City of El Centro Bicycle Master Plan October PDF Free Download

City of El Centro Bicycle Master Plan October 2010 8) Provide a City Bicycle Facility Maintenance Program for maintaining the existing bicycle facilities to support safety. 9) Pursue grant funds for planning, design, and construction of bicycle facilities. Page 23

Lotus Ave Lotus Ave La Brucherie Ave Imperial Ave 10th St 6th St 3rd St Cross Rd 2nd St Hope St 4th St 1St St Waterman Ave 12th St 12th St 12th St Cypress Dr Cypress Dr 10th St 3rd St 2nd St 1St St 1St St Hope St Dogwood Ave Dogwood Ave Industr y Way Cruickshank Dr Pico Ave Pico Ave Villa Ave Æc Scott Ave 14th St Scott Ave Villa Ave Villa Ave Euclid Ave Adams Ave Main St Barbara Worth Dr Waterman Ave Commercial Ave Æa State St Æa Commercial Ave Main St Main St Gillett St Orange Ave Orange Ave Hamilton Ave Hamilton Ave Hamilton Ave Ross Ave Aurora Dr Aurora Dr Ocotillo Dr Cypress Dr 4th St 4th St 8 Dogwood Ave 8 Wake Ave Wake Ave Wake Ave Wake Ave Danenberg Dr Danenberg Dr Danenberg Dr Bicycle Routes 8th St Class II- Planned 2016 Class II - Existing Manuel A. Ortiz Ave Class III - Proposed Sharrows Collisions 2009-2015 Pedestrian (93 Total) Bicycle (89 Total) Sources: TIMS and El Centro Police Department 0 1,450 2,900 5,800 Feet Cypress Dr Mccabe Rd 4th St Farnsworth Ln Mccabe Rd Attachment I-2A - Collisions Map & Data

DATE PEDESTIRAN/BICYCLE COLLISION 2/2/2009 BICYCLE 2/18/2009 PEDISTRIAN 3/13/2009 PEDISTRIAN 3/26/2009 PEDISTRIAN 4/23/2009 PEDISTRIAN 4/23/2009 BICYCLE 4/30/2009 BICYCLE 5/7/2009 BICYCLE 5/10/2009 BICYCLE 5/18/2009 PEDISTRIAN 5/24/2009 BICYCLE 7/12/2009 PEDISTRIAN 8/17/2009 BICYCLE 9/3/2009 PEDISTRIAN 9/18/2009 PEDISTRIAN 9/30/2009 BICYCLE 10/4/2009 BICYCLE 10/8/2009 PEDISTRIAN 10/22/2009 PEDISTRIAN 12/10/2009 BICYCLE 12/16/2009 BICYCLE 1/5/2010 PEDISTRIAN 1/12/2010 PEDISTRIAN 1/12/2010 BICYCLE 1/17/2010 BICYCLE 1/19/2010 PEDISTRIAN 2/4/2010 BICYCLE 2/7/2010 PEDISTRIAN 3/19/2010 PEDISTRIAN 3/20/2010 BICYCLE 3/31/2010 PEDISTRIAN 4/13/2010 BICYCLE 4/15/2010 PEDISTRIAN 4/26/2010 BICYCLE 5/10/2010 PEDISTRIAN 5/13/2010 BICYCLE 5/20/2010 PEDISTRIAN 5/20/2010 PEDISTRIAN 5/21/2010 PEDISTRIAN 6/2/2010 BICYCLE 6/29/2010 BICYCLE 7/31/2010 PEDISTRIAN 8/11/2010 PEDISTRIAN 8/27/2010 PEDISTRIAN 9/2/2010 PEDISTRIAN SOURCE: TIMS AND EL CENTRO POLICE DEPARTMENT ATTACHMENT I-2A COLLISIONS MAP AND DATA

DATE PEDESTIRAN/BICYCLE COLLISION 9/23/2010 BICYCLE 10/12/2010 PEDISTRIAN 10/18/2010 BICYCLE 10/28/2010 BICYCLE 11/16/2010 PEDISTRIAN 11/22/2010 BICYCLE 12/3/2010 BICYCLE 12/6/2010 BICYCLE 1/4/2011 PEDISTRIAN 1/6/2011 BICYCLE 1/25/2011 PEDISTRIAN 1/27/2011 PEDISTRIAN 2/8/2011 PEDISTRIAN 2/8/2011 BICYCLE 2/9/2011 PEDISTRIAN 2/15/2011 PEDISTRIAN 3/19/2011 BICYCLE 3/30/2011 BICYCLE 4/7/2011 BICYCLE 4/27/2011 BICYCLE 5/1/2011 PEDISTRIAN 5/9/2011 PEDISTRIAN 5/20/2011 PEDISTRIAN 5/23/2011 BICYCLE 5/24/2011 PEDISTRIAN 6/6/2011 BICYCLE 6/16/2011 BICYCLE 7/19/2011 PEDISTRIAN 8/3/2011 BICYCLE 9/21/2011 PEDISTRIAN 9/28/2011 BICYCLE 10/2/2011 PEDISTRIAN 10/13/2011 PEDISTRIAN 10/18/2011 BICYCLE 10/24/2011 BICYCLE 10/26/2011 PEDISTRIAN 11/2/2011 BICYCLE 11/15/2011 PEDISTRIAN 11/18/2011 PEDISTRIAN 11/21/2011 PEDISTRIAN 1/17/2012 PEDISTRIAN 1/19/2012 BICYCLE 1/20/2012 BICYCLE 2/19/2012 PEDISTRIAN 2/20/2012 PEDISTRIAN SOURCE: TIMS AND EL CENTRO POLICE DEPARTMENT ATTACHMENT I-2A COLLISIONS MAP AND DATA

