Open House Summary. The Elk Grove Multi modal Facility Feasibility Study will:

Transcription

1 Open House Summary Introduction On Thursday, September 14, 2017, the City of Elk Grove held a second Community Open House for the. 30 community members attended the open house at the City Council Chambers located at 8400 Laguna Palms Way in Elk Grove from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Project Team The following project team members were present at the open house: Mike Costa, City of Elk Grove Tom Metcalf, City of Elk Grove Kevin Bewsey, City of Elk Grove Adam Dankberg, Kimley Horn Nicole Porter, AIM Consulting Katie Durham, AIM Consulting Isabelle Gaillard, AIM Consulting Mike Costa, City of Elk Grove, presenting the results of the draft study. Project Overview Commuters traveling between Elk Grove and the Sacramento region currently have the option of driving, carpooling, taking the e Tran express bus, or driving to a Regional Transit station in Sacramento. The provision of a multi modal facility in Elk Grove may allow for a new commuter rail (Amtrak) station, providing commuter service between Sacramento and Bakersfield, as well as a convenient location to access and transfer between transit services such as local and commuter buses. In the future, the multi modal facility may include services such as light rail or bus rapid transit (BRT). The City of Elk Grove is studying the potential for a multi modal facility to provide access to these alternative transportation options at one location. The Elk Grove Multi modal Facility Feasibility Study will: Identify and assess the feasibility of potential locations for a multi modal facility Evaluate potential reductions to commuter traffic Identify potential site locations and select a preferred location using a detailed evaluation process Inform future planning and funding efforts for a multi modal facility Page 1 of 19

2 Open House Purpose The community open house provided an opportunity for community members to learn about the study, ask questions, and provide their input on the two preferred site locations of the multi modal facility. Open house objectives included: Provide an overview of the feasibility study, its purpose, and objectives Present the results of the draft feasibility study Identify first and second preferred site locations Discuss and gather input from community members about the study and preferred site locations Open House Format The open house included a presentation by Mike Costa, City of Elk Grove Transit Planner. The presentation included an overview of the goals and objectives for the study, the study process, and the results of the draft feasibility study. Presentation A multi modal facility in Elk Grove could provide a consolidated access point for bus, heavy rail, and light rail transit. It could improve connectivity between different modes of transportation while enhancing access to transportation alternatives to reduce traffic congestion and emissions. Additionally, a facility could generate economic development and activity nearby by establishing the facility as a destination in Elk Grove and by significantly enhancing transportation connectivity for the area around the site. The Elk Grove Multi Modal Feasibility Study screened 13 initial potential site locations for a multi modal facility. Of those sites, four potential site locations were evaluated in greater detail: Site 1 Adjacent to the railroad tracks, north of Bilby Road Site 2 Near the southwest corner of the Elk Grove Boulevard and Franklin Boulevard intersection Site 3 Near the future Civic Center site (Elk Grove Boulevard and Big Horn Boulevard) Site 4 Near the City of Elk Grove Special Waste Collection Center (Grant Line Road and the railroad tracks) The future site of a multi modal facility will need to meet certain requirements: enough space for a 1,000 foot long platform along rail tracks; five to ten acres for facilities such as parking; connectivity to the existing transportation network including roads, bus lines, bike facilities, and sidewalks; and no major environmental issues such as wetlands or soil contamination. The project team is also taking into consideration if a lot is already vacant or has low real estate impacts, and estimated site design and construction costs. Page 2 of 19

3 Based upon technical analysis and community input, the project team has identified two preferred site locations: Site 1 Adjacent to the railroad tracks, north of Bilby Road Site 2 Near the southwest corner of the Elk Grove Boulevard and Franklin Boulevard intersection A map of the two preferred site locations. This map is also available in this document s appendix. Page 3 of 19

