DOCSLIB.ORG

2018 Los Angeles County Regional Transportation Improvement Program December 2017 This Page Is Left Blank

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2018 Los Angeles County Regional Transportation Improvement Program December 2017 This Page Is Left Blank 2018 Los Angeles County Regional Transportation Improvement Program december 2017 This page is left blank. 2018 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (2018 RTIP) Table of Contents Page Number Cover Letter A. Overview and Schedule Section 1. Executive Summary...................................................................................... 1 Section 2. General Information……………………………………………………………… 3 Section 3. Background of Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)…… 4 Section 4. Completion of Prior RTIP Projects…………………………………................. 4 Section 5. RTIP Outreach and Participation…………………………………..…………... 5 B. 2018 STIP Regional Funding Request Section 6. 2018 STIP Regional Share and Request for Programming…………………. 8 Section 7. Overview of Other Funding Included With Delivery of RTIP Projects……….9 Section 8. Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) Funding……….. 10 Section 9. Projects Planned Within the Corridor………………………………………….. 10 C. Relationship of RTIP to RTP/SCS/APS and Benefits of RTIP Section 10. Regional Level Performance Evaluation……………………………………...11 Section 11. Regional and Statewide Benefits of RTIP…………………………………….15 D. Performance and Effectiveness of RTIP Section 12. Evaluation of the Cost Effectiveness of RTIP……….…….…......................17 Section 13. Project Specific Evaluation……………………………………………………..19 E. Detailed Project Information Section 14. Overview of Projects Programmed with RIP Funding……..……………….. 51 F. Appendices Section 15. Project Programming Request Forms Section 16. Board Resolution or Documentation of 2018 RTIP Approval Section 17. Links to Project Study Reports and Project Study Report Equivalents This page is left blank. A. Overview and Schedule Section 1. Executive Summary The 2018 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) for Los Angeles County satisfies the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) requirements for an urbanized county. The RTIP is a listing of state highway and transit projects that Los Angeles County proposes for funding through the 2018 STIP covering the five-year period from Fiscal Year 2018/2019 to 2022/2023. The primary purpose of the RTIP is to help implement the 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan and the Southern California Association of Government’s adopted Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), as the County Transportation Commission for Los Angeles County, is responsible for developing the county’s funding priorities for the STIP, and for submitting the projects to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) by way of the RTIP. On August 16, 2017, the CTC adopted the 2018 STIP Fund Estimate (Fund Estimate). According to the Fund Estimate there is sufficient capacity to restore the $754 million in statewide deletions that resulted from the negative Fund Estimate for the 2016 STIP. In addition, the Fund Estimate indicates that there is also $1.5 billion for the regions and the state to program additional projects, as well as $335 million in capacity to fund Advanced Project Development Element (APDE) work through the 2018 STIP period. Consistent with STIP priorities, Metro has reprogrammed prior 2016 deletions and has introduced a modally balanced program of new projects proposed for the 2018 STIP. Table 1 on the following page summarizes our 2018 RTIP submittal. 2018 Los Angeles County Regional Transportation Improvement Program 1 Table 1 – 2018 RTIP Submittal for Los Angeles County ($ in 000s) Tier 1 Requests (Total Target) Programming Year Agency Rte Projects PPNO FY18/19 FY19/20 FY20/21 FY21/22 FY22/23 Total Planning Programming & METRO 9001 Monitoring (PPM) 9001 4,002 4,002 4,002 12,005 Caltrans 138 SR 138 Segment 6 4356 19,750 19,750 Caltrans 138 SR 138 Segment 13 4357 4,000 67,000 71,000 Caltrans 138 SR 138 Segment 4 4353 5,250 15,700 19,000 39,950 Caltrans 71 SR 71 2741 20,000 20,000 East San Fernando Valley Transit METRO transit Corridor 4296 34,630 17,775 54,733 107,138 METRO transit Bus Acquisition-Project 1 30,246 30,246 METRO transit Bus Acquisition-Project 2 17,096 17,096 Total -Total Target Requests 29,000 45,946 58,632 40,777 142,831 317,185 Tier 2 Requests (APDE) Programming Year Agency Rte Projects PPNO FY18/19 FY19/20 FY20/21 FY21/22 FY22/23 Total Long 710 Early Action Project/ Beach 710 Shoemaker 14,000 14,000 I-605/I-5 