DATE PEDESTIRAN/BICYCLE COLLISION 2/23/2012 BICYCLE 3/18/2012 PEDISTRIAN 3/21/2012 BICYCLE 3/29/2012 BICYCLE 4/24/2012 BICYCLE 4/29/2012 BICYCLE 5/25/2012 PEDISTRIAN 6/1/2012 PEDISTRIAN 6/11/2012 BICYCLE 6/20/2012 PEDISTRIAN 6/21/2012 BICYCLE 7/19/2012 BICYCLE 8/20/2012 BICYCLE 8/24/2012 PEDISTRIAN 9/2/2012 BICYCLE 9/26/2012 BICYCLE 9/28/2012 PEDISTRIAN 10/4/2012 BICYCLE 10/26/2012 PEDISTRIAN 11/14/2012 PEDISTRIAN 12/3/2012 PEDISTRIAN 12/3/2012 BICYCLE 12/7/2012 PEDISTRIAN 12/17/2012 PEDISTRIAN 1/5/2013 BICYCLE 1/7/2013 PEDISTRIAN 1/21/2013 PEDISTRIAN 2/8/2013 BICYCLE 2/13/2013 BICYCLE 2/27/2013 BICYCLE 3/8/2013 PEDISTRIAN 3/8/2013 BICYCLE 3/11/2013 PEDISTRIAN 3/21/2013 BICYCLE 4/6/2013 PEDISTRIAN 4/13/2013 BICYCLE 4/30/2013 BICYCLE 5/3/2013 BICYCLE 6/2/2013 BICYCLE 6/7/2013 BICYCLE 6/16/2013 PEDISTRIAN 6/28/2013 BICYCLE 7/1/2013 BICYCLE 9/20/2013 BICYCLE 9/30/2013 PEDISTRIAN SOURCE: TIMS AND EL CENTRO POLICE DEPARTMENT ATTACHMENT I-2A COLLISIONS MAP AND DATA

DATE PEDESTIRAN/BICYCLE COLLISION 10/4/2013 BICYCLE 10/9/2013 BICYCLE 10/13/2013 BICYCLE 10/14/2013 PEDISTRIAN 10/25/2013 PEDISTRIAN 10/25/2013 PEDISTRIAN 11/14/2013 BICYCLE 11/20/2013 PEDISTRIAN 1/3/2014 PEDISTRIAN 1/7/2014 PEDISTRIAN 1/9/2014 BICYCLE 1/9/2014 BICYCLE 1/13/2014 PEDISTRIAN 2/19/2014 PEDISTRIAN 2/28/2014 BICYCLE 3/8/2014 BICYCLE 3/10/2014 PEDISTRIAN 3/10/2014 BICYCLE 3/13/2014 PEDISTRIAN 4/2/2014 PEDISTRIAN 4/11/2014 PEDISTRIAN 4/11/2014 PEDISTRIAN 4/17/2014 BICYCLE 4/21/2014 PEDISTRIAN 5/2/2014 PEDISTRIAN 5/7/2014 BICYCLE 5/12/2014 BICYCLE 6/25/2014 BICYCLE 7/15/2014 PEDISTRIAN 7/15/2014 PEDISTRIAN 7/16/2014 PEDISTRIAN 7/16/2014 PEDISTRIAN 8/3/2014 BICYCLE 9/29/2014 PEDISTRIAN 11/18/2014 BICYCLE 11/22/2014 BICYCLE 11/28/2014 BICYCLE 12/5/2014 BICYCLE 12/30/2014 BICYCLE 1/6/2015 BICYCLE 1/19/2015 PEDISTRIAN 2/21/2015 PEDISTRIAN 3/7/2015 PEDISTRIAN 3/23/2015 PEDISTRIAN 3/24/2015 PEDISTRIAN SOURCE: TIMS AND EL CENTRO POLICE DEPARTMENT ATTACHMENT I-2A COLLISIONS MAP AND DATA

DATE PEDESTIRAN/BICYCLE COLLISION 3/25/2015 PEDISTRIAN 3/27/2015 PEDISTRIAN 4/2/2015 PEDISTRIAN 4/15/2015 PEDISTRIAN 5/2/2015 PEDISTRIAN 5/12/2015 BICYCLE SOURCE: TIMS AND EL CENTRO POLICE DEPARTMENT ATTACHMENT I-2A COLLISIONS MAP AND DATA

Public Participation Photographs ATP Workshop ATTACHMENT I-3A - PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Children s Fair Event (Poster Boards Used) ATTACHMENT I-3A - PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

