 reconstruction. Mr. Anderson noted that policy discussions will be needed on maintenance/landscape/litter pickup, which was funded in the amount of $10 million in Proposition 400, because the TPC felt the freeways are the gateway to their communities and at the time, ADOT was having some funding challenges. Mr. Anderson stated that everything MAG does to fund operations and maintenance takes the pressure off ADOT. He noted that in Proposition 300, the MAG region would pay for the construction of new freeways and ADOT would pay for the ongoing operations and maintenance. Mr. Anderson stated that there is a lot of need on the highway side, such as the reconstruction of the Stack interchange, major repairs to the Tunnel, and improvements to the Inner Loop on Interstate 10. He noted that autonomous vehicles could change the dynamics.

Mr. Anderson stated that the Freight Transportation Master Plan has been completed and identifies key commerce corridors. He noted that it is important to maintain connections on arterial streets as well as on highways. Mr. Anderson noted that with reductions in the gas tax and funding challenges by member agencies, Proposition 500 might include funding for arterial streets. He noted that approximately 10 percent of Proposition 400 funding is dedicated to arterial streets. Mr. Anderson said that discussion is needed on determining sources of sustainable funding for these types of projects.

Mr. Anderson displayed a map of transit routes with a demand for higher frequency service. He noted that one hour frequency does not work well, but supporting higher frequency costs money. Mr. Anderson stated that light rail will be a component of Proposition 500. Due to the Great Recession, some routes planned in Proposition 400 were delayed. Mr. Anderson stated that a High Capacity Transit Framework Study is underway that might identify transit route needs.

Mr. Anderson stated that work has been done on commuter rail since Proposition 400 was passed. He indicated that the TPC will need to discuss including commuter rail in Proposition 500. Mr. Anderson stated that a commuter rail study that includes rail costs and ridership information is underway should be completed in the next few months.

Mr. Anderson stated that other work, besides the commuter rail study and the transit framework study, includes focus groups and surveys, analyses of the impacts of vehicle sharing, autonomous vehicle, and sensor technologies, development of long-term revenue projections, and development of cost/benefit models. Mr. Anderson stated that a Plan is needed that resonates with voters and deals with the needs in this region.

Vice Chair Daniels asked members if they had questions.

Mayor Wolcott noted that when she served on the Minnesota Legislature it tried to replicate the success of the MAG region on Proposition 400 but failed. She asked for clarification of the TPC membership in statute.

10 Mr. Anderson stated that the TPC was created first by MAG before it was codified in state statute. He stated that the TPC included six business representatives: one transit, one freight, one construction, and three regionwide business.

Mayor Wolcott asked for clarification of the central and seven large member agencies on the TPC.

Mr. Dennis Smith stated that Glendale Mayor Elaine Scruggs, Phoenix Councilmember Peggy Bilsten, and Mesa Mayor Keno Hawker were on the MAG Transportation Subcommittee who put forth a composition. Having the seven largest cities on the TPC would ensure that an approved plan had the support of the majority of members and the recommendation of the TPC would not be overturned by the Regional Council. Mr. Smith stated that the TPC is a powerful committee, but the Regional Council is still the MPO in federal law.

Mayor Wolcott asked for clarification that the TPC composition is in state statute. Mr. Smith replied yes. Mayor Wolcott recommended that for Proposition 500 the composition be changed to reflect more than the seven largest cities. She stated that things have changed significantly and the West Valley is a high growth area. Mayor Wolcott stated that the TPC needs to include representation by cities most directly impacted by proposed projects. How do you not reflect that the business community is determining where the projects will go? When you have a billionaire dropping a lot of money in the middle of nowhere then that is where the infrastructure will go. Mayor Wolcott stated that she would not like to see the seven largest cities making decisions for cities two or three cities away.

Vice Chair Daniels noted that cities not on the TPC will have the opportunity for input.

Mr. Smith stated that five geographically balanced seats are included on the TPC, not just the largest. He stated that the private sector was the broker of this group, for example, at the time when the TPC was created, the TPC was intentionally not called the MAG TPC because its Chair, Tempe Mayor Neil Giuliano, wanted the private sector to have ownership of the committee and they were pivotal in discussions. Mr. Smith stated that AGC raised almost $1 million to support the Proposition 400 campaign, while light rail opponents raised $1 million. He indicated that the anti- rail people spent their money at the end of the campaign and were outspending AGC and other proponents by three or four to one. Mr. Smith stated that this cannot be just a MAG process or you will not have the business community spending money. He said that they had all of the lobbyists to get signatures on the bill and he brought 65 packets to AGC and still did not have enough. Mr. Smith stated that there was a reason Proposition 400 was successful. He stated that MAG lost in 1994 because it ran a traditional process – they had a technical committee, the MAG Management Committee, and Regional Council. They had consultants from California who recommended not putting the elected officials out front. Mr. Smith stated that in Proposition 400, the elected officials led the charge in their own communities – it was all hands on deck. He commented that if the private sector does not believe it has been treated fairly in the process, there will be problems.

Mayor John Giles expressed his appreciation to those who came before. It is great to have figured out the plan that works. Mayor Giles asked the process for asking the Legislature to authorize

11 calling for an election, who proposes the ballot language and the tax rate. He also added that this session or next session seem none too soon to begin the process.

Mr. Smith replied that it is up in the air if we need to ask the Legislature to authorize a vote. He said that most regions do not have to ask the Legislature.

Mr. Anderson stated that he confirmed unofficially with Legislative counsel that we would not have to ask for authorization, but they have not written an opinion yet. Mr. Anderson stated that the key to that is the percentages (the rate, term, allocations) would need to remain the same. He said that he heard that Representative Campbell has a draft bill ready to go authorizing counties to go to voters asking for up to one cent sales tax for transportation. The rate based on the needs that are determined. During Proposition 400 discussion, needs exceeded what was available. Mr. Anderson stated that the TPC discussed a full cent tax, a perpetual tax, etc., but then decided to keep the rate the same and change the allocation and it would not be viewed as raising taxes. He added that this was viewed as the safest political position. At the end of the day, it comes down to the impact on success at the election. Mr. Anderson said that there was discussion of a statewide tax, but rural agencies indicated that if there was a tax imposed by law was one thing, but they would not choose to tax themselves.

Mr. Roc Arnett stated that representatives from GPL, GPEC, Westmarc, East Valley Partnership, and AGC and major lobbyists met weekly and raised approximately $2.8 million for the advertising campaign. He commented that raising the money was a real business effort. At the end of the day, the goal was to get votes and to do that, the plan had to be balanced so all voters feel they are getting a piece of this. The plan has to be balanced or it will be viewed as skewed.

Vice Chair Daniels asked what will need to occur before we go to the Legislature.

Mr. Smith said that he would provide a review of what took place in past elections. The voters approved the 1985 tax, but it was followed by the savings and loan crash and the economic decline. Mr. Smith stated that KPMG Peat Marwick conducted an audit. He said that Lela Steffey from Mesa ran a bill that with a 20-year tax and a 20-year life cycle program was implemented. Mr. Smith stated that the life cycle program helped the freeway program. He said that in the 2004 election, life cycle programs were included for arterial streets, transit, and freeways, but the question for Proposition 500 is whether to tie up money for that length of time. Mr. Smith commented on projects being at the front of a 20-year plan. He stated that most MPOs do a five year transportation program and then figure out the next year, but we thought a better way is a 20- year program because we wanted to give the development community certainty. However, he was not so sure this is the best way because we do not know what will happen in year 15 or year 20 of a plan.

Mayor Wolcott stated that it is difficult to project because of unknowns, such as Bill Gates and his purchase of a significant amount of acreage.

12 Vice Chair Daniels stated that the plan will need some flexibility. She asked the steps for moving forward.

Mr. Smith stated that staff could provide some back-of-the-envelope estimates and they are already working on subarea plans. He indicated that the TPC will need policy discussion on maintenance costs. Mr. Smith stated that the TPC will need to discuss how revenue is raised, for example, Mr. Sellers’ suggestion about an interim gas tax and he noted that the Arizona Legislature is a no-new- tax legislature. He stated that another revenue source for possible discussion alternatives to assign a tax to a vehicle. Mr. Smith stated that staff needs to continue collecting more information to bring back to the TPC. He stated that a firm date for the election is needed, because that date drives the process.

Mr. Eric Anderson stated that we will need to go to the Legislature at some point as far as an election date to clarify the authority and distribution of proceeds from a tax. Mr. Anderson stated that he previously laid out a date of 2020, 2022, or 2024, with 2018 being too soon. He indicated that staff is currently working on activities for a scenario of November 2022, chosen because it was the date in the middle. If the TPC decided on November 2020, they could probably accelerate those activities and if November 2024 was selected, activities could be pushed out.

Vice Chair Daniels asked for clarification that this is currently a MAG-centered process. Mr. Anderson replied yes.

Vice Chair Daniels stated that there was discussion by the TPC at the May meeting regarding four policy questions and there was some direction to continue to include the manager’s working group in that discussion. She asked if this was going to continue.

Mr. Smith stated that the process for the 2004 election was not driven by the Management Committee. He indicated that this is reason the TPC had three-hour meetings – the private sector does not want the cake baked before it gets to the TPC. Mr. Smith stated that local government representatives will be staffed. He indicated that the then-Chair of the TPC, Mayor Neil Giuliano, made a call for projects at the first TPC meeting and MAG looked at the models to see if they provided any benefit. Mr. Smith stated that this process could provide 80 percent of the answer. He recalled what Mr. Arnett noted, that the vote will not be successful without support. In 1994, a technical committee, the Management Committee, and the Regional Council developed the plan. In 2004, it was the TPC who developed the plan and the elected officials and the private sector owned the plan. Mr. Smith added that the “TPC” is not the “MAG TPC.”

Vice Chair Daniels asked for clarification that the TPC would be doing much of the technical work.

Mr. Smith replied yes. The TPC would be brought the studies, the projects, and the policy issues.

Vice Chair Daniels asked when agency technical staff would be involved in the process.

13 Mr. Smith replied that in the 2004 RTP process, agency technical staff did not meet as a formal group in the MAG process, but they informed the TPC. It was clarified that MAG has a Transportation Review Committee and a Management Committee but not a managers’ working group.

Mr. Anderson noted that due to the nature of the discussion being so policy-heavy is the reason the TPC is where major discussion occurs.

Vice Chair Daniels asked for clarification that information would flow to the TPC from MAG staff.

Mr. Smith replied yes, and added that information also would flow to the TPC from member staff. He noted that a significant number of meetings took place in the East Valley and the West Valley and they were advising the elected officials. Mr. Smith stated that it was not a secret process.

Vice Chair Daniels stated that this was her first RTP development and she was trying to learn how everyone in the entire region, including the business community, will have the opportunity to weigh in.

Mr. Smith noted that they realized that people are not familiar with the process because Mr. Arnett and Mr. Berry are the only members still on the TPC from 2004 and no Management Committee member in 2004 still sits on the committee. Mr. Smith stated that Mr. Anderson’s presentation included an explanation of TPC responsibilities.

Mr. Anderson noted that in many regions, this type of process would be technically driven and the result is a technical plan that might not suit the policy. He stated that they flipped that. Mr. Anderson stated that this process worked quite well leading up to Proposition 400 and staff would recommend replicating that process for Proposition 500. He noted that the Proposition 400 process included a lot of subarea meetings and public involvement.