Interchange Caltrans 605 Improvements 18,170 18,170 I-605/SR-91 Interchange Caltrans 605 Improvements 22,000 22,000 Total - Tier 2 APDE Requests 36,000 - 18,170 - - 54,170 Tier 3 Requests (Potential Additional Shares) Programming Year Agency Rte Projects PPNO FY18/19 FY19/20 FY20/21 FY21/22 FY22/23 Total East San Fernando Valley Transit METRO transit Corridor 4296 - 59,460 39,030 98,490 I-405 Crenshaw Blvd Ramp Caltrans 405 Improvement 12,000 12,000 Total - Tier 3 Requests - - - 71,460 39,030 110,490 Total of Tiers 1, 2 and 3 65,000 45,946 76,802 112,237 181,861 481,845 2018 Los Angeles County Regional Transportation Improvement Program 2 Section 2. General Information - Regional Agency Name Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Agency website links for Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP): Regional Agency Website Link: http://www.metro.net/ RTIP document link: https://www.metro.net/projects/funding/ RTP link: http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/default.aspx - Regional Agency Executive Director/Chief Executive Officer Contact Information Name Phillip A. Washington Title Chief Executive Officer Email [email protected] Telephone (213) 922-7555 - RTIP Manager Staff Contact Information Name William Ridder Title Executive Officer Address One Gateway Plaza, MS: 99-23-3 City/State Los Angeles, CA Zip Code 90012 Email [email protected] Telephone (213) 922-2887 Fax (213) 922-2476 - California Transportation Commission (CTC) Staff Contact Information Name Teresa Favila Title Associate Deputy Director Address 1120 N Street City/State Sacramento, CA Zip Code 95814 Email [email protected] Telephone 916-653-2064 Fax 916-653-2134 2018 Los Angeles County Regional Transportation Improvement Program 3 Section 3. Background of Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) A. What is the Regional Transportation Improvement Program? The Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) is a program of highway, local road, transit and active transportation projects that a region plans to fund with State and Federal revenue programmed by the California Transportation Commission in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The RTIP is developed biennially by the regions and is due to the Commission by December 15 of every odd numbered year. The program of projects in the RTIP is a subset of projects in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), a federally mandated master transportation plan which guides a region’s transportation investments over a 20 to 25 year period. The RTP is based on all reasonably anticipated funding, including federal, state and local sources. Updated every 4 to 5 years, the RTP is developed through an extensive public participation process in the region and reflects the unique mobility, sustainability, and air quality needs of each region. B. Regional Agency’s Historical and Current Approach to developing the RTIP The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) develops the biennial RTIP based on the projects identified in the 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan, 2014 Short Range Transportation Plan, Metro’s Measure R and Measure M Expenditure Plans and the Southern California Association of Governments 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Additionally, Metro coordinates with Caltrans District 7 as well as our local agency partners for identifying projects to be submitted in the RTIP. Further, for the 2018 RTIP, Metro employed the Metro Board-adopted Evaluative Criteria Framework to develop the program of projects proposed. All of the projects submitted in the RTIP from Los Angeles County have gone through thorough analysis and public outreach. Section 4. Completion of Prior RTIP Projects (Required per Section 68) Per Section 68 of the STIP Guidelines, reporting is required on RIP-funded projects completed since the last RTIP adoption. Project completion is defined as construction contract acceptance. Since the 2016 RTIP adoption, no RIP-funded projects have reached the milestone of construction contract acceptance, and therefore there is nothing to report at this time. 2018 Los Angeles County Regional Transportation Improvement Program 4 Section 5. RTIP Outreach and Participation A. RTIP Development and Approval Schedule Action Date CTC adopts Fund Estimate and Guidelines August 16, 2017 Caltrans identifies State Highway Needs September 15, 2017 Caltrans submits draft ITIP October 13, 2017 CTC ITIP Hearing, South October 24, 2017 CTC ITIP Hearing, North October 19, 2017 Regional Agency adopts 2018 RTIP November 30, 2017 Regions submit RTIP to CTC December 15, 2017 Caltrans submits ITIP to CTC December 15, 2017 CTC STIP Hearing, South January 25, 2018 CTC STIP Hearing, North February 1, 2018 CTC publishes staff recommendations February 28, 2018 CTC Adopts 2018 STIP March 21-22, 2018 B. Public Participation/Project Selection Process As noted in Section 3A, Metro selects projects which are identified in the 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan, 2014 Short Range Transportation Plan, Metro’s Measure R and Measure M Expenditure Plans and the Southern