4 Community input received from the first community open house and online questionnaire included the preference to keep project costs low, and identify potential sources of funding to build this facility. Accessibility, the travel time to key destinations, and the proximity of drop off locations to key destinations were also important considerations the community shared. The evaluation criteria the project team considered when identifying the two preferred site locations includes: Rail service feasibility Other risk factors Site adequacy for multimodal use Congestion relief Grant potential Changes to bus network Accessibility Nearby bus and bike facilities Ridership estimation Opportunity for supporting uses Site acquisition feasibility Site #1 was identified as the preferred site location for the following reasons: High feasibility of providing rail service on corridor Can accommodate all identified multimodal uses Aligns well with grant application criteria Easily accessible from existing roadway, bike, pedestrian networks Lower environmental risk factors The project has an anticipated capital cost of $20 to $25 Million. The project team is partnering with the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (SJJPA), Altamont Commuter Express (ACE), Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), and Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) to assess all opportunities for passenger rail service connections to Sacramento, the Central Valley, and the Bay Area. The study process began in June 2017, including a community open house in August 2017 to assist with the completion of a draft study, and the project team will present its findings to City Council on October 25, The City of Elk Grove received funding for this study through the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) Sustainable Transportation Planning Strategic Partnerships Grant. The grant is part of the Federal Transportation Planning Grant. Information Stations Before and after the presentation, community members were encouraged to stop by four information stations to learn more about the study and provide their input. Page 4 of 19

5 Project Purpose and Goals: This station provided an overview of the Elk Grove Multi Modal Facility Feasibility Study s purpose and four goals. Preferred Site Locations #1 and #2: This station highlighted the preferred site locations, Site #1 and Site #2, for a multi modal facility as identified by the draft study. Project Schedule: This station provided an overview of the study schedule and key milestones. The project team will present the final feasibility study report to City Council on October 25. Comments: This board provided community members with post it notes and pens to provide questions and comments about the study. Notification To notify the community about the Community Open House, notifications were sent to more than 80 interested community members. The project team reached out to neighborhood associations and homeowners associations near the four proposed potential multi modal facility locations to introduce the study and promote the open house with their organizations and on their social media channels and newsletters if applicable. The following groups promoted the open house to their members and organizations: North State College of Pharmacy Elks lodge Clubs Stone Lake Homeowners Association 50 Corridor TMA International Association of Lions Glenbrooke Community Association Club Jasmine Homeowners Association Sacramento Regional Transit Camden Neighborhood Association Cosumnes River College Quail Ranch Estates Association Volt/ Sox Sigma Black Belt California Correctional Healthcare Ride Downtown 916 Services (CCHS) Ace Hardware The Elk Grove Unified School District Senior Center of Elk Grove Big Horn Master Association Laguna Oaks and Laguna New Dimensions Wisteria Place Homeowners Association Information about the open house was also featured on the City of Elk Grove s website, Facebook, and Twitter. How did you hear about this open house? Page 5 of 19

6 Upon arrival at the open house, community members were asked to identify how they heard about it. The graph below shows their responses. 9% 9% 4% 14% 5% 5% Newsletter 36% NextDoor Flyer Friend/Family Call Media 18% Social Media Questions & Answers After the presentation, the project team facilitation a Question and Answer discussion to address community questions and comments. The Question and Answer session lasted approximately two hours. Below is a summary of the discussion. Comment: I live near Site 1 and can see the trains from my kitchen window. If this facility is built then I would have to look out my window and see the buses. There are 4,000 A community member asking a question after the presentation. 6,000 homes across from Site 1. I feel like my property values are going to drop by 50%. No one will be bothered by Sites 3 and 4. Question: What is multi modal facility? Will it include every type of transportation? Who makes the decision on choosing a preferred site? Is it the City staff who are here at this open house? Don t City staff make a recommendation to the City Council, and then Page 6 of 19