Mr. Smith noted that from a governance model, Arizona is the only state to have Management Committees in its COGs or MPOs.

Mr. Anderson stated that the public involvement component was a key driver in shaping the plan. and that information was always brought back to the TPC. If you miss the mark with the public, you will not win the election.

Mayor Christian Price stated that this is a very complex topic. He remarked that Mr. Smith is right about the TPC receiving information. Mayor Price stated that Pinal County recently had a half-cent sales tax election for road improvements, much like Proposition 400. He noted that complying with a new Arizona state law, the plan and the tax were separate votes. Mayor Price stated that the plan passed at 56 percent and the tax passed at 52 percent. He said that it is a matter of ebb and flow between the policy makers and the business community; it is about lots and lots of meetings and give and take. Without that evolution, it is difficult to arrive at that plan. Mayor Price said that a full-court press by the TPC is needed. He said that the public, the business community, and the

14 lawmakers at the State Capitol need to be informed. Mayor Price stated that he has a meeting with Senator Worsley soon and met with Speaker Mesnard recently. He said that there are those at the Legislature who say no to new taxes for everything. Mayor Price commented that at the end of the day, everyone together from this region needs to show them why it is important.

Mr. Charles Huellmantel said that he understood the inclusive process, but said that he would like to know which body determines the ballot language, what it includes, and how far in advance it needs to be finalized.

Mr. Smith replied that the answer is the MAG Regional Council because it is the official MPO, however, the way the TPC is constituted, its recommendation is very determinative.

Mr. Anderson stated that the ballot language was crafted as part of the development of HB 2456. He indicated that he and Mr. John Halikowski worked on the language with legislative staff. Mr. Anderson explained that MAG cannot call the election because it is not a government entity, but the legislation says that the Board of Supervisors shall call the election if requested by the regional planning agency.

Mayor Wolcott expressed her agreement with Mr. Sellers’ suggestion regarding an interim tax. She said that a stopgap measure is needed. Mayor Wolcott stated that there is confusion at the table and if there is confusion here, other people will be confused. She noted that Proposition 400 was Maricopa County and she asked what would be the jurisdiction of Proposition 500.

Mr. Anderson replied that the TPC could choose to structure it in different ways. He noted that Pinal County just passed its own half-cent sales tax, and he thought the assumption was that Proposition 500 would apply to Maricopa County only. Mr. Anderson mentioned that the Regional Freeway and Highway map he displayed earlier in the meeting contained many Pinal County projects, which would not be eligible for Proposition 500 funding if it only was collected in Maricopa County. Mr. Anderson stated that there have been discussions on whether taxpayers in this region should be asked to make improvements to Interstate 17 up to Sunset Point, however, this has not been discussed with the TPC. Mr. Anderson stated that staff would be providing a briefing on a Proposition 400 extension to the Management Committee at its January meeting. He added that this follows the same format as it did in 2004 – discussion would begin at TPC, then be presented at Management Committee, and then to the Regional Council.

9. Legislative Update

No update was provided on legislative issues of interest.

10. Request for Future Agenda Items

Topics or issues of interest that the Transportation Policy Committee would like to have considered for discussion at a future meeting were requested.

15 Vice Chair Daniels noted the previously requested item to discuss alternative methods of taxation besides the gas tax for long term planning.

11. Comments from the Committee

An opportunity was provided for Transportation Policy Committee members to present a brief summary of current events. The Transportation Policy Committee is not allowed to propose, discuss, deliberate or take action at the meeting on any matter in the summary, unless the specific matter is properly noticed for legal action.

No comments were noted.

Adjournment

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:45 p.m.

______Chair ______Secretary

16 Agenda Item #4B

MARICOPA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS INFORMATION SUMMARY... for your review ~Revised~

DATE: February 15, 2018

SUBJECT: Project Changes - Amendment and Administrative Modification to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program, FY 2018 Arterial Life Cycle Program, and the 2040 MAG Regional Transportation Plan, as Appropriate

SUMMARY: Since the TPC mailout on February 13, 2018, additional project changes have been requested. Updates include modifications to Table A tinted in blue, a new Table E, a revised requested action to include amendment to the FY 2018 Arterial Life Cycle Program, and an updated Prior Committee Actions section to reflect action taken by the MAG Management Committee on February 14, 2018. (Tables B, C and D remain unchanged.)

The Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), FY 2018 Arterial Life Cycle Program, and the 2040 MAG Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), were approved by the MAG Regional Council on June 28, 2017, with the last modification approved at the January 31, 2018, MAG Regional Council meeting. Additional changes and modifications have been requested by member agencies.

• Project changes requested in Table A include detailed project listings for the Highway Safety Improvement Program priority listings for Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) programming, general ADOT changes, and MAG clean up for the Project Initiation Pool for FY2018. Also, just added is a recent award of funding through the Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment (ATCMTD) Program, administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The project will be led by ADOT and the Maricopa County Department of Transportation. Stakeholders include Valley Metro, the cities of Chandler, Glendale, Mesa, Peoria, Phoenix, Scottsdale, and Tempe, the Maricopa Association of Governments, the Arizona Department of Public Safety, the University of Arizona, and Arizona State University. The project is the Loop 101 Mobility project and will address the collective goals of reducing congestion, increasing reliability, and improving incident and event management on the Loop 101 freeway and adjacent arterials by establishing Integrated Corridor Management capabilities. The project will support regional mobility, safety, accessibility and economic development.

• Project changes requested in Table B are regarding SR-30, early advancement of right-of-way funding, and material cost changes for the I-10 traffic interchange at Fairway Drive project, and the US-60/Grand Avenue at Bell Road project. These items are being heard as separate agenda items.

• Project changes requested in Table C are programming of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program and Transportation Alternatives funding for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. • Project changes requested in Table D are programming of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), and CMAQ 2.5 funded paving of unpaved roads projects.

• Project changes requested in Table E are Arterial Life Cycle project changes that include actual cost savings, clean up of duplicate work reflected in another project, and general project workphase modifications.

PUBLIC INPUT: None.

PROS & CONS: PROS: Approval of this TIP amendment and administrative modification will allow the projects to proceed based on agency updated work schedules, and will assist in ensuring that all sub- allocated federal funding is authorized for Federal FY 2018 projects, and the planned projects may proceed for the future work phases.

CONS: Approval of this item does not guarantee full utilization of current year funding, and additional changes may be required.

TECHNICAL & POLICY IMPLICATIONS: TECHNICAL: Projects that wish to utilize transportation federal funds need to be shown in the TIP in the year that they expect to commence and may need to undergo a conformity analysis or consultation. All projects that are programmed with Federal Highway Administration Federal Fiscal Year 2018 funds must submit their project for obligation to the Arizona Department of Transportation no later than June 1, 2018, or funding may be lost from the project and from the region.

POLICY: This amendment and administrative modification request is in accord with MAG guidelines.

ACTION NEEDED: Recommend approval of amendments and administrative modifications to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program, FY 2018 Arterial Life Cycle Program, and 2040 MAG Regional Transportation Plan, as appropriate.

PRIOR COMMITTEE ACTIONS: Since the TPC mailout on February 13, 2018, additional project changes were requested. Updated materials include modifications to Table A tinted in blue, and a new Table E, with an action for the agenda item that also has been updated to include amendment to the Arterial Life Cycle Program. These additional requests for project changes arrived past the submission time for inclusion in the MAG Management Committee agenda. The requested project changes that do not include these additional project change requests were recommended for approval at the February 14, 2018, MAG Management Committee meeting.

MEMBERS ATTENDING Patrick Banger, Gilbert, Chair Jim Shano, El Mirage Kevin Artz for Avondale # Brent Billingsley, Florence * Bryant Powell, Apache Junction * Phil Dorchester, Fort McDowell Roger Klingler, Buckeye Yavapai Nation Gary Neiss, Carefree Bob Rodgers for Grady Miller, Fountain Hills # Carrie Dyrek, Cave Creek * Michael Celaya, Gila Bend Marsha Reed, Chandler * Pamela Thompson, Gila River Indian # Louis Andersen for Greg Stanley, Community Pinal County Kevin Phelps, Glendale John Kross, Queen Creek Dan Cotterman, Goodyear * Bryan Meyers, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Jeff Kulaga, Guadalupe Indian Community * Sonny Culbreth, Litchfield Park * Jim Thompson, Scottsdale * Patricia Sorensen, City of Maricopa # Bob Wingenroth, Surprise Christopher Brady, Mesa Andrew Ching, Tempe Dawn Marie Buckland for Kevin Burke, Reyes Medrano, Jr., Tolleson Paradise Valley Vince Lorefice, Wickenburg Jeff Tyne, Peoria * Jeanne Blackman, Youngtown Ed Zuercher, Phoenix Eric Gudiño for John Halikowski, ADOT Joy Rich, Maricopa County Scott Smith, Valley Metro/RPTA

* Those members neither present nor represented by proxy. # Participated by telephone conference call. + Participated by videoconference call.

On February 1, 2018, the MAG Transportation Review Committee recommended approval of amendments and administrative modifications to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program and 2040 MAG Regional Transportation Plan, as appropriate.

MEMBERS ATTENDING Avondale: David Janover Maricopa County: Mitch Wagner for ADOT: Clem Ligocki for Gregory Byres Jennifer Toth Apache Junction: Mike Wever Mesa: R. J. Zeder Buckeye: Scott Lowe Peoria: Dan Nissen for Adina Lund * Cave Creek: Dave Peterson * Phoenix: Ray Dovalina, Vice Chair Chandler: Dan Cook Pinal County: Scott Bender for Louis El Mirage: Jorge Gastelum Andersen * Florence: Chris Salas Queen Creek: Mohamed Youssef # Fountain Hills: Randy Harrel # Scottsdale: Lisa Johnson for Paul Basha Gila River Indian Community: Tim Oliver Surprise: Karl Zook Gilbert: Rene Guillen Tempe: Robert Yabes for Shelly Seyler Glendale: Debbie Albert, Chair # Tolleson: Jamie McCracken Goodyear: Rebecca Zook * Valley Metro: John Farry # Guadalupe: Robert Thaxton * Wickenburg: David Nigh Litchfield Park:Woody Scoutten * Youngtown: Grant Anderson * Maricopa (City): Bill Fay

EX-OFFICIO (NON-VOTING) MEMBERS ATTENDING * Street Committee: Kini Knudson, Phoenix * Active Transportation Committee: * ITS Committee: Chris Hamilton, Jim Hash, Mesa Avondale * Transportation Safety Committee: Kiran * FHWA: Ed Stillings Guntupalli, Glendale

* Members neither present nor represented by proxy. + Attended by Videoconference # Attended by Audioconference

CONTACT PERSON: Teri Kennedy, TIP Manager, or David Massey, Transportation Planner II, (602) 254-6300.

