Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout07 July 10, 2019 CommissionRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME/DATE: 9:30 a.m. / Wednesday, July 10, 2019 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside COMMISSIONERS Chair — Chuck Washington Vice Chair— Ben J. Benoit Second Vice Chair — Jan Harnik Kevin Jeffries, County of Riverside, District 1 Karen Spiegel, County of Riverside, District 2 Chuck Washington, County of Riverside, District 3 V. Manuel Perez, County of Riverside, District 4 Jeff Hewitt, County of Riverside, District 5 Art Welch / Daniela Andrade, City of Banning Lloyd White / Julio Martinez, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / Johnny Rodriguez, City of Blythe Larry Smith / Linda Molina, City of Calimesa Randall Bonner / Jeremy Smith, City of Canyon Lake Raymond Gregory / Mark Carnevale, City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez / Megan Beaman Jacinto, City of Coachella Wes Speake / Jim Steiner, City of Corona Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Clint Lorimore / Todd Rigby, City of Eastvale Linda Krupa / Russ Brown, City of Hemet Dana Reed / To Be Appointed, City of Indian Wells Waymond Fermon / Oscar Ortiz, City of Indio Brian Berkson / Chris Barajas, City of Jurupa Valley Kathleen Fitzpatrick / Robert Radi, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Natasha Johnson, City of Lake Elsinore Bill Zimmerman / Dean Deines, City of Menifee Victoria Baca / Carla Thornton, City of Moreno Valley Scott Vinton / Randon Lane, City of Murrieta Berwin Hanna / Ted Hoffman, City of Norco Jan Harnik / Kathleen Kelly, City of Palm Desert Lisa Middleton / Jon R. Roberts, City of Palm Springs Michael M. Vargas / Rita Rogers, City of Perris Ted Weill / Charles Townsend, City of Rancho Mirage Rusty Bailey / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Andrew Kotyuk / Russ Utz, City of San Jacinto Michael S. Naggar / Maryann Edwards, City of Temecula Ben J. Benoit / Joseph Morabito, City of Wildomar Mike Beauchamp, Governor's Appointee Caltrans District 8 Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org MEETING AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, July 10, 2019 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, CA In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, Government Code Section 54954.2, and the Federal Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, including accessibility and translation services. Assistance is provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide assistance at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS — Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this three -minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Also, the Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Commission shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Under the Brown Act, the Commission should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda that are not listed on the agenda. Commission members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda July 10, 2019 Page 2 5. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS — The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission. If there are less than 2/3 of the Commission members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JUNE 12, 2019 7. PUBLIC HEARING — ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF FEE INTEREST IN CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, BY EMINENT DOMAIN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 305-060-009 (RCPN 1164), LOCATED IN PERRIS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN INTERCHANGE AT THE INTERSECTION OF INTERSTATE 215 AND PLACENTIA AVENUE, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Page 1 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Conduct a hearing to consider the adoption of Resolution of Necessity, including providing all parties interested in the affected properties and their attorneys, or their representatives, an opportunity to be heard on the issues relevant to the Resolution of Necessity; 2) Make the following findings as hereinafter described in this report: a) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; b) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; c) The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; d) The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner; and 3) Adopt Resolution of Necessity No. 19-015 to "Adoption of a Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition of a Fee Interest in Certain Real Property, By Eminent Domain, More Particularly Described as Assessor Parcel No. 305-060-009 (RCPN 1164), Located in Perris, Riverside County, California, for the Construction of an Interchange at the Intersection of Interstate 215 and Placentia Avenue, in Riverside County, California". Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda July 10, 2019 Page 3 8. PUBLIC HEARING — RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSIT SERVICES FUNDING ALLOCATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 16 1) Conduct a public hearing at the July Commission meeting on the proposed Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 Program of Projects (POP); 2) Approve Fiscal Year 2019/20 Transit Operator Funding Allocations for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona and Riverside; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA); Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and the Commission's Rail Program; 3) Direct staff to add the federally funded and regionally significant projects into the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); 4) Adopt Resolution No. 19-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate Local Transit Assistance Funds and State Transit Assistance Funds;" and 5) Approve the FY 2019/20 FTA Sections 5307 and 5311 POP for Riverside County (County). 9. CONSENT CALENDAR —All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 9A. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Page 30 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4, 2018. 9B. FISCAL YEAR 2017/18 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT AND MEASURE A AUDIT RESULTS Page 39 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Transportation Development Act (TDA) and Measure A audit results report for Fiscal Year 2017/18. 9C. #REBOOT MY COMMUTE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROGRAM SUMMARY Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update about the Commission's #RebootMyCommute public engagement program in Riverside County. Page 47 Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda July 10, 2019 Page 4 9D. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the following bill position: a) HR. 2939 (Napolitano) — Support; 2) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation. Page 60 9E. FISCAL YEARS 2019/20 — 2023/24 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR THE LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM Page 63 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the Fiscal Years 2019/20 — 2023/24 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Local Streets and Roads (LSR) as submitted by the participating agencies. 9F. 2020 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUNDING DISTRIBUTION AND DRAFT FUND ESTIMATE Page 66 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the 2020 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funding distribution among the three geographic areas in Riverside County per the adopted STIP Intracounty Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). 9G. 2019 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT UPDATE, INCLUDING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN AND LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Page 70 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the 2019 Title VI Program Report, including the Public Participation Plan and Language Assistance Plan in compliance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda July 10, 2019 Page 5 9H. CHANGE ORDER TO AMEND THE INTERSTATE 15 EXPRESS LANES PROJECT TOLL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KAPSCH TRAFFICCOM USA FOR THE INTERSTATE 15/STATE ROUTE 91 EXPRESS LANES CONNECTOR PROJECT Page 131 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Contract Change Order (CCO) No. 6 to Agreement No. 16-31-043-00 for the Interstate 15 Express Lanes Project (15 Express Lanes) with Kapsch TrafficCom USA Inc. (Kapsch) in the amount of $2,809,286, plus a contingency amount of $290,000, for a total amount not to exceed $3,099,286; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to negotiate and execute the change order on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for the project. 91. CEQA REVALIDATION AND ADDENDUM FOR THE MODIFIED STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT'S EXPRESS LANE CONNECTOR IMPROVEMENTS Page 168 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 19-011, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting an Addendum to the Previously Certified Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2008071075) Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Approving the Proposed Changes to the Project". 9J. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT THE INTERSTATE 15/STATE ROUTE 91 EXPRESS LANES CONNECTOR PROJECT THROUGH A DESIGN -BUILD CONTRACT Page 177 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize staff, subject to concurrence by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to issue Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 19-31-074-00 and future addenda to design and construct the Interstate 15/State Route 91 Express Lanes Connector (15/91 ELC) project through a design -build (DB) contract; 2) Approve the selection criteria for the selection of the apparent best value (ABV) proposer; Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda July 10, 2019 Page 6 3) Authorize the Executive Director to select the top -ranked ABV proposer for DB services, based on the criteria identified in the RFP and addenda, and to conduct subsequent limited negotiations; 4) Authorize the Executive Director to pay, to the unsuccessful shortlisted DB proposers (or potentially all DB proposers in the case that the procurement is cancelled after the proposal due date) that submit a timely and responsive proposal, a stipend of $225,000, plus a contingency amount of $25,000 per proposer, for a total amount not to exceed $1 million; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve stipend contingency up to the total amount not to exceed as deemed necessary. 9K. AGREEMENT WITH WSP USA INC. FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT PHASE FOR THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY NEXT GENERATION EXPRESS LANES Page185 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 19-31-058-00 to WSP USA Inc. (WSP) to provide planning and preliminary engineering services to complete the Project Initiation Document for the Next Generation Express Lanes Project (NGELP), in the amount of $1,296,110, plus a contingency amount of $99,611, for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,395,721; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to approve an increase not to exceed $20,000 of the total amount based on the final Caltrans Independent Office of Audits and Investigations (IOAI) and Commission's pre -award audit results; 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as may be required for the Project. 9L. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT WITH RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION FOR THE MID COUNTY PARKWAY MITIGATION SITE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 232 1) Award Agreement No. 19-31-086-00 to Riverside Construction, as the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, for the construction of the Mid County Parkway (MCP) Mitigation Project (Project) in the amount of $1,782,653, plus a contingency amount of $267,398, for a total amount not to exceed $2,050,051; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda July 10, 2019 Page 7 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work pursuant to the agreement terms up to the total not to exceed amount. 9M. AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR SENATE BILL 1 FUNDING OF THE FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL PROGRAM IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Page 248 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 19-45-101-00 with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the Senate Bill (SB) 1 funding of the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in an amount not to exceed $1,390,287; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 9N. AMENDMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL TOWING SERVICES SUPPORTING THE STATE ROUTE 60 TRUCK LANES PROJECT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 259 1) Approve the following amendments to agreements to provide Construction Freeway Service Patrol (CFSP) services for the State Route 60 Truck Lanes Project (Project) for an additional amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $500,000: 2) a) Agreement No. 15-45-060-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 15-45-060-00, with Airport Mobile Towing, Inc. (Airport); b) Agreement No. 18-45-131-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 18-45-131-00, with Coastal Pride Towing, Inc. (Coastal); c) Agreement No. 17-45-061-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 17-45-061-00, with Pepe's Towing, Inc. (Pepe's); and 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 10. 2009 MEASURE A EXPENDITURE PLAN REVIEW & UPDATE Page 266 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan Review & Update. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda July 10, 2019 Page 8 11. INNOVATIVE FINANCING OPPORTUNITIES Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 272 1) Authorize staff to continue to develop a plan of finance for the 2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan (Delivery Plan) eligible projects that includes, but is not limited to, the issuance of RCTC 91 Express Lanes surplus toll revenue bonds; 2) Adopt as Commission policy that priority shall be given to Delivery Plan -supporting projects for programming of federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) designated for the South Coast Air Basin, and Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) funds; 3) Authorize staff to pursue legislation that amends the Commission's authorizing statutes to extend the eligible use of RCTC 91 Express Lanes surplus toll revenues east to the 60/91/215 interchange and south on 1-15 to SR-74; and 4) Approve the reimbursement of all or a portion of the Measure A investment in the 91 Project that was not previously financed as an eligible use of surplus toll revenues. 12. 2019-2029 WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY HIGHWAY DELIVERY PLAN Page 278 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt the 2019-2029 Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan. 13. COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT & TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN AND ORDINANCE Page 282 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize staff to develop a Countywide Transportation Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan and implementation ordinance for potential presentation to Riverside County voters in November 2020; 2) Authorize the Executive Director to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 18-15-086-01, an amendment to Agreement No. 18-15-086-00, pursuant to legal counsel review, with AlphaVu for an additional amount not to exceed $3.85 million to enhance the Public Engagement Program to include a Countywide Transportation Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan and implementation ordinance; 3) Approve an increase of an amount not to exceed $1,997,500 in FY 2019/20 expenditures to accommodate the enhancement of the Public Engagement Program; and 4) Sponsor any legislation necessary to clarify its authorizing statutes to implement a voter -approved sales tax measure. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda July 10, 2019 Page 9 14. COACHELLA FESTIVAL SPECIAL EVENTS TRAIN PLATFORM DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 301 1) Approve Agreement No. 19-25-103-00 with the California State Transportation Agency (CaISTA) regarding a State Rail Assistance (SRA) grant to fund the Coachella Festival Special Event Train Platform Development Project (Platform Project) for an amount not to exceed $5,942,510; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 19-012, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding Authorization for the Execution of the Certifications and Assurances and Authorized Agent Forms for the State Rail Assistance"; 3) Adopt Resolution No. 19-013, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding Authorization for the Execution of the State Rail Assistance Project"; 4) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Agreement No. 19-25-102-00 with Los Angeles — San Diego — San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor (LOSSAN) and Amtrak for the coordination and development of the Platform Project; 5) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to negotiate and execute the final CaISTA and MOU agreements on behalf of the Commission; 6) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to negotiate and execute a cooperative agreement with Amtrak for construction of the Platform Project based on estimated costs established by the Commission and within the Platform Project budget estimated at $8,688,241; and 7) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to negotiate and execute agreements with LOSSAN, the city of Indio (City), Goldenvoice, Valley Music Travel, and host railroads, as may be needed for the full implementation of the Platform Project, provided that all such agreements are within the Platform Project budget estimated at $8,688,241. 15. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 16. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda July 10, 2019 Page 10 17. CLOSED SESSION 17A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) Case No. RIC1616789 17B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee Item APN(s) Property Owner Buyer(s) Greens 1 118-270-003 and 118-270-023 RCTC Development Inc. 18. ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the Commission is scheduled to be held on Wednesday, August 14, 2019, Board Room, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. AGENDA ITEM 6 MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, June 12, 2019 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Chuck Washington at 9:36 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Victoria Baca Rusty Bailey Ben J. Benoit Brian Berkson Russell Betts Randall Bonner David Bricker Joseph DeConinck Waymond Fermon Kathleen Fitzpatrick Raymond Gregory Berwin Hanna Jan Harnik Jeff Hewitt Andrew Kotyuk Clint Lorimore* Bob Magee *Arrived after the meeting was called to order **Commissioner Kevin Jeffries assigned his proxy vote to Commissioner Jeff Hewitt. with the Clerk of the Board. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Lisa Middleton V. Manuel Perez Dana Reed Wes Speake Karen Spiegel Larry Smith Michael M. Vargas Scott Vinton Chuck Washington Ted Weill Art Welch Lloyd White Bill Zimmerman Commissioner Jan Harnik led the Commission in a flag salute. Commissioners Absent Steven Hernandez Kevin Jeffries** Linda Krupa Michael Naggar A letter was filed At this time, Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board, announced she has a letter that Commissioner Kevin Jeffries assigned his proxy vote to Commissioner Jeff Hewitt. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 2 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests to speak from the public. 5. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — May 8, 2019 M/S/C (Berkson/Benoit) to approve the May 8, 2019 minutes as submitted. Abstain: Betts and DeConinck 7. PUBLIC HEARING — PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 Chair Washington announced the public hearing remains open from the May 8 meeting. Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance, presented the Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2019/20 and discussed the following areas: • Budget adjustments • Budget summary • Funding sources and comparison • Summary of expenditures, expenses, and uses • Capital projects highlights • Toll operations • Functional uses breakdown • Measure A administrative costs • Next steps At this time, Commissioner Clint Lorimore joined the meeting. Commissioner Jeff Hewitt expressed appreciation for being a member of this Commission and to Anne Mayer for bringing this issue about the past -unfunded liability with the Commission's pension and taking care of it. He explained it definitely shows how responsible the Commission is however due to the new rules if the Commission goes upside down each one of these jurisdictions will be burdened with that liability. He expressed the Commission is blazing a path of fiscal responsibility for a $1 million responsibility joint powers authority, which is impressive. Commissioner Andrew Kotyuk referred to the revenue/sources comparison slide and clarified the FY 2018/19 projected is going up from the $10 million to about $13 million. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 3 Michele replied yes and stated it goes back to the Commission being extremely conservative especially when it comes to interest. She explained for years the Commission has been budgeting interest well below 1 percent and this year staff decided to get closer to what is being received as far as on the investments, which is closer to 2 percent. Commissioner Kotyuk stated the Federal Reserve has been clear about their position on rates it seems what is secured for the next 12-18 months is about a .25 to a 1/2 percent decrease. He explained if the Commission is receiving 2 percent that is a 25 percent decrease in interest income and suggested to back that off to a 1 and 1/2 percent range and to be cautious. Michele Cisneros replied staff could do that. She explained staff comes back to the Commission in January for mid -year budget adjustments and staff can monitor throughout the next six months, come back to the Commission and adjust that down depending on the Commission's performance received on its investments. Anne Mayer stated staff tracks the economic indicators on a regular basis, and usually staff comes back in January at mid -year to make whatever adjustments seen based on what is happening. She suggested for this particular one it can be changed or leave it as is and staff will track it carefully and commit to the Commission if staff realizes any trends that would require a modification prior to January staff will come back to the Commission with a recommendation. Commissioner Kotyuk concurred with Anne Mayer's suggestion and for adding this to the discussion and stated he supports with adopting as is. In response to Commissioner Karen Spiegel's clarification from the revenue/sources comparison slide the projected is what the Commission is projecting today, which is for FY 2019/20, Michele Cisneros replied the projected is for FY 2019/20, which is what the Commission expects to happen for the full 12 months ending in June 30, 2020. In response to Commissioner Spiegel's clarification the projected for FY 2018/19 was for June of last year, Michele Cisneros replied no it would end June 30, 2019. In response to Commissioner Spiegel's inquiry, Michele Cisneros replied the Commission is projecting how it will end this fiscal year. In response to Commissioner Spiegel's question about the revised budget is the mid -year, Michele Cisneros replied it is what the Commission's budget is as of today based on the original budget plus any revised budget adjustments received that the Commission has approved as of today. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 4 In response to Commissioner Spiegel's clarification the swing in the numbers are significant when looking at the federal and local reimbursements, Michele Cisneros replied those are based on project activities. She explained at the beginning of the fiscal year when the budget is being developed staff anticipates everything will run perfectly and will be able to ask for reimbursement on those eligible incurred costs. Those do not always transition the way they are going to and they get pushed out for the next fiscal year, which is the same concept with the revenues. Commissioner Spiegel expressed appreciation the Commission was paying off the pension liability and Michele Cisneros noted about applying it appropriately to the previous years without exceeding the Commission's administrative costs. She expressed appreciation for a very well done budget and a great presentation. Anne Mayer explained concerning reimbursements not only sometimes the invoicing can be delayed due to schedules but also staff has to make submittals to other agencies and this affects the Commission, the cities, and the transit agencies. She explained as an example the reimbursements by the federal government if it takes them more than five or six months, it can have a big swing on these factors. Commissioner Wes Speake expressed appreciation for the presentation and noted raising the same concern from the May Commission meeting that the Commission is projecting a 13 percent decrease in toll revenue. He stated understanding the Commission wants to be conservative and those toll revenues go back into the system that generated them. Commissioner Speake reiterated the Commission is projecting a 13 percent decrease from $47 million to $41 million, which could affect the projects in the queue. Anne Mayer replied to Commissioner Speake his comments are being heard and stated the Commission monitors this on a regular basis and can assure that any projects slated to move forward would not be held back if a budget number does not reconcile with actuals. She explained when staff comes back for a mid -year budget adjustment staff will provide the Commission with the first six-month trends of the year and have a better target and depending what happens with the economy the budget number if the actuals are significantly higher will not constrain any project development. At this time, Chair Washington asked if there were any comments from the public. No comments were received. At this time, Chair Washington closed the public hearing. M/S/C (Vargas/Baca) to: 1) Receive input on the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2019/20; 2) Close the public hearing on the proposed Budget for FY 2019/20; Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 5 3) Approve the salary schedule effective July 4, 2019, located in Appendix E of the proposed budget; and 4) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2019/20. 8. PUBLIC HEARING — AMENDED AND RESTATED ORDINANCE OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF TOLLS AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF TOLL VIOLATIONS FOR THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION EXPRESS LANES Jennifer Crosson, Toll Operations Manager, presented the amended ordinance to administer tolls and enforce violations, highlighting the following areas: • Background: o Adopted Ordinance No. 16-001 prior to the 91 Express Lanes opening o Ordinance required to set the administrative procedures for processing toll evasion violations and to establish the penalty schedule o The penalty schedule adopted in 2016 was the same that OCTA used • Why amending? o Include the 15 Express Lanes and future Express Lanes o Correct a reference error o Change the penalty schedule • Penalty Schedule • Collection Assessment: One violation - $100 current/$100 revised; two violations - $300 current/$200 revised; and three violations $600 current/$300 revised • Benefit of reduced penalties: o Easier resolution for customers with multiple violations o Less expended on collection efforts o Expected net financial impact of zero o Consistency with other California toll operators • Other fees added — DMV fee of $3 and non -sufficient fund check fee $25 Chair Washington opened the public hearing. At this time, Chair Washington asked if there were any comments from the public. No comments were received. Commissioner Jan Harnik clarified that this would put the Commission more aligned with other transportation authorities. She explained if they receive a violation from OCTA and a violation from the Commission on the 91 Express Lanes, how is the Commission aligned with OCTA. Jennifer Crosson replied today the Commission's policies are identical and the Commission is adopting this revised ordinance and OCTA will follow with an exact revised Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 6 ordinance with the same penalty schedule. In order to allow the agencies to align the Commission is requesting an effective date of January 1, 2020, to get in place. At this time, Chair Washington closed the public hearing. M/S/C (Berkson/Benoit) to: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt Ordinance No. 19-001, "An Amended and Restated Ordinance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Relating to the Administration of Tolls and the Enforcement of Toll Violations for the Riverside County Transportation Commission Express Lanes", including approval of the toll evasion penalties and fees for a violation set forth in Schedule A of the Ordinance. 9. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (Berkson/Smith) to approve the following Consent Calendar items. Abstain: Jeffries on Agenda Item 9D 9A. APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 Adopt Resolution No. 19-010, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Annual Appropriations Limit", for Fiscal Year 2019/20. 9B. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2019. 9C. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the nine months ended March 31, 2019. 9D. RECURRING CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 1) Approve the single -year recurring contracts in an amount not to exceed $16,982,780 for Fiscal Year 2019/20; Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 7 2) Approve the recurring contracts for specialized services in an amount not to exceed $3,439,000 in FY 2019/20 and $7,262,100 in FYs 2020/21 — 2021/22; and 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 9E. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE 1) Adopt the following bill positions: a. SB 742 (Allen) — Support; b. AB 1149 (Fong) — Support; and 2) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation. 9F. 2019 STATE ROUTE 91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Approve the 2019 State Route 91 Implementation Plan. 9G. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT WITH REYES CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN LAYOVER FACILITY EXPANSION PROJECT 1) Award Agreement No. 19-33-029-00 to Reyes Construction, Inc., as the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, for the construction of the Riverside Downtown Layover Facility Expansion Project (Project) in the amount of $4,379,858, plus a contingency amount of $420,142, for a total amount not to exceed $4.8 million; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work pursuant to the agreement terms up to the total amount. 9H. AMENDMENT TO ON -CALL STATION REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE 1) Approve Agreement No. 18-24-001-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 18-24-001-00, with Braughton Construction Co. Inc. (Braughton) for additional station repair, maintenance and modernization services for an additional amount of $1,222,000 and a total amount not to exceed $3,942,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the amendment on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 8 91. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES, MATERIALS TESTING, AND CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING AND APPROVAL OF VARIOUS AGREEMENTS FOR THE INTERSTATE 15/RAILROAD CANYON ROAD INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 1) Award Agreement No. 19-31-030-00 to Arcadis U.S., Inc. to perform construction management services, materials testing, and construction surveying for the Interstate 15/Railroad Canyon Road Interchange Improvements Project (Project) in the amount of $ 5,450,793, plus a contingency amount of $545,079 for potential changes in scope, for a total amount not to exceed $ 5,995,872; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to approve the use of the contingency amount as may be required for the Project; 3) Approve Agreement No. 10-72-016-07, Amendment No. 7 to Agreement No. 10-72-016-00 with the city of Lake Elsinore (City) to identify the Commission as the implementing agency for the Construction Phase and authorize $22,248,700 in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) regional arterial funds for the construction phase; 4) Approve Agreement No. 19-31-031-00 with the City for enhanced landscaping and aesthetics and the City's contribution of $755,000; 5) Approve Agreement No. 19-31-077-00, between the Commission and Ca!trans that defines the roles and responsibilities for Project construction; 6) Approve Agreement No. 19-31-069-00 with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) for Construction Zone Enforcement Enhancement Program (COZEEP) for an amount not to exceed $477,300; and 7) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to finalize and execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 9J. FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 MEASURE A COMMUTER ASSISTANCE BUSPOOL SUBSIDY FUNDING CONTINUATION REQUESTS 1) Authorize payment of the $2,350/month maximum subsidy per buspool for the period July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020, to the existing Riverside buspool; and 2) Require subsidy recipients to meet monthly buspool reporting requirements as supporting documentation to receive payments. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 9 9K. FISCAL YEARS 2019/20 — 2021/22 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS 1) Approve the Fiscal Years 2019/20 — 2021/22 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning (Banning), Beaumont (Beaumont), Corona (Corona), and Riverside; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA); Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and the Commission's Commuter Rail Program; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve final versions of the SRTPs. 9L. POLICY UPDATE ON THE USE OF STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUNDING BY OPERATORS Approve the use of unallocated and unprogrammed State Transit Assistance (STA) funds for transit operating assistance under eligibility standards as outlined in the Transportation Development Act (TDA) Guidelines and Public Utilities Code (PUC) § 99314.6 for transit operators and PUC § 99234.9 and 99313.7 for rail services. 