ATTACHMENT I-3A - PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Active Transportation Grant Meeting Minutes May 12, 2015 Brian McNeece, President of the Velo Cycling Club, provided the following suggestions: Chevron signs that legally tells motorists/cyclists to share the road and stay within 3 feet of each other Repair roads with pot holes / gashes in city streets Bike lane lines or expand bike lanes Review, and integrate bike lanes signs to be guided along city Provide cyclists safe places to ride without the dangers of opening car doors Vicky Sendano, Imperial Valley Cycling Club provided the following suggestions: Establish a coalition Establish a program to instruct and educate children on cycling health benefits and cycling safety Reach out to the cycling community for needs Commissioner Miranda asked if the grant allows for the purchase of bike racks to install throughout the city. Adriana Nava, Associate Planner, responded that the grant does allow for the purchase of bike racks, however the city would need input for installation locations. Commissioner Gaddis asked if sidewalks are included in the improvements because current sidewalks are not safe for pedestrian and cycling use and do not have a vegetative buffer. Adriana Nava presented the targeted improvement areas along 8 th Street with the funds awarded from last year s ATP grant and encouraged cyclist to identify streets for bike lanes. Abraham Campos, Senior Engineer asked cyclists to keep in mind, when prioritizing, that bike lanes limit parking lanes, so streets need to be wide enough to accommodate bike lanes. Dennis Price started Southwest High School s Cycling Club, which has been extremely successful. There are safety concerns when supervising a group of students through city streets where signage is necessary to provide safety for the cyclists. He used Lotus Avenue as a sample street to what should be done. Chairman Walk added that residents were upset over losing parking on Lotus due to the bike lanes. Mr. Walk suggested bike lanes be spread out throughout the city. Mr. Price asked for time to meet with cyclists to work collectively on a priority list. Vicky Zendrano would like time to analyze the routes that would benefit from signage. ATTACHMENT I-3A - PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Norma Villicana, Community Development Director suggested they meet with City staff soon to target the streets cyclists would like to post signs in. Doug Gardner commented on the deteriorated state of city and county roads. Pete Rodriguez, would like to see bike lanes to parks for children. Dave Sanchez suggested cleaning up the roads to eliminate rocks and debris. Tomas Oliva from Southern California Association of Governments informed the Commission that his agency and Imperial County Transportation Commission are working on a Safe Routes to School Master Plan and advised not to duplicate efforts. For that reason, he has met with City staff to identify and not duplicate areas of need. Daniel Majudano congratulated staff and Commission for their efforts to promote and improve cycling. He is doing the same in Mexicali and offered any help from his fellow cyclists. Denahi Valdez from Mexicali Bici extended an invitation to promote National Bike To Work Day on Friday May 15. Event is a collaboration to promote public policies that benefit cycling. Chuck Wallace suggested a County / City collaboration to apply for funds to improve the roads between the cities for cycling. He also advised the Planning Commission to make a statement to public and City Council to promote the active lifestyle concept and it s benefits to create a culture for active transportation not only in El Centro, but in the surrounding cities of Imperial Valley. Chairman Walk added that trying to accommodate bike lanes into an already established city is a difficult task. Abraham Campos stated the City has adopted a bicycle Master Plan and invites the public for their input to suggest routes. Projects have been identified, but have not been funded. Once specific streets are identified it would be easier to apply for grants. Ben Brock suggested to make roads work with cyclists, such as triggering stop lights for cyclists and improving road conditions to attract people to active transportation. Chairman Walk suggested cyclists to meet with Board of Supervisors to address their concerns on improving County roads. Commissioner Dunnam suggested including education on pedestrian, cyclists and skateboarders visibility with colorful clothes. ATTACHMENT I-3A - PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

El Centro Community Development Department ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Community Workshop Tuesday, May 12, 2015 6 PM (During Planning Commission) El Centro Council Chambers 1275 W. Main Street, El Centro, CA 92243 Help improve bicycling and walking in El Centro Recommend bicycle network lanes and pedestrian areas that can be improved Use your local knowledge and experience to improve active transportation in our community For additional information contact Community Development at (760) 337-4545 ATTACHMENT I-3A - PROOF OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