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ncbr (Fastlane)
    APPLICANT CONTACT Port of Moses Lake Jeffrey Bishop, Executive Director 7810 Andrews N.E. Suite 200 Moses Lake, WA 98837 Port of Moses Lake www.portofmoseslake.com [email protected] Project Name Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project Was a FASTLANE application for this project submitted previously? Yes If yes, what was the name of the project in the previous application? Northern Columbia Basin Railroad Project Previously Incurred Project Costs $2.1 million Future Eligible Project Costs $30.3 million Total Project Costs $32.4 million Total Federal Funding (including FASTLANE) $9.9 million Are matching funds restricted to a specific project component? If so, No which one? Is the project of a portion of the project currently located on Yes National Highway Freight Network? Is the project of a portion on the project located on the NHS? This project crosses under the NHS as well is it runs adjacent to the NHS Does the project add capacity to the Interstate system? Yes, by diverting VMT to rail Is the project in a national scenic area? No Does the project components include a railway-highway grade No crossing or grade separation project? The project includes crossing If so, please include the grade crossing ID improvements. Do the project components include an intermodal or freight rail Yes project, or freight project within the boundaries of a public or private freight rail, water (including ports, or intermodal facility? If answered yes to either of the two component questions above, $9.9 million how much of requested FASTLANE
    [Show full text]
  • Enterprise Best Practices for Ios Devices On
    White Paper Enterprise Best Practices for iOS devices and Mac computers on Cisco Wireless LAN Updated: January 2018 © 2018 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. This document is Cisco Public. Page 1 of 51 Contents SCOPE .............................................................................................................................................. 4 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................. 4 WIRELESS LAN CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................................... 5 RF Design Guidelines for iOS devices and Mac computers on Cisco WLAN ........................................................ 5 RF Design Recommendations for iOS devices and Mac computers on Cisco WLAN ........................................... 6 Wi-Fi Channel Coverage .................................................................................................................................. 7 ClientLink Beamforming ................................................................................................................................ 10 Wi-Fi Channel Bandwidth ............................................................................................................................. 10 Data Rates .................................................................................................................................................... 12 802.1X/EAP Authentication ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut Statewide Freight Plan
    November 2017 Connecticut Statewide Freight Plan This page intentionally left blank. LIST OF ACRONYMS AHTD – Annual Hours of Truck Delay ATA – American Trucking Association BPA – Bridgeport Port Authority CIP – Capital Improvement Plan CMAQ – Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program CNG – Compressed Natural Gas COG – Council of Governments CPA – Connecticut Port Authority CRA – Connecticut Railroad Association CRFC – Critical Rural Freight Corridors CTDOT – Connecticut Department of Transportation CUFC – Critical Urban Freight Corridors CVISN – Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks DECD – Department of Economic and Community Development DEEP – Department of Energy and Environmental Protection DMV – Department of Motor Vehicles EJ – Environmental Justice EPA – United States Environmental Protection Agency FAA – Federal Aviation