9M. REGIONALIZATION OF COMMUTER PROGRAMS 1) Approve Agreement No. 19-45-080-00 with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for a three-year term to reimburse the Commission in an amount not to exceed $4.5 million for commuter/employer rideshare (IE Commuter) and Inland Empire 511 (IE511) programs administered by the Commission, on behalf of both agencies, and for the Commission to reimburse SBCTA an amount not to exceed $350,000, for SBCTA's provision of rideshare and vanpool program web -based software, as part of an ongoing bi-county partnership; 2) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 19-45-079-00, between Los Angeles County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (LA SAFE) and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), Orange County Transportation Authority, SBCTA, and Ventura County Transportation Commission for Metro's regional 511 deployment and operations; and 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 10 10. APPROVAL OF METROLINK OPERATING AND CAPITAL SUBSIDIES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 AND RELATED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND OF THE FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA OPTIMIZED RAIL EXPANSION PROGRAM FOR THE RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN STATION EXPANSION PROJECT Sheldon Peterson, Transit Manager, welcomed and introduced SCRRA's Chief Executive Officer Stephanie Wiggins and Chief Financial Officer Ronnie Campbell to present the details of the proposed Fiscal Year 2019/20 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) Budget. Stephanie Wiggins expressed appreciation to the Metrolink members, which are Commissioners Karen Spiegel, Andrew Kotyuk, and Brian Berkson for being supportive. She then stated as the new CEO her vision was to create value, and exceed expectations, and highlighted the following: • Customer -First: Focusing on the customer experience, safety and security, and modernizing their business practices At this time, Ronnie Campbell presented the FY20 Metrolink Budget, highlighting the following areas: • FY20 Budget priorities: o Customers first —Supported by the pillars of safety, and Integrated System, and Modernized Business practices o Continued emphasis on safe operations with positive train control o Investments in existing assets to maintain a state of good repair o Increase ridership farebox revenue, reduce the reliance on member operating subsidy • FY20 New Service for the 91/PVL Line — Weekends/extend two Riverside — Los Angeles roundtrips to South Perris — Los Angeles; and Weekdays/extend two South Perris — Riverside roundtrips to South Perris — Los Angeles • Revenue allocation by member agency • FY20 proposed expenditures —Train Operations & Services, Maintenance -of -Way, Administration & Services, and Insurance Expense • Expense allocation and subsidy by member agency • FY20 proposed rehabilitation budget — For communications, facilities, fleet vehicle, rolling stock, signals, structures, and track • FY20 proposed new capital budget — For facilities, rolling stock, and signals • Next steps Anne Mayer expressed appreciation to Stephanie Wiggins and Ronnie Campbell for coming to present the FY20 Metrolink Budget and for the outstanding work they have been doing in partnership with all of the member agencies. There is a real focus on Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 11 financial sustainability and safety and operations for the customers and it is appreciated and are hopeful to start seeing increased ridership as well as opportunities for expanding service. Chair Washington expressed appreciation to Commissioners Spiegel and Kotyuk for their participation on the Metrolink Board. M/S/C (Berkson/Vargas) to: 1) Receive and file a report on the Commission's portion of the Fiscal Year 2019/20 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) operating and capital budget; 2) Approve the FY 2019/20 SCRRA operating and capital budget, which results in a total operating and capital subsidy of $23,475,203 from the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director to finalize and execute Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 19-25-078-00 with SCRRA regarding annual funding, including subrecipient matters related to pass -through of federal funding; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director to finalize and execute Agreement No. 19-33-082-00 for the Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) Program Cooperative Agreement for the Riverside - Downtown Station Expansion Project. 11. FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Jenny Chan, Management Analyst, presented the Fiscal Year 2019/20 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program funding recommendations, highlighting the following areas: • SB 821: o 2 percent of LTF revenue o Bicycle and Pedestrian projects o Bike and Pedestrian Master Plans • Past Commission actions: o March & November 2014 Commission meetings o Subcommittee formed o Commission adopted the following recommendations: ✓ Biennial Call for Project ✓ Release & close dates ✓ Evaluation criteria ✓ Minimum five evaluators Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 12 • 2019 SB 821 Call for Projects recommended for allocation — Four projects from Coachella Valley for approximately $1.3 million; eight projects from Western Riverside for approximately $2.6 million for a total of 12 projects for approximately $3.9 million • Funding recommendation — A list of the 12 projects being recommended for award M/S/C (Baca/Berkson)to: 1) Approve the Fiscal Year 2019/20 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (SB 821) program recommended project allocations in the amount of $3,901,915; 2) Direct staff to prepare memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with the project sponsors to outline the project schedules and local funding commitments; and 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director to execute the MOUs with the project sponsors, pursuant to legal counsel review. 12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION There were no items pulled from the Consent Calendar. 13. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 13A. Commissioner Joey DeConinck expressed appreciation to the Board of Supervisors on behalf of his city's citizens and the 4H kids to keep the cooperative extension open and to keep the whole of Riverside for the 4H kids. Chair Washington replied to Commissioner DeConinck your welcome. 13B. Commissioner Larry Smith announced having a great opportunity with Commissioner Berkson to visit the toll facilities. He expressed appreciation as it is a different prospective when it is seen administratively to be able to visit the facilities and understand what is going on. 13C. Commissioner Speake expressed appreciation to the Commissioners that serve on the State Route 91 Advisory Committee as himself and about 40 city of Corona residents attended the June 7 meeting and were able to express pushing forward what is being planned. He expressed appreciation to Anne Mayer for her true leadership and pushing those projects forward on the 91, which faced some challenge. Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 13 13D. Commissioner Bill Zimmerman expressed appreciation for the funding of the Salt Creek Trail through the city of Menifee. For the last few years he served as a County Supervisor Marion Ashley's representative on the Parks & Open Space Commission and been working hard as Scott Bangle, CPRP, Parks Director/General Manager for Riverside County and his team, which have done a lot to make that happen and to see it funded and to come to fruition. 14. CLOSED SESSION 14A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION (D)(2) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 Potential Number of Case(s): 1 14B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee Item APN(s) Property Owner Buyer(s) 1 118-160-021 RCTC C&E Investments and Brian Tressen 2 117-122-029 RCTC Pravin Kumar 14C. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee Item APN(s) Property Owner Buyer(s) 1 305-060-008 Mendoza, Pedro & RCTC Teresa 2 305-060-009 Fernandez, Jesse RCTC 3 305-060-029 Swift Transportation RCTC 4 465-110-001 Dilworth, Nelson S., et al. RCTC 413-380-004 5 413-380-005 Johnson, Keith W. & RCTC 413-380-013 William C. 6 413-380-021 Bouye, Steve & Diana RCTC 413-380-022 7 414-110-058 RSI Communities RCTC Calif Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes June 12, 2019 Page 14 8 153-020-010 Schamber, Eutimio & Tammie Jo RCTC There were no announcements from the Closed Session Items. 16. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, Chair Washington adjourned the meeting at 11:05 p.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, August 14, 2019, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Mobley Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 7 PUBLIC HEARING RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Mark Lancaster, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition of Fee Interest in Certain Real Property, by Eminent Domain, More Particularly Described as Assessor Parcel No. 305-060-009 (RCPN 1164), Located in Perris, Riverside County, California, for the Construction of an Interchange at the Intersection of Interstate 215 and Placentia Avenue, in Riverside County, California STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Conduct a hearing to consider the adoption of Resolution of Necessity, including providing all parties interested in the affected properties and their attorneys, or their representatives, an opportunity to be heard on the issues relevant to the Resolution of Necessity; 2) Make the following findings as hereinafter described in this report: a) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; b) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; c) The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; d) The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner; and 3) Adopt Resolution of Necessity No. 19-015 to "Adoption of a Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition of a Fee Interest in Certain Real Property, By Eminent Domain, More Particularly Described as Assessor Parcel No. 305-060-009 (RCPN 1164), Located in Perris, Riverside County, California, for the Construction of an Interchange at the Intersection of Interstate 215 and Placentia Avenue, in Riverside County, California". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission is being asked to consider the adoption of a resolution of necessity declaring its intent to acquire fee interest in all of certain real property, by eminent domain, more particularly described as Assessor Parcel No. (APN) 305-060-009 (RCPN 1164), for the construction of an interchange at the intersection of Interstate 215 and Placentia Avenue, as part of Mid County Parkway Project (Project). The immediate need for the property acquisitions is to proceed with the construction of the Project. The acquisitions are required for and will benefit the community by providing Agenda Item 7 1 additional lanes on Placentia Avenue between Indian Avenue and Harvill Avenue, as well as a new freeway access point with entrance and exit ramps to 1-215 from Placentia Avenue. A preliminary title report was obtained from Commonwealth Title Insurance Company to confirm and identify the record owner of the parcel affected by the Project. The Commission then served the affected property owner with a notice of the Commission's decision to appraise the property. The Commission had the properties appraised and made offer to the record owner. Negotiations have been unsuccessful for the purchase of the interests necessary for the Project. The adoption of a Resolution of Necessity for the interest will not prevent negotiations from continuing. Since an agreement has not been reached with the owners of record, it may be necessary to acquire the fee interest described in the attachments by eminent domain. The initiation of the eminent domain process is accomplished by the Commission's adoption of resolution of necessity for the affected property. Description Of Property To Be Acquired: APN 305-060-009 (RCPN 1164) is owned by Jesse Fernandez. The property is located at 2756 Indian Avenue, in Perris, Riverside County, California. The property is occupied by one residential tenant and two businesses operate from the property. The Commission desires to acquire the entire parcel to accommodate construction of a detention basin for storm water runoff. The legal description and map of the property to be acquired is attached and marked as Exhibit A. Project Description: The Project is located on 1-215 In and Near Perris from south of the Ramona Expressway/Cajalco Road Overcrossing to north of the Nuevo Road Overcrossing portion of the Mid County Parkway. The purpose is to improve the existing 1-215 by adding an interchange at Placentia Avenue in the City of Perris. The proposed improvements include construction of new northbound and southbound on and off ramps on the east and west sides of 1-215 at Placentia Avenue, relocation of the East Frontage Road, removal of the West Frontage Road connection to Placentia Avenue, widen Placentia Avenue Overhead and Overcrossing bridges from two to six lanes between Harvill Avenue on the west and Indian Avenue on the east, install high occupancy vehicle by pass lane and ramp metering on the on -ramps, construct drainage improvements, install new traffic signals on Placentia Avenue at Harvill Avenue, Indian Avenue, East Frontage Road, and at the ramp intersections, and install advance freeway overhead signs. Hearings And Required Findings: The action requested of the Commission at the conclusion of this hearing is the adoption of resolution of necessity, authorizing the acquisition of real property interests by eminent Agenda Item 7 2 domain. The property owner is Jesse Fernandez. This will be a full acquisition of the entire parcel in fee. The property is further identified in the legal description and depiction attached hereto as Exhibit A. California eminent domain law provides that a public entity may not commence with eminent domain proceedings until its governing body has adopted a resolution of necessity, which resolution may only be adopted after the governing body has given each party with an interest in the affected property, or their representatives, a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard on the following matters: 1. The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; 2. The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; 3. The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; and 4. The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner. A notice of the hearing was sent by first class mail to the property owner, and stated the Commission's intent to consider the adoption of a resolution, the right of the property owner to appear and be heard on these issues, and that failure to file a written request to appear would result in a waiver of the right to appear and be heard. The Commission has scheduled this hearing at which all persons who filed a written request within 15 days of the date of notice was mailed may appear and be heard. The Commission's legal counsel mailed the required notices to the property owners, on June 11, 2019, in accordance with the California Code of Civil Procedure, section 1245.235. The property owner was also invited to meet with Commission and Caltrans staff to address any concerns the property owner may have with the design of the Project in the manner proposed and the necessity of the acquisition. The four required findings are addressed as follows: Finding 1: Public Interest And Necessity Require The Proposed Project The Project will reduce traffic congestion and enhance safety, and will ensure compliance with Caltrans' standards for design. Finding 2: The Project Is Planned Or Located In A Manner That Will Be Most Compatible With The Greatest Public Good And The Least Private Injury A thorough analysis was conducted to find the single best location for this Project. Environmental analyses and findings indicate that this and other sites uniquely satisfy the engineering, public health, and environmental issues, and these locations are the most compatible with the greatest public good. These locations will result in the least private injury. Agenda Item 7 3 Finding 3: The Property Sought To Be Acquired Is Necessary For The Proposed Project As described above, a careful analysis was performed regarding this location and what property and property rights were needed, and this parcel meets all the desired characteristics for the construction of the improvements for the Project. Based on that analysis, the acquisition of the property is necessary for construction of the Project. Finding 4: The Offer Of Just Compensation Has Been Made An appraisal was prepared by the Commission's appraiser Joyce L. Riggs, MAI, SR/WA, of Riggs & Riggs, Inc., to establish the fair market value of the real property the Commission is seeking to acquire from the interest owned by the property owner identified herein. An offer of just compensation was made to the property owner to purchase the property interest, based on the approved appraisal, as required by Section 7267.2 of the California Government Code. Although negotiated settlements may still be possible, it would be appropriate to commence the procedures to acquire the interests sought through eminent domain, to ensure that the property will be available to meet the time frames associated with the construction of the I-215/Placentia Interchange. Environmental Analysis: Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act has been satisfied by Caltrans' certification of an Environmental Impact Report in its role as lead agency on April 8, 2015. Fiscal Impact: No fiscal impact. Notice of Public Hearing: A notice of Hearing to Property Owners was mailed on June 11, 2019 to Jesse Fernandez, the owner of record. Attachments: 1) Resolution of Necessity No. 19-015 2) Palmieri Tyler, Attorneys at Law— Letter Dated June 25, 2019 Agenda Item 7 4 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 19-015 RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A FEE INTEREST IN CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, BY EMINENT DOMAIN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 305-060-009 (RCPN 1164), LOCATED IN PERRIS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN INTERCHANGE AT THE INTERSECTION OF INTERSTATE 215 AND PLACENTIA AVENUE, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") proposes to acquire a fee interest in certain real property, located in Riverside County, California, more particularly described as Assessor Parcel No. 305-060-009 (RCPN 1164), for the construction of an interchange at the intersection of Interstate 215 and Placentia Avenue, in Riverside County, California, pursuant to the authority granted to it by section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, the Commission scheduled a public hearing for Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 9:30 a.m., at the County Administration Building, Board of Supervisors Chambers, at 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, and gave to each person whose property is to be acquired and whose name and address appeared on the last equalized county assessment roll, notice and a reasonable opportunity to appear at said hearing and be heard on the matters referred to in section 1240.030 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; and WHEREAS, said hearing has been held by the Commission, and the affected property owner was afforded an opportunity to be heard on said matters; and WHEREAS, the Commission may now adopt a Resolution of Necessity pursuant to section 1240.040 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSION DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure. There has been compliance by the Commission with the requirements of section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure regarding notice and hearing. Section 2. Public Use. The public use for the fee interest in the property to be acquired is for the Mid -County Parkway Project in Riverside County, California. Section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code authorizes the Commission to acquire, by eminent domain, property necessary for such purposes. 