California Department of Education Analysis, Measurement, & Accountability Reporting Division Data Reporting Office October 2014 Data Collection Data certified as of: March 16, 2015 Source: 2014 15 California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) Fall 1 Version: 1.0 Free or Reduced Price Meal Data ATTACHMENT I-5A - DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY DATA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A B C D E F G H I J K Academic Year County Code District Code School Code County Name District Name School Name District Type School Type 2014 2015 13 63115 0131243 Imperial Central Union High Phoenix Rising High High School DAlternative S Alternative S 21 21 100.0% 21 100.0% 21 21 100.0% 21 100.0% Y 2014 2015 13 63115 1330133 Imperial Central Union High Southwest High High School DHigh Schools Traditional 2,057 1,253 60.9% 1,415 68.8% 1,964 1,191 60.6% 1,348 68.6% Y 2014 2015 13 63115 1333004 Imperial Central Union High Central Union High High School DHigh Schools Traditional 1,871 1,268 67.8% 1,430 76.4% 1,796 1,204 67.0% 1,363 75.9% Y 2014 2015 13 63115 1333558 Imperial Central Union High Desert Oasis High (Continuation) High School DContinuationContinuation 157 135 86.0% 144 91.7% 89 78 87.6% 84 94.4% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 0118455 Imperial El Centro ElementaryBallington Academy for the Arts and Scienc Elementary SElementary STraditional 229 139 60.7% 154 67.2% 226 136 60.2% 151 66.8% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 0121855 Imperial El Centro ElementaryImagine Schools at Imperial Valley Elementary SElementary STraditional 873 564 64.6% 648 74.2% 857 555 64.8% 635 74.1% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 0122663 Imperial El Centro ElementaryImperial Valley Home School Academy Elementary SElementary STraditional 81 8 9.9% 8 9.9% 79 8 10.1% 8 10.1% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6008411 Imperial El Centro ElementaryDe Anza Magnet Elementary SElementary STraditional 455 230 50.5% 281 61.8% 455 230 50.5% 281 61.8% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6008429 Imperial El Centro ElementaryDesert Garden Elementary Elementary SElementary STraditional 347 262 75.5% 292 84.1% 347 262 75.5% 292 84.1% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6008437 Imperial El Centro ElementaryHarding Elementary Elementary SElementary STraditional 525 338 64.4% 413 78.7% 513 331 64.5% 406 79.1% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6008445 Imperial El Centro ElementaryKennedy Middle Elementary SIntermediateTraditional 353 291 82.4% 305 86.4% 353 291 82.4% 305 86.4% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6008452 Imperial El Centro ElementaryLincoln Elementary Elementary SElementary STraditional 368 313 85.1% 337 91.6% 367 313 85.3% 337 91.8% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6008460 Imperial El Centro ElementaryMargaret Hedrick Elementary Elementary SElementary STraditional 502 281 56.0% 353 70.3% 488 272 55.7% 343 70.3% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6008478 Imperial El Centro ElementaryMcKinley Elementary Elementary SElementary STraditional 399 326 81.7% 346 86.7% 399 326 81.7% 346 86.7% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6008486 Imperial El Centro ElementaryWashington Elementary Elementary SElementary STraditional 430 378 87.9% 402 93.5% 416 368 88.5% 391 94.0% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6008494 Imperial El Centro ElementaryWilson Jr. High Elementary SIntermediateTraditional 671 459 68.4% 533 79.4% 671 459 68.4% 533 79.4% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6108823 Imperial El Centro ElementaryMartin Luther King Jr. Elementary Elementary SElementary STraditional 417 330 79.1% 363 87.1% 404 322 79.7% 352 87.1% Y 2014 2015 13 63123 6113658 Imperial El Centro ElementarySunflower Elementary Elementary SElementary STraditional 451 214 47.5% 274 60.8% 451 214 47.5% 274 60.8% Y Educational Option Type Enrollment (K 12) Free Meal Count (K 12) Percent (%) Eligible Free (K 12) FRPM Count (K 12) Percent (%) Eligible FRPM (K 12) Enrollment (Ages 5 17) Free Meal Count (Ages 5 17) Percent (%) Eligible Free (Ages 5 17) FRPM Count (Ages 5 17) Percent (%) Eligible FRPM (Ages 5 17) 2013 14 CALPADS Fall 1 Certificatio n Status ATTACHMENT I-5A - DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY DATA

DP03 SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Data and Documentation section. Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section. Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties. EMPLOYMENT STATUS Subject El Centro city, California Estimate Margin of Error Percent Percent Margin of Error Population 16 years and over 31,406 +/-507 31,406 (X) In labor force 19,373 +/-593 61.7% +/-2.0 Civilian labor force 19,351 +/-591 61.6% +/-2.0 Employed 16,028 +/-663 51.0% +/-2.1 Unemployed 3,323 +/-490 10.6% +/-1.6 Armed Forces 22 +/-20 0.1% +/-0.1 Not in labor force 12,033 +/-705 38.3% +/-2.0 Civilian labor force 19,351 +/-591 19,351 (X) Percent Unemployed (X) (X) 17.2% +/-2.5 Females 16 years and over 16,517 +/-474 16,517 (X) In labor force 9,219 +/-450 55.8% +/-2.4 Civilian labor force 9,212 +/-450 55.8% +/-2.4 Employed 7,736 +/-428 46.8% +/-2.4 Own children under 6 years 4,301 +/-445 4,301 (X) All parents in family in labor force 2,746 +/-361 63.8% +/-6.6 Own children 6 to 17 years 8,016 +/-517 8,016 (X) All parents in family in labor force 5,466 +/-523 68.2% +/-4.3 COMMUTING TO WORK Workers 16 years and over 15,582 +/-689 15,582 (X) Car, truck, or van -- drove alone 12,180 +/-736 78.2% +/-2.8 Car, truck, or van -- carpooled 1,862 +/-383 11.9% +/-2.4 Public transportation (excluding taxicab) 157 +/-89 1.0% +/-0.6 Walked 337 +/-139 2.2% +/-0.9 Other means 238 +/-115 1.5% +/-0.7 Worked at home 808 +/-237 5.2% +/-1.5 Mean travel time to work (minutes) 19.0 +/-1.5 (X) (X) OCCUPATION Civilian employed population 16 years and over 16,028 +/-663 16,028 (X) ATTACHMENT I-5A - DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY DATA 1 of 5 05/28/2015