7 the City Council decides to vote yes? Can we, the community, do anything if we don t like your decision? I m scared; I don t want to live 300 feet from a bus station where people from Sacramento will come and go, leaving trash. Always coming and going with gang members and trash. Are there going to be police at this facility? Sites #3 and #4 make the most sense. o Response: The Elk Grove City Council makes the decision. The project team only presents findings from the study to the Council. Comment: My concern is that there is no accountability to us and this decision. Comment: Bradshaw Road is currently designated for a bus route and transit, which will force Grant Line Road to be for bus and transit. This all points down to Site #4. One thing I would request is that you remove the emphasis on railroads; you have no control over the railways and the train schedules or their arrival at the Elk Grove station. They are secondary. You should put an emphasis on Light Rail and bus rapid transit and save your money with the railroad folks. Question: Do we have an idea of what kind of rail riders we would attract at an Elk Grove station? o Response: The project team does not currently have any statistics on that. Comment: It is easier for drivers to A representative from Sacramento Regional Transit speaking during the question and answer discussion. move south during peak traffic times. My preference is Site #4. There is a mall and a casino nearby, and high density population. Comment: Think south; think beyond Elk Grove for this facility. Galt is developing, Wilton is developing. Comment: I m here tonight because I m very interested in Light Rail specifically. I know we also need to focus on bus rapid transit. Comment: The city owns the property for Site #4. I know councilmembers don t want to increase density around the suburban propane tanks, but I believe the propane company is going to move because of liability issues. Should that happen, Site #4 is more practical because the city owns that property. The negatives of Site #4 include: we have a waste collection area, that won t be attractive, and there will be more dumping and more Page 7 of 19

8 trucks. But what needs to be looked at with Union Pacific Railway, if the suburban propane moves, how many times will the passenger trains travel along the line? And is that going to diminish the freight movement along those lines. Question: If we are looking at the Site #1 station, do we know how long it would take a commuter train to get from the station to Sacramento or Stockton? o Response: It all depends on what the connection between Elk Grove and Sacramento would be. There is no station in Elk Grove right now, but there may be a station between us and Downtown and Midtown. But no time table has been established at this point. Question: What about the cost of tickets? Is it really going to be feasible if you must take a $30 round trip? If the costs are too high for a person, you might as well toss the study: it won t be feasible if it s too expensive. If it s feasible, then Site #4 is great. We are trying to alleviate traffic on SR99. If I had a regular commute, and the cost wasn t too high to ride the train, I would take it. Question: I don t like the idea of bringing Regional Transit into Elk Grove. No one wants to sit on a train with too many stops on the way to Sacramento. There are too many transients on light rail too. The train directly to Sacramento is a great idea. Sites #1 or #2 would be great as well. o Comment (from community member): Last week I bought a round trip transit ticket to Stockton and paid $11.99 each way. The only stop is Lodi. It takes me about an hour from Sacramento to Stockton. Comment: I am solely a transit rider myself. Ride Downtown 916 had an informal meeting about some things coming up and this study came up. The members felt that Site #1 should be the site that City Council should select. We felt that way because of the railroads. Union Pacific owns the railways and therefore is the one that coordinates with the train schedules. I heard that there is no open negotiation to expanding service at Site #4. We are not open to that if there is going to be flexibility with Site #1 with the railroads. We are open to discussing and recommending Site #1. Not so much over Site #4, but definitely over Site #2, because of the national wildlife refuge at Site #2. Comment: The Sacramento Subdivision line is the future to expand beyond two round trips to Sacramento. We feel there is a great future north of Stockton, but it has to work well with the partners. Site #1 is what we are going to testify to at the City Council meeting. Comment: There has been no Environmental Impact Report (EIR) completed at Site #1, so how will the City Council decide which site to recommend without an EIR? Page 8 of 19