5 Section 3. Description of Property. Attached and marked as Exhibit "A" are the legal description and plat map, respectively, of the interest to be acquired by the Commission, which describe the general location and extent of the property with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. Section 4. Findings. The Commission hereby finds and determines each of the following: (a) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; (b) The proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury; (c) The property defined and described in Exhibit "A" is necessary for the proposed project; and (d) The offer required by section 7267.2 of the California Government Code was made. Section 5. Use Not Unreasonably Interfering with Existing Public Use. Some or all of the real property affected by the interest to be acquired is subject to easements and rights -of -way appropriated to existing public uses. The legal descriptions of these easements and rights -of -way are on file with the Commission and describe the general location and extent of the easements and rights -of -way with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. In the event the herein described use or uses will not unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described interest subject to such existing public use pursuant to section 1240.510 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Section 6. More Necessary Public Use. Some or all of the real property affected by the interest to be acquired is subject to easements and rights -of -way appropriated to existing public uses. To the extent that the herein described use or uses will unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, the Commission finds and determines that the herein described use or uses are more necessary than said existing public use. Counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described real property appropriated to such existing public uses pursuant to section 1240.610 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Staff is further authorized to make such improvements to the affected real property that it determines are reasonably necessary to mitigate any adverse impact upon the existing public use. 6 Section 7. Further Activities. Counsel for the Commission is hereby authorized to acquire the hereinabove described real property in the name of and on behalf of the Commission by eminent domain, and counsel is authorized to institute and prosecute such legal proceedings as may be required in connection therewith. Legal counsel is further authorized to take such steps as may be authorized and required by law, and to make such security deposits as may be required by order of court, to permit the Commission to take possession of and use said real property at the earliest possible time. Counsel is further authorized to correct any errors or to make or agree to non- material changes in the legal description of the real property that are deemed necessary for the conduct of the condemnation action, or other proceedings or transactions required to acquire the subject real property. Section 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day ofJuly, 2019. Chuck Washington, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 7 LEGAL DEFINITIONS OF RIGHTS TO BE ACQUIRED "Fee," also known as fee simple or fee simple absolute, grants to Riverside County Transportation ("RCTC"), absolute ownership of the interests in the portion of the property to be acquired. EXHIBIT A, PAGE 1 OF 3 8 EXHIBIT "A" THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THE SOUTH 440 FEET OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST; SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF PERRIS. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. EXCEPTING THEREFROM A STRIP OF LAND 20 FEET WIDE ALONG THE EASTERLY SIDE THEREOF HERETOFORE DEEDED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. ALSO THEREFROM THE SOUTH 220 FEET THEREOF. Assessor's Parcel Number: 305-060-009 9 Mt wil NIIANi010w AIu11YlY[ Nll*MONO YDLw[AV ION LOT 1 I4.CW - -WATER ASS ISOffi YIP IMOPO Of Ie.,1,lflclrAli.c,u. EXHIBIT "A" N 112, SW 114, 1SEC. 1&, T.4S., r CITY OF DERR=S -- � r�Aa��sr� LOTA 1 - - - - - " .1_- - - - _, t--- 5 1 � Pm f 1 �+ p[Y.11[sl, 5 1 i 1 6 t t� ,1 t 1 0.,r z„- 1111 AO 1rAtr•G 671A MAC Aq.16 N6 76M7 W CI API 16-01 w51iiL ZtrAi t I 1 1 I too 1 c 0 - - 6 - - DK.t 0 e _ i sv.r 136 C 2 d e A e ii3[iC:CT c 3 111u-A�yi12 cam own caws A 0 to B OI6 ACY. I o ar----4- j1 c MNIAr r.rw • tr 1B CAM A[OMSYYBl6 N.D. 601AP1 YdACUrA AVIS,4N wf 1517/ IPALLVIO. IOW W1201T e W 305106 167 10 PALM I E RI TYLE R ATTACHMENT 2 Anish J. Banker Direct Dial (949) 851-7220 Direct Fax (949) 825-5427 abanker@ptwww.com VIA E-MAIL & U.S. MAIL ATTORNEYS AT LAW June 25, 2019 Lisa Mobley Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, California 92501 P.O. Box 19712 Irvine, CA 92623-9712 Refer To File No. 39535-000 Document I.D. 2537258.1 Re: Objection to Proposed Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for Acquisition of Certain Real Property Located at 2756 Indian Avenue, Perris, California; Assessor Parcel Number 305-060-009 (the "Subject Property") for the Interstate 215 and Placentia Avenue Interchange Project (the "Project") Dear Clerk of the Board of Supervisors: This firm represents Jesse Fernandez (the "Owner"), owner of the above - referenced Subject Property. We have received notice that Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") intends to consider adopting a resolution of necessity authorizing the taking of the Subject Property by condemnation for the above -referenced Project. The hearing on the resolution of necessity is set for July 10, 2018, at 9:30 a.m. The purpose of this letter is to provide written objections on behalf of the Owner to the adoption of the resolution of necessity in lieu of personally appearing at the hearing. Accordingly, we request that this letter be included as part of the formal record on that agenda item. The Owner believes that the adoption of the resolution of necessity is improper at this time, and objects to its adoption on each of the following grounds: 1. RCTC Has Failed to Extend a Legitimate Precondemnation Offer Pursuant to Government Code section 7267.2. California law requires that RCTC make a legitimate offer of just compensation based upon its approved appraisal prior to initiating a condemnation proceeding. Compliance with Government Code section 7267.2 is a mandatory prerequisite to 1900 Main Street, Suite 700, Irvine, CA 92614-73218 1 T 949.851.9400 I F 949.851.1554 I ptwww.com PALMIERI TYLER Lisa Mobley June 25, 2019 Page 2 adopting a resolution of necessity and initiating an eminent domain action. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1240.040, 1245.230, subd. (c)(4); City of San Jose v. Great Oaks Water Co. (1987) 192 Ca1.App.3d 1005.) Failure to strictly comply with the requirements of this section are grounds for dismissing the entire proceeding. Here, the appraiser, acting on RCTC's behalf, did not engage in a proper analysis. A cursory review of recent sales of comparable properties in the surrounding area indicate a unit rate in excess of the per square foot rate relied upon by RCTC in its precondemnation offer. As such, RCTC's precondemnation offer is invalid and cannot support the adoption of a resolution of necessity authorizing the acquisition of the sought for portions of the Subject Property. It is inappropriate to attempt to condemn first, and then suggest that an error can be corrected by a subsequent offer or subsequent appraisal after the adoption of a resolution of necessity. (See, City of Stockton v. Marina Towers (2009) 171 Ca1.App.4th 93.) RCTC cannot correct its error by simply reappraising after adopting a resolution of necessity to retroactively confer upon itself with the authority to do that for which it has already done. California's Eminent Domain Law mandates strict compliance with its statutory requirements before a public entity may confer upon itself with the awesome power of eminent domain to condemn private property for a public purpose. "The proceeding to condemn land for a public use is special and statutory and the prescribed method in such cases must be strictly pursued especially if those methods benefit the [property] owner." (City of Needles v. Griswold (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1881, 1895, quoting Harrington v. Superior Court (1924) 194 Cal. 185, 191 and City of Los Angeles v. Glassell (1928) 203 Cal. 44, 46 [emphasis added].) 2. Based Upon Information Currently Known, RCTC's Proposed Project Is Not Planned Or Located In The Manner That Will Be Most Compatible With the Least Private Injury. RCTC's consideration and adoption of a resolution of necessity requires a finding that the Project as proposed is planned and located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1245.340, subd. (c)(2).) In this case, however, RCTC has not provided adequate information to the property owner of any viable Project alternatives that may exist and enable RCTC to obtain all of the amenities of the Project as proposed. As far as we can tell, based upon the scant information provided, there may be other viable project 2537258.1 12 PALMIERI TYLER Lisa Mobley June 25, 2019 Page 3 alternatives that will be less disruptive and damaging to the Subject Property, the specifics of which, however, have not been disclosed to property owner. RCTC must consider all alternatives before an informed determination can be made as to whether the Project as proposed is "most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury." 3. The Property Sought To Be Acquired Is Not Necessary For the Project. One of the mandatory components to the necessity determination is that the property sought to be acquired must be necessary for the project. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1240.030, subd. (c).) The Eminent Domain Law defines "property" to include real and personal property and any interest thereon. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1235.170.) Thus, RCTC must not only consider whether the property is necessary for the project but also whether the particular interest in the property that RCTC seeks to take is necessary. In the absence of substantial evidence supporting such a determination, the resolution of necessity will be invalid. The Owner is informed and believes that viable Project alternatives exist that would provide all of the amenities of the proposed Project but at a substantially reduced cost and with less private property. Those alternatives would materially reduce the need to acquire any private property for construction of the proposed Project. Barring such consideration, RCTC cannot make an informed determination as to whether the Subject Property is actually necessary for the project. 4. RCTC Is Incapable of Conducting A Fair, Legal, And Impartial Hearing On The Proposed Adoption of The Resolution of Necessity. It is believed that RCTC has already committed itself to the proposed taking, so any hearing resulting in the adoption of the resolution by RCTC would be a predetermined result. The proposed resolution hearing is a pretense and artifice, and any resolution adopted under these circumstances would be voidable by a court of competent jurisdiction. (See, Redevelopment Agency v. Norm's Slauson (1985) 173 Ca1.App.3d 1121, 1127.) 2537258.1 13 PALMIERI TYLER Lisa Mobley June 25, 2019 Page 4 As a condition precedent to the exercise of the power of eminent domain, a public agency "must hold a public hearing to determine whether a particular taking meets the [requirements of Civil Code section 1245.235, i.e., is for a public use, necessary, and designed in such a manner to cause the least private injury] ...." (Norm's Slauson, supra, 173 Ca1.App.3d at p. 1125 [Emphasis added].) "Implicit in this requirement...is the concept that...the [a]gency engage in a good faith and judicious consideration of the pros and cons of the issue and that the decision to take be buttressed by substantial evidence...." (Id., at pp. 1125-1126.) "[A]n agency that would take private property...must...conduct a fair hearing and make its determination on the basis of evidence presented in a judicious and nonarbitrary fashion." (Id., at p. 1129.) In the absence of a fair and impartial hearing, the resolution of necessity is void. If the condemning agency fails to conduct itself in this manner, then the resolution is not entitled to its ordinary conclusive effect and the burden of proving the elements for a particular taking rests on the government agency with the court being the final adjudicator. (Norm's Slauson, supra, 173 Ca1.App.3d at pp. 1128-1129.) "The governmental agency in such a situation cannot act arbitrarily and then seek the benefit of having its decision afforded the deference to which it might otherwise be entitled." (Id. at p. 1129.) In Norm's Slauson, the Court held that the condemning agency's approval of the resolution of necessity was invalid when the agency "simply 'rubber stamped' a predetermined result" because, prior to any hearing on the resolution, it (a) entered into an agreement with a developer by which the agency agreed to transfer a portion of defendant/property owner's restaurant, and the developer agreed to construct a condominium thereon; and (b) issued and sold tax exempt bonds to pay for the acquisition. (Id. at p. 1127.) "In short, the agency, without any notice to Norm's [the property owner], in effect sold the property and issued bonds to obtain the money to acquire the property all before taking any steps to condemn the property." (Id., at p. 1125.) Here, the Owner is informed and believes that RCTC has impermissibly committed itself to take the Subject Property. By having already committed to the project, RCTC has left itself no recourse but to approve the resolution. (See, e.g., Norm's Slauson, supra, 173 Ca1.App.3d at pp. 1127- 1130; Code Civ. Proc., § 1245.255, subd. (b).) Accordingly, if the resolution is adopted, the hearing which led to its adoption will have been a pretense and RCTC's policy - making board will simply be "rubber stamping" a pre -determined result. If the resolution is adopted under such circumstances, it will be voidable on that basis. 2537258.1 14 PALMIERI TYLER Lisa Mobley June 25, 2019 Page 5 If RCTC has any questions or comments concerning the content of this letter, it should contact the undersigned at the number listed above. Very truly yours, cc: Mark A. Easter (via email only) Patrick A. Hennessey (via email only) Client (via email only) 2537258.1 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REQUEST OF COMMISSION THE COMM! SSI ON I S REQU I RED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; 2. The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; 3. The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; and 4. The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION VU.9116ied1r1.i.L41411 - r•1 + _ 1-215/Placentia Ave IC P5&E Project Overview n2/21l1 S TyLININ I ERNAE IONAL RIVERSIDE FERNANDEZ PARCEL LOCATION COMMISSION71AVORTATION RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMM! SSI ON ADOPT A RESOLUTI ON OF N ECESSI TY BASED ON THE FOLLOW! N G FI N DI N GS: 1. The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; 2. The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; 3. The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; and 4. The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner. AGENDA ITEM 8 PUBLIC HEARING RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Monica Morales, Management Analyst LoreIle Moe -Luna, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Riverside County Transit Services Funding Allocations for Fiscal Year 2019/20 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Conduct a public hearing at the July Commission meeting on the proposed Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 Program of Projects (POP); 2) Approve Fiscal Year 2019/20 Transit Operator Funding Allocations for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona and Riverside; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA); Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and the Commission's Rail Program; 3) Direct staff to add the federally funded and regionally significant projects into the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); 4) Adopt Resolution No. 19-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate Local Transit Assistance Funds and State Transit Assistance Funds;" and 5) Approve the FY 2019/20 FTA Sections 5307 and 5311 POP for Riverside County (County). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its June 12 meeting, the Commission approved the FY 2019/20 — 2021/22 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; the Commission's Commuter Rail Program; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA); Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); and SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine). The core components of each agency's SRTP includes the operating and capital plans and project justifications that are utilized as the basis for receiving transit funding. The SRTPs also document each operator's system and route performance data, which provide the basis for the Commission's oversight activities to ensure compliance with the Transportation Development Act (TDA), federal regulations, state law, and Commission -adopted policies and guidelines. Agenda Item 8 16 Short Range Transit Plan Financial Overview Approximately $250.1 million in total funding is required to support the FY 2019/20 operating and capital requests for the provision of transit services in Riverside County. To implement the SRTPs for FY 2019/20, the programming plan is to utilize available funding of approximately $179.5 million for operating and $70.6 million for capital purposes. Table 1 below provides an overview of the total operating and capital costs by apportionment area. Table 1: FY 2019/20 Operating and Capital Expense Type Western Riverside Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley Total Bus Rail Bus Rail Operating Capital $ 104,954,044 45,994,921 $ 32,168,000 2,508,361 $ 40,840,150 12,711,407 $ - 9,138,241 5 1,526,160 273,758 $ 17%488,354 70,526,688 Total [Operat"ng & Cap ta.r $ 150,948,965 $ 34,676,361 $ 53,551,557 $ 9,138,241 $ 1,799,918 $ 250,115,042 a Excius ve of LA Metro, OCTA & SANBAG's share and passenger fare revenues for Commuter Ra expenses Total bus transit expenses for FY 2019/20 reflect a systemwide operating expense decrease of 9 percent and capital expenses increase of 22 percent compared to FY 2018/19 funding levels (Table 2). The decline in operating is attributable mainly to RTA's one-time payment of $22.1 million to CaIPERS for its net pension liability. Bus capital funds programmed in FY 2019/20 represent an increase of significant capital outlay for replacement vehicles, fuel station enhancements, and planned construction of new operations and maintenance facilities. Rail operating costs programmed in FY 2019/20 show a decrease of 9 percent primarily due to a reduction of special projects such as rail and station studies, special train services, and marketing. Rail operating budget primarily consists of Metrolink operating costs, which for FY 2019/20 is about $30.2 million, an increase of about 7 percent from FY 2018/19 mostly attributable to new weekend service and additional weekday trips. Rail capital funding increased by about $10.9 million due to rehabilitation and maintenance required for state of good repair (SGR) and the implementation of a Special Events Platform in the city of Indio for the Coachella Valley festivals, which totals $8.7 million. Agenda Item 8 17 Table 2: FY 2019/20 and FY 2018/19 OPERATING & CAPITAL COSTS BY MODE EXPENSE TYPE Bus Rail* BUS & RAIL OP/CAP to Total BUS & RAIL OP/CAP to Total TOTAL BUS & RAIL CHANGE FY 2019/20 FY 2018/19 Change FY 2019/20 FY 2018/19 Change FY 19/20 FY 18/19 OPERATING $ 147,320,354 $ 162,484,465 -9.3% $ 32,168,000 $ 35,359,606 -9.0% $ 179,488,354 71.8% r $ 197,844,071 80.1% -9.28% CAPITAL 58,980,086 48,552,702 21.5% 11,646,602 752,084 1448.6% 70,626,688 28.2% 49,304,786 19.9% 43.25% TOTAL $ 206,300,440 $ 211,037,167 r -2.2% $ 43,814,602 $ 36,111,690 r 21.3% $ 250,115,042 100.0% $ 247,148,857 100.0% 1.20% *Excludes Station Operations and Right -of -Way Maintenance, which is primarily funded by Measure A and is approved through the Commission's budget process. Figure 1 below provides an overview of the operating and capital costs by funding source required to support the County's transit operations. State funds, primarily Local Transportation Funds (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA), make up the largest share of about $159 million (63 percent) of revenues, followed by federal funds totaling about $49.4 million (20 percent). Local revenues represent about $41.7 million (17 percent). Approximately $206.5 million (83 percent) consists of federal, state, and local funds to be allocated through Commission action at this meeting. This also includes other discretionary grants such as Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) funds awarded to the cities. The remaining $43.6 million (17 percent) of the $250.1 million total operating and capital costs identified in the chart is funded by the following sources: • $25.4 million — Passenger fares (bus and rail); • $11.9 million — Carryover funds (Federal FTA Section 5307 and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) that were previously allocated by the Commission and state Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP); and • $6.4 million — Miscellaneous other revenues such as but not limited to interest income, advertising fees, compressed natural gas sales, general fund contributions, low carbon fuel standard credits, and taxi voucher sales. Agenda Item 8 18 Figure 1: FY 2019/20 Public Transit Operating and Capital Funding Sources TDA (LTF & STA Funds), $141,964,336, 57% Carryover Funds (Sec 5307/CMAQACTO P), $11,860,133, 5% Other Revenues, $6,368,449 , 2% Passenger Fares, $25,371,180, 10% Misc Grants (MSRC/Wellness), $11,000 , 0% Local (Measure A), $9,969,663 , 4% Federal Funds (Sec 5307, 5309, 5310, 5311, 5311f, 5339) & CMAQ, $37,778,923 , 15% State Funds (SGR, SRA, Prop 16 & LCTOP) , $16,791,358, 7% Staff reviewed transit operators' funding requests for farebox ratio compliance and other eligibility requirements and recommends the approval of the FY 2019/20 funding allocations as summarized in Attachment 1 by transit operator and subsequent programming of federally - funded and regionally significant projects into the FTIP. In accordance with TDA, allocations to claimants (transit operators) shall be made and take effect by resolution adopted by the regional transportation planning agency. As such, Resolution No. 19-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate Local Transit Assistance Funds and State Transit Assistance Funds" is required for adoption. FTA Sections 5307 and 5311 POP FTA Section 5307 is authorized each year via the federal transportation bill in urbanized areas of 50,000 or more. Funds are distributed to regions by urbanized area formula based upon population served and the amount of transit service provided. The Riverside/San Bernardino Urbanized Area (UZA) receives apportionments per a formula codified in Title 49 of the US Code Agenda Item 8 19 that includes a formulaic split for buses and fixed guideway. Riverside County consists of four UZAs, namely: • Riverside/San Bernardino; • Hemet/San Jacinto; • Temecula/Murrieta; and • Indio/Cathedral City/Palm Springs. FTA requires that a public participation process is established for the approval of Section 5307 projects. The Commission develops and approves a POP for each UZA in coordination with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Transit operators may rely on SCAG's public participation process associated with the FTIP development to satisfy this requirement; however, the Commission also conducts a supplemental public hearing to seek public feedback. If the draft POP is not amended through the public hearing process, the POP will be programmed into the FTIP, which is subsequently forwarded to SCAG for review and final approvals. Attachment 3 includes the proposed Section 5307 POP for Riverside County by UZA and shows a listing of requested funds by operators. FTA Section 5311 transit funding provides formula funds to rural or non -urbanized areas in the state. The program is administered by Caltrans, and the majority of the these funds are passed through the counties based on population formula. This year's program allocates a total of $956,443 for Riverside County. Eligible activities include public transportation planning, capital, operating, job access and reverse commute projects, and the acquisition of public transportation services. Remaining funds are awarded in a statewide discretionary program Section 5311(f) for rural capital projects and intercity bus programs. The Commission is responsible for ensuring proposed projects selected are eligible and included in a POP, as listed in the table below, for submittal to Caltrans. FY 2019/20 Section 5311 and 5311(f) Requested Funds Agency Section 5311 Section 5311(f) RTA $ 478,221 SunLine 286,933 $ 186,051 PVVTA 191,289 Total $ 956,443 $ 186,051 Staff reviewed the requested funding requests and eligibility requirements and recommends approval of the Sections 5307 and 5311 POP for Riverside County. Agenda Item 8 20 Fiscal Impact LTF, STA, SGR, and Measure A fund allocations, as well as Rail FTA, CMAQ, and State Rail Assistance, are included in the Commission's approved FY 2019/20 budget. The various other FTA, CMAQ, LCTOP, Proposition 1B, and MSRC funds, as well as passenger fares and other revenues, received directly by the transit operators are not included in the Commission's budget. Should any funding revenue projections change, or transit operators require additional funds, staff will return to the Commission with amendments as necessary. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2019/20 FY2020/21 Amount: $99,854,720 (LTF) $34,651,535 (STA) $9,969,663 (Measure A) $3,673,608 (SGR) $7,458,081 (STA) Source of Funds: TDA (LTF and STA); Measure A; and SGR Budget Adjustment: No N/A GLA No • LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND Western County Bus STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE Western County Bus 002210 86101 601 62 86101 $59,075,035 Western County Rail 002201 86101 241 62 86101 $2,880,000 002201 86102 241 62 86102 $24,500,000 Coachella Valley Bus 002213 97001 601 62 97001 $18,787,272 Coachella Valley Bus 002202 86102 241 62 86102 $6,583,535 Coachella Valley Rail 00221186101 601 62 86101 $20,926,808 Palo Verde Valley 002202 97001 241 62 97001 $450,000 Palo Verde Valley 002212 86101 601 62 86101 $1,065,605 002203 86102 241 62 86102 $238,000 MEASURE A Western County Consolidated Transportation STATE OF GOOD REPAIR Western Riverside Bus 00222186102 242 62 86102 $2,088,347 Western Riverside Rail Service Agency Specialized Transit 270-26-86101 $856,800 Western County Operating 002224 86102 242 62 86102 $819,100 Coachella Valley Bus 269-62-86101 $2,406,500 Coachella Valley Specialized Transit 002222 86102 242 62 86102 $730,403 Palo Verde Valley 258-26-86101 $6,706,363 002223 86102 242 62 86102 $35,758 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \I-ke/Liittov� Date: 06/17/2019 Attachments: 1) FY 2019/20 Transit Operator Allocations 2) Resolution 19-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate Local Transit Assistance Funds and State Transit Assistance Funds" 3) Section 5307 Program of Projects Agenda Item 8 21 Attachment 1 Fiscal Year 2019/2020 Transit Operator Funding Sources* Banning Beaumont Corona Riverside WR Rail RTA SunLine CV Rail PVVTA Fund Total LTF1 $ 1,743,957 $ 2,735,230 $ 1,661,806 $ 3,912,200 $ 18,787,272 $ 49,021,842 $ 20,926,808 $ - $ 1,065,605 $ 99,854,720 STA1 325,000 2,840,000 39,674 49,619 - 31,583,788 6,583,535 450,000 238,000 42,109,616 Measure Al 3,263,300 6,706,363 9,969,663 SGR1 37,740 - 98,198 96,914 819,100 1,855,495 730,403 - 35,758 3,673,608 LCTOP2 53,765 146,842 1,496,728 1,659,331 1,287,665 50,011 4,694,342 SRA 5,942,510 5,942,510 Prop 1B 2,745,731 2,745,731 FTA 53073' 4 - 641,600 320,000 - 24,485,568 8,138,664 - - 33,585,832 FTA 53094 410,574 410,574 FTA 53104 - - - - 398,584 46,250 - - 444,834 FTA 5311 & 5311(04 478,221 472,984 191,289 1,142,494 FTA 53374 - - - 1,689,261 - - - - 1,689,261 FTA 53393 145,326 198,477 6,127,614 593,070 7,064,487 CMAQ4 - - - 3,000,000 1,000,000 1,036,741 - - 5,036,741 AQM D/M SRCs 11,000 11,000 Passenger Fares6 204,000 281,000 290,750 475,500 8,884,000 12,345,996 2,799,649 - 90,285 25,371,180 Other6 1,100 6,200 114,000 - - 2,299,328 3,818,851 - 128,970 6,368,449 Grand Total $ 2,365,562 $ 6,009,272 $ 3,002,354 $ 5,052,710 $ 34,676,361 $ 134,519,067 $ 53,551,557 $ 9,138,241 $ 1,799,918 $ 250,115,042 Based on respective agencies' FY2019/20 SRTP Table 4: Summary of funds requested. 1 Commission allocations based on FY19 projected fund balances and FY20 revenue projections. Z LCTOP funds were approved by the Commission and transit agencies in FY19 for programming in FY20. FTA funding allocations based on estimates from prior year apportionments. Final FY20 amounts to be determined. 4 May include remaining funds from prior year approved grants. s Air Quality funds such as AQMD or MSRC are applied for directly by transit agencies and do not require allocation from the Commission. 6 Passenger fares and other revenues do not require Commission allocation. Other revenues include but are not limited to interest income, advertising fees, compressed natural gas sales, general fund contributions, low carbon fuel standard credits, and taxi voucher sales. 22 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. 19-014 A RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO ALLOCATE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS AND STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2019/2020 WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission is designated the regional entity responsible for the allocation of Local Transportation Funds and State Transit Assistance Funds within Riverside County; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission has examined the Short Range Transit Plans submitted by the public transit operators and Transportation Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, all proposed expenditures in Riverside County are in conformity with the Regional Transportation Plan; and WHEREAS, the level of passenger fares is sufficient for public transit operator claimants to meet the fare revenue requirements of Public Utilities Code Sections 99268.2, 99268.3, 99268.4, 99268.5, and 99268.9, as applicable; and WHEREAS, the public transit operator claimants are making full use of federal funds available under the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act; and WHEREAS, the sum of the public transit operator claimant allocations from the Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance Fund do not exceed the amount the public transit operator claimants are eligible to receive during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, priority consideration has been given to claims to offset reductions in federal operating assistance and the unanticipated increase in the cost of fuel, to enhance existing public transportation services, and to meet high priority regional, countywide, or area -wide public transportation needs; and WHEREAS, the public transit operators have made a reasonable effort to implement the productivity improvements recommended pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 99244; and WHEREAS, the public transit operator claimants are not precluded by any contract entered into on or after June 28, 1979, from employing part-time drivers or contracting with common carriers or persons operating under a franchise or license; and WHEREAS, public transit operators are in full compliance with Section 18081.1 of the Vehicle Code, as required in Public Utilities Code Section 99251. 23 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission to allocate Local Transportation Funds and State Transit Assistance Funds for FY 2019/20 as detailed in Attachment 1. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of July, 2019. Chuck Washington, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 24 ATTACHMENT Page 1 of 5 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 FY 2019/20 URBANIZED AREA: RIVERSIDE/SAN BERNARDINO Total Apportionment (FY19/20 Estimate based on FY18/19 full year apportionment updated March 2019) NUMBER Apportionment Lapsing Funds (per FTA) Carryover (Estimate) Total Funds Available Less Current Requests Balance (Projected) Sub Area Allocation Corona, City of Riverside, City of Riverside Transit Agency* PROGRAM OF PROJECTS Bus Rail Total $ 12,886,011 $ 6,655,906 $ 19,541,917 1,061,951 11,996,859 13,058,810 13,947,962 18,652,765 32,600,727 13,503,177 - 13,503,177 $444,785 $18,652,765 $19,097,550 $ 641,600 320,000 12, 541, 577 TOTAL $ 13,503,177 Corona, City of 1) Capital Cost of Operating Fixed Route & Dial -a -ride 2) Comprehensive Operational Analysis TOTAL: City of Corona Riverside, City of 4) Capitalized Preventive Maintenance 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) TOTAL FEDERAL AMOUNT SHARE $ 742,000 $ $ 48,000 $ $ 790,000 $ TOTAL: City of Riverside $ Riverside Transit Agency Capitalized preventative Maintenance Capital Cost of Contracting ADA Complementary Paratransit Service H-D CNG Bus Replacement (35) COFR Bus Replacement (41) Non -Revenue Vehicles (18) Support Vehicles Associated Transit Improvements Capitalizeed Tire Lease 400,000 $ 400,000 $ 8,750,000 8,750,000 2,175, 000 27,019,076 8,998,043 473,400 200,000 394,411 PROJECT DESIGNATED TYPE RECIPIENT 593,600 Operating SCAG 48,000 Operating SCAG 641,600 320,000 Operating SCAG 320,000 3,872,222 3,172,222 870,000 800,000 2,972,884 378,720 160,000 315,529 TOTAL: Riverside Transit Agency $ 56,759,930 $ 12,541,577 GRAND TOTAL $ 57,949,930 $ 13,503,177 Operating SCAG Operating SCAG Operating SCAG Capital SCAG Capital SCAG Capital SCAG Capital SCAG Capital SCAG *RTA Table 4 reflects a total of $13.8 million to account for additional carryover. Carryover fund balance and apportionment estimates subject to change. Final POP will be published in approved SCAG FTIP. Updated: 6/13/2019 Approved: 25 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 FY 2019/20 URBANIZED AREA: HEMET/SAN JACINTO RECIPIENT: RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Total Apportionment (FY19/20 Estimate based on FY18/19 full year apportionment updated March 2019) Bus $ 3,395,918 185,809 NUMBER 1) 2) 3) 4) TOTAL: Apportionment Carryover (estimate) Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) Total Funds Available Less Current Requests" Balance (Projected) PROGRAM OF PROJECTS Operating Assistance Capital Cost of Contracting COFR Bus Replacement (41) TOTAL AMOUNT $ 45,457,481 8,750,000 8,998,043 3,581,727 3,474,076 $107,651 FEDERAL SHARE $ 2,104,076 600,000 770,000 $ 63,205,524 $ 3,474,076 PROJECT TYPE Operating Capital Capital Capital ATTACHMENT Page 2 of 5 DESIGNATED RECIPIENT Caltrans Caltrans Caltrans Caltrans "RTA Table 4 reflects a total of $4.6 million to account for additional carryover. Carryover fund balance and apportionment estimates subject to change. Final POP will be published in approved SCAG FTIP. Updated: 6/13/2019 Approved: 26 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 FY 2019/20 URBANIZED AREA: INDIO/CATHEDRAL CITY/PALM SPRINGS RECIPIENT: SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Total Apportionment (FY19/20 Estimate based on FY18/19 full year apportionment updated March 2019) Bus $ 4,935,745 982,704 Apportionment Carryover (Estimate) Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) Total Funds Available 5,918,449 Less Current Requests 5,696,550 Balance (Projected) $ 221,899 NUMBER PROGRAM OF PROJECTS 1) Operating Assistance 2) Replacement Fixed Route Buses (3) TOTAL: Updated: 6/13/2019 Approved: TOTAL AMOUNT FEDERAL SHARE $ 38,145,505 $ 3,630,155 4,032,000 2,066,395 $ 42,177,505 $ 5,696,550 