Subject El Centro city, California Estimate Margin of Error Percent Percent Margin of Error Management, business, science, and arts 4,474 +/-435 27.9% +/-2.4 occupations Service occupations 3,914 +/-429 24.4% +/-2.5 Sales and office occupations 3,810 +/-409 23.8% +/-2.4 Natural resources, construction, and maintenance 1,905 +/-281 11.9% +/-1.7 occupations Production, transportation, and material moving occupations 1,925 +/-338 12.0% +/-2.1 INDUSTRY Civilian employed population 16 years and over 16,028 +/-663 16,028 (X) Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 1,052 +/-226 6.6% +/-1.4 Construction 823 +/-228 5.1% +/-1.4 Manufacturing 677 +/-211 4.2% +/-1.3 Wholesale trade 355 +/-123 2.2% +/-0.8 Retail trade 2,039 +/-327 12.7% +/-2.0 Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 1,082 +/-240 6.8% +/-1.5 Information 235 +/-96 1.5% +/-0.6 Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental 784 +/-207 4.9% +/-1.3 and leasing Professional, scientific, and management, and 930 +/-260 5.8% +/-1.6 administrative and waste management services Educational services, and health care and social 4,584 +/-440 28.6% +/-2.5 assistance Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and 922 +/-233 5.8% +/-1.4 accommodation and food services Other services, except public administration 553 +/-123 3.5% +/-0.7 Public administration 1,992 +/-349 12.4% +/-2.1 CLASS OF WORKER Civilian employed population 16 years and over 16,028 +/-663 16,028 (X) Private wage and salary workers 9,968 +/-643 62.2% +/-2.8 Government workers 5,090 +/-480 31.8% +/-2.8 Self-employed in own not incorporated business 805 +/-156 5.0% +/-1.0 workers Unpaid family workers 165 +/-89 1.0% +/-0.5 INCOME AND BENEFITS (IN 2013 INFLATION- ADJUSTED DOLLARS) Total households 12,925 +/-284 12,925 (X) Less than $10,000 1,330 +/-266 10.3% +/-2.0 $10,000 to $14,999 1,166 +/-204 9.0% +/-1.6 $15,000 to $24,999 1,960 +/-292 15.2% +/-2.2 $25,000 to $34,999 1,190 +/-209 9.2% +/-1.6 $35,000 to $49,999 1,525 +/-230 11.8% +/-1.8 $50,000 to $74,999 1,875 +/-283 14.5% +/-2.2 $75,000 to $99,999 1,471 +/-276 11.4% +/-2.1 $100,000 to $149,999 1,586 +/-242 12.3% +/-1.9 $150,000 to $199,999 462 +/-145 3.6% +/-1.1 $200,000 or more 360 +/-107 2.8% +/-0.8 Median household income (dollars) 42,166 +/-3,566 (X) (X) Mean household income (dollars) 60,391 +/-3,439 (X) (X) With earnings 9,975 +/-316 77.2% +/-2.2 Mean earnings (dollars) 62,834 +/-3,968 (X) (X) With Social Security 3,461 +/-334 26.8% +/-2.5 Mean Social Security income (dollars) 14,238 +/-880 (X) (X) With retirement income 1,405 +/-201 10.9% +/-1.5 Mean retirement income (dollars) 29,869 +/-4,802 (X) (X) With Supplemental Security Income 1,249 +/-236 9.7% +/-1.8 Mean Supplemental Security Income (dollars) 8,721 +/-1,053 (X) (X) With cash public assistance income 900 +/-191 7.0% +/-1.5 ATTACHMENT I-5A - DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY DATA 2 of 5 05/28/2015

Subject El Centro city, California Estimate Margin of Error Percent Percent Margin of Error Mean cash public assistance income (dollars) 5,024 +/-625 (X) (X) With Food Stamp/SNAP benefits in the past 12 months 2,716 +/-275 21.0% +/-2.1 Families 9,990 +/-309 9,990 (X) Less than $10,000 885 +/-229 8.9% +/-2.2 $10,000 to $14,999 587 +/-155 5.9% +/-1.5 $15,000 to $24,999 1,491 +/-251 14.9% +/-2.5 $25,000 to $34,999 985 +/-178 9.9% +/-1.8 $35,000 to $49,999 1,288 +/-192 12.9% +/-1.9 $50,000 to $74,999 1,525 +/-242 15.3% +/-2.3 $75,000 to $99,999 1,240 +/-225 12.4% +/-2.3 $100,000 to $149,999 1,427 +/-236 14.3% +/-2.4 $150,000 to $199,999 342 +/-119 3.4% +/-1.2 $200,000 or more 220 +/-72 2.2% +/-0.7 Median family income (dollars) 46,210 +/-4,990 (X) (X) Mean family income (dollars) 62,198 +/-3,142 (X) (X) Per capita income (dollars) 18,877 +/-1,054 (X) (X) Nonfamily households 2,935 +/-347 2,935 (X) Median nonfamily income (dollars) 19,241 +/-2,494 (X) (X) Mean nonfamily income (dollars) 49,259 +/-10,137 (X) (X) Median earnings for workers (dollars) 23,910 +/-2,518 (X) (X) Median earnings for male full-time, year-round workers 47,471 +/-5,029 (X) (X) (dollars) Median earnings for female full-time, year-round workers (dollars) 36,794 +/-2,642 (X) (X) HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE Civilian noninstitutionalized population 42,388 +/-260 42,388 (X) With health insurance coverage 34,025 +/-930 80.3% +/-2.0 With private health insurance 18,827 +/-955 44.4% +/-2.2 With public coverage 17,903 +/-977 42.2% +/-2.3 No health insurance coverage 8,363 +/-836 19.7% +/-2.0 Civilian noninstitutionalized population under 18 12,876 +/-515 12,876 (X) years No health insurance coverage 1,256 +/-369 9.8% +/-2.9 Civilian noninstitutionalized population 18 to 64 years 25,449 +/-455 25,449 (X) In labor force: 18,593 +/-580 18,593 (X) Employed: 15,464 +/-677 15,464 (X) With health insurance coverage 11,567 +/-597 74.8% +/-2.6 With private health insurance 9,397 +/-600 60.8% +/-2.9 With public coverage 2,582 +/-315 16.7% +/-2.1 No health insurance coverage 3,897 +/-466 25.2% +/-2.6 Unemployed: 3,129 +/-478 3,129 (X) With health insurance coverage 1,846 +/-360 59.0% +/-7.1 With private health insurance 481 +/-147 15.4% +/-4.3 With public coverage 1,414 +/-322 45.2% +/-7.2 No health insurance coverage 1,283 +/-297 41.0% +/-7.1 Not in labor force: 6,856 +/-563 6,856 (X) With health insurance coverage 4,943 +/-447 72.1% +/-4.1 With private health insurance 1,994 +/-264 29.1% +/-4.1 With public coverage 3,209 +/-392 46.8% +/-3.9 No health insurance coverage 1,913 +/-352 27.9% +/-4.1 ATTACHMENT I-5A - DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY DATA 3 of 5 05/28/2015