9 o Response: If the City Council considers a site, then that would require an environmental study. This is the beginning of the process. An environmental study will have to be completed on a site before construction can begin. Comment: City staff needs to have an EIR completed and hold multiple meetings with the City Council members. You need to think globally and environmentally. Where is the logic of Site #1? I m upset because I would lose half the value of my home if Site #1 is built. Community members asking questions during the open house. Comment: It sounds like the City will complete an EIR, but don t want to complete 13 EIRs, so when a site is chosen then the City will begin an EIR. Is this correct? o Response: Yes. Comment: The residents by Interstate 5 are worried about the fact that we have a lot of schools. For Sites #1 and #2, how is this station going to interact with the children? There are a lot of schools on our side of Interstate 5 and we are worried about how we are going to get kids to and from school. There is a lot of concern regarding the kids safety with Sites #1 and #2. o Response: This facility would be a multi modal facility, so the project team is thinking about all modes of transportation. This includes bikes and pedestrians, not just trains. We want to make sure the station is accessible from all modes. Question: Will Elk Grove benefit if Regional Transit joins the facility? o Response: With Site #1, there wouldn t necessarily be a connection with Regional Transit. It would have a train. Site #3 relates to Light Rail, since a route has been planned near there for a long time. However there has been no funding for Regional Transit to move forward with this line yet. Question: For Site #1, I don t know if there are five acres of land there. Also, if people are going to park there and commute is there enough room? Will there be a cut off time where all activity must stop at 10:00 p.m.? As far as property value, it will probably damage nearby property values. Page 9 of 19

10 o Response: Parking has been considered for this facility. An aggregation of three parcels would make up the land for this facility. The project team is currently anticipating about 250 parking spaces for this site. That is based on assumptions of development. Question: The facility would only have 250 parking spots? Elk Grove has 25,000 homes and this site would only have 250 spots? o Response: 250 parking spots is an estimate. There is an opportunity to increase this number, as Site #1 provides flexibility for this factor which is another reason it is a preferred location. Because this is a multi modal facility, there is a potential for separate taxi locations, ride sharing drop off and pick up areas, bikes, and pedestrian access in addition to the 250 parking spaces. Additionally, in a typical multi modal facility similar to this site, the parking needed is frequently less than half of the total ridership. If there are residents who live around the facility and want to get there, they will have other means of getting to the facility besides driving. Question: What kind of parking would be at this site? A garage or asphalt? My recommendation is that 250 is a small number, but with asphalt there is room to expand. If I was going to Sacramento, I d probably drive my car, but 250 parking spots seems small if you have commuters. I would hate to go to the site to park my car, and drive around for 10 minutes trying to find a spot. o Response: The configuration of the parking facility has not yet been determined. 250 spaces could easily fit on the surface of the site and there would be an opportunity to enlarge the surface parking area or provide a parking structure. Comment: With a parking structure, there will be tall lights beaming into nearby homes. Comment: I would like to see Site #2 removed from all discussion. The reason behind this is when the city became a city, Franklin Road needed widening, and the mitigation for Site #2 will add a lot to the cost of the project, and the city has already gone down that road. Question: Have you looked at car sharing? It s integrated into a lot of the BART stations. o Response: Car sharing is a potential mode that could be included in this facility. Until a preferred site has been chosen, the project team cannot identify specific amenities at the facility. Comment: Car sharing will soon use driverless cars within the next 5 10 years. This is something to keep in mind when choosing a site and designing it. Page 10 of 19

11 Comment: Not only should Site #2 to be eliminated, Site #4 should be as well. That goes back to the freight railroads regarding the expansion of service. The freight rail that owns that has said no to expansion. Unfortunately, we are not in the north east corridor where Amtrak owns the tracks where they can say yes to flexible service schedules and expansion. When you re on tracks owned by the freight companies, it is a long dated process to make a schedule change. Question: Do freight lines have the ability to reject Amtrak traffic? Or does Amtrak have precedent? o Response: If freight owns the track, then they decide the schedule. Comment: No one will drive 18 miles to park their car in the middle of nowhere and hop on a train for 28 minutes when their car would get them to their location in the same, or faster, time. o Response (community member): I would, if I was going to a basketball game in Sacramento and knew I wanted to drink alcohol at the event. Then I would have a guaranteed ride home. Comment: 250 parking spaces is too small of a number. Please consider a multi level parking structure to accommodate more than 250. If you are going to make this work, you need more than 250 parking spaces. We need a multi level parking structure. Question: Scrap the idea of railroads. I only hear special interest for railroads; I want to see the other side of the story. If the railroad option is removed, it simplifies the process and the project will be cheaper. Can Regional Transit support the development of planning? o Response: Extension of the light rail service is planned, but no funding exists and the timing is uncertain. Comment: The city should pour money into light rail and bus rapid transit. Comment: When we talk about multi level parking, it increases costs exponentially. Flat parking versus multi level can have an impact of millions more in project budget. Comment: I live very close to Site #1. I am a state worker so I travel a lot to downtown Sacramento. Interstate 5 is better than SR99. If you want to take the pressure off of SR99, they aren t going to drive 20 minutes to Site #1. They ll look at Site #3. If the idea is to relieve pressure on SR99, go with Site #3. Comment: I m also a state worker, and I agree with Site #3. I take the bus to work and it s always crowded. Question: Is Site #3 the most expensive? Page 11 of 19