Administration FAST Act – Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act FHWA – Federal Highway Administration FMCSA – Federal Motor Carrier Administration FRA – Federal Railroad Administration FTA – Federal Transit Administration FTIP – Freight Transportation Improvement Program GIS – Geographic Information System GPS – Global Positioning Systems HCAADT – Heavy Commercial Average Annual Daily Traffic HHS – U.S. Department of Health and Human Services HOS – Hours of Service HSIP – Highway Safety Improvement Program ITS – Intelligent Transportation Systems LEP – Limited English Proficiency LRP – Long Range Plan MAP-21 – Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act MPG – Miles Per Gallon MPH –
    [Show full text]
  • EPP Graduate Fellowship Table Name Deadline for Application
    EPP Graduate Fellowship Table Deadline for Contact Information/ Name Eligibility requirements Brief Description Application Website CMU's Fellowship & CMU FSO Scholarship n/a n/a Fellowship and Scholarship Office http://www.cmu.edu/fso/ Office (FSO) Applicants must be from one of the following GEM: Graduate Application open on July underrepresented groups: For MS or PhD students in Gem Fellowship Degrees for Minorities 1, 2017 through Native American, African physical or natural sciences, or http://www.gemfellowship.org/gem- in Engineering and November 13, 2017. American, Latino, Puerto engineering. fellowship Science Rican, or other Hispanic American. Applicants must be nominated Ph.D. students who have an by doctoral faculty members interest in solving problems that IBM Fellowship The IBM Ph.D. Applications accepted and enrolled full-time in a are important to IBM and http://www.research.ibm.com/universi Fellowship Program through October 26,2017 college or university Ph.D. fundamental to innovation in ty/phdfellowship/ program. multiple areas. Students pursuing PhD studies in applied physics, biological and engineering sciences. US citizens Applications accepted or permanent residents. August 15, 2017 - The Hertz Foundation Fellowships Applications from students The Hertz Foundation October 27, 2017. U.S Citizens or permanent Brochure currently beyond their first year of Fellowships Reference Reports must resident aliens. http://hertzfoundation.org/fellowships/ graduate school are rarely acted be received by October, fellowshipaward upon favorably, and only 30, 2017. considered in cases of exceptional leverage. (Critical to apply to as a first year). 2018 Pre-doctoral Ford Foundation For graduate study in any field for National Academies Fellowship application deadline: Fellowship for U.S Minorities those planning a career in teaching http://sites.nationalacademies.org/pga/ December 14, 2017 Minorities or research.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado Truck Parking Information Management System FASTLANE 2016 • April 14, 2016
    Colorado Truck Parking Information Management System FASTLANE 2016 • April 14, 2016 Previously Incurred Project Cost $0 Future Eligible Project Cost $9,000,000 Total Project Cost $9,000,000 NSFHP Request $5,000,000 Total Federal Funding (including NSFHP) $7,200,000 Are matching funds restricted to a specific project component? If so, which one? No Is the project or a portion of the project currently located on National Highway Freight Network? Yes Is the project or a portion of the project located on the National Highway System? Yes • Does the project add capacity to the Interstate system? No • Is the project in a national scenic area? No Do the project components include a railway-highway grade crossing or grade separation project? No Do the project components include an intermodal or freight rail project, or freight project within the No boundaries of a public or private freight rail, water (including ports), or intermodal facility? If answered yes to either of the two component questions above, how much of requested NSFHP funds N/A will be spent on each of these projects components? State(s) in which project is located Colorado Small or large project Small Also submitting an application to TIGER for this project? No Urbanized Area in which project is located, if applicable N/A Population of Urbanized Area? N/A Is the project currently programmed in the: • TIP? No • STIP? No • MPO Long Range Transportation Plan? No • State Long Range Transportation Plan? Yes • State Freight Plan? Yes Table of Contents A. Project Description ............................................................................................... 1 B. Project Location .................................................................................................... 8 C.