3 TABLE A: Requested amendments and administrative modifications to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan1, TIP AMENDMENT #5 Sort: Section, Agency, Location, Work Year TIP Amendment #5

Work MAG Apport. Agency Section 4 TIP ID MAG ID Location Work Funding 3 Federal Regional Local Total TIP Change Request Miles Lanes

ID/ALI Mode

Year Before Year Program Federal TRACS/ Grant ID In Life Cycle Cycle Life In Lanes After

L101 Mobility Project; develop decision 101 (Agua DOT18- support system for Amend: New project. Part 1 of 5 Local match is ADOT Highway 2018 NEW Fria/Pima/Price): I-10 to 61 8 8 ----- 5-year ----- Freeway ATCMTD 2018 50,000 - 50,000 100,000 812 integrated corridor $50K (HURF funds) from MCDOT. SR-202L Santan Freeway management; Phase I - Project Initiation

L101 Mobility Project; develop decision 101 (Agua Amend: New project. Part 2 of 5 Local match DOT19- support system for ADOT Highway 2019 NEW Fria/Pima/Price): I-10 to 61 8 8 ----- 5-year ----- Freeway ATCMTD 2019 500,000 - 7,213,926 7,713,926 consists of $500K (HURF funds) from MCDOT, 811 integrated corridor SR-202L Santan Freeway remaining match is in-kind by partner agencies. management; Phase II - Design

L101 Mobility Project; develop decision 101 (Agua DOT20- support system for Amend: New project. Part 3 of 5 Local match ADOT Highway 2020 NEW Fria/Pima/Price): I-10 to 61 8 8 ----- 5-year ----- Freeway ATCMTD 2020 995,000 - 6,816,428 7,811,428 807 integrated corridor consists of in-kind by partner agencies. SR-202L Santan Freeway management - Phase III - Implementation

L101 Mobility Project; develop decision 101 (Agua DOT21- support system for Amend: New project. Part 4 of 5 Local match ADOT Highway 2021 NEW Fria/Pima/Price): I-10 to 61 8 8 ----- 5-year ----- Freeway ATCMTD 2021 2,600,000 - 7,887,520 10,487,520 8 integrated corridor consists of in-kind by partner agencies. SR-202L Santan Freeway management - Phase III - Implementation

L101 Mobility Project; develop decision 101 (Agua DOT22- support system for Amend: New project. Part 5 of 5 Local match ADOT Highway 2022 NEW Fria/Pima/Price): I-10 to 61 8 8 ----- 5-year ----- Freeway ATCMTD 2022 1,855,000 - 5,638,345 7,493,345 8 integrated corridor consists of in-kind by partner agencies. SR-202L Santan Freeway management - Phase III - Implementation

DOT18- 60 (Superstition): Crismon Design FMS ADOT Highway 2018 35674 4 4 4 ----- RFHP ----- Freeway CMAQ 2018 377,200 - 22,800 400,000 Amend: Delete duplicate listing. 462 Rd - Idaho Rd Rehabilitation

DOT19- 60 (Superstition): Crismon Amend: Change local match from regional to state ADOT Highway 2018 35674 Design FMS 4 4 4 ----- RFHP ----- Freeway CMAQ 2018 377,000 - 23,000 400,000 704 Rd - Idaho Rd funding. No change in total project cost.

Page 1 of 4 Date Printed 2/13/2018 TABLE A: Requested amendments and administrative modifications to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan1, TIP AMENDMENT #5 Sort: Section, Agency, Location, Work Year TIP Amendment #5

Work MAG Apport. Agency Section 4 TIP ID MAG ID Location Work Funding 3 Federal Regional Local Total TIP Change Request Miles Lanes

ID/ALI Mode

Year Before Year Program Federal TRACS/ Grant ID In Life Cycle Cycle Life In Lanes After

DOT18- Right of way plans and Amend: Decrease funding by $450,000. Excess ADOT Highway 2018 19798 MAG regionwide 0 0 0 ----- RFHP ----- Freeway RARF 2018 - 450,000 - 450,000 409 titles funding moved to contingency.

DOT16- Right of way property Amend: Delete project. Funding moved to DOT18- ADOT Highway 2016 3730 MAG regionwide 0 0 0 ----- RFHP ----- Freeway RARF 2016 - 450,000 - 450,000 405 management 402.

DOT18- Right of way property Amend: Increase funding by $450,000. Funding ADOT Highway 2018 3730 MAG regionwide 0 0 0 ----- RFHP ----- Freeway RARF 2018 - 900,000 - 900,000 402 management moved from DOT16-405.

DOT18- Design to replace wrong ADOT Highway 2018 4635 MAG Regionwide 0 0 0 ----- 5-year ----- Freeway State 2018 - - 245,000 245,000 Amend: Increase funding by $125,000. 843 way signs on freeways

Amend: Add new workphase. Projects DOT19- Regionwide; 10 Design Phase: Positive ADOT Highway 2019 NEW 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Safety HSIP-AZ 2019 752,515 - 45,486 798,001 programmed as part of ADOT statewide HSIP 810 Intersections Offest Improvments programming process.

Construction Phase: Amend: Add new workphase. Projects DOT20- Regionwide; 10 ADOT Highway 2020 NEW Positive Offset 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Safety HSIP-AZ 2020 605,972 - 36,628 642,600 programmed as part of ADOT statewide HSIP 806 Intersections Improvements programming process.

Construction Phase: Amend: Add new workphase. Projects GLN20- Install Flashing Yellow Glendale Highway 2020 NEW Citywide; 21 Intersections 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Safety Local 2020 - - 2,809,881 2,809,881 programmed as part of ADOT statewide HSIP 801 Arrows and Median programming process. Modifications

Project Initiation Pool for MAG funded Amend: Delete placeholder. Funding moved to MAG18- STBGP- MAG Highway 2018 10280 MAG regionwide CMAQ, STP, TAP, 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Other 2018 130,134 - 7,866 138,000 scoping study as part of the Unified Planning Work 7PIP MAG HSIP, and STP Program. projects.

PM-2.5 Paving Projects PM-2.5 non- Placeholder. Detailed MAG21- Amend: Delete placeholder. Funding programmed MAG Highway 2021 42548 Attainment/maintenance programming 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Air Quality CMAQ-2.5 2021 784,610 - 47,426 832,036 832 through competitive process. areas in Pinal County. expected Early to mid FFY2018.

Page 2 of 4 Date Printed 2/13/2018 TABLE A: Requested amendments and administrative modifications to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan1, TIP AMENDMENT #5 Sort: Section, Agency, Location, Work Year TIP Amendment #5

Work MAG Apport. Agency Section 4 TIP ID MAG ID Location Work Funding 3 Federal Regional Local Total TIP Change Request Miles Lanes

ID/ALI Mode

Year Before Year Program Federal TRACS/ Grant ID In Life Cycle Cycle Life In Lanes After

PM-2.5 Paving Projects PM-2.5 non- Placeholder. Detailed MAG22- Amend: Delete placeholder. Funding programmed MAG Highway 2022 42548 Attainment/maintenance programming 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Air Quality CMAQ-2.5 2022 797,992 - 48,235 846,227 832 through competitive process. areas in Pinal County. expected Early to mid FFY2018.

PM-10 Paving Projects Regionwide PM-10 non- Placeholder. Detailed MAG21- Amend: Delete placeholder. Funding programmed MAG Highway 2021 47291 Attainment/maintenance programming 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Air Quality CMAQ 2021 5,500,000 - 332,450 5,832,450 831 through competitive process. areas. expected Early to mid FFY2018.

PM-10 Paving Projects Regionwide PM-10 non- Placeholder. Detailed MAG22- Amend: Delete placeholder. Funding programmed MAG Highway 2022 47291 Attainment/maintenance programming 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Air Quality CMAQ 2022 4,500,000 - 272,004 4,772,004 831 through competitive process. areas. expected Early to mid FFY2018.

Amend: Add new workphase. Projects PHX19- 43rd Avenue; 3 Design Phase: Traffic Phoenix Highway 2019 NEW 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Safety Local 2019 - - 250,500 250,500 programmed as part of ADOT statewide HSIP 805 Intersections Signal Improvements programming process.

Construction Phase: Amend: Add new workphase. Projects PHX20- 43rd Avenue; 3 Phoenix Highway 2020 NEW Traffic Signal 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Safety HSIP-AZ 2020 802,302 - 214,210 1,016,512 programmed as part of ADOT statewide HSIP 805 Intersections Improvements programming process.

Amend: Add new workphase. Projects PHX19- Design Phase: Positive Phoenix Highway 2019 NEW Citywide; 6 Intersections 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Safety Local 2019 - - 275,000 275,000 programmed as part of ADOT statewide HSIP 803 Offest Improvments programming process.

Construction Phase: Amend: Add new workphase. Projects PHX20- Phoenix Highway 2020 NEW Citywide; 6 Intersections Positive Offset 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Safety HSIP-AZ 2020 961,181 - 268,531 1,229,712 programmed as part of ADOT statewide HSIP 803 Improvements programming process.

Thomas Road & Indian Amend: Add new workphase. Projects PHX19- Design Phase: Traffic Phoenix Highway 2019 NEW School Road: 4 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Safety Local 2019 - - 290,000 290,000 programmed as part of ADOT statewide HSIP 804 Signal Improvements Intersections programming process.

Page 3 of 4 Date Printed 2/13/2018 TABLE A: Requested amendments and administrative modifications to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan1, TIP AMENDMENT #5 Sort: Section, Agency, Location, Work Year TIP Amendment #5

Work MAG Apport. Agency Section 4 TIP ID MAG ID Location Work Funding 3 Federal Regional Local Total TIP Change Request Miles Lanes

ID/ALI Mode

Year Before Year Program Federal TRACS/ Grant ID In Life Cycle Cycle Life In Lanes After

Thomas Road & Indian Construction Phase: Amend: Add new workphase. Projects PHX20- Phoenix Highway 2020 NEW School Road: 4 Traffic Signal 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Safety HSIP-AZ 2020 1,072,907 - 285,805 1,358,712 programmed as part of ADOT statewide HSIP 804 Intersections Improvements programming process.

SUR18- 303 (Estrella): Litchfield Scoping for Traffic Surprise Highway 2018 NEW 0 0 0 ----- Other ----- Freeway Local 2018 - - 125,000 125,000 Amend: Add new locally funded scoping study. 802 Rd TI Interchange

Install DMS, CCTV TMP- TMP18- cameras, wireless link, T0120 Amend: Defer project from 2018 to 2019. This will Tempe Highway 2019 11549 Tempe (Citywide) 0 0 0 0(250) Other ITS CMAQ 2019 392,010 - 23,695 415,705 460 bicycle detection, & EVP 01C be the first deferral for this project. D networking

Amend: Increase costs to reflect one additional bus PHX17- Purchase bus: 11.12. 5307-AVN Phoenix Transit 2018 8434 Regionwide 0 0 0 TLCP ----- Transit Bus 2017 1,630,321 287,704 - 1,918,025 purchase as modification made to grant after 708T Articulated - 2 replace 01 UZA approval.

Amend: Decrease costs and amend into current PHX15- 11.7A. STBGP- TIP to reflect modifications made to the grant after Phoenix Transit 2018 44311 Regionwide Preventive Maintenance 0 0 0 5-year ----- Transit Bus 2017 34,559 - 8,640 43,199 444T 00 AZ-Flex approval. Update funding source to STBGP-AZ- Flex to reflect new name of program.

Notes

1. Rows in the report are sorted in order by the following columns: Section, Agency, Year and TIP ID. Changes are in red font. Deletions are show in strike through font. 3. The year the federal funds (if any) were apportioned by Congress. This item is included only for informational purposes.

2. The following are used to indicate MAG Committees reviewing these TIP listings for amendment: TRC = Transportation Committee, MC = Management Committee, TPC = Transportation Review Committee, RC = Regional Council 4. For federal projects this is the year the project will authorize. For transit this is the year the project will appear in a grant. 5. Changes are in red font. Deletions are shown in strike through font.