12 o Response: No, the city already owns the property. Question: Does Light Rail want to be a part of this facility? o Response: Light Rail has looked at expanding routes to Elk Grove, but there is no funding right now. With no funding, there is no forecast if the service could come down. Question: Site #3 would bring the station more into the center of Elk Grove. If the city is trying to define themselves as a city, this would be good. Right now there is no City Center, and Site #3 would help do that. Comment: I like Site #3. Right now it is a mess to drop kids off at a school on Franklin Road. Go with Site #3 and work with light rail and buses. Comment: I live on the east side of Elk Grove, and I like Site #3. It would take me minutes to get to Site #1. With Site #1 I would rather just drive to Sacramento. Question: Has there been any consideration regarding flooding? o Response: Floods will be considered in an Environmental Impact Report, if a site is identified as preferred. Question: Is this going to be an elevated rail platform? o Response: No, it will be a surface rail. Comment: To the left of Site #1 is the Stone Lakes Wildlife Preserve. Hypothetically, 250 people would throw their trash out of their car, which will hit the wildlife preserve. I don t want to look out my kitchen window and see the pine trees and then a multi level parking garage. The environmentalists will not like Site #1. Pick Site #3. Question: How long would Light Rail take to make it from Site #3 to downtown Sacramento? Site #3 is popular, but how long will it take? If it s long, I might as well drive to Sacramento. If it s a 60 min ride on Light Rail but a shorter distance to drive there, what s the point if I can drive there in half the time? o Response: The potential light rail extension is currently only a plan and has been for years. The time table has not been determined yet due to a lack of funding. Question: How long does it take to get from Cosumnes River College to downtown Sacramento? o Response: The scheduled time is 35 minutes between the College and the 7 th & Capitol station Comment: I m an advocate for light rail, and I know it takes the local politicians to get behind that. Elk Grove was not proactive in getting Light Rail to Elk Grove. The federal workers want light rail in cities. Light rail coming is an opportunity for people to get jobs Page 12 of 19

13 in Sacramento. Unfortunately, crime happens on light rail. I called the police, and the crime happens around the parking at light rail. But we noticed a decrease in our DUIs because people started to take light rail. We need to have local politicians to go to bat for light rail. Question: How many years does it take to justify the cost of light rail? Comment: Sacramento City Colleges (American River College, Consumes River College) charge all students a mandatory Regional Transit fee, but there is not that much ridership going to the colleges. o Response: Yes there is a student fee for those schools, which provides students with a transit pass. Question: City colleges are giving away free transit passes but students are still paying for parking passes at the college to park their cars. What is going to get people from Elk Grove to Sacramento and to Stockton to work? How do we get other people to ride transit? You aren t going to take light rail to somewhere close in town, it s not costeffective. Site #2 is ideal. Comment: The city needs to look at the impact this facility would have on traffic. I am by Franklin High School and the congestion is horrible. Comment: Site #1 would be good. Comment: People don t want long commutes and it won t be done soon. The traffic will change, what we are seeing now is horrendous. I want to see light rail. I am being selfish because I am a senior resident who needs medical outlets that are along the route I will use. Question: If there is light rail at the civic center, where there is a senior center, it makes sense to have light rail there because at this age, driving isn t as easy as it used to be. You might have limited income so you are going to want to use light rail. My sister in San Jose uses light rail. She could drive but why? There is light rail where the San Francisco 49ers play. I have taken light rail from Sacramento to Elk Grove and it was a breeze. Light rail is the way to go. What if the train on a railroad track has freight and there is a chemical spill? Question: Who has access in and out of that civic center? Increased traffic on Elk Grove Boulevard will make it worse without some improvements. Comment: People are saying that the feasibility study will not allow light rail to come to downtown unless it s at Site #3, is this true? o Response: The goal of the project is to identify ways to provide connected transportation services at a site. Looking at Site #1 instead of Site #3 does not Page 13 of 19