    [Show full text]
  • A04120071 Page 1 of 1
    +PC * S NATIONU SCIENCE FOUNDATION OFFICEOFFICE OF OF INSPECTOR INVESTIGATIONS GENERAL z4 .q$$@!0 CLOSEOUT MEMORANDUM D~~~~ \o Case Number: A04120071 Page 1 of 1 In connection with a proactive review, we reviewed an awardee's ' General Ledger. This review revealed that the awardee had spent the last $32,000 of NSF funds on post-award expenditures. Further iilvestigation revealed that the PI had requested an extension of tiine to complete work beyond the award's expiration, but NSF denied this request. In addition, investigation revealed that despite NSF's denial of the second-no-cost extension, the PI engineered the draw down of the $32,000 by falsely characteriziilg the draw down as a reimbursement. However, the ~najorityof the funds, approxi~nately$27,000, were used to fund newly incurred, ongoing, post-award expenses. Thereafter, the awardee filed a false final Federal Cash Transaction Report certifying that all award funds had been spent. Then, the PI filed a Final Report that falsely represented that all work on the award was complete. When asked about this by OIG investigators, the PI said she didn't know the second no-cost extension had been denied by NSF. The weight of the evidence refuted this assertion. Without adinitting liability, the awardee settled a civil false claims case with the Department of Justice for $52,150 and agreed to enter into a self-governance programdesigned to ensure that it will operate with honestly and integrity and in compliance with applicable law. In a separate and unrelated ad~ni~listrativeaction, the PI was debarred by NSF for 5 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Gao-18-38, Discretionary Transportation Grants
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Committees November 2017 DISCRETIONARY TRANSPORTATION GRANTS DOT Should Take Actions to Improve the Selection of Freight and Highway Projects GAO-18-38 November 2017 DISCRETIONARY TRANSPORTATION GRANTS DOT Should Take Actions to Improve the Selection of Freight and Highway Projects Highlights of GAO-18-38, a report to congressional committees. Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found In December 2015, the Fixing In 2016, the Department of Transportation (DOT) developed a multi-phased America’s Surface Transportation Act review and selection process for a new grant program—the Fostering (FAST Act) authorized DOT to award Advancement in Shipping and Transportation for the Long-term Achievement of $4.5 billion in discretionary grants for National Efficiencies (FASTLANE). DOT awarded FASTLANE grants to 18 fiscal years 2016 through 2020; DOT freight and highway projects. Multiple teams of reviewers evaluated 218 awarded $759.2 million in fiscal year applications based on an evaluation plan that outlined the criteria and process 2016. for evaluating applications. GAO found that the awarded projects addressed key The FAST Act required GAO to assess program requirements, such as ensuring that at least 10 percent of awarded FASTLANE’s processes for selecting funds went to small projects and 25 percent to projects located in rural areas. grants. This report addresses: (1) the DOT generally followed the process outlined in the FASTLANE evaluation plan; processes used to evaluate and award however the plan resulted in inconsistencies and allowed for broad discretion FASTLANE grants, (2) the extent to which DOT followed its FASTLANE during certain team reviews.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 82, No. 11/Wednesday, January 18, 2017
    5970 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations § 490.411 Establishment of minimum level be classified as Structurally Deficient (c) For all bridges carrying the NHS, for condition for bridges. when one of its NBI Items, 58—Deck, which includes on- and off-ramps (a) State DOTs will maintain bridges 59—Superstructure, 60—Substructure, connected to the NHS and bridges so that the percentage of the deck area or 62—Culverts, is 4 or less, or when carrying the NHS that cross a State of bridges classified as Structurally one of its NBI Items, 67—Structural border, FHWA shall calculate a ratio of Deficient does not exceed 10.0 percent. Evaluation or 71—Waterway Adequacy, the total deck area of all bridges This minimum condition level is is 2 or less. Beginning with calendar classified as Structurally Deficient to the applicable to bridges carrying the NHS, year 2018 and thereafter, a bridge will total deck area of all applicable bridges which includes on- and off-ramps be classified as Structurally Deficient for each State. The percentage of deck connected to the NHS within a State, when one of its NBI Items, 58—Deck, area of bridges classified as Structurally and bridges carrying the NHS that cross a State border. 59—Superstructure, 60—Substructure, Deficient shall be computed by FHWA (b) For the purposes of carrying out or 62—Culverts, is 4 or less. to the one tenth of a percent as follows: this section and § 490.413, a bridge will Where: § 490.413 Penalties for not maintaining DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Structurally Deficient = total number of the bridge condition.