Page 4 of 4 Date Printed 2/13/2018 TABLE B: Requested amendments and administrative modifications to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan1, TIP AMENDMENT #5 Sort: Section, Agency, Location, Work Year TIP Amendment #5 Reviewed By2 T M T R Work MAG Apport. R C P C Agency Section TIP ID MAG ID Location Work Funding Federal Regional Local Total TIP Change Request 4 3 C C Miles Lanes Lanes ID/ALI Mode

Year Before Year Program Federal Federal TRACS/ Grant ID In Life Cycle Lanes After Lanes

Amend: MATERIAL COST CHANGE. Add DOT18- 10 (Papago): Fairway Dr (El Construct traffic ADOT Highway 2018 35521 0 0 0 ----- RFHP ----- Freeway RARF 2018 - 25,600,000 - 25,600,000 additional funding due to unforseen costs that were 803 Mirage Rd) TI interchange not anticipated in the predesign phases.

Amend: Add additional right-of-way phase. Advance 30 (I-10 Reliever): SR303L - DOT18- Right of way for Phase ROW acquisition funds needed today to purchase ADOT Highway 2018 10389 SR202L South Mountain, 13.8 0 4 ----- RFHP ----- Freeway RARF 2018 - 60,000,000 - 60,000,000 811 1 roadway hardship properties and a significant development Phase 1 under construction.

60 (Grand Ave): SR303L - Amend: MATERIAL COST CHANGE. Add DOT18- Right of way for Phase ADOT Highway 2018 35240 SR101L corridor, Grand at 0.25 6 6 ----- RFHP ----- Freeway RARF 2018 - 10,752,108 - 10,752,108 additional funding due to increased right-of-way 810 1 roadway Bell Traffic Interchange cost.

Notes

1. Rows in the report are sorted in order by the following columns: Section, Agency, Year and TIP ID. Changes are in red font. Deletions are show in strike through font. 3. The year the federal funds (if any) were apportioned by Congress. This item is included only for informational purposes.

2. The following are used to indicate MAG Committees reviewing these TIP listings for amendment: TRC = Transportation Committee, MC = Management Committee, TPC = Transportation Review Committee, RC = Regional Council 4. For federal projects this is the year the project will authorize. For transit this is the year the project will appear in a grant. 5. Changes are in red font. Deletions are shown in strike through font.

Page 1 of 1 Date Printed 2/12/2018 DRAFT Table C: Preliminary Programming of CMAQ and TA Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects

Life cycle Open to Lanes Lanes AQ Area/ Funding MAG CMAQ TA Year Year Location Work Miles ALI program, or TRACS Funding Federal Regional Local Total Traffic Before After county Year Mode Rank Rank Requested Programmed APPL Agency Section MAG ID TIP ID none Note Order Apache APJ19- Included design review fee of ----- APJ-21-002 Junction Highway TBD 801D Idaho Rd, Superstition Blvd to McKellips Rd (See Appl APJ-21-002) Design bike lanes, sidewalk, curb & gutter 2021 2 ------P Other ----- 2019 Bike/Ped Local - - 273,000 273,000 30,000 4 19 1 2019 Apache APJ21- Included contingency in local APJ-21-002 Junction Highway TBD 802C Idaho Rd, Superstition Blvd to McKellips Rd (See Appl APJ-21-002) Construct bike lanes, sidewalk, curb & gutter 2021 2 ------P Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 803,097 - 48,544 851,641 funding 4 19 2 2021 2021 Apache APJ20- Old West Hwy, Idaho Rd to Goldfield Rd and Winchester Rd, Old Included design review fee of ----- APJ-22-001 Junction Highway TBD 803D West Highway to the 6th St. alignment (See Appl APJ-22-001) Design sidewalk, curb & gutter 2022 2 ------P Other ----- 2022 Bike/Ped Local - - 278,000 278,000 30,000 7 23 3 2020 Apache APJ22- Old West Hwy, Idaho Rd to Goldfield Rd and Winchester Rd, Old Included contingency in local APJ-22-001 Junction Highway TBD 804C West Highway to the 6th St. alignment (See Appl APJ-22-001) Construct sidewalk, curb & gutter 2022 2 ------P Other ----- 2022 Bike/Ped CMAQ 1,461,557 - 88,344 1,549,901 funding 7 23 4 2022 2022 CHN18- mile north of Ray Road and McClintock Drive, SR 202L to approx. Design for bike lanes, Narrow or remove medians and ----- CHN-21-001 Chandler Highway TBD 801D 1/2 mile north of Ray Rd. (See Appl CHN-21-001) restrip roadway 2021 3.8 ------M Other ----- 2018 Bike/Ped Local - 420,000 420,000 Includes $10,000 review fee 5 1 5 2018 CHN20- mile north of Ray Road and McClintock Drive, SR 202L to approx. Utility relocations for bike lanes, Narrow or remove ----- CHN-21-001 Chandler Highway TBD 802U 1/2 mile north of Ray Rd. (See Appl CHN-21-001) medians and restrip roadway 2021 3.8 ------M Other ----- 2020 Bike/Ped Local - 150,000 150,000 5 1 6 2020 CHN21- mile north of Ray Road and McClintock Drive, SR 202L to approx. Add bike lanes, Narrow or remove medians and restrip CHN-21-001 Chandler Highway TBD 803C 1/2 mile north of Ray Rd. (See Appl CHN-21-001) roadway 2021 3.8 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 3,058,380 - 184,865 3,243,245 5 1 7 2021 2021 GBD19- Design and utilities for sidewalks and bike lanes with Combines design, review fees and ----- GBD-21-001 Gila Bend Highway TBD 801D Various segments in Gila Bend (See Appl GBD-21-001) shade trees 2021 1.3 ------M Other ----- 2019 Bike/Ped Local - - 357,000 357,000 utilities 1 8 8 2019 GBD21- GBD-21-001 Gila Bend Highway TBD 802C Various segments in Gila Bend (See Appl GBD-21-001) Construct sidewalks and bike lanes with shade trees 2021 1.3 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 1,110,967 - 97,153 1,208,120 1 8 9 2021 2021 GDL19- Avenida del Yaqui: Baseline Rd to Calle Carmen (NB) (See Appl GDL- Design of 5-ft bike lane and 3-ft buffer and pedestrian ----- GDL-21-001 Guadalupe Highway TBD 801D 21-001) crosswalks 2021 0.75 ------M Other ----- 2019 Bike/Ped Local - - 694,000 694,000 Includes $30,000 review fee 26 2 10 2019 GDL19- Avenida del Yaqui: Baseline Rd to Calle Carmen (NB) (See Appl GDL- Utility relocations for 5-ft bike lane and 3-ft buffer and ----- GDL-21-001 Guadalupe Highway TBD 802U 21-001) pedestrian crosswalks 2021 0.75 ------M Other ----- 2019 Bike/Ped Local - - 390,000 390,000 26 2 11 2019 GDL21- Avenida del Yaqui: Baseline Rd to Calle Carmen (NB) (See Appl GDL- Construct 5-ft bike lane and 3-ft buffer and pedestrian GDL-21-001 Guadalupe Highway TBD 803C 21-001) crosswalks on Northbound side 2021 0.75 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped TA 1,561,613 - 94,392 1,656,005 26 2 12 2021 2021 GDL19- Avenida del Yaqui: Baseline Rd to Calle Carmen St. (SB) (See Appl Design 5-ft bike lane and 3-ft buffer and pedestrian ----- GDL-22-002 Guadalupe Highway TBD 804D GDL-22-002) crosswalks on Southbound side 2022 0.75 ------M Other ----- 2019 Bike/Ped Local - - 53,500 53,500 Includes $30,000 review fee 27 6 13 2019 GDL21- Avenida del Yaqui: Baseline Rd to Calle Carmen St. (SB) (See Appl Construct 5-ft bike lane and 3-ft buffer and pedestrian GDL-22-002 Guadalupe Highway TBD 805C GDL-22-002) crosswalks on Southbound side 2022 0.75 ------M Other ----- 2022 Bike/Ped TA 1,237,886 - 74,824 1,312,710 27 6 14 2022 2021 GLN18------GLN-21-001 Glendale Highway TBD 801D Maryland Ave, 69th Ave to 75th Ave (See Appl GLN-21-001) Design bike path and stipe bike lane 2021 0.75 ------M Other ----- 2018 Bike/Ped Local - - 145,979 145,979 Includes review fee 6 17 15 2018 GLN18------GLN-21-001 Glendale Highway TBD 802RW Maryland Ave, 69th Ave to 75th Ave (See Appl GLN-21-001) ROW and Utilities for bike path and stripe bike lane 2021 0.75 ------M Other ----- 2018 Bike/Ped Local - - 17,000 17,000 6 17 16 2018 GLN21- GLN-21-001 Glendale Highway TBD 803C Maryland Ave, 69th Ave to 75th Ave (See Appl GLN-21-001) Construct bike path and stipe bike lane 2021 0.75 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 262,842 - 15,888 278,730 6 17 17 2021 2021 MAR19------MAR-21-002 Maricopa Highway TBD 801D Smith Enke to Edison Pointe (See Appl MAR-21-002) Design pedestrian path 2021 0.34 ------P Other ----- 2019 Bike/Ped Local - 75,439 75,439 Includes review fee 10 26 18 2019 MAR22- MAR-21-002 Maricopa Highway TBD 802C Smith Enke to Edison Pointe (See Appl MAR-21-002) Construct pedestrian path 2021 0.34 ------P Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 188,196 - 11,376 199,572 10 26 19 2021 2022 PEO19------PEO-21-001 Peoria Highway TBD 801D Stadium Trail, 73rd Ave to 83rd Ave (See Appl PEO-21-001) Design multiuse path 2021 1.23 ------M Other ----- 2018 Bike/Ped Local - - 147,750 147,750 12 18 20 2019 PEO22- PEO-21-001 Peoria Highway TBD 802C Stadium Trail, 73rd Ave to 83rd Ave (See Appl PEO-21-001) Construct mulituse path 2021 1.23 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 1,545,788 - 92,750 1,638,538 12 18 21 2021 2022 SCT20------SCT-21-001 Scottsdale Highway TBD 801D 68th St, Indian School Rd to Thomas Rd (See Appl SCT-21-001) Design road diet, bike lanes, and intersection 2021 1 ------M Other ----- 2020 Bike/Ped Local - - 196,012 196,012 Includes $10,000 review fee 8 9 22 2020 SCT21- SCT-21-001 Scottsdale Highway TBD 802C 68th St, Indian School Rd to Thomas Rd (See Appl SCT-21-001) Construct road diet, bike lanes, and intersection 2021 1 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 615,243 - 95,045 710,288 8 9 23 2021 2021 SCT20------SCT-22-002 Scottsdale Highway TBD 803D Thomas Rd, 56th Str to 73rd St (See Appl SCT-22-002) Design road diet, bike lanes, and intersection 2022 2.15 ------M Other ----- 2020 Bike/Ped Local - - 681,702 681,702 Includes $10,000 review fee 15 10 24 2020 SCT22- SCT-22-002 Scottsdale Highway TBD 804C Thomas Rd, 56th Str to 73rd St (See Appl SCT-22-002) Construct road diet, bike lanes, and intersection 2022 2.15 ------M Other ----- 2022 Bike/Ped TA 3,681,972 - 494,230 4,176,202 15 10 25 2022 2022 SUR20- At various locations along Bell Rd, Grand Av, Bullard Av, and ----- SUR-21-004 Surprise Highway TBD 801D Litchfield Rd. (See Appl SUR-21-004) Design and review fee for Bikeshare station siting 2021 7 ------M Other ----- 2020 Bike/Ped Local - 35,000 35,000 Includes $30,000 review fee 9 24 26 2020 SUR22- At various locations along Bell Rd, Grand Av, Bullard Av, and SUR-21-004 Surprise Highway TBD 805 Litchfield Rd. (See Appl SUR-21-004) Bikeshare Equipment (Bikes, Racks, Kiosks, Map Signs) 2021 7 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 213,080 - 12,880 225,960 9 24 27 2021 2022 TMP19- Country Club Way Bike Blvd, US60 to Warner Rd (See Appl TMP-21------TMP-21-001 Tempe Highway TBD 801D 001) Design bike boulevard 2021 3.5 ------M Other ----- 2019 Bike/Ped Local - - 464,000 464,000 Includes $10,000 review fee 14 4 28 2019 TMP22- Country Club Way Bike Blvd, US60 to Warner Rd (See Appl TMP-21- TMP-21-001 Tempe Highway TBD 802C 001) Construct bike boulevard 2021 3.5 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 2,611,733 - 237,867 2,849,600 14 4 29 2021 2022 TMP21- TMP-21-004 Tempe Highway TBD 803 Various Locations (See Appl TMP-21-004) Acquisition of bikes, racks, kiosks 2021 29 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 975,062 - 68,938 1,044,000 Includes $10,000 review fee 3 3 30 2021 2021 TMP19- Scottsdale Road Bike Lane Continuation (Curry to Continental) (See Conduct study, scoping, design; prepare construction ----- TMP-21-005 Tempe Highway TBD 804D Appl TMP-21-005) documents 2021 1.25 ------M Other ----- 2019 Bike/Ped Local - - 189,500 189,500 Includes $10,000 review fee 2 5 31 2019 TMP21- Scottsdale Road Bike Lane Continuation (Curry to Continental) (See TMP-21-005 Tempe Highway TBD 805C Appl TMP-21-005) Reconfigure roadway and construct N/S bike lanes 2021 1.25 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped CMAQ 1,256,548 - 85,953 1,342,501 2 5 32 2021 2021 TMP20------TMP-22-002 Tempe Highway TBD 806D North South Rail Spur MUP - Baseline to Knox Rd Design multiuse path 2022 3.5 ------M Other ----- 2020 Bike/Ped Local - - 482,000 482,000 Includes $10,000 review fee 13 7 33 2020 TMP20------TMP-22-002 Tempe Highway TBD 807U North South Rail Spur MUP - Baseline to Knox Rd Utilities for multiusepath 2022 3.5 ------M Other ----- 2020 Bike/Ped Local - - 50,000 50,000 13 7 34 2020 TMP22- TMP-22-002 Tempe Highway TBD 808C North South Rail Spur MUP - Baseline to Knox Rd Construct multiuse path 2022 3.5 ------M Other ----- 2022 Bike/Ped CMAQ 2,815,171 - 250,164 3,065,335 13 7 35 2022 2022 TMP20- including $10,000 ADOT review ----- TMP-22-003 Tempe Highway TBD 809D Baseline Road at Western Canal (See Appl TMP-22-003) Design multiuse underpass 2022 0.1 ------M Other ----- 2020 Bike/Ped Local - - 317,300 317,300 fee 11 16 36 2020 TMP21------TMP-22-003 Tempe Highway TBD 810U Baseline Road at Western Canal (See Appl TMP-22-003) Utilities for multiuse underpass 2022 0.1 ------M Other ----- 2021 Bike/Ped Local - - 123,500 123,500 11 16 37 2021 TMP22- TMP-22-003 Tempe Highway TBD 811C Baseline Road at Western Canal (See Appl TMP-22-003) Construct multiuse underpass 2022 0.1 ------M Other ----- 2022 Bike/Ped CMAQ 1,723,745 - 229,755 1,953,500 11 16 38 2022 2022 Maricopa MMA20------MMA-22-001 County Highway TBD 801D University Dr, Higley Rd to Power Rd (See Appl MMA-22-01) Design multiuse path 2022 2 ------M Other ----- 2020 Bike/Ped Local - - 285,000 285,000 20 11 39 2020 Maricopa MMA21- MMA-22-001 County Highway TBD 802C University Dr, Higley Rd to Power Rd (See Appl MMA-22-01) Construct mulituse path 2022 2 ------M Other ----- 2022 Bike/Ped TA 1,272,319 - 333,906 1,606,225 20 11 40 2022 2021