14 preclude Site #3. In line with funding opportunities, Site #1 was found to be feasible and preferred for a multi modal facility. The civic center will be a transportation hub in the city with or without this project. There will be transit opportunities at that transit center for commuters and students. The project team had to consider the transportation opportunities currently present. Working with Amtrak and the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority, there is an opportunity because of their current rail line, and we are considering connections to that service. Meanwhile, light rail or bus rapid transit is still many years away. Placing a facility at Site #1 does not take away the opportunity for Site #3 to have light rail in the future. Assuming a rough cost of $250 million to lay down 4 miles to the civic center, that s $125 million to just look at funding half of that. Site # 3 still has potential, but other things need to happen. Question: How much does total project cost weigh into your assessment? o Response: The estimated cost of a facility at Site #1 or Site #2 would be $20 25 million. There are existing wetlands on Site #2 which is a separate potential issue. The cost for Site #3 is less because the City already owns the land for the site. The next five years are uncertain in terms of funding. Comment: Look at the development at Jackson Road. There will be thousands of people living there. Consider building the facility outside of Elk Grove. Question: How long until you break ground and start construction on this facility, if a site is identified as preferred and funding is secured? o Response: At the earliest, the City is looking at 5 10 years. Question: Could you clarify the timeline of this study? o Response: We are presenting a draft feasibility study today, which we want your input and comments on. Your comments can also be submitted through an online comment period through September 21. Then, the project team will present the study to City Council. Question: How long do I have to lobby my council member if I don t agree with the project team s decision for the preferred site location? o Response: Council will meet on October 25. You can also attend the council meeting and express your comments there. Comment: The rail on the west side of the city also has a connection in Stockton to the bay area. I would like that. I would take my kids to do that, a day trip to the Bay Area. It would also allow me to introduce my kids to transit use. Page 14 of 19

15 Comment: I m still exploring this city. I do evening workouts with other moms in Elk Grove. There is a divide in the city because of the SR99 freeway running through the middle of it. A site in the heart of the city will help connectivity within the city. Feedback Below is a summary of all the input received from community members via comment cards and s. Comment Cards I like Site 1 for commuting to Sacramento and Stockton. I am strictly opposed to Site 3 and bringing light rail into Elk Grove. It would take too long to take light rail into Sacramento, and I am not interested in light rail going to the casino because I believe it would bring drunk passengers to the light rail. I think Site 1 would make it easy to get to Sacramento for events at Golden 1 Center or otherwise and to Stockton for connection to the Bay Area. I think there should be more than 250 parking spaces at Site 1, but I also expect that with driverless cars and fractional ownership we might not need all that many more. It would be nice to have the name of the panel members (city people presenting) and their designations on the pamphlet that is given to the public. My number one preferred location is Site 3 on Elk Grove Boulevard. Why? 1. It is in the middle of the city 2. It will provide good interaction among people of Elk Grove that live on the east side of SR 99 and those who live near I 5. It is very important to consider parking spaces. We need more than 250 parking spaces. I live in the Laguna area and currently take the E Tran to downtown Sacramento. The buses are very crowded and sometimes there is no room to sit. Thus, to help ease pressure on the buses and reduce the heavy congestion on the I 5 and SR 99 I recommend having the multi modal facility located on Site 3. Sites 1, 2, and 4 are far away from Laguna, and many in Laguna would not go to Sites 1, 2, and 4 due to distance and time. Plus, light rail can expand to Site 3, thereby providing a great alternative to buses. I support Site 3 as the location. Scrap train options. Place emphasis on BRT and light rail using Sites 3 or 4. Provide ridership numbers on railroad, not numbers possible from railroad consultantsspecial interests. Have a Regional Transit representative at the next multi modal meeting someone who is knowledgeable with potential BRT and light rail current ridership and future plans Page 15 of 19