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 3 of 5 PROJECT DESIGNATED TYPE RECIPIENT Operating Capital SCAG SCAG 27 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 FY 2019/20 URBANIZED AREA: TEMECULA/MURRIETA RECIPIENT: RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Total Apportionment (FY19/20 Estimate based on FY18/19 full year apportionment updated March 2019) Bus Apportionment $ 4,940,295 Lapsing Funds (per FTA) Carryover (Estimate) 928,663 Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) Total Funds Available 5,868,958 Less Current Requests' 5,041,338 Balance (Projected) $827,620 NUMBER PROGRAM OF PROJECTS 1) 2) 3) TOTAL: TOTAL FEDERAL AMOUNT SHARE Capitalized Preventive Mainenance $ 8,750,000 $ 2,035,669 Capital Cost of Contracting 8,750,000 2,135,669 ADA Complementary Paratransit Service 2,175,000 870,000 $ 19,675,000 $ 5,041,338 ATTACHMENT Page 4 of 5 PROJECT DESIGNATED TYPE RECIPIENT Operating Operating Operating SCAG SCAG SCAG *RTA Table 4 reflects a total of $6 million to account for additional carryover. Carryover fund balance and apportionment estimates subject to change. Final POP will be published in approved SCAG FTIP. Updated: 6/13/2019 Approved: 28 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 5 of 5 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 FY 2019/20 URBANIZED AREA: LOS ANGELES-LONG BEACH-ANAHEIM RECIPIENT: RCTC RAIL/RTA Total Apportionment (FY19/20 Estimate based on FY18/19 full year apportionment updated March 2019) Bus/Rail $ 42,711 193,937 Apportionment Carryover Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) Total Funds Available Less Current Requests Balance (Projected) NUMBER PROGRAM OF PROJECTS 1) TOTAL: TOTAL AMOUNT FY 2019/20 Operating - General $ 46,315,272 $ 46,315,272 236,648 1,393 $ 235,255 FEDERAL SHARE PROJECT TYPE $ 1,393 Operating $ 1,393 DESIGNATED RECIPIENT SCAG *RTA Table 4 reflects a total of $13.8 million to account for additional carryover. Carryover fund balance and apportionment estimates subject to change. Final POP will be published in approved SCAG FTIP. Updated: 6/13/2019 Approved: C:\Users\mmorales\Documents\Book5 29 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSIT SERVICES FUNDING ALLOCATIONS FIAL YEAR 2019/ 2020 Monica Morales, Management Analyst Multimodal Services Department Fiscal Year 2019/2020 Transit Funding Allocations STAGECOACH TOWN USA City of Banning City of Beaumont C RONA CRUISER C RONA DIAL -A -RIDE BEAUMONT -CALIFORNIA- City of Corona Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency City of Riverside Riverside Transit Awry Riverside Transit Agency Salm TARNSIT RllfNEY SunLine Transit Agency RCTC Western Riverside Rail METR❑LINK RCTC Coachella Valley Rail 2 Fiscal Year 2019/2020 Transit Funding Allocations Total Funding Request FY19/ 20 Operating $179.5 Million Capital $70.6 Million 3 Fiscal Year 2019/2020 Transit Funding Allocations Funding Request Comparison, FY 2020 vs FY2019 EXPENSE TYPE FY2019/2020 FY2018/2019 (Million) Bus (Million) Rail (Million) Total (Million) Bus (Million) Rail (Million) Total OPERATING $ 147 $ 32 $ 179 $ 162 $ 35 $ 197 CAPITAL 59 12 71 45 1 46 TOTAL $ 206 $ 44 $ 250 $ 207 $ 36 $ 243 4 Fiscal Year 2019/2020 Transit Funding Allocations FY 2019/ 20 TRANSITFUNDING BY REVENUE SOURCE TDA (LTF & STA Funds), $141,964,3 57% Carryover Funds (Se 5307/CMAQ/LCTOP), $11,860,133 , 5% Other Revenues, $6,368,449 , 2% Passenger Fares, $25,371,180 , 10% Misc Grants (MSRC/Wellness), $11,000 , 0% Local (Measure A), $9,969,663 , 4% Federal Funds (Sec 5307, 5309, 5310, 5311, 5311f, 5339) & CMAQ, $37,778,923 , 15% State Funds (SGR, SRA, Prop 1B & LCTOP) , $16,791,358 , 7% 5 Fiscal Year 2019/2020 Transit Funding Allocations FY2019/ 2020 Transit Operator Allocations* Banning Beaumont Corona Riverside VAR Rai RTA SunLine CV Rai MIA Fund Total LTF 1,743,957 2,735,230 1,661,805 3,912, 200 18, 787, 272 49,021,842 20,925,808 - 1,055, 505 99,854,720 5TA1 325,000 2,840,000 39,574 49,519 - 31,583,788 6,583,535 450,000 238,000 42,109,616 M•eaaureA2 - - - - - 3,263,300 6,706,353 - - 9,969,6.63 StiRi 37,740 - 98,198 95,914 819,100 1,855,495 730,403 - 35,758 3,673,608 LCTOP7 53,755 145,842 - - 1,496,728 1,659,331 1,287,555 - 50,011 4,694,342 SRA - - - - - - - 5,9.42,510 - 5,942,510 Priab 1B - - - - - - - 2,745,731 - 2,745,731 FTA 53O73'7 - - 541,500 320,000 - 24,485,558 8,138,564 - - 33,585,832 FTA 5309 - - - - - - 410,574 - - 410,574 FTA 5 310 - - - - - 398,584 45,250 - - 444,834 FTA 5311 & 5311(f)3 - - - - - 478,221 472,984 - 191,289 1,142,494 FTA 53377 - - - - 1,689,261 - - - - 1,589,261 FTA 53393 - - 145,326 198,477 - 6,127,514 593,070 - - 7,064,487 CMACC - - - - 3,000,000 1,000,000 1,035,741 - - 5,036,741 f1 IK Grants5 - - 11,000 - - - - - 11,000 Passenger Fares a-.,=.��, 290,750 475,500 8,884,004 12,345,996 2,799,549 - 90,285 25,371,180 Other _,-"" 6.1C0 114,000 - - 2,299,32E 3,818,851 - 128,970 6,358,449 Grand Total 2,365,562 6,009,272 3,002,354 5,052,710 34,676,361 134,519,057 53,551,557 9,138,241 1,799,918 250,115,042 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Staff Recommendations Public Hearing for FTA 5309 Program of Projects Approve Transit Operator Funding Allocations Federal Projects added to FTIP Approve FTA 5307 & 5311 POP Questions? rctc.org 951.787.7141 info@rctc.org f If O C theRCTC 8 AGENDA ITEM 9A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4, 2018. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement with MuniServices, LLC (MuniServices), an Avenu Company, for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenues generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. As part of the recurring contracts process in June 2018, the Commission approved a five-year extension through June 30, 2023. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales tax revenues. Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices submitted audits, which reported findings and submitted to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), as successor to the California State Board of Equalization, for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 909 businesses. Through 4Q 2018, the CDTFA approved 591 of these accounts for a cumulative sales tax recovery of $9,755,797. If CDTFA concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission will receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. Additionally, MuniServices provided the Commission with the Quarterly Sales Tax Digest Summary report for 4Q 2018. Most of the 4Q 2018 Measure A sales tax revenues were received in the first quarter of calendar year 2019, during January 2019 through March 2019, due to a lag in the sales tax calendar. The summary section of the 4Q 2018 report is attached and includes an overview of California's economic outlook, local results, historical cash collections analysis by quarter, top 25 sales/use tax contributors, historical sales tax amounts, annual sales tax by business category, and five-year economic trend for significant business category (general retail). As reported to the Commission in November 2018, the CDTFA implemented a new automation system in May 2018, and encountered some issues that included delays in tax return processing. Agenda Item 9A 30 This included numerous sales tax returns for the first two quarters of calendar year 2018 unprocessed at the CDTFA. The CDTFA has been responsive and committed to resolving the issues and completed the 1Q, 2Q, and 3Q 2018 unprocessed sales tax return and has an insignificant amount of 4Q 2018 unprocessed sales tax returns. Staff continues to work closely with MuniServices to receive regular updates on the CDTFA unprocessed sales tax returns. Taxable transactions for the top 25 contributors in Riverside County generated 24.6 percent of taxable sales for the benchmark year ended 4Q 2018, slightly higher than the 22 percent for the benchmark year ended 4Q 2017. The top 100 tax contributors generated 39.2 percent, slightly higher than the 37.6 percent for the benchmark year ended 4Q 2017. In the Economic Category Analysis below, five of the six categories experienced new highs in the 4Q 2018 benchmark year compared to the prior eight benchmark years. The Miscellaneous category is below the 4Q 2014 benchmark year due to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) change to sales taxes being reported using a unique transaction code rather than historically as a sales tax permit. The DMV sales tax reporting change will be reflected correctly in the 1Q 2019 report. ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS of Total / %Change RCTC State Wide Orange County San Bernardino County S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley South Coast North Coast Central Coast General Retail 28.9/9.7 27.9/2.1 29.i/1.4 26.2/4.2 25.6/1.8 27.8/5.3 30.4/3.9 28.8/1.8 30.0/2.6 29.2/6.5 Food Products 17.8/6.2 20.6/2.6 20.2/3.3 15.1/5.6 21.5/2.0 17.0/4.0 16.0/2.4 22.3/2.8 16.4/0.4 30.6/6.5 Transportation 24.6 / 5.6 24.1 / 5.2 23.7 / 5.8 26.8 / 2.4 22.6 / 11.6 28.2 / 3.5 25.7 / 3.8 23.3 / 4.3 28.4 / 0.6 22.3 / 5.5 Construction 10.8/8.5 9.8/9.6 8.7/6.0 9.4/13.6 9.8/10.1 11.9/11.3 11.5/11.0 8.8/7.8 13.4/7.5 8.5/39.1 Business to Business 16.3/3.6 16.3/3.7 16.9/2.1 19.8/4.9 19.3/3.7 13.9/1.3 15.6/9.0 15.6/3.8 10.4/9.6 8.6/6.1 Miscellaneous 1.6/-26.4 1.3/5.7 1.3/8.1 2.7/7.9 1.2/19.9 1.1/4.1 0.8/11.9 1.2/12.5 1.4/1.4 0.8/11.8 Total 100.0/6.1 100.0/3.9 100.0/3.4 100.0/5.0 100.0/5.3 100.0/4.6 100.0/5.2 100.0/3.5 100.0/3.0 100.0/8.4 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc. Retail Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment Construction: Building Materials Retail and Building Materials Wholesale Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, Auto Sales - New, Auto Sales - Used, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales Business to Business: Office Equip., Electronic Equip., Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, Leasing, Biotechnology, I.T. Infrastructure, and Green Energy Miscellaneous: Health & Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments An analysis of sales tax performance by quarter through 4Q 2018 is attached and illustrates fairly consistent cycles for sales tax performance for most of the economic categories since 4Q 2013. For 9 of the top 10 segments (restaurants, auto sales -new, department stores, miscellaneous retail, building materials -wholesale, food markets, apparel stores, building materials -retail, and heavy industry) during the eight benchmark year quarters, sales tax receipts reached a new high point. The segments represent 66.3 percent of the total sales tax receipts. Service stations representing 7.8 percent was higher than the last four benchmark year quarters since 4Q 2014. The top 10 segments represent 74.1 percent of the total sales tax receipts. For the other 21 segments representing 25.9 percent of the total sales tax receipts, 10 segments representing 14.4 percent of the total sales tax receipts reached new high points in the benchmark year 4Q 2018. In the Economic Segments Analysis below, auto sales -new and department stores have Agenda Item 9A 31 been in the top three economic segments. Restaurants replaced service stations in the top three economic segments beginning in 4Q 2014. The service stations segments high occurred in 4Q 2012 and declined through 1Q 2017 due to lower fuel prices; the 4Q 2018 benchmark year quarter for service stations reflects an increase over the last four benchmark year quarters since 4Q 2014 due to rising fuel prices. RCTC State Wide Orange County ECONOMIC SEGMENT San Bernardino County ANALYSIS S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley South Coast North Coast Central Coast Largest Segment Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Auto Sales - New Department Stores Restaurants Department Stores Restaurants %ofTotal /%Change 11.2/4.3 14.8/2.1 15.0/2.5 10.4/3.7 15.6/2.3 11.9/-0.9 12.2/1.9 16.6/2.2 12.0/3.9 21.9/5.9 2nd Largest Segment Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Department Stores Restaurants Auto Sales - New Restaurants Auto Sales - New %ofTotal /%Change 11.2/0.7 11.0/3.6 12.1/6.6 9.6/-3.0 12.0/13.7 11.5/13.8 10.5/2.5 10.7/2.4 10.4/0.3 11.1/2.9 3rd Largest Segment Department Stores Department Stores Misc Retail Department Stores Misc Retail Restaurants Auto Sales- New Misc Retail Service Stations Misc Retail %ofTotal /%Change 9.6/5.2 8.8/1.9 9.7/0.2 9.6/0.9 7.6/3.8 11.3/2.2 10.2/-1.8 8.6/1.6 10.3/6.0 9.8/4.7 As reported in the 3Q 2018 Sales Tax Analysis Report, staff notified the Commission of a reporting error by one of the top 25 sales/use tax contributors related to a misallocation of the district tax to the Commission during 2Q 2018 through 4Q 2018, resulting in an overpayment to the Commission estimated in the amount of $2.5 million. Staff is not certain in which period the misallocation correction will be completed; however, the FY 2019 sales tax revenues after the correction are expected to continue to reflect an increase over the FY 2018 revenues. Information regarding sales tax comparison by city and change in economic segments (two highest gains and two highest losses) from 4Q 2017 to 4Q 2018 is attached. Staff continues to monitor monthly sales tax receipts and other available economic data to determine the need for any adjustments to the revenue projections. Staff will utilize the forecast scenarios with the complete report and receipt trends in assessing such projections. Attachments: 1) Sales Tax Digest Summary 4Q 2018 2) Sales Tax Performance by Quarter 4Q 2018 3) Quarterly Sales Tax Comparison by City for 4Q 2017 to 4Q 2018 Agenda Item 9A 32 Riverside County Transportation Commission Sales Tax Digest Summary Collections through December 2018 Sales through September 2018 (2018Q4) ATTACHMENT 1 CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMIC OUTLOOK California sales tax receipts increased by 7.3% over the same quarter from the previous year, with Northern California reporting a 6.8% increase compared to 7.8% for Southern California. Receipts for the RCTC increased by 8.9% over the same periods. Unprecedented increases were due to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration implementation of a new reporting system and processing of many sales tax returns filed for the prior three quarters in the current quarter. • GDP: Grew 2.6% in 2018Q4: 3.4% in 2018Q3; and 4.2% in 2018Q2. Consumer spending was robust due to a strong job market, tax cuts and household income gains. Business investment, after faltering in the third quarter, bounced back in final three months of the year. • The California Department of Tax and Fee Administration: announced that it will require out-of- state retailers to collect and remit use tax beginning on April 1, 2019 if in the preceding or current calendar year their sales into California exceed $100,000, or 200 or more separate transactions. • Real Estate Sales in California: Statewide sales of existing, single-family homes in January 2019 totaled 357,730, down 3.9% from December and down 12.6% from January 2018. The 30-year, fixed - mortgage interest rate averaged 4.46% in January, up from 4.03% in January 2018 (Freddie Mac). LOCAL RESULTS Net Cash Receipts Analysis Local Collections Share of County Pool 0.0% Share of State Pool 0.0% SBE Net Collections Less: Amount Due County 0.0% Less: Cost of Administration Net 4Q2018 Receipts Net 4Q2017 Receipts Actual Percentage Change 52,675,125 0 0 52,675,125 .00 (500,220) 52,174,905 47,892,420 8.9 Business Activity Performance Analysis Local Collections — Economic Basis 4Q2018 Local Collections — Economic Basis 4Q2017 Quarter over Quarter Change Quarter over Quarter Percentage Change $51,680,056 $49,044,802 2,635,254 5.4% Avenu Insights & Analytics' On -Going Audit Results Total Recovered Year to Date $10,500,671 www.avenuinsights.com (8(0 800-8181 Page 1 RCTC HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $- (in thousands of $) M o $600 $500 - $400 - $300 - $200 3Q2016 4Q2016 1Q2017 2Q2017 3Q2017 4Q2017 1Q2018 2Q2018 3Q2018 4Q2018 mE Net Receipts —6—CDTFAAdmin Fees Due $100 $- TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies RCTC's Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents sales from October 2017 to September 2018. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 24.6% of RCTC's total sales and use tax revenue. AMAZON.COM ARCO AM/PM MINI MARTS BEST BUY STORES CARMAX THE AUTO SUPERSTORE CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS FERGUSON ENTERPRISES FOOD 4 LESS HOME DEPOT KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME CENTERS MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY ROBERTSONS READY MIX ROSS STORES RALPH'S SAM'S CLUB SHELL SERVICE STATIONS STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES TESLA VERIZON WIRELESS WAL MART STORES www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800-8181 34 Page 2 RCTC HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level from annual sales through December 2018, the highs, and the lows for each segment over the last two years in thousands of $. • $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $- ¢44 \¢`' ya �o PJ t 1 I I t ,,y ¢5 ¢ a \¢ at�y� Q 5ce SJy, P cF \c¢/ \ a Qa`v o¢$ ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY 4Q2018 3Q2018 2Q2018 1Q2018 4Q2017 3Q2017 2Q2017 1Q2017 4Q2016 3Q2016 (in thousands of $) 1 <,p \ao,� 0 ■ 4Q2018 ♦ High • Low 54,899 33,783 46,783 20,524 30,908 3,048 53,010 32,719 47,586 20,600 31,229 3,425 51,487 30,465 45,832 18,871 29,260 3,494 49,916 32,358 45,302 20,733 29,748 4,602 50,062 49,772 31,821 30,277 44,312 18,908 45,032 18,356 29,826 4,140 29,299 4,020 49,595 29,172 43,561 17,786 48,419 30,881 43,466 19,004 I 28,542 4,189 49,034 30,310 42,256 17,467 28,536 3,829 48,183 28,623 42,839 17,513 28,470 3,692 27,822 3,284 $ 0 $ 20,000 $ 40,000 $ 60,000 $ 80,000 $ 100,000 $ 120,000 $ 140,000 $ 160,000 $ 180,000 $ 200,000 ■ General Retail ■ Food Products ■ Transportation ■ Construction ■ Business To Business ■ Miscellaneous www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800-8181 35 Page 3 RCTC FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: General Retail $18,000 $16,000 $14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0 (in thousands of $) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .71- v .71- .71- lf7 LA L11 Ln l0 tD l0 l0 n N N N. o0 oo oo oo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N o N N N o N N N N N N N N N N N N www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800-8181 36 Page 4 RCTC: Sales Tax Performance Analysis by Quarter ATTACHMENT 2 TOTAL TOTAL $60,000,000 $50, 000, 000 $40, 000, 000 $30, 000, 000 $20, 000, 000 $10,000,000 $0 a 0" 0' 0- 0- Crt. 