    [Show full text]
  • Odot 2017 I-44 Fastl
    Supporting information can be found at: US -75 & I-44 Tulsa County FASTLANE ODOT Contact: Matthew Swift, P.E., Strategic Asset and Performance Management Division, ODOT (405) 521-2704 email: [email protected] This project was submitted for FASTLANE funding in FY 2017 under the project name: Reconstruction of I-44/US-75 Interchange Bridges and Related Improvements on I-44, City of Tulsa, Oklahoma Previously Incurred Project Cost: $ 1,084, 580 . Project on NHFN? YES . Future Eligible Project Cost: $108,686,040 . Project on NHS? YES . Total Project Cost: $109,770,620 . Project to add Interstate capacity? YES . NSFHP Request: $63,829,200 . Project in national scenic area? NO . Rail grade crossing or separation included? NO . Total Federal Funds (including . Intermodal or freight rail project, or freight $86,948,830 NSFHP) project within freight rail, water, or NO intermodal facility? . If yes, specify: NA . Matching funds restricted to NO specific project component? . NSFHP $ to be spent on above two items: NA State: Oklahoma Begin: Lat/Long: 36˚5’20.40”N / 96˚01’50.17”W Inclusion in Planning Documents: End: Lat/Long: 36˚5’23.40”N/ 95˚59’36.12”W . TIP: NO* Size of project: Large . STIP: NO* Submitting TIGER project? No . MPO LRTP: YES Urbanized Area (UA): Tulsa, OK . State LRTP: YES UA population, 2015 686,033 . State Freight Plan: NA *elements of this project are included in the current STIP and TIP documents Submitted by: Oklahoma Department of Transportation CONTENTS 1.0 Project Description .................................................................................. 1 2.0 Project Location...................................................................................... 4 3.0 Project Parties.......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cross-Agency Collaboration a Case Study of Cross-Agency Priority Goals
    2017 Collaborating Across Boundaries Series Cross-Agency Collaboration A Case Study of Cross-Agency Priority Goals John M. Kamensky IBM Center for The Business of Government Collaborating Across Boundaries Series 2017 Cross-Agency Collaboration: A Case Study of Cross-Agency Priority Goals John M. Kamensky IBM Center for The Business of Government CROSS-AGENCY COLLABORATION: A CASE STUDY OF CROSS-AGENCY PRIORITY GOALS www.businessofgovernment.org Table of Contents Foreword . 4 Executive Summary . 6 Introduction . 9 The Context for Cross-Agency Collaboration . 11 The Growing Demand for Cross-Agency Collaboration to Address Public Challenges . 11 Institutional Constraints on Cross-Agency Collaboration . 13 Understanding Cross-Agency Priority (CAP) Goals . 14 The Creation of New Authority to Act Across Agency Boundaries . 15 What Were the CAP Goals for the Fiscal Year 2014–2017 Period? . 16 Characteristics of CAP Goals During the Fiscal Year 2014–2017 Period . 18 Observations on the Implementation of CAP Goals, FY 2014–2017 . 22 How Did the CAP Goals Operate? . 22 How Did Agencies Effectively Collaborate on the CAP Goals? . 27 How Is the Federal Government Building Capacity to Undertake Cross-Agency Collaboration? . 29 How Did Internal and External Reviews and Reporting Take Place? . 30 What Has Been the Impact of CAP Goals? . 32 Tangible, But Qualitative, Achievements of Mission and Mission-Support Results . 32 Improved Governance and Processes for Cross-Agency Collaboration . 34 Created New Capacities to Govern Across Agency Boundaries . 34 Encourages Greater Cross-Agency Collaboration Beyond CAP Goals . 35 Recommendations for Improving the Next Round of CAP Goals . 37 Improvements to the Governmentwide Goal Framework and Governance System .