16 Page 16 of 19 ed Comments While I understand the purpose of the feasibility study, I do not understand what the need was that required a feasibility study to be done. For example, was it needed because of the high volume of riders between Sacramento and Bakersfield? (I don't think that this premise is true). Was it to reduce commuter traffic on I 5 and Highway 99? This may be a need but was it what led to the feasibility study? If the need was to reduce commuter traffic to/from Elk Grove and Sacramento, then the plan to have a rail station will not relieve any traffic congestion on Hwy 99 and may only have a minimal impact on I 5. Most people living in Elk Grove and working in Sacramento are not going to travel to the southern corners of Elk Grove to travel Northbound into Sacramento. The best way to reduce commuter traffic would be to add buses or bus routes and/or expand light rail in central Elk Grove or expand bus service to light rail stations that service downtown Sacramento. I was sorry to miss the meeting last week, and especially concerned when I heard what sites had been discussed as two of them are very close to my home. Nextdoor is quite active with threads on this issue and I have a few questions about the following locations that were posted on Nextdoor. 1. The open field west of Willard Parkway / Blossom Ridge Drive I understand this is the first choice. Is the city planning on taking this land by eminent domain from the current owner? This is very close to residential neighborhoods and a park that is used frequently by families in the area. If this were multi modal, what steps would be taken to handle the homeless from coming in to the neighborhood? Sacramento has seen a substantial increase of the homeless population and I was wondering if this is something that was discussed. I never see Amtrak San Joaquin on this track; are there plans to have it rerouted to this track. There are currently two San Joaquin trains that leave Sacramento to go south every day and two that come north every day. I have never seen these trains on the west bound Elk Grove tracks. The train stops in Stockton, Lodi, and then Sacramento. What track is Amtrak currently using? There are 5 other trains a day originating in Oakland and 5 other trains a day originating in Bakersfield, with only thruway bus service to Sacramento, would Amtrak increase train service to Sacramento or would they continue the bus service? This is a small location, where would parking be and what steps would be taken so people wouldn't be parking in the neighborhoods. 2. Open field southwest of Franklin Boulevard / Elk Grove Boulevard Isn't this a federal wildlife preserve? There is a sign on the corner of Elk Grove Boulevard and Franklin Boulevard stating this. 3. Southeast of Elk Grove Boulevard / Big Horn Boulevard How would Amtrak reach this location? What plans are there for light rail to this location? 4. Southeast of Grant Line Road / Survey Road Maybe I missed something, but why is this the last choice for location, since it's a central location for both east and west Elk Grove, for residents in Galt and for the mall and casino that is supposedly being built.

17 This is an area close to commercial growth and would also help to spur new commercial growth as well. 5. The site of the original Elk Grove train station is not on this list, I was wondering why since the majority of Capital Corridor stations reside at original train stations. I am also curious what if any requirements the city needs to make to inform citizens of projects that affect their neighborhoods. Is the city required to send notification of upcoming works projects, similar to SMUD sending out notification of their plan to increase their substation? It seems like citizens have to search out the information and often times we are set scrambling at the last minute, rather than being prepared from the onset of a project. Where are the results of all of the locations identified? I only see one location? I am just wondering how an analysis can be made on all of the properties if only one is presented? I 100% am against location number one as it will not only increase traffic, decrease home values and potentially encourage homeless or those wishing to prevent crime a way to get to an area which could easily become venerable. If there is a need for the service, I believe there is more space and would be of more value at proposed location four. Thank you for your time and consideration. As an Elk Grove resident, I strongly oppose adding a new Amtrak station to our city. My main concerns are as follows: 1. The cost and impact that the new station will bring to our community. I am not convinced the city has enough resources to maintain the security of its surrounding area and a very complexed population trains will bring. I would rather have the city allocates the funds to address the issues that need more attention, such as education, neighborhood safety, illegal marijuana plantation, and the outlet and casino in the pipeline. 2. There have already been several Amtrak service locations in/around Elk Grove including Capitol Corridor, Harbor Point (bus station), even Stockton station (40 min driving). I do not see the necessity to have another station in Elk Grove. 3. Elk Grove is a commuter town to serve the Great Sacramento Area. We have just spent a large fund to have a new built light rail that connects Elk Grove to Sacramento. Again, I do not see the necessity to have an Amtrak stop to serve the same purpose. Unless the city wants to convert Elk Grove into a bedroom town for bay area workers, having an Amtrak station then makes some sense. However, this move will face fierce competition from many cities closer to bay area than Elk Grove such as Stockton, Lodi, Manteca, Modesto, Ripon, even Galt, not mentioning Mountain House and Tracy. I do not expect we can win it in the long term simply because of the location. Thank you very much for your service! My name is Alexander Wan and I am a resident of Elk Grove in District 3. I just returned from the, where I provided my comments about where the facility should be located. I would like Page 17 of 19