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- ti°' ti° ^y tiN. Ny ti`O ti`O y y by ti� Q1 r CATEGORY TOTAL $18,000,000 $16, 000, 000 $14,000,000 $12, 000, 000 $10, 000, 000 $8, 000, 000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 'GENERAL RETAIL Economic 2018 Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $51,680,056 5.4% $2,635,254 6.1% $11,027,974 2018Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $16,891,800 11.9% $1,802,043 9.7% $4,837,205 % of 2018Q4 Total: 32.7% LFOOD PRODUCTS 2018Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $8,543,894 1.4% $118,258 6.2% $1,962,731 % of Total: 16.5% 'TRANSPORTATION 2018Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $11,601,051 4.5% $496,515 5.6% $2,471,197 % of Total: 22.4% CONSTRUCTION 2018Q4 Q0Q %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $5,351,579 12.3% $584,787 8.5% $1,616,423 % of Total: 10.4% BUSINESS TO BUSINESS 2018Q4 Q0Q %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $7,986,535 -0.7%-$58,964 3.6% $1,081,119 % of Total: 15.5% QoQ = 18Q4 / 17Q4 YoY = YE 18Q4 / YE 17Q4 37 ATTACHMENT 3 Quarterly Comparison of 2O17Q4 and 2O1844 (October through December Sales) RIVERSIDE COUNTY BANNING BEAUMONT BLYTHE CALIMESA CANYON LAKE CATHEDRAL CITY COACHELLA CORONA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DESERT HOT SPRINGS EASTVALE HEMET INDIAN WELLS INDIO JURUPA VALLEY LA QUINTA LAKE ELSINORE MENIFEE MORENO VALLEY MURRIETA NORCO PALM DESERT PALM SPRINGS PERRIS RANCHO MIRAGE RIVERSIDE SAN JACINTO TEMECULA WILDOMAR w z w` l7 25.8% 2.1% - 9.2% -3.2% 92.9% -8.1% - 0.3% -4.0% - 4.7% 59.9% 26.3% -0.9% 15.3% 30.6% 4.4% 3.0% 2.6% - 3.2% -4.2% - 1.3% 3.9% 5.0% 39.0% 3.4% -0.1% 5.6% -3.9% - 1.4% a' a` 0 -10.3% 2.5% -18.2% 1.5% 1.7% -0.6% -0.1% 1.8% -16.2% 7.3% -5.2 % -1.0% -0.4% -6.1% 0.7% -7.1% -3.3% -11.9% -0.7% -4.7% -2.5% -2.0% -3.6% 2.1% 18.6% Transportation -0.9% 8.5% -2.8% 6.1% 196.5% 2.7% 11.2% -5.6% 5.7% 8.1% 21.8% 5.6% 0.0% -3.0% 0.9% -0.4% -9.7% 7.2% 4.5% 1.3% 54.1% 7.4% -3.4% 17.5% 1.0% 1.6% -1.1% -56.9% 3.8% 6.1% -38.7% 8.5% -10.6% 23.1% 2.9% -0.4% -11.4% 7.4% 403.7% 19.8% 0.8% 2.1% -22.0% -5.6% -7.0% -26.1% 3.6% 3.5% -40.4% 12.5% 7.7% 0.6% 7.6% 216.9% m 0 0 H w w c � • Oct -Dec 2018 Oct -Dec 2017 m' (201804) (2017Q4) %Chg Gain Gain Decline Decline -13.2% -50.4% -0.9% 10.6% 38.2% 3.8% -25.1% -8.0% -3.9% -16.8% -49.4% -13.7% 8.3% 11.7% 32.9 % 15.4% -13.8% 3.8% 9.4% 2.6% 17.3% -23.4% -7.0% 3.1% -28.5% 6.1% 74.8% -35.4% 3.2% -53.8% -75.6% -0.1% 16.2% -41.5% -36.3 % -16.5% -69.1% 66.4% -39.5% 66.5% -19.2% -9.6% 3.0% -40.3% 38.7% -28.5% -47.8% 31.5% -13.2% 14.4% -4.8% -12.1% 6.0% -24.5% -24.1% -44.6% 633,119 647,351 -2.2% 1,167,426 1,166,072 0.1% 383,970 416,208 -7.7% 198,589 195,373 1.6% 82,769 52,744 56.9% 2,124,528 2,124,011 0.0% 809,057 786,645 2.8% 9,657,778 10,055,962 -4.0% 7,051,535 7,183,396 -1.8% 401,166 350,085 14.6% 2,104,871 1,969,729 6.9% 2,715,104 2,691,669 0.9% 258,530 229,702 12.6% 2,550,435 2,600,001 -1.9% 2,934,416 2,629,989 11.6% 2,286,975 2,225,465 2.8% 2,238,338 2,274,548 -1.6% 1,892,652 1,900,295 -0.4% 4,572,034 4,709,814 -2.9% 3,874,960 4,065,436 -4.7% 1,519,606 1,539,140 -1.3% 4,992,144 4,835,735 3.2% 3,222,042 3,076,363 4.7% 4,305,211 4,119,954 4.5% 1,354,008 1,299,259 4.2% 14,833,382 14,660,601 1.2% 699,017 698,575 0.1% 8,632,554 8,796,676 -1.9% 452,263 395,876 14.2% Miscellaneous Retail Misc. Vehicle Sales Auto Sales - New BIdg.Matls-Whsle Service Stations Restaurants Light Industry Leasing Service Stations Light Industry Food Markets Auto Sales - New Service Stations Light Industry Miscellaneous Other Leasing Auto Parts/Repair Miscellaneous Retail Heavy Industry Auto Sales - Used Auto Sales - New Service Stations Furniture/Appliance Food Markets Service Stations Florist/Nursery Energy Sales Food Markets BIdg.Matls-Whsle Electronic Equipment Heavy Industry Miscellaneous Retail Service Stations Heavy Industry Apparel Stores Miscellaneous Retail Miscellaneous Retail Service Stations BIdg.Matls-Whsle Miscellaneous Other Department Stores BIdg.Matls-Whsle Miscellaneous Retail Food Markets Service Stations Department Stores Food Markets Miscellaneous Retail Miscellaneous Retail Restaurants Apparel Stores Heavy Industry Heavy Industry Department Stores Miscellaneous Retail Energy Sales Miscellaneous Retail Heavy Industry Light Industry Misc. Vehicle Sales Department Stores Furniture/Appliance Auto Sales - New Food Markets Department Stores Light Industry Auto Sales - New Food Markets Service Stations Food Markets BIdg.Matls-Whsle BIdg.Matls-Retail Department Stores Auto Sales - New Miscellaneous Retail Food Markets Department Stores Auto Sales - Used Miscellaneous Retail Service Stations Auto Sales - Used Service Stations Auto Sales - New BIdg.Matls-Whsle Auto Sales - New Department Stores Food Markets Restaurants Service Stations Leasing Drug Stores Restaurants Furniture/Appliance Apparel Stores BIdg.Matls-Retail Electronic Equipment Auto Sales - New BIdg.Matls-Whsle Food Markets Restaurants BIdg.Matls-Whsle Department Stores Heavy Industry Miscellaneous Retail Service Stations Department Stores Food Markets Auto Sales - Used Chemical Products BIdg.Matls-Whsle Auto Sales - New Department Stores BIdg.Matls-Whsle Food Markets Service Stations Miscellaneous Retail Non -Confidential 38 MuniServices / Avenu Insights & Analytics AGENDA ITEM 9B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Audit Ad Hoc Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2017/18 Transportation Development Act and Measure A Audit Results AUDIT AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Transportation Development Act (TDA) and Measure A audit results report for Fiscal Year 2017/18. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In July 2016, following a competitive procurement, the Commission awarded contracts for a five-year contract term to three audit firms to perform financial and compliance audits and agreed -upon procedures (audits) for TDA claimants and Measure A recipients: • Macias Gini O'Connell LLP (MGO) for Western County TDA claimants and Measure A local streets and roads recipients; • BCA Watson Rice LLP (BCAWR) for Western County Measure A Specialized Transit recipients; and • Conrad LLP (Conrad) for Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley, and county of Riverside TDA claimants and Measure A recipients. Initially, this scope of work excluded audits for Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine), and the city of Beaumont (Beaumont), as these jurisdictions elected to hire their own auditors. After its auditors completed Beaumont's FY 2015/16 audit, Beaumont requested, and Commission staff agreed, that the Commission's auditor conduct the required audits beginning with FY 2016/17. MGO, BCAWR, and Conrad along with the other agencies' auditors completed the audits and issued the audit reports. The following is a summary of the 60 audits performed: Agenda Item 9B 39 Funding Type Type of Procedure MGO BCAWR Conrad (Western (Western (Eastern County County) County) & Riverside Co.) Other Auditors Total TDA Article 3 (bicycle and pedestrian projects) TDA Article 4 (transit) Measure A specialized transit Measure A local streets and roads IFinancial and compliance audit Financial and compliance audit 4=111.1 1 EL: 7 Agreed -upon procedures 0 14 0 -..mr 14 Agreed -upon procedures 18 0 11 0 29 Based on a review of the reports, the following items are highlights of the results of these audits. TDA Article 4 (Transit) • One transit operator (Beaumont) did not meet the fare ratio requirement. Since this was the first year of noncompliance, it is considered a grace year and does not result in any penalty or loss of eligibility for these funds. Failure to meet the fare ratio requirement in future years could result in the loss of funding. • Three transit operators (Corona, Riverside, and RTA) restated their beginning balances for a total amount of approximately $5.5 million, related to a restatement of the net OPEB obligation due to the implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 75, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions. Measure A Specialized Transit • Two agencies (Blindness Support Services and Boys & Girls Club of Southwest County) did not meet the adjusted match requirement by a combined total of $1,615 (1 percent of the adjusted match requirement). • Two agencies (Care -A -Van and Community Connect) had excess revenues over expenditures totaling $28,720, of which approximately 47 percent may be payable to the Commission. During site visits to be conducted during FY 2018/19 or through other procedures, Commission staff will review the circumstances for the excess revenues over expenditures in order to determine the return of Measure A funds, if any, to the Commission. • Five agencies (Blindness Support Services, Forest Folk, Friends of Moreno Valley, Independent Living Partnership, and U.S. Veterans Initiative) had an excess of expenditures over revenues aggregating $6,882. Two agencies (Friends of Moreno Valley and Independent Living Partnership) submitted final invoices following the issuance of the reports in FY 2018/19 to claim a total of $3,748. The other agencies are responsible to cover the remaining deficits totaling $3,134. Agenda Item 9B 40 Measure A Local Streets and Roads • Three jurisdictions (Blythe, Calimesa, and Murrieta) met their maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements using the prior year carryover, as permitted under the MOE Guidelines. • Six jurisdictions (Banning, Eastvale, Hemet, Murrieta, Palm Desert, and San Jacinto) have fund balances in excess of three years of revenues. While the Commission policy suggests such amounts should not exceed three years, it appears that the jurisdictions reduced the amounts in excess of three years through current year expenditures. • Two jurisdictions (Wildomar and the county of Riverside) recorded overhead costs in excess of 8 percent of revenues. The Commission's policy states overhead should not exceed 8 percent of revenues. The county of Riverside's overhead allocation is based on an approved indirect cost rate, and Wildomar's overhead costs were slightly above at 8.2 percent. • One jurisdiction (Beaumont) did not account for Measure A activities in a separate fund and did not allocate interest income to the Measure A activities, which is not in accordance with the Commission's policy. Effective in FY 2018/19, the jurisdiction established a new special revenue fund for Measure A activities and will allocate interest income. Attached is the summary of transportation and transit fund operations and related audit results for the various types ofTDA (Articles 3 and 4) and Measure A (specialized transit and local streets and roads) funding. Each schedule provides information for each claimant and recipient regarding the revenues, expenditures/expenses, and change in fund balance/net assets for the year ended June 30, 2018, and other financial and compliance information. Attachments: 1) FY 2017/18 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Schedule 2) FY 2017/18 Transportation Development Act Article 4 Schedule 3) FY 2017/18 Measure A Specialized Transit Schedule 4) FY 2017/18 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Schedule Agenda Item 9B 41 ATTACHMENT 1 Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Article 3 Total revenues Transportation Development Act Article 3 Schedule Year Ended June 30, 2018 Desert Hot Indian Jurupa Moreno Palm Beaumont Springs Wells' Hemet Valley Valley Springs Perris Riverside Wildomar $ 204,000 $145,000 $ 20,000 $ $ - $ 26,309 $ 348,296 $ 68,484 $ 308,575 $ 158,400 204,000 145,000 20,000 - 26,309 348,296 68,484 308,575 158,400 Total expenditures 204,000 20,000 75,000 47,898 26,309 348,296 68,484 11,358 623,928 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 145,000 (75,000) (47,898) - 297,217 (465,528) Transfers in (out) 18,583 - Excess (deficiency) of revenues and transfers in over (under) expenditures 145,000 - (75,000) (29,315) - 297,217 (465,528) Prior period adjustment - Fund balances at beginning of year - (145,000) - - (18,583) - - (285,355) (83,197) Fund balances at end of year $ - $ - $ - $ (75,000) $ (47,898) $ $ - $ - $ 11,862 $ (548,725) Deferred revenues at end of year $ - $ - $ - $ 75,000 $ 51,524 $ $ - $ 247 $ - $ 567,111 Due to RCTC $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ $ - $ - $ - $ Source: 2018 Financial Statements 'Represents 2017 financial information that was audited during this audit cycle 5/30/2019 42 ATTACHMENT 2 Transportation Development Act Article 4 Schedule Year Ended June 30, 2018 Banning Beaumont Corona Riverside PVVTA RTA' SunLine' Total operating revenues $ 117,872 $ 234,182 $ 363,489 $ 443,070 119,828 $ 10,712,941 $ 6,949,374 Operating expenses: Depreciation and amortization 223,138 518,763 473,173 714,219 253,266 14,221,349 8,501,403 Other operating expenses 1,626,239 2,679,451 2,918,211 4,053,083 1,124,884 79,372,860 32,610,394 Total operating expenses 1,849,377 3,198,214 3,391,384 4,767,302 1,378,150 93,594,209 41,111,797 Operating loss (1,731,505) (2,964,032) (3,027,895) (4,324,232) (1,258,322) (82,881,268) (34,162,423) Nonoperating revenues (expenses): Grants: Local Transportation Funds 1,319,357 2,426,067 1,515,320 3,374,048 879,376 41,097,909 18,789,954 State Transit Assistance 21,550 96,671 653,517 109,004 813,283 2,496,551 Federal - - 712,692 845,941 111,387 22,682,182 10,266,693 Measure A specialized transit - - 3,395,333 5,153,400 Proposition 1 B/Low Carbon Transit Operations Program 509,735 19,014 - 36,125 690,661 355,581 Other 353,655 2,684,155 4,912,075 Interest income 1,740 4,984 9,051 2,513 50 472,563 7,460 Interest expense - (15,163) - Transfers in (out), net 18,000 (322) (31,378) - - - - Gain (loss) on sale of property - 2,637 3,833 21,309 Insurance proceeds 97,876 - - - - - Other 30,108 - 28,494 - 1,666,465 - Total nonoperating revenue (expense) 1,998,366 2,546,414 2,859,202 4,238,470 1,489,597 73,506,384 42,003,023 Net increase (decrease) 266,861 (417,618) (168,693) (85,762) 231,275 (9,374,884) 7,840,600 Prior period adjustment - (266,484) (24,327) - 5,814,788 - Net assets at beginning of year (874,611) 1,821,792 4,469,539 284,174 2,367,416 88,633,747 52,653,833 Net assets at end of year $ (607,750) $ 1,404,174 $ 4,034,362 $ 174,085 $ 2,598,691 $ 85,073,651 $ 60,494,433 Deferred revenue at end of year: Operating $ 285,844 $ 174,002 $ 369,010 $ 617,917 $ 83,715 $ 7,083,568 $ 590,848 Capital 191,467 24,358 - 634,808 30,360 34,464,028 4,445,563 Total deferred revenue at end of year $ 477,311 $ 198,360 $ 369,010 $ 1,252,725 $ 114,075 $ 41,547,596 $ 5,036,411 10.00% 10.00% 15.00% 10.00% 10.00% 17.44% 17.46% Actual fare ratio 10.31 % 9.09% 16.25% 10.93% 10.41 % 21.69% 21.49% Fare ratio compliance status Met Did not Meet Met Met Met Met Met Source: 2018 Financial Statements 5/30/2019 The audits for RTA and SunLine were completed by other auditors hired by each entity. 43 ATTACHMENT 3 Measure A Specialized Transit Schedule Year Ended June 30, 2018 Riverside County of County Boys & Girls Riverside Regional United Club of Community Community Dept of Friends of Independent Medical States Blindness Southwest Care Connect - Connect - Mental Moreno Living City of Operation Center/ Veterans Voices for Support County Care -A -Van Connexxus 211 TAP Health Forest Folk Valley Partnership Norco SafeHouse (RUNS) Initiative Children Operating revenues: Measure $ 65,353 $ 209,695 $ 324,870 $ 298,050 $ 77,059 $ 64,415 $ 200,000 $ 55,000 $ 66,262 $ 481,458 $60,000 $ 30,298 $307,659 $ 42,840 $ 95,478 In -kind match 1,000 7,229 74,455 11,556 24,387 - 40,121 18,070 862,799 - - 252,597 Cash match: other revenue 31,648 110,262 93,125 163,226 29,877 9,644 103,030 5,372 45,699 - 30,911 15,752 189,029 27,713 - Total operating revenues 98,001 327,186 492,450 461,276 118,492 98,446 303,030 100,493 130,031 1,344,257 90,911 46,050 496,688 70,553 348,075 Operating expenses -in kind 1,000 7,229 74,455 11,556 24,387 - 40,121 18,070 862,799 - - 252,597 Operating expenses -salaries & benefits 59,959 151,507 275,650 222,114 61,588 33,292 241,111 22,616 162,657 66,972 25,446 412,076 51,501 30,000 Operating expenses-nonpersonnel 37,469 113,631 135,750 204,994 18,211 29,733 61,919 37,900 115,898 307,046 19,139 17,261 84,612 19,792 65,478 Operating expenses -administrative overhead 10,792 34,168 8,761 7,285 13,389 4,800 3,343 Capital expenditures 44,027 - - Total operating expenses/capital expenditures 98,428 327,186 485,855 461,276 100,116 94,697 303,030 100,637 133,968 1,345,891 90,911 46,050 496,688 71,293 348,075 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures $ (427) $ - $ 6,595 $ - $ 18,376 $ 3,749 $ - $ (144) $ (3,937) $ (1,634) $ - $ - $ - $ (740) $ Match requirement (as adjusted) Actual match Match requirement compliance status Source: 2018 Agreed -Upon Procedures $ 33,466 $ 118,288 $ 165,191 $ 136,515 $ 34,039 $ 32,197 $ 103,030 $ 45,138 $ 35,224 $ 207,503 $30,911 $ 15,752 $159,697 $ 22,309 $ 153,722 $ 32,648 $ 117,491 $ 167,580 $ 163,226 $ 41,433 $ 34,031 $ 103,030 $ 45,493 $ 63,769 $ 862,799 $ 30,911 $ 15,752 $189,029 $ 27,713 $ 252,597 Did not meet Did not meet Met adjusted Met Met adjusted Met adjusted Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Met adjusted match adjusted match match match match requirements requirements Measure A Specialized Transit 5/30/2019 44 ATTACHMENT 4 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Schedule Year ended June 30, 2018 Westem County Banning Beaumont Calimesa Canyon Lake Corona Eastvale Hemet Jurupa Valley Lake Elsinore Menifee Moreno Valley Mumeta Norco Perris Riverside San Jacinto Temecula Wildomar I I Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Measure $ 563,927 $ 601,889 $ 166,168 $ 184,294 $ 4,134,306 $1,314,044 $1,762,566 $ 1,938,244 $ 1,351,409 $1,664,930 $ 3,707,442 $2,425,462 $ 677,384 $1,624,086 $ 7,732,065 $ 877,187 $3,173,344 $ 616,835 Reimbursements - - - - - - - - - - 900,929 - - - 419,465 - 35,483 Other revenues - - - - 1,919 146,458 - 275,279 12,400 - - - - - Interest income 15,802 - 4,005 (354) 7,869 40,720 24,971 2,066 8,337 3,720 60,680 82,050 25,253 8,453 76,718 36,591 33,824 Other