Printed: 1/25/2018 Page 1 of 2 DRAFT DRAFT Table C: Preliminary Programming of CMAQ and TA Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects

Life cycle Open to Lanes Lanes AQ Area/ Funding MAG CMAQ TA Year Year Location Work Miles ALI program, or TRACS Funding Federal Regional Local Total Traffic Before After county Year Mode Rank Rank Requested Programmed APPL Agency Section MAG ID TIP ID none Note Order

Year Category CMAQ TA Total

2021 Funding 8,902,638 4,188,864 13,091,502

Requested 12,640,936 1,561,613 14,202,549

Programmed 8,082,139 4,071,818 12,153,957

Under/Over 820,499 117,046 937,545

2022 Funding 9,044,031 4,259,666 13,303,697

Requested 6,000,473 6,192,177 12,192,650

Programmed 10,559,270 3,681,972 14,241,242

Under/Over (1,515,239) 577,694 (937,545)

Funding Funding 17,946,669 8,448,530 26,395,199

Requested 18,641,409 7,753,790 26,395,199

Programmed 18,641,409 7,753,790 26,395,199

Under/Over (694,740) 694,740 -

Printed: 1/25/2018 Page 2 of 2 DRAFT TIP Listings Table D: Particulate Matter Paving Projects (FY 2017 Call for Projects) Sorted by Agency, Location and Work Year

Funding Miles Lanes Before Lanes After AQ Area/ county Agency Section Work Year TIP ID Location Work YY Traffic: to Open Year Funding Federal Local Total Note Anderson Rd, 325 ft North of Maricopa-Casa Grande Hwy Design Road Amend: Add new project and work phase to Maricopa (City) Highway 2020 2021 1.5 2 2 M 2020 Local $ - $ 105,179 $ 105,179 to Peters and Nall Rd; and Peters and Nall Rd to Antone St Paving TIP. MAR20-201D (See Appl MAR-21-01) Anderson Rd, 325 ft North of Maricopa-Casa Grande Hwy Construct Road Amend: Add new project and work phase to Maricopa (City) Highway 2021 2022 1.5 2 2 M 2021 CMAQ 2.5 $ 437,565 $ 26,449 $ 464,014 to Peters and Nall Rd; and Peters and Nall Rd to Antone St Paving TIP. MAR21-202C (See Appl MAR-21-01) Amend: Add new project and work phase to Phoenix Highway 2020 Design 2021 24.9 2 2 M 2020 Local $ - $ 80,000 $ 80,000 TIP. PHX20-201D Various Locations in Phoenix (See Appl PHX-21-01) Construct Pave Amend: Add new project and work phase to Phoenix Highway 2022 2022 24.9 2 2 M 2021 CMAQ $ 1,585,709 $ 1,987,531 $ 3,573,240 Dirt Alleys TIP. Project sponcer to accept partial funding. PHX21-202C Various Locations in Phoenix (See Appl PHX-21-01) Design Road Amend: Add new project and work phase to Pinal County Highway 2019 Russell rd from Arica to I-8 (See Appl PNL-21-03) Paving & ADOT 2020 1.3 2 2 P 2019 Local $ - $ 172,968 $ 172,968 TIP. PNL19-205D PMDR Construct Road Amend: Add new project and work phase to Pinal County Highway 2021 Russell rd from Arica to I-8 (See Appl PNL-21-03) 2022 1.3 2 2 P 2021 CMAQ 2.5 $ 1,055,061 $ 64,266 $ 1,119,327 Paving TIP. PNL21-206C Design Road Amend: Add new project and work phase to Pinal County Highway 2019 Russell Rd from I-8 to SR84 (See Appl PNL-21-02) Paving & ADOT 2020 3.7 2 2 P 2019 Local $ - $ 437,000 $ 437,000 TIP. PNL19-203D PMDR Construct Road Amend: Add new project and work phase to Pinal County Highway 2021 Russell Rd from I-8 to SR84 (See Appl PNL-21-02) 2022 3.7 2 2 P 2021 CMAQ $ 2,699,025 $ 163,144 $ 2,862,169 Paving TIP. PNL21-204C Design Road Smith Rd from SR84 to Kortsen Rd and Kortsen Rd from Amend: Add new project and work phase to Pinal County Highway 2019 Paving & ADOT 2020 3.0 2 2 P 2019 Local $ - $ 360,000 $ 360,000 SR347 to Smith Rd (See Appl PNL-21-1) TIP. PNL19-201D PMDR Smith Rd from SR84 to Kortsen Rd and Kortsen Rd from Construct Road Amend: Add new project and work phase to Pinal County Highway 2021 2022 3.0 2 2 P 2021 CMAQ $ 2,210,041 $ 133,587 $ 2,343,628 SR347 to Smith Rd (See Appl PNL-21-1) Paving TIP. PNL21-202C Salt River Pima- Various Roadways on the Salt River Maricopa-Indian Design Pave Dirt Amend: Add new project and work phase to Maricopa Indian Highway 2020 2021 2.0 2 2 M 2020 Local $ - $ 86,300 $ 86,300 Community (See Appl SRP-22-01) Roads Project TIP. Community SRP20-201D Salt River Pima- Construction of Various Roadways on the Salt River Maricopa-Indian Amend: Add new project and work phase to Maricopa Indian Highway 2022 Pave Dirt Roads 2023 2.0 2 2 M 2022 CMAQ $ 967,672 $ 88,491 $ 1,056,163 Community (See Appl SRP-22-01) TIP. Community SRP22-202C Project. Amend: Add new project and work phase to Surprise Highway 2022 Construct Paving 2023 1.0 2 2 M 2022 CMAQ $ 560,790 $ 33,897 $ 594,688 Patton Road/Dynamite Blvd from 163 rd Avenue to 171st TIP. SUR22-202C Avenue (See Appl SUR-22-01) Amend: Add new project and work phase to Surprise Highway 2021 Design 2022 1.0 2 2 M 2021 Local $ - $ 84,500 $ 84,500 Patton Road/Dynamite Blvd from 163rd Avenue to 171st TIP. SUR21-201D Avenue (See Appl SUR-22-01) Design Alley Amend: Add new project and work phase to Tempe Highway 2019 2020 4.0 2 2 M 2019 Local $ - $ 63,500 $ 63,500 Paving TIP. TMP19-201D Clark Park in Tempe (See Appl TMP-21-01) Amend: Add new project and work phase to Tempe Highway 2022 Pave Dirt Alleys 2022 4.0 2 2 M 2021 CMAQ $ 1,190,773 $ 71,977 $ 1,262,750 TIP. TMP21-202C Clark Park in Tempe (See Appl TMP-21-01) Design Alley Amend: Add new project and work phase to Tempe Highway 2019 2020 1.0 2 2 M 2019 Local $ - $ 58,000 $ 58,000 Paving TIP. TMP19-203D George Ditch in Tempe (See Appl TMP-21-02)