18 to share my comments with you since you are my city council representative. Specifically, I am strongly supportive of creating a multi modal facility and believe that it should be built in the third preferred site location, which is on the corner of Big Horn Boulevard and Elk Grove Boulevard. The other locations are very far from the Laguna area and, as a result of the time and distance, many Laguna residents would not commute to the other three proposed locations. Moreover, having the facility located at the third preferred location would help reduce congestion both on the buses and on I 5. I currently take the bus to downtown Sacramento and the buses are almost always crowded and the freeway is frequently congested as well. Thus, locating the facility at the third preferred location (Elk Grove Boulevard/Big Horn Boulevard) would ease pressure on the buses and ease the commute on I 5. Overall, in my view, the third preferred location is the ideal location for the facility and I ask you to consider this when the Elk Grove City Council votes on the facility in October. Thank you for your time and consideration. As Elk Grove residents and tax payer, we strongly oppose Train station in our city! We won't use or need the train, it only bring crime, pollution and noisy our living town! We cannot accept that! Please don't waste tax payer's money to ruin our living town! Use our money on safety and environment on this city! Thank you for your consideration. PROS: The idea is great, I am looking forward to use your transportation to go downtown from time to time. CONS: My main concern is the noise since I live very close to big horn Boulevard. QUESTION: How do you think the project will handle the train noise? I'd like to add my opinion regarding the proposed transit station for Elk Grove. Please push for location 4 (off Grant Line). We do not need the congestion and elements that come with a transit station along the Franklin corridor. If there is going to be a casino than all these type of accommodations should be clustered together. The locations near residential developments along Franklin would be negatively affected. I have yet to see a neighborhood next to a train station that remained visually pleasant and safe. It is not responsible city planning. I know the comment is late, but I just became aware of it. I note that the preferred site (#1) does not connect to light rail or to surface streets. Sites 3 & 4 seem to meet the multimodal concept better that the remote Site 1. In terms of having all the connections, Site 3 seems to have all the elements and is not located close to the Stone Lakes Wildlife Preserve like Site 1 is. Not sure why Site 1 is preferred. I am writing to voice my concerns over the potential light rail to be placed by the bilby road railroad tracks. My main concerns are: Traffic. As someone who lives in the area, I can confidently say that between Franklin elementary, Franklin HS, and the middle school, traffic is already a challenge. Adding a commuter train to that area would make it even worse. Are there prepared solutions to the increased traffic? Crime. I'm sure you can see statistics and come to the conclusion that these stations bring crime. Bringing increased crime to an area that is primarily residential seems like the city is asking for trouble with regards to property crime. Will EGPD be expanding to deal with this Page 18 of 19

19 probable increase of crime? Home value of surrounding neighborhoods. The placement of the light rail would likely decrease home value because of the reasons above. As someone who just purchased a new home in the area for $450,000+, what assurances can be offered to home owners in that area? I understand the desire to grow Elk Grove. I do not believe the light rail is the best solution for this. Appendix Flyer Presentation Display Boards Informational Brochure Comment Card Page 19 of 19