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 WWE Women's Division Checklist V1
    BASE ROSTER UPDATES Card Number Team 1 Alexa Bliss WWE 2 Alicia Fox WWE 3 Asuka WWE 4 Bayley WWE 5 Becky Lynch WWE 6 Brie Bella WWE 7 Carmella WWE 8 Cathy Kelley WWE 9 Charlotte Flair WWE 10 Charly Caruso WWE 11 Dana Brooke WWE 12 Dasha Fuentes WWE 13 JoJo WWE 14 Lana WWE 15 Liv Morgan WWE 16 Mandy Rose WWE 17 Maria Kanellis WWE 18 Maryse WWE 19 Mickie James WWE 20 Naomi WWE 21 Natalya WWE 22 Nia Jax WWE 23 Nikki Bella WWE 24 Renee Young WWE 25 Ronda Rousey WWE 26 RuBy Riott WWE 27 Sarah Logan WWE 28 Sasha Banks WWE 29 Sonya Deville WWE 30 Stephanie McMahon WWE 31 Tamina WWE 32 Aliyah NXT 33 Bianca Belair NXT 34 Billie Kay NXT 35 Candice LeRae NXT 36 Dakota Kai NXT 37 Ember Moon NXT 38 Kairi Sane NXT 39 Kayla Braxton NXT 40 Lacey Evans NXT 41 Nikki Cross NXT 42 Peyton Royce NXT 43 Shayna Baszler NXT 44 Taynara Conti NXT 45 Vanessa Borne NXT 46 Zelina Vega NXT 47 Alundra Blayze WWE Legends 48 Lita WWE Legends 49 Trish Stratus WWE Legends 50 Wendi Richter WWE Legends MEMORABLE MATCHES AND MOMENTS Card Number Team Card Title NXT-1 NXT® EmBer Moon™ Defeats Liv Morgan™ NXT-2 NXT TakeOver®: San Antonio Asuka™ Defeats Billie Kay™, Peyton Royce™ and Nikki Cross™ NXT-3 NXT® Asuka™ Defeats Peyton Royce™ to retain the NXT® Women's Championship NXT-4 NXT® RuBy Riott™ Makes her NXT® DeBut NXT-5 NXT TakeOver®: Orlando NXT® Women's Champion Asuka™ Defeats EmBer Moon™ NXT-6 NXT® Asuka™ Crashes the NXT® Women's Championship No.
    [Show full text]
  • Connection Presentation
    1 US 160/US 550 FASTLANE Grant US 160/US 550 Grandview Interchange Mike McVaugh, Region 5 Transportation Director 2 US 160/US 550 Grandview Interchange 3 US 160/US 550 Grandview Interchange 4 US 160/US 550 Grandview Interchange 5 US 160/US 550 Grandview Interchange HISTORY • The Grandview Interchange was constructed in three phases, beginning in the summer of 2008 and completed by the start of 2012 • The Grandview Interchange cost: $46.5 million • This phased development process was a critical component of long range planning, aimed at addressing the safety and mobility needs of traffic traveling on US 160 and US 550 • The final connection of US 550 to the interchange will provide positive economic impacts to the region. US 160/US 550 Grandview Interchange CURRENT • Fall of 2016 - CDOT in partnership with La Plata County, prepares a second FASTLANE grant request for the interchange connection (total estimated cost $75m) • Dec. 2016 - La Plata County submits FASTLANE application ($15m requested) • December 2016 – CDOT Region 5 submits a request to the Transportation Commission and receives approval for $27 million in additional funding if a FASTLANE grant is awarded to La Plata County for the connection • July 2017 - La Plata County contacted by USDOT to see if they would accept $12.3 million instead of $15 million requested • La Plata County notifies CDOT of USDOT request for reduced grant award. CDOT agrees to accept a lower grant award • August 2017 – Senators Gardner and Bennet release a joint press release in advance of a 60 day congressional review to award FASTLANE grants for 10 projects nationally • La Plata County’s award of $12.3 million is the largest FASTLANE grant award nationally in 2017.
    [Show full text]