Page1 of 2 Printed: 2/2/2018 TIP Listings Table D: Particulate Matter Paving Projects (FY 2017 Call for Projects) Sorted by Agency, Location and Work Year

Funding Miles Lanes Before Lanes After AQ Area/ county Agency Section Work Year TIP ID Location Work YY Traffic: to Open Year Funding Federal Local Total Note Amend: Add new project and work phase to Tempe Highway 2022 Pave Dirt Alleys 2022 1.0 2 2 M 2021 CMAQ $ 179,170 $ 10,830 $ 190,000 TIP. TMP21-204C George Ditch in Tempe (See Appl TMP-21-02) Amend: Add new project and work phase to Tempe Highway 2019 Design Dirt Alleys 2020 2.4 2 2 M 2019 Local $ - $ 63,500 $ 63,500 TIP. TMP19-205D Hudson Manor in Tempe (See Appl TMP-21-03) Amend: Add new project and work phase to Tempe Highway 2022 Pave Dirt Alleys 2022 2.4 2 2 M 2021 CMAQ $ 707,485 $ 42,765 $ 750,250 TIP. TMP21-206C Hudson Manor in Tempe (See Appl TMP-21-03) Total 11,593,291 4,133,884

FUNDING AND PROGRAMMING SUMMARY Year Source Funding Programmed Balance Carry Forward 10,689.00 0 10,689

CMAQ 5,500,000 4,909,066 590,934 2021 CMAQ 2.5 784,610 1,492,626 (708,016) Subtotal 6,284,610 6,401,692 (117,082)

CMAQ 4,500,000 5,191,599 (691,599) 2022 CMAQ 2.5 797,992 - 797,992 Subtotal 5,297,992 5,191,599 106,393

Total w/o Carry 11,582,602 11,593,291 (10,689)

Total w Carry 11,593,291 11,593,291 (0)

Page2 of 2 Printed: 2/2/2018 Maricopa Association of Governments Table E. ALCP Project Changes to the Fiscal Year 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program and the FY 2018 Arterial Life Cycle Program1 ALCP - IN TIP 2/13/2018 TIP # Agency Project Location Project Fiscal Est. Date Length Lanes Lanes Fund Local Cost Federal Cost Regional Cost Total Cost Reimb. Fund Regional Notes: RTP ID Description Year Open (miles) Before After Type Fiscal Type Reimb. Year Amend: Remove federal funding. Transfer regional funding to Chandler Heights Road: Acquisition of right- CHN20- construction phase and defer 1 Chandler McQueen Road to of-way for 2018 Jun-21 3.0 2 4 Local 2,100,000 - - 2,100,000 ------ACI-PRC-10-03-B 113RWZ year. ROW phase will be locally Gilbert Rd roadway widening funded. No change to open year or number of lanes. Amend: New TIP listing. Transfer Chandler Heights Road: ROW regional funding to CHN19- Construct STBGP- STBGP- Chandler McQueen Road to 2019 Jun-21 3.0 2 4 119,700 1,980,300 - 2,100,000 2019 1,980,300 construction phase and defer 1 ACI-PRC-10-03-B 113CZ Roadway Widening MAG MAG Gilbert Rd year. No change to open year or number of lanes. Amend: Delete TIP listing. Duplicate GLB20- Lindsay Road/SR-202L Gilbert Design Interchange 2020 Sep-22 1.3 2 4 Local 1,500,000 - 1,500,000 ------listing; work is already reflected in ACI-LND-20-03-A 122DZ TI & Frontage Rd DOT20-826. Utility Relocation Amend: Delete TIP listing. Duplicate GLB25- Lindsay Road/SR-202L Gilbert for Transportation 2021 Sep-22 1.3 2 4 Local 342,500 - - 342,500 ------listing; work is already reflected in ACI-LND-20-03-A 122CZ TI & Frontage Rd Interchange DOT20-827. Construct Amend: Delete TIP listing. Duplicate GLB30- Lindsay Road/SR-202L Gilbert Transportation 2021 Sep-22 1.3 2 4 Local 16,000,000 - - 16,000,000 ------listing; work is already reflected in ACI-LND-20-03-A 122CZ TI & Frontage Rd Interchange DOT20-827. Amend: Only $1,464,300 of the $1,500,000 programmed amount Northern Parkway: Design intersection MMA22- Maricopa STBGP- STBGP- authorized. Decrease listing to 99th Ave to East Loop improvement 2017 Dec-20 0.5 4 6 (1,464,300) 1,464,300 - - 2017 1,464,300 ACI-NOR-10-03-D 112DZ County MAG MAG match actual authorization. 101 Ramps (Reimb) Transfer the difference ($35,700) to MMA18-112DZ Northern Parkway: Design intersection MMA18- Maricopa STBGP- STBGP- Amend: Increase by $35,700 from 99th Ave to East Loop improvement 2018 Dec-20 0.5 4 6 (435,343) 435,343 - - 2018 435,343 ACI-NOR-10-03-D 112DZ County MAG MAG MMA22-112DZ. 101 Ramps (Reimb)

MES17- University Dr: Construct Amend: Decrease project cost to Mesa 2017 Jun-17 1.5 4 6 Local 2,567,215 - - 2,567,215 ------ACI-UNV-10-03-C 153CZ Sossaman Rd to 88th St Roadway Widening match actuals. Amend: Decrease project reimbursement amount by MES21- University Dr: Construct $691,100.20. Move balance to a Mesa 2018 Jun-17 1.5 4 6 RARF (1,728,347) - 1,728,347 - 2018 RARF 1,728,347 ACI-UNV-10-03-C 153CRB Sossaman Rd to 88th St Roadway Widening "savings" line item and defer in exchange for an ACI-SGB-10-03-B advancement. Amend: New TIP listing. Create MES18- University Dr: Project Savings for savings line item and defer to 2020 Mesa 2020 Jun-17 1.5 4 6 RARF - - 691,100 691,100 2020 RARF 691,100 ACI-UNV-10-03-C 153SAV Sossaman Rd to 88th St Roadway Widening in exchange for an ACI-SGB-10-03-B advancement. Amend: Advance $691,100.20 to MES20- Signal Butte Road: Construct Mesa 2020 Mar-15 2.0 4 6 RARF (58,900) - 58,900 - 2020 RARF 58,900 2018 in exchange for ACI-UNV-10- ACI-SGB-10-03-B 132CRB Elliot Rd to Ray Rd Roadway Widening 03-C deferral. Amend: New TIP listing. Advance MES23- Signal Butte Road: Construct Mesa 2018 Mar-15 2.0 4 6 RARF (691,100) - 691,100 - 2018 RARF 691,100 $691,100.20 to 2018 in exchange ACI-SGB-10-03-B 132CRB Elliot Rd to Ray Rd Roadway Widening for ACI-UNV-10-03-C deferral. 1. Rows in the report are sorted in order by the following columns: Agency, RTP ID, Project Description, Fiscal Year, and Fund Type. Changes are in red font. Deletions are show in strike through font. Yellow highlight represents changes made since Management Committee.

1 / 1 Agenda Item #6

MARICOPA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS INFORMATION SUMMARY... for your review

DATE: February 13, 2018

SUBJECT: Quarterly Status on the Implementation of the Regional Freeway and Highway Program and Material Changes Requests and Amendments to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program and 2040 Regional Transportation Plan SUMMARY: On June 28, 2017, the MAG Regional Council approved modifications to the Tentative Scenario for the Rebalancing of the Regional Freeway and Highway Program (RFHP). Since these modifications were made, MAG has met monthly with the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Infrastructure Delivery and Operations staff to monitor the progress for implementing the Program. As of the date of this transmittal, progress is being made on 19 of the program’s 37 projects. In addition to the current construction of Loop 202/South Mountain, ADOT’s current project development activities will result in the construction of the following projects in 2018 (please refer to the attached map for project locations): • Interstate 10, New Traffic Interchange at Fairway Drive (Map ID 2) • Interstate 17, Interchange Reconstruction, Happy Valley Road and Pinnacle Peak Road (Map ID 18) • US-60/Grand Avenue, Frontage Road Reconstruction, Greenway Road to Thunderbird Road (Map ID 39) In addition, ADOT expects construction to begin on the following projects in 2019: • Interstate 10, Add Lanes, SR-85 to Verrado Way (Map ID 1) • Interstate 17, Overcrossing Reconstruction, Central Avenue (Map ID 9) • Loop 101/Pima, Add Lanes, I-17 to Pima Road (Map ID 23) • Loop 101/Price, Add Lanes, Baseline Road to Loop 202/Santan (Map ID 27) • SR-24/Gateway, Phase I (Interim) Construction, Ellsworth Avenue to Ironwood Dr. (Map ID 33) • Loop 303, New Freeway, MC-85 to Van Buren Street (Map ID 35) • Loop 303, Add Lanes, Happy Valley Pkwy. to Lake Pleasant Pkwy. (Map ID 37) • SR-85, New Overcrossing at Warner Street (Map ID 38) In 2018 and 2019, ADOT expects to let approximately $723.2 million in construction projects. When combined with Loop 202/South Mountain, more than $1.6 billion in infrastructure construction is either or will be underway in metropolitan Phoenix. Since the Regional Council approved the RFHP modifications in June 2017, the MAG Material Change Policy was also amended on December 6, 2017 to provide for greater accountability in delivering the MAG Regional Freeway and Highway Program. In amending this policy, approval is needed for increases to a project’s program amount that is more than five percent overall, but not less than $500,000. ADOT has identified the following two projects in need of additional funding: • US-60/Grand Avenue at Bell Road - In closing out the final matters related to this new grade separated traffic interchange in Surprise, ADOT has identified severance damages that are

1 needed in the final right-of-way settlement for the project. These damages are due to the loss of visibility and view shed by properties adjacent to the recently constructed interchange. From agency experience, ADOT recommends settlement to limit the potential for higher costs from a judgment if the cases were to go to court. The recommended request is for $10,752,108. ADOT Financial Management Services and MAG staff have determined that the RFHP cash flow will support this additional funds request. • Interstate 10, New Traffic Interchange at Fairway Dr. (Map ID 2) - As ADOT is in the final stages of developing the design plans for the project, it has been determined that additional right-of-way is needed to accommodate the new traffic interchange in Avondale. In addition, the construction needed for structural walls to avoid recent development constructed along Fairway Dr. next to Interstate 10 has some unforseen costs that were not anticipated in the predesign phases. ADOT recommends an additional program amount for construction of $6,000,000 to meet these needs. This project’s current program amount is $23,450,000. ADOT Financial Management Services and MAG staff have determined that the RFHP cash flow will support this additional funds request Materials related to ADOT’s requests are attached to this transmittal summary. Also attached, data are provided for the RFHP as approved by the MAG Regional Council in June 2017 and the recommendations for February 2018. For changes from the June program, figures are in strikeout and a new recommended program amount or construction start date provided on the following line in red font. PUBLIC INPUT: None has been received at this time. PROS & CONS: PROS: When the MAG Regional Council approved the Tentative Scenario for Rebalancing the Regional Freeway and Highway Program in April 2017, with amendments in June 2017, the cash flow modeling identified a positive balance at the conclusion of the Proposition 400 program in 2026. The thinking was to maintain this positive balance to cover potential unforseen cost increases due to construction or right-of-way matters as the RFHP is implemented. This strategy is proving successful as ADOT Financial Management Services and MAG staff have determined that the RFHP cash flow can accommodate these needs. CONS: Although the RFHP cash flow indicates these additional funding needs can be accommodated, MAG and ADOT staff continue to work with project mangers and designers during the design phases to keep the project costs contained to the program amounts approved by the MAG Regional Council. Over the past two-years, MAG and ADOT have instituted a Cost Risk Analysis (CRA) program to work with the managers and designers to identify and quantify the risks associated with each project. While the program has been implemented on a project-by-project basis, MAG and ADOT are still in the process of implementing the Cost Risk Analysis on a program-wide basis to provide the strategic tools needed to keep costs contained. TECHNICAL and POLICY IMPLICATIONS: TECHNICAL: The Regional Freeway and Highway Program remains funded and all 37 projects identified for construction over the next 12-years remain on schedule for delivery. Unforseen costs have and will occur as the projects enter the predesign and design phases and the program amounts are challenged with engineering and constructability decisions. Likewise, right-of-way settlements in excess of program amounts are possible in the final development of an RFHP project. ADOT and MAG have instituted program oversight meetings and continue to develop tools to assist project managers and designers in their delivery of the program. Decisions made about current projects and

2 lessons learned continue to serve as examples for improving project delivery and keep costs contained to the program amounts approved by the MAG Regional Council. POLICY: Approving the changes recommended in this quarterly update is consistent with the process identified by MAG Material Change Policy approved by the MAG Regional Council in December 2017.