Subject El Centro city, California Estimate Margin of Error Percent Percent Margin of Error PERCENTAGE OF FAMILIES AND PEOPLE WHOSE INCOME IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS IS BELOW THE POVERTY LEVEL All families (X) (X) 23.0% +/-2.7 With related children under 18 years (X) (X) 30.2% +/-3.9 With related children under 5 years only (X) (X) 28.2% +/-10.5 Married couple families (X) (X) 12.1% +/-2.7 With related children under 18 years (X) (X) 17.2% +/-4.0 With related children under 5 years only (X) (X) 5.9% +/-5.0 Families with female householder, no husband present (X) (X) 42.7% +/-6.8 With related children under 18 years (X) (X) 47.7% +/-8.1 With related children under 5 years only (X) (X) 46.8% +/-24.5 All people (X) (X) 24.9% +/-2.7 Under 18 years (X) (X) 32.1% +/-4.6 Related children under 18 years (X) (X) 31.8% +/-4.7 Related children under 5 years (X) (X) 34.8% +/-6.8 Related children 5 to 17 years (X) (X) 30.7% +/-4.8 18 years and over (X) (X) 21.7% +/-2.5 18 to 64 years (X) (X) 21.9% +/-2.8 65 years and over (X) (X) 20.7% +/-5.0 People in families (X) (X) 22.9% +/-3.0 Unrelated individuals 15 years and over (X) (X) 39.9% +/-5.9 Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables. There were changes in the edit between 2009 and 2010 regarding Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security. The changes in the edit loosened restrictions on disability requirements for receipt of SSI resulting in an increase in the total number of SSI recipients in the American Community Survey. The changes also loosened restrictions on possible reported monthly amounts in Social Security income resulting in higher Social Security aggregate amounts. These results more closely match administrative counts compiled by the Social Security Administration. Workers include members of the Armed Forces and civilians who were at work last week. Census occupation codes are 4-digit codes and are based on the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC). The Census occupation codes for 2010 and later years are based on the 2010 revision of the SOC. To allow for the creation of 2009-2013 tables, occupation data in the multiyear files (2009-2013) were recoded to 2013 Census occupation codes. We recommend using caution when comparing data coded using 2013 Census occupation codes with data coded using Census occupation codes prior to 2010. For more information on the Census occupation code changes, please visit our website at http://www.census.gov/people/io/methodology/. Industry codes are 4-digit codes and are based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The Census industry codes for 2013 and later years are based on the 2012 revision of the NAICS. To allow for the creation of 2009-2013 and 2011-2013 tables, industry data in the multiyear files (2009-2013 and 2011-2013) were recoded to 2013 Census industry codes. We recommend using caution when comparing data coded using 2013 Census industry codes with data coded using Census industry codes prior to 2013. For more information on the Census industry code changes, please visit our website at http://www.census.gov/people/io/methodology/. While the 2009-2013 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the February 2013 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) definitions of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas; in certain instances the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB definitions due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities. Estimates of urban and rural population, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2010 data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2009-2013 5-Year American Community Survey ATTACHMENT I-5A - DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY DATA 4 of 5 05/28/2015

S1903 MEDIAN INCOME IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS (IN 2013 INFLATION-ADJUSTED DOLLARS) 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Note: This is a modified view of the original table. Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Data and Documentation section. Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section. Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties. Subject California El Centro city, California Median income (dollars) Median income (dollars) Estimate Margin of Error Estimate Margin of Error Households 61,094 +/-157 42,166 +/-3,566 One race-- White 63,894 +/-184 43,736 +/-3,148 Black or African American 43,969 +/-421 68,409 +/-27,148 American Indian and Alaska Native 44,498 +/-1,419 56,306 +/-26,992 Asian 76,806 +/-372 86,346 +/-15,750 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 60,930 +/-2,956 - ** Some other race 44,889 +/-283 30,703 +/-5,871 Two or more races 58,020 +/-929 36,742 +/-7,607 Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 47,082 +/-199 33,015 +/-4,812 White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 71,226 +/-256 77,903 +/-5,628 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER 15 to 24 years 30,273 +/-336 30,640 +/-9,403 25 to 44 years 64,092 +/-296 50,549 +/-5,532 45 to 64 years 73,430 +/-327 43,750 +/-8,712 65 years and over 43,181 +/-206 23,442 +/-6,395 FAMILIES Families 69,661 +/-273 46,210 +/-4,990 With own children under 18 years 63,246 +/-351 41,604 +/-5,235 With no own children under 18 years 74,886 +/-251 52,544 +/-5,207 Married-couple families 85,024 +/-270 63,867 +/-5,193 Female householder, no husband present 36,763 +/-235 22,043 +/-5,345 Male householder, no wife present 48,015 +/-478 32,778 +/-15,470 NONFAMILY HOUSEHOLDS Nonfamily households 40,611 +/-178 19,241 +/-2,494 Female householder 35,180 +/-246 17,235 +/-3,450 Living alone 30,322 +/-174 15,206 +/-4,499 Not living alone 64,596 +/-707 36,618 +/-68,088 Male householder 47,009 +/-301 22,117 +/-10,695 Living alone 39,807 +/-344 18,042 +/-5,336 ATTACHMENT I-5A - DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY DATA 1 of 2 05/15/2015

Project Name: Project Location: y of El Centro Establishment of SR2S Program & Bicycle Route Improveme Various Locations throughout the City of El Centro INFRASTRUCTURE Bike Projects (Daily Person Trips for All Users) (Box1A) Project Costs (Box 1D) Non SR2S Infrastructure Project Cost Existing 2,492 SR2S Infrastructure Project Cost Forecast (1 Yr after completion) 2,866 (1 YR aftercompletion) (actual) Without Project With Project $308,226 Commuters Recreational Users ATP Requested Funds (Box 1E) Existing Trips 2,218 Non SR2S Infrastructure New Daily Trips (estimate) 1109 0 SR2S Infrastructure CRASH DATA (Box 1F) Last 5 Yrs Annual Average Project Information Non SR2S Infrastructure Fatal Crashes 0 Bike Class Type Bike Class III Injury Crashes 0 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) 50,000 PDO 0 Pedestrian Projects (Daily Person Trips for All Users) (Box 1B) SAFETY COUNTERMEASURES (improvements) (Box 1G) Y or N Without Project With Project (Capitalized) Existing Pedestrian countdown signal heads N Forecast (1 YR after project Pedestrian crossing N completion) Advance stop bar before crosswalk N Without Project With Project Install overpass/underpass N Existing step counts Raised medians/refuge islands N (600 steps=0.3mi=1 trip) Pedestrian crossing (new signs and markings only) N Existing miles walked Pedestrian crossing (safety features/curb extensions) N Pedestrian signals N Safe Routes to School (SR2S) (Box 1C) Total Bike lanes Y Number of student enrollment 10,105 Sidewalk/pathway (to avoid walking along roadway) N Approximate no. of students living along school Pedestrian crossing (with enhanced safety features) N route proposed for improvement 90 Pedestrian crossing N Percentage of students that currently walk or bike Other reduction factor countermeasures Y to school Projected percentage of students that will walk or 20.00% bike to school after the project 35.00% Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection Roadways ATTACHMENT I-6A - BENEFIT/COST CALCULATOR

Project Name: Project Location: ity of El Centro Establishment of SR2S Program and Bicycle Route Improvement Various locations throughout the City of El Centro NON INFRASTRUCTURE Outreach ( SR2S) (Box 2A) Outreach (Non SR2S) (Box 2B) Participants (School Enrollment) 10,105 Participants Current Active Trans Walker/Bicyclist Users 2,021 Current Active Trans Walker/Bicyclist Users 0 Percentage of Current Active Trans Walkers/Bicyclists 20% Percentage of Current Active Trans Walkers/Bicyclists Project Cost $215,422 Project Cost ATP Requested Funds $523,648 ATP Requested Funds Duration of Outreach (months) 24 Duration of Outreach (months) Outreach to new users 8,084 Outreach to new users 0 Perception (must be marked with an "x") (Box 2C) Outreach is Hands on (self efficacy) x Overcome Barriers (e.g., dist, time, etc.) x Eliminates Hazards/Threats (speed, crime, etc.) x Connected or Addresses Connectivity Challenges x Creating Value in Using Active Transportation x Promotional Effort (must be marked with an "x") (Box 2D) Effort Targets 5 E's or 5 P's Knowledgable Staff/Educator Partnership/Volunteers Creates Community Ownership/Relationship Part of Bigger Effort (e.g., political support) Younger than 10 10 12 13 24 25 55 55+ Age (must be marked with an "x") (Box 2E) Duration (must be marked with an "x") (Box 2F) x One Day x One Month x One Year x Multiple Years x Continuous Effort Projected New Active Trans Riders Projected New Active Trans Riders Longitudinal New Users 707 Longitudinal New Users 0 CRASH DATA (Box 2G) Last 5 Yrs Annual Assumption: Fatal Crashes 3 0.6 Benefits only accrue for five years, unless the project Injury Crashes 179 35.8 is ongoing. PDO 0 ATTACHMENT I-6A - BENEFIT/COST CALCULATOR

Non Infrastructure All Projected New ATP Users Annual Mobility Benefits Annual Health Benefits Annual Recreational Benefits Annual Safety Benefits 707 $0 Did not quantify mobility benefits. $103,273 $0 Did not quantify recreational benefits. ######## Safety benefits are assumed to be a reduction in Other Reduction Factor Countermeasures. Fuel saved $125,427 Emissions Saved $9,196 Fuel and Emissions Saved $134,623 Underlying assumptions for calculations: 1) 1 mile driven is ~ 0.05 gal ~ 1 lb of CO2 based on US average 20mpg. Source: Active Transportation for America: The Case for Increased Federal Investment in Bicycling and Walking. Rails to Trails Conservancy, page 22. http://www.railstotrails.org/resourcehandler.ashx?id=2948 2) Assume users divert 1040 miles ( 4 miles (bike 3 mi, walk.6 mi) * 5days *52 weeks) 3) Gasoline price per gallon is $3.41 (incl. tax) 4) Carbon price is $25 per ton (updated $2014 value) 5) 2,000 lbs = 1 ton ESTIMATED SAFETY BENEFITS FROM POTENTIAL CRASH REDUCTION Countermeasures Crash Reduction Factors (CRFs) Service Life OTHER REDUCTION FACTOR 10% 5 1st year $2,557,251 Fatal Injury PDO Total Frequency 3 179 0 182 Cost/crash $3,750,837 $80,000 $6,924 ATTACHMENT I-6A - BENEFIT/COST CALCULATOR

SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL Infrastructure Before Project No. of students enrollment 10,105 Approximate no. of students living along school route proposed for improvement 90 Percent that currently walks/bikes to school 20% Number of students that walk/bike to school 18 Assumptions: 1) 180 school days 2) 2 miles distance to school = 1 hour walk 3) Takes 1 hour back and forth to school grounds, used distance of 1 mile ( 4) Approximate no. of students living along school route proposed for imp before and after to get an actual increase number of ATP users or corresp 5) We used the value of time for adults for SR2S since we did not quantify community in general. Value of time for adults $13.03 vs. $5.42 for kids. After Project No. of students enrollment 10,105 6) Safety benefits are assumed to be the same as non SRTS infrastructure p Approximate no. of students living along school route proposed for improvement 90 Projected percentage of students that will walk or bike because of the project 35% Number of students that will walk/bike to school after the project 31.5 ATP Shift Fuels Saved Emissions Saved 4,860 $828.63 $60.75 Annual Mobility Benefits Annual Health Benefits Annual Safety Benefits Fuel and Emissions Saved Recreational Benefits $31,675 $1,976 $0 $889 $0 Did not quantify recreational benefits for SR2S Infrastructure projects. ATTACHMENT I-6A - BENEFIT/COST CALCULATOR

20 Year Invest Summary Analysis Total Costs $523,648.00 Net Present Cost $503,507.69 Total Benefits $147,637,855.45 Net Present Benefit $101,075,168.57 Benefit Cost Ratio 200.74 20 Year Itemized Savings Mobility $139,718,846.13 Health $4,510,326.38 Recreational $0.00 Gas & Emissions $878,701.81 Safety $13,308,037.51 Funds Requested $523,648.00 Net Present Cost of Funds Requested $503,507.69 Benefit Cost Ratio 200.74 ATTACHMENT I-6A - BENEFIT/COST CALCULATOR

ESTIMATED DAILY MOBILITY BENEFITS FROM THE PROJECT Current Walk Counts Project Types Total miles walked 0.00 For M values: Total person Trips walked 0.00 20.38 min/trip OFF STREET Bike Class I Total Steps walked 0.00 18.02 min/trip ON STREET w/o parking benefit Bike Class II 15.83 min/trip ON STREET w/ parking benefit Bike Class III After the Project is Completed Total miles walked 0.00 $13.03 Value of Time Total person trips walked 0.00 Total Steps walked 0.00 600 steps=0.3mi=1 trip Converted miles walked to trips 0 $1 Value of Total Pedestrian Environmental Impacts per trip Difference of person trips walked 0 Converted steps walked to trips 0 Current Bike Counts Existing Commuters 2,218 New Commuters 1109 Benefits, 2014 values Annual Mobility Benefit (Walking) $0 Annual Mobility Benefit (Biking) $5,718,694.35 Total Annual Mobility Benefits $5,718,694 Sources: NCHRP 552 Methodology (Biking) Heuman (2006) as reported by UK Dept of Transport and Guidance (walking) ATTACHMENT I-6A - BENEFIT/COST CALCULATOR

ATTACHMENT I-6A - BENEFIT/COST CALCULATOR

Adriana Nava From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hsieh, Wei@CCC <Wei.Hsieh@CCC.CA.GOV> on behalf of ATP@CCC <ATP@CCC.CA.GOV> Tuesday, May 26, 2015 3:33 PM Adriana Nava; Abraham Campos Hsieh, Wei@CCC; ATP@CCC; inquiry@atpcommunitycorps.org; Lucatero, Robert@CCC; Weaver, Sara@CCC; Soria, Rhody@CCC RE: El Centro ATP Application Hi Adriana, Thank you for contacting the CCC. Unfortunately, we are unable to participate in this project. Please include this email with your application as proof that you reached out to the CCC. Thank you, Wei Hsieh, Manager Programs & Operations Division California Conservation Corps 1719 24 th Street Sacramento, CA 95816 (916) 341 3154 Wei.Hsieh@ccc.ca.gov From: Adriana Nava [mailto:anava@ci.el centro.ca.us] Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 3:28 PM To: ATP@CCC Cc: Norma Villicana; ACampos@ci.el centro.ca.us Subject: El Centro ATP Application Hello Wei, Please find attached a letter from the City of El Centro in regards to our Active Transportation Grant Application. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Adriana C. Nava, AICP Associate Planner City of El Centro Phone (760) 337 4545 Email anava@cityofelcentro.org Address 1275 W. Main Street El Centro, 92243 Website http://www.cityofelcentro.org/ From: Hsieh, Wei@CCC [mailto:wei.hsieh@ccc.ca.gov] On Behalf Of ATP@CCC Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 10:27 AM 1

ATTACHMENT J - LETTERS OF SUPPORT