financing sources -transfers in - - - - 89,691 - 539,725 - - - - - - - - - Total revenues 579,729 601,889 170,173 183,940 4,144,094 1,444,455 1,787,537 2,626,493 1,359,746 1,943,929 4,681,451 2,507,512 702,637 1,632,539 8,228,248 913,778 3,242,651 616,835 Expenditures and other financing uses: Engineering, construction and maintenance 147,164 60,000 175,035 2,064,074 1,591,412 1,307,954 1,383,733 - 320,119 1,556,183 4,159 1,076,660 2,194,777 - - 795,372 621,776 Administrative overhead/indirect costs - - 12,400 - - - - - 293,250 - - - 6,728 27,488 - 45,842 Capital outlay - - - 26,451 - 1,402,299 392,572 4,759,648 - Debt service 147,000 - - 493,293 - - 1,487,196 730,645 2,996,088 - - - Transfers out - - - - - 98,415 - 508,909 1,159,113 1,301,088 1,103,501 - - - - 213,823 4,455,221 50,776 Total expenditures and other financing uses 147,164 60,000 187,435 147,000 2,064,074 1,716,278 1,307,954 2,385,935 1,159,113 1,621,207 5,842,429 1,127,376 1,076,660 2,194,777 7,762,464 241,311 5,250,593 718,394 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures and other financing uses 432,565 541,889 (17,262) 36,940 2,080,020 (271,823) 479,583 240,558 200,633 322,722 (1,160,978) 1,380,136 (374,023) (562,238) 465,784 672,467 (2,007,942) (101,559) Prior period adjustment/rounding (1) - 1 1 CO 2 - (14,825) 1 (189,313) Fund balances at beginning of year 1,768,949 - 566,862 324,917 10,882,442 4,677,775 5,336,943 (120,363) 1,545,370 686,730 5,135,340 7,150,588 2,060,218 4,928,089 17,852,987 3,235,105 6,251,531 275,786 Fund balances at end of year $ 2,201,513 $ 541,889 $ 549,601 $ 361,858 $ 12,962,462 $ 4,405,953 $5,816,526 $ 120,195 $ 1,746,002 $1,009,454 $ 3,974,362 $8,515,899 $1,686,195 $4,365,851 $ 18,318,771 $ 3,907,573 $4,243,589 $ (15,086) Fund balance by year received: 2018 $ 579,729 $ 541,889 $ 170,173 $ 183,940 $ 4,144,094 $1,444,455 $1,787,537 $ 120,195 $ 1,359,746 $1,009,454 $ 3,974,362 $2,507,512 $ 702,637 $1,632,539 $ 8,228,248 $ 913,778 $3,242,651 $ (15,086) 2017 558,909 - 195,916 170,672 8,818,368 1,262,191 1,624,564 - 386,256 - - 2,346,957 $ 643,386 1,457,511 7,316,322 847,427 1,000,938 - 2016 547,451 183,512 7,246 - 1,161,037 1,683,976 - 2,161,621 340,172 1,275,801 2,774,201 776,338 515,424 538,270 720,449 1,499,809 1,370,030 - Total fund balances by year received $ 2,201,513 $ 541,889 $ 549,601 $ 361,858 $ 12,962,462 $ 4,405,953 $5,816,526 $ 120,195 $ 1,746,002 $1,009,454 $ 3,974,362 $8,515,899 $1,686,195 $4,365,851 $ 18,318,771 $ 3,907,573 $4,243,589 $ (15,086) Cash and investments $2,063,687 $ 322,749 $ 336,971 $ 346,130 $ 12,220,912 $4,147,200 $5,521,873 $ 263,643 $ 1,414,467 $ 335,930 $ 3,214,348 $8,146,191 $2,207,172 $4,018,832 $ 15,560,783 $ 389,230 $3,475,927 $ MOE Base Year requirement $ 164,325 $ 343,939 $ 2,401 $ 28,873 $ 2,208,200 $ 38,949 $ 18,924 $ - $ 960,771 $ 214,225 $ 1,459,153 $ 595,702 $ 22,536 $1,218,470 $ 12,449,203 $ 156,391 $1,431,799 $ Amount of Excess MOE at end of year $ 310,797 $ 710,094 $ 16,441 $ 147,770 $ 15,910,751 $ 131,964 $ 758,349 $ - $14,629,655 $3,692,379 $ 6,501,322 $ 254,625 $ 62,252 $1,748,331 $ 40,233,322 $ 623,648 $8,635,450 $ MOE compliance status Met Met Met with use Met Met Met Met N/A Met Met Met Met with use Met Met Met Met Met N/A of carryover of carryover Source: 2018 Agreed -Upon Procedures Measure A Local Streets Roads 4 of 5 5/30/2019 45 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Schedule Year ended June 30, 2018 I I Palo Verde 1 I 1 Coachella Valley 1 Valley 1 I Cathedral Desert Hot J 1 County of 1 City Coachella Springs Indian Wells Indio La Quinta Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Blythe ! Riverside Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: - MeasureA $ 1,474,000 $ 632,653 $ 454,537 $ 261,780 $ 1,934,623 $ 761,138 $ 2,765,692 $ 2,093,402 $ 810,467 $ 755,441 $ 6,788,097 Reimbursements - - - 488,050 200,450 210,665 - - Other revenues 57,793 - - 536,854 11,147 75,000 (28,489) - - - Interest income 2,372 (814) - 231 7,219 254,693 34,490 3,632 14,076 33,456 Other financing sources -transfers in 80,562 - - - 737,481 23,675 - - - - Total revenues 1,614,727 631,839 454,537 261,780 3,697,239 803,179 3,295,835 2,310,068 814,099 769,517 6,821,553 Expenditures and other financing uses: Engineering, construction and maintenance 1,511,975 - 206,384 210,833 2,614,731 - 2,871,083 2,704,571 - 5,569,295 Administrative overhead/indirect costs - - 15,338 - 386,972 - - - 60,435 1,668,442 Capital outlay - - - 2,009,876 - - Debt service - - 200,000 617,267 - 1,098,050 236,211 Transfers out 117,920 421,744 - - 49,242 412,422 - - 1,279,026 - Total expenditures and other financing uses 1,629,895 421,744 421,722 210,833 3,668,212 412,422 2,871,083 3,802,621 2,009,876 1,575,672 7,237,737 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures and other financing uses (15,168) 210,095 32,815 50,947 29,027 390,757 424,752 (1,492,553) (1,195,777) (806,155) (416,184) Prior period adjustment/rounding - - - (114,681) - - 1 Fund balances at beginning of year 446,496 1,263,691 45,572 20,520 725,555 854,791 21,545,267 7,369,067 3,349,388 2,332,281 1,735,443 Fund balances at end of year $ 431,328 $ 1,473,786 $ 78,387 $ 71,467 $ 639,901 $ 1,245,548 $ 21,970,019 $ 5,876,514 $ 2,153,611 $ 1,526,126 $ 1,319,260 Fund balance by year received: 2018 $ 431,328 $ 631,839 $ 78,387 $ 71,467 $ 639,901 $ 803,179 $ 3,295,835 $ 2,310,068 $ 814,099 $ 769,517 $ 1,319,260 2017 - 561,279 - - - 442,369 4,172,229 2,671,339 971,911 756,609 - 2016 280,668 6,885,291 895,107 367,601 - - 7,616,664 Total fund balances by year received $ 431,328 $ 1,473,786 $ 78,387 $ 71,467 $ 639,901 $ 1,245,548 $ 21,970,019 $ 5,876,514 $ 2,153,611 $ 1,526,126 $ 1,319,260 Cash and investments $ 156,591 $ 1,423,600 $ (34,294) $ - $ - $ 1,119,892 $ 36,702,635 $ 5,933,716 $ 1,996,672 $ 1,446,058 $ 1,311,449 MOE Base Year requirement $ 391,688 $ 92,205 $ 75,147 $ 963,640 $ 2,048,564 $ 937,007 $ 2,398,146 $ 1,498,732 $ 674,811 $ 170,000 5 - Amount of Excess MOE at end of year $ 4,523,041 $ 5,251,884 $ 1,269,788 $ 13,653,016 $ 12,018,618 $ 6,150,003 $ 9,479,114 $ 23,147,890 $ 4,062,134 $ 76,825 5 - MOE compliance status Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Met with use N/A of carryover Source: 2018 Agreed -Upon Procedures Measure A Local Streets Roads 5 of 5 5/30/2019 46 AGENDA ITEM 9C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Cheryl Donahue, Public Affairs Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: #Reboot My Commute Public Engagement Program Summary BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update about the Commission's #RebootMyCommute public engagement program in Riverside County. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission launched its #RebootMyCommute public engagement program on March 6, 2019, to solicit feedback from residents about ways to improve mobility across Riverside County. The feedback will help inform long-term transportation priorities, including review of the Measure A expenditure plan, development of the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan, continued development of next generation toll projects, and completion of the Next Generation Rail Corridor Feasibility Study and Long Range Transportation Plan. Defining transportation priorities is critical for the Commission, which is facing a $12.6 billion shortage between its anticipated transportation funding and needs during the next 20 years. Compounding this funding gap are additional transportation challenges. Rapid population growth likely will continue in Riverside County, which has relatively lower housing costs and more open space than Orange, Los Angeles, and parts of San Diego Counties. Despite significant expected employment gains, Riverside County is forecast to retain a high jobs -to -housing imbalance, creating a large commuting population. Riverside County is also a growing hub for the logistics industry, which employs many residents yet also contributes to traffic congestion, air pollution, and other impacts. Residents and motorists in Riverside County are expressing frustration with traffic congestion, experiencing construction fatigue, and voicing concerns about the need for equitable shares of transportation funding. The public and elected officials are seeking solutions to these issues. The Commission created #RebootMyCommute to invite residents and commuters to provide feedback about how to create a better transportation system in Riverside County. The program offered opportunities for the public to tell their stories and to recommend how and where the Agenda Item 9C 47 Commission's limited transportation dollars should be spent. Using the theme, "We are Listening," #RebootMyCommute acknowledged the public's frustration with traffic, late trains, potholed streets, and how long it takes for improvements to happen. The Commission accepted comments from March 6 to June 3, a 90-day period. Multiple tools were available for residents and commuters to learn about #RebootMyCommute and share feedback: 1) RebootMyCommute.org website 2) Social media advertising with videos 3) Tele-townhall meetings 4) Community booths 5) News media 6) The Point subscriptions 7) Helpline 8) Presentations 9) Text messaging 10) Brochures and postcards Feedback received via these methods are qualitative and not intended to represent a statistically representative sample of Riverside County residents. The data described below should not be used to reach scientific conclusions. Comments, By The Numbers The following is a numerical summary of the metrics for #RebootMyCommute. Appendix A provides a graphic display of these metrics. 1) Tele-Townhall Meetings: The Commission hosted Tele-town Hall meetings on March 19 and 20. These attracted 7,539 participants, 52 phone discussions, and nine follow-up voice messages. 2) Community Booths: The Commission staffed booths at six community events throughout Riverside County and engaged with 559 residents at these events. 3) News Media: Ten news stories featured the "Reboot" program. Advertisements were placed in The Press -Enterprise and The Desert Sun, with a combined print ad circulation of 461,702 and digital ad circulation of 156,250. The video ad aired 16 times on television station KESQ. Commissioners and staff also took part in various video and podcast series. 4) Website: The RebootMyCommute.org website had 22,061 sessions with 19,556 unique visitors. The Commission received 473 comment forms via the site. 5) The Point Subscriptions: The Commission publishes a monthly newsletter, The Point, which the Commission emails to subscribers. As part of the #RebootMyCommute program, residents were encouraged to register to receive the newsletter; 1,315 new subscribers registered during the program. Agenda Item 9C 48 6) Text Messaging: A text -messaging feature was available for those who wished to provide input via text. The Commission received 81 text messages. However, the texts received were limited to those who registered to receive The Point. 7) Brochures and Postcards: The Commission produced and distributed more than 5,500 brochures — printed in English and Spanish — to city halls, community centers, libraries, senior centers, transportation groups, chambers of commerce, and elected officials' offices across Riverside County. The brochures also were available at community booths and presentations. 8) Social Media: The Commission placed a series of targeted social media ads with videos related to #RebootMyCommute. a. On Facebook, 596,316 people viewed the videos in their entirety and 31,736 clicked to learn more. There were 2,098 direct engagements with viewers, 3,927,342 impressions, and a reach of 630,409. b. On Twitter, there were 7,613 full video views, 1,989 click-throughs, 54 direct engagements, and 368,225 impressions. c. On Instagram, 30,820 people watched the full video, and 4,448 clicked to learn more. There were 1,830 direct engagements, 2,898,023 impressions, and a reach of 629,129. d. On YouTube, there were 803,978 full video views, 13,584 click-throughs, and 3,495,097 impressions. 9) Helpline: A toll -free helpline was available for those who preferred to express their views by telephone. The Commission received 56 calls through the helpline. 10) Presentations: The Commission made several presentations, including multiple chapters of Riverside Transit Agency's Transportation Now, the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, the March Joint Powers Authority, the Temescal Valley Municipal Advisory Council, the Riverside Bike Club, the Riverside City Council, and the Norco City Council. Comments, Executive Summary The Commission received 948 comments through the website, social media and other sources. Staff sorted the comments into seven topics and seven geographical areas; summaries by topic and geography follow. Topics: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Active Transportation Economy & Jobs Highways &Traffic Streets & Local Issues Public Transportation Safety Express Lanes Summary, Comments by Topic Geographical Area: 1) Coachella Valley 2) Hemet -San Jacinto 3) 1-215 Corridor 4) Northwestern Riverside County 5) Southwestern Riverside County 6) Riverside 7) San Gorgonio Pass Agenda Item 9C 49 The chart below reflects the number of comments received about each topic. Since some comments addressed more than one topic, the table shows 1,113 comments. Following the chart is a summary of comments received by topic. COMMENTS BY TOPIC m CO m 1 ACTIVE TRANS. ECONOMY -JOBS HIGHWAYS- LOCAL -STREETS PUBLIC TRANS. SAFETY EXPRESS LANES TRAFFIC 1. Active Transportation —53 Comments Received: Most of these comments focused on the need to complete the Santa Ana River Trail between Riverside County and Orange County and the need to complete or make additional improvements to CV Link, the transportation route and recreational pathway in the Coachella Valley. The CV Link comments also suggested improving bike lanes and sidewalks approaching the trail or modifying the project to remove golf cart access. A number of comments noted the need for more bike lanes, walkable communities, sidewalk improvements, ADA signs for pedestrians, and motorized scooters. 2. Economy & Jobs — 81 Comments Received: Many comments noted the need to bring higher -paying jobs to Riverside County to reduce the need to commute to other counties, to offer incentives to businesses or employees who work from home, to provide more incentives for ridesharing, and to allow tax breaks for employers who hire local. A number of people were concerned about the high volume of residential and commercial development in Riverside County and the impact to traffic. Several voiced concerns about any possible new taxes and suggested that gas tax revenue should fund only freeway and roadway improvements. Agenda Item 9C 50 3. Highways & Traffic — 383 Comments Received: The Commission received wide-ranging comments about increasing traffic congestion on highways throughout Riverside County. Frequently mentioned were the need to improve the State Route 91 corridor, including the area between Green River Road and SR-241, the 71/91 interchange, 91 Express Lanes access, and the need for an alternate route between Riverside County and Orange County. A large number of residents voiced the need to widen and improve Interstate 15 between Riverside County and San Diego County, particularly near the 15/215 split. The number of comments increased greatly following an "1-15 Traffic Crisis" video posted on Facebook by the city of Temecula in mid -May. Other residents mentioned the need for traffic congestion relief along 1-10 through the San Gorgonio Pass and the need for improvements to Highway 111 in the Coachella Valley. Residents also expressed concerns about increasing congestion along 1-215 in Perris and Moreno Valley. Some motorists suggested removing express lanes, expanding carpool lanes, using reversible lanes, building double -decked highways, and limiting travel times for big -rig vehicles. 4. Streets & Local Issues — 207 Comments Received: Many comments in the category focused on the need to fix potholes, repave roads, improve timing and coordination of traffic signals, add left -turn phases to traffic signals, and add left -turn lanes. Other comments addressed the need for more sidewalks, the effectiveness of roundabouts, the need to install more stop signs, and the need for red-light cameras for traffic enforcement. A number of comments noted specific streets that require repair, widening, and extension. 5. Public Transportation & Specialized Services — 318 Comments Received: Comments centered on the need for more rail and bus options throughout Riverside County, although some comments noted that public transit is ineffective in southern California. Many comments supported establishing daily train service to and from the Coachella Valley, with requests for stations in various cities. A number of residents requested that the Commission provide Metrolink or a light rail service for southwestern Riverside County and into San Diego County, to the San Gorgonio Pass, and to the Hemet -San Jacinto area. Others noted the need for greater train frequency, free weekend rides for families, discounted train tickets, weekend service on the 91/Perris Valley Line (PVL), and extending the 91/PVL to San Bernardino. Residents asked for more bus options between the Coachella Valley and Riverside, greater bus frequency, 24-hour bus systems, more station amenities, improved bus stop safety, bus -only lanes, more compressed natural gas buses, and greater assistance for veterans, seniors, and riders with disabilities. Riders also voiced the need for better on -time performance for trains and buses and additional ridesharing/vanpooling incentives. 6. Safety —38 Comments Received: Comments noted the need for more police presence on roadways with larger fines for texting and driving, more stop signs, diagonal parking spaces, buses to enhance safety during the Coachella festivals, Park & Ride Lot security, and the removal of homeless people from bus shelters. Other comments noted the need Agenda Item 9C 51 for improvements to the I-15/Railroad Canyon Road/Diamond Drive interchange, Alessandro Boulevard and Columbia Avenue and the need to reopen Pigeon Pass Road, San Timoteo Canyon Road, and connector between Watkins Drive and Poarch Road. Residents also questioned the effectiveness of a planned raised median on Florida Avenue in Hemet. 7. Express Lanes — 70 