ACTION NEEDED: Recommend approval of material changes requested by the Arizona Department of Transportation in the amount of $16,752,108 in additional program amounts to meet funding needed at US-60/Grand Avenue at Bell Road and I-10/Papago at Fairway Drive in the current Regional Freeway and Highway Program, and of amendments to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program and 2040 Regional Transportation Plan. PRIOR COMMITTEE ACTIONS: No prior committee actions have been taken on the recommended action.

CONTACT PERSON: Bob Hazlett, Senior Engineering Manager, 602-254-6300.

3 North 19

37

18 22 23 17 21 39 25 16 15 36 14 20 13 12 40 11 3 2 26 1 35 38 10 9 4 28 Legend – Project Coloring 34 41 1 Map ID Numbers 29 27 Projects starting 2017 to 2019 33 32 31 Projects starting 2020 to 2022 8 7 Projects starting 2023 to 2025

Projects starting after 2026

RFHP Map IDs and Project Scheduling Numbers represent project (as of 6/5/2017) © 2017, All Rights Reserved. Identification numbers, only. 000 - Program amount or construction start date, no changes, approved June 2017 Regional Freeway and Highway Program 000 - Previous program amount or construction start date, approved June 2017 UPDATED 2/14/2018 000 - Recommended program amount or construction start date, February 2018 Proposed February 2018 Cash Flow Programmed and Rebalanced Projects Rebalance Cost Predesign/ Change of Design-Build Construction Map ID Corridor Improvement Type Project Limits Opinion Environmental Access Report Procurement Design ROW/Utility Construction Project Start 1 I-10 Add Lanes SR-85 to Verrado Way $ 108,300,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 300,000 $ 6,500,000 $ 8,300,000 $ 91,700,000 Aug-19 2 I-10 New Interchange Fairway Dr $ 23,450,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 1,750,000 $ 19,600,000 Apr-18 $ 29,450,000 $ 25,600,000 3 I-10 Rebuild Interchange Sky Harbor West Access $ 100,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 500,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 9,500,000 $ 85,000,000 May-24 4 I-10 Add Lanes, Rebuild Interchanges; I-17 Split to SR-202L; Bike/Ped Overcrossing at Western Canal (near I-10/US-60), $ 525,500,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 16,000,000 $ 12,500,000 $ 480,000,000 May-21 Bike/Ped Overcrossing Highline Canal (near I-10/Baseline Rd) 7 I-10 Add Lanes SR-202L to Riggs Rd $ 65,550,000 $ 1,950,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 59,600,000 Nov-24 8 I-10 New Interchange Chandler Heights Rd $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 Jan-22 9 I-17 Rebuild Interchange Central Avenue Overcrossing $ 23,500,000 $ 500,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 20,000,000 May-19 10 I-17 Add Lanes, Rebuild Interchanges I-10 Split to 19th Ave $ 217,350,000 $ 5,100,000 $ 750,000 $ 13,000,000 $ 8,000,000 $ 190,500,000 Jan-24 11 I-17 Rebuild Interchange Indian School Rd Traffic Interchange $ 59,450,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 750,000 $ 5,000,000 $ 1,200,000 $ 50,400,000 Jan-20 12 I-17 Rebuild Interchange Camelback Rd Traffic Interchange $ 68,600,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 750,000 $ 5,850,000 $ 7,100,000 $ 52,900,000 Jul-21 13 I-17 Rebuild Interchange Glendale Rd Traffic Interchange $ 75,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 750,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 6,350,000 $ 59,900,000 Jan-25 14 I-17 Rebuild Interchange Northern Avenue Traffic Interchange $ 66,850,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 750,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 2,900,000 $ 55,200,000 Jan-24 15 I-17 Drainage/Flood Control Peoria Ave to Greenway Rd $ 30,000,000 $ 200,000 $ 300,000 $ 4,500,000 $ 25,000,000 Jan-19 16 I-17 Rebuild Interchange Thunderbird Rd Traffic Interchange $ 113,650,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 750,000 $ 15,400,000 $ 600,000 $ 93,900,000 Jul-26 17 I-17 Rebuild Interchange Bell Rd Traffic Interchange $ 96,350,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 750,000 $ 7,800,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 82,000,000 Jul-26 18 I-17 Rebuild Interchanges Happy Valley Rd/Pinnacle Peak Rd Traffic Interchanges $ 49,500,000 $ 5,500,000 $ 500,000 $ 43,500,000 Jan-18 19 I-17 Add Lanes North of Anthem Way $ 50,000,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 3,200,000 $ 5,000,000 $ 40,000,000 Jan-20 20 SR-101L Agua Fria Add Lanes, new DHOV I-10 to US-60/Grand Avenue $ 268,800,000 $ 3,800,000 $ 500,000 $ 17,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 246,500,000 Jan-25 21 SR-101L Agua Fria Add Lanes US-60/Grand Ave to 75th Ave $ 93,400,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 6,600,000 $ 85,000,000 Jan-27 22 SR-101L Agua Fria Add Lanes 75th Ave to I-17 $ 62,000,000 $ 1,200,000 $ 4,400,000 $ 56,400,000 Jan-24 23 SR-101L Pima Add Lanes I-17 to Pima Rd $ 145,500,000 $ 5,000,000 $ 1,200,000 $ 139,300,000 Jan-19 25 SR-101L Pima Add Lanes Pima Rd to Shea Blvd $ 63,700,000 $ 100,000 $ 6,600,000 $ 57,000,000 May-20 26 SR-101L Pima Extend Roadway Pima Rd JPA Extension $ 3,931,000 $ 297,000 $ 3,634,000 Jan-20 27 SR-101L Price Add Lanes Baseline Rd to SR-202L Santan $ 55,050,000 $ 500,000 $ 3,150,000 $ 51,400,000 Jan-19 28 SR-202L Red Mtn - Add HOV Lanes Broadway Rd to Gilbert Rd $ 53,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 48,000,000 Jan-24 Santan 29 SR-202L S Mtn P3 Maintenance Forecast Maintenance $ 6,071,762 $ 6,071,762 Jan-22 31 SR-202L Santan New Interchange Lindsay Rd Traffic Interchange $ 17,842,500 $ 1,500,000 $ 342,500 $ 16,000,000 Mar-21 32 SR-202L Santan Add Lanes Gilbert Rd to I-10 $ 91,700,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 83,700,000 Jan-24 33 SR-24 Gateway Phase 1 New Construction Ellsworth Rd to Ironwood Rd $ 145,280,000 $ 8,400,000 $ 65,800,000 $ 71,080,000 Nov-19 34 SR-30 Phase 1 New Construction SR-303L to SR-202L South Mountain $ 342,500,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 22,000,000 $ 95,500,000 $ 222,000,000 Jun-22 35 SR-303L New Construction MC-85 to Van Buren St $ 120,000,000 $ 500,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 10,700,000 $ 93,800,000 Sep-19 36 SR-303L New Interchange Northern Ave-Olive Ave Traffic Interchanges $ 13,150,000 $ 150,000 $ 1,300,000 $ 600,000 $ 11,100,000 Jul-24 37 SR-303L Add Lanes Happy Valley Pkwy to Lake Pleasant Pkwy $ 41,100,000 $ 500,000 $ 4,400,000 $ 36,200,000 Jun-19 38 SR-85 New Overcrossing Warner St Bridge $ 5,500,000 $ 200,000 $ 5,300,000 Jan-19 39 US-60 Grand Rebuild Frontage Rd Greenway Rd to Thompson Ranch Rd Frontage Rd $ 6,000,000 $ 300,000 $ 5,700,000 Mar-18 40 US-60 Grand Rebuild Interchange Indian School Rd-35th Ave Traffic Interchange $ 85,900,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 7,600,000 $ 75,300,000 Jan-26 -- US-60 Grand New Interchange Bell Rd Traffic Interchange; ROW Settlement $ 10,752,108 41 US-60 Superstitition Add Lanes Crismon Rd to Meridian Rd $ 28,400,000 $ 1,900,000 $ 26,500,000 Jan-20 $ 3,336,875,262 $ 60,700,000 $ 8,550,000 $ 21,000,000 $ 195,997,000 $ 246,442,500 $ 2,804,185,762 $ 3,353,627,370 $ 60,700,000 $ 8,550,000 $ 21,000,000 $ 195,997,000 $ 257,194,608 $ 2,810,185,762

Maricopa Association of Governments 2/14/2018

Intermodal Transportation

MEMORANDUM

TO: Bob Hazlett, Senior Transportation Manager MARICOPA Association of Governments

THRU : Steve Boschen, IDO Division Director Annette Riley, Sr. Division Administrator

FROM: Derek B. Boland, Sr. Project Manager DB

DATE: December 28, 2017

RE: US 60 / Bell Rd. TI Right of Way Cost Increase Justification (H8485 01C)

This memorandum provides a justification for the requested additional funds needed for the now constructed improvements of US 60/Bell Road Traffic Interchange project. This design‐build project impacted two large retail centers with anchor tenants in Surprise, Arizona. The Right of Way Estimate was based off the Design Concept Report and updated as the design took shape but did not take into consideration the significant amount of severance damages being claimed by property owners. Severance Damages are due to loss of visibility and access which ADOT was not able to appraise accurately during the scoping phase. The appraisal valuations set the basis for offer for properties. When a parcel proceeds to condemnation a separate appraisal is conducted per the legal process. The new appraisers had the benefit of viewing the actual severance damages in the field after construction, which caused higher than expected severance damages.

Please see attached Right of Way project foot print map for your reference. It is ADOT's recommendation to settle these parcels to limit the potential for higher costs associated with trial and judgments should these cases go to court.

Based on this, project team is requesting additional $10.752.108.00 to settle outstanding condemnation cases for this project.

Attachments: Map of ROW Impacts, DCR vs. Final Design

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 206 S. 17th Ave. | Phoenix, AZ 85007 | azdot.gov US 60 (Grand Avenue) Bell Road Traffic Interchange TRACS No.: H8485 01C

7-

11900

D

A

O

R

1 L 1 L 3 3 0 100 200 E 4 4 T T B H H

D A R V Scale I E V N 7- E U E 11957

7- 11804

7- 7- 11956 11811

7- 11803 7- 11802 7- 11805

7- 11797

7- 7- 11821 11821

BNSF BNSF

US 60 (GRAND AVENUE)

US 60 (GRAND AVENUE)

7-

11807 E E 7- 7- 7- 7-

7- Einstein Bagels V

V I

I 11816 11806 7- 7- 11815 11898

11896 R 7- R

11800 11817 D

D

11819 7- E R 7- 7-

7- D

E 11814

11899 T

11808 11800 N

A

N

E

R

C

G

L

E

L

N

E

W B

Walmart O T 7- 7- 11897 11801

D A 7- O 11799 R L L E B

W E S T Right-Of-Way Summary P O LEGEND: IN T P Acquired A R K Eliminated Acquisitions From DCR W A Y PRINTED:8/22/2017

Intermodal Transportation

MEMORANDUM

TO: Bob Hazlett, Senior Transportation Manager MARICOPA Association of Governments THRU: Steve Boschen, IDO Division Director SCB Steve Mishler, Acting PMG Group Manager

FROM: Siva Sivakumar, Project Manager

DATE: January 18, 2017

RE: I-10 Fairway Drive Traffic Interchange Project (H8587) Increase Funding $6.0M for a total of $29.45M

This memorandum provides justification for the requested additional funds needed for the acquisition of the real property interest and for the construction of the I-10 Fairway Drive Traffic Interchange project.

Right of Way/Real Property Interest needs:

Three parcel acquisitions are needed for this project. The original right of way estimate did not include condemnation costs. This project has acquired two parcels after negotiated settlements and the third parcel is in condemnation. Based on past experience on condemnation negotiation, it is estimated that the project will need an additional $500K to resolve this case in court, thereby completing the right of way requirements for the project. This $500K is inclusive of additional monies over the appraised value needed to resolve the case, plus statutory interest on the money deposited with the court.

Construction needs:

The Stage IV estimate (October 2017) for the above referenced project exceeds the programmed amount for this project. Two of the primary contributors to the cost increase include the retaining walls foundations and the AR-ACFC resurfacing.

An in-depth geotechnical investigation was completed following the Stage III submittal. Based on this investigation, the final recommendations included over-excavation (to depths ranging from 5’ to 15’) below the new retaining walls to mitigate geotechnical concerns. In addition the AR- ACFC between Dysart Road and Avondale Boulevard will be replaced based on its current condition. The additional $5.5M cost of these items was not anticipated with the Design Concept Report (DCR) estimate.

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 206 S. 17th Ave. | Phoenix, AZ 85007 | azdot.gov

Based on the above, the project team is requesting an increase of $6.0M for a total of $29.45M to deliver this project.

Attachments: Project Map

I-10 Fairway Dr T.I. TRACS No.: H8587 01D E R L A A E D Y N D I-10 O O V O A G r e v i d R v

l

a Garfield St B i

r e F l

e a a v d u A n

g d o h A R v t

t 9 A r 1 a 1 s y D

Corporate Dr r D

LEGEND y

a Existing Right-Of-Way

Existing Access Control w

r New Right-Of-Way i

a New Access Control

F City Boundary

Proposed Retaining Wall

Proposed Bridge Proposed Drainage Improvements

New AR-ACFC

Proposed Work

Van Buren St Improvements By Others

Exst Ramps & I-10 Aux Lanes

Agenda Item #7

MARICOPA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS INFORMATION SUMMARY... for your review

DATE: February 13, 2018

SUBJECT: Amendment to the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program for Early Right-of-Way Acquisition in the SR-30/Tres Rios Freeway Corridor

SUMMARY: On June 28, 2017, the MAG Regional Council approved modifications to the 2017 Tentative Scenario for rebalancing the Regional Freeway and Highway Program to include phase I (interim) construction of Arizona State Route (SR) 30/Tres Rios Freeway between Loop 303 and Loop 202/South Mountain Freeway. This segment of the future freeway corridor is located in the West Valley and is planned for construction within the cities Avondale, Goodyear, and Phoenix, as well as unincorporated Maricopa County. Construction of this facility is scheduled to begin in June 2022, and a program amount of $342,500,000 was identified.

Since this action was taken by the Regional Council, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) has been active in developing the project’s predesign and environmental tasks, including development of an Environmental Assessment scheduled for completion in early 2019. As stakeholders have been engaged along the preferred centerline of SR-30, an opportunity has developed to acquire a residential subdivision at 99th Avenue in Phoenix, presently under construction, prior to its full development. ADOT is requesting action to acquire the development before the project’s right-of-way and utility phases start after the Environmental Assessment is completed. It is anticipated that early acquisition of this development will save the program costs and minimize multiple residential relocations for new residents.

Early, or hardship, acquisition of rights-of-way for future freeways within the MAG Regional Freeway and Highway Program has been a practice undertaken by the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG). The goal with this practice is to protect future freeway corridors prior to an environmental action in the event the known location causes a financial hardship on a property owner. Examples of early acquisitions including purchasing parcels near the I-10/US-60 system traffic interchange in Tempe in anticipation of the future widening to allow for ramp braids and collector-distributor roadways programmed for construction in 2021, as well as in the Loop 202/South Mountain Freeway corridor near Dobbins Road in Phoenix.

Before ADOT can begin an early right-of-way acquisition, the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) requires an amendment to allow the process to begin. This is subject of this agenda item.

1 PUBLIC INPUT: No specific input has been received by MAG on this matter. On November 16, 2017, ADOT conducted a public meeting with affected stakeholders in the preferred SR-30 corridor that generated the need for this early acquisition.

PROS & CONS: PROS: Presently, a $340 million phase I (interim) facility is programmed for the segment from Loop 303 in Goodyear to Loop 202/South Mountain in Phoenix, with construction estimated to begin in 2022. This early acquisition action is anticipated to save the Regional Freeway and Highway Program over time as steps will be taken to obtain the entire development at one time instead of a prolonged process to acquire each individual residence if the subdivision were to be fully developed and all parcels sold. In practice, early acquisitions have proven to be very effective in containing costs and preventing hardships as demonstrated in those parcels obtained for Loop 202/South Mountain in Phoenix and near the junction of I-10 and US-60 in Tempe.

CONS: Corridor preservation for future freeways in the MAG Regional Freeway and Highway Program has been challenging. Until the environmental process is completed, ADOT has no ability to set the corridor’s center line to begin the right-of-way acquisition process. However, early, or hardship acquisitions have been used in the past with success in preserving corridors for future freeways.

TECHNICAL & POLICY IMPLICATIONS: TECHNICAL: The future SR-30/Tres Rios Freeway corridor will provide a critical function in the West Valley, and its long-term operation will be key to economic activity and the region’s quality of life. Early acquisition in this corridor is actually an advancement of right-of-way activities for SR-30 from presently programmed in July 2020 to February 2018. A program amount of $95 million has been allotted for right-of-way acquisition for this segment of SR-30. The request is to advance $60 million of that approved program amount.

POLICY: ADOT’s Red Letter process has been an effective tool in advising MAG member agencies about potential locations for future freeway corridors. This process also identifies potential conflicts and notes the need for early, or hardship acquisition of rights-of-way before environmental actions have concluded. As noted, ADOT has undertaken early acquisitions, by advancing right-of-way activities, to save the program money overall and minimize potential hardships as environmental actions are developed.

ACTION NEEDED: Recommend amending the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program to move $60 million in right-of-way funding for SR-30 from FY 2021 to FY 2018 to allow for early right-of-way acquisition in the SR-30/Tres Rios Freeway Corridor.

PRIOR COMMITTEE ACTIONS: This item is on the February 14, 2018, MAG Management Committee agenda. An update will be provided on action taken by the Committee.

On February 1, 2018, the MAG Transportation Review Committee recommended approval of the FY 2018-2022 MAG Transportation Improvement Program for $60 million to allow for early right-of-way acquisition in the SR-30/Tres Rios Freeway Corridor.

2 MEMBERS ATTENDING Avondale: David Janover Maricopa County: Mitch Wagner for ADOT: Clem Ligocki for Gregory Byres Jennifer Toth Apache Junction: Mike Wever Mesa: R. J. Zeder Buckeye: Scott Lowe Peoria: Dan Nissen for Adina Lund * Cave Creek: Dave Peterson * Phoenix: Ray Dovalina, Vice Chair Chandler: Dan Cook Pinal County: Scott Bender for Louis El Mirage: Jorge Gastelum Andersen * Florence: Chris Salas Queen Creek: Mohamed Youssef # Fountain Hills: Randy Harrel # Scottsdale: Lisa Johnson for Paul Basha Gila River Indian Community: Tim Oliver Surprise: Karl Zook Gilbert: Rene Guillen Tempe: Robert Yabes for Shelly Seyler Glendale: Debbie Albert, Chair # Tolleson: Jamie McCracken Goodyear: Rebecca Zook * Valley Metro: John Farry # Guadalupe: Robert Thaxton * Wickenburg: David Nigh Litchfield Park:Woody Scoutten * Youngtown: Grant Anderson * Maricopa (City): Bill Fay

EX-OFFICIO (NON-VOTING) MEMBERS ATTENDING * Street Committee: Kini Knudson, Phoenix * Active Transportation Committee: * ITS Committee: Chris Hamilton, Jim Hash, Mesa Avondale * Transportation Safety Committee: Kiran * FHWA: Ed Stillings Guntupalli, Glendale

* Members neither present nor represented by proxy. + Attended by Videoconference # Attended by Audioconference

CONTACT PERSON: Bob Hazlett, MAG Senior Engineering Manager, 602 254-6300.

3 Intermodal Transportation

MEMORANDUM

TO: Bob Hazlett, Senior Transportation Manager MARICOPA Association of Governments

THRU: Steve Boschen, IDO Division Director SB Steve Mishler, Acting PMG Group Manager

FROM: Tricia Brown, Project Manager

DATE: January 24, 2018

RE: State Route 30 (SR 303 to SR 202 South Mountain) H6876 Request for Advanced Right‐of‐Way (ROW) Acquisition Funds

Advanced ROW acquisition funds are needed for State Route 30, between SR 303 and SR 202 South Mountain Freeways.

A public meeting was held on November 16, 2017, where the Recommended Build Alternative was presented. Since then, the ADOT study team has identified current and future developments as well as potential hardship properties that are located along the path of this build alignment. ADOT strongly recommends advanced acquisition of these properties as soon as possible to eliminate escalating ROW costs as well as to avoid personal hardship for private home owners.

Based on market conditions and taking into account the construction improvements that are already in place for a major development, an estimated $60,000,000 is needed to proceed with these advanced acquisitions by the end of February 2018.

ADOT’s request to advance $60,000,000 of the RARF‐funded $95,000,000 programmed for SR 30 ROW will allow for early acquisition of this development as well as any other parcels that may be identified following the November 16, 2017, public meeting.

Attachment:

‐ Project Map

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 206 S. 17th Ave. | Phoenix, AZ 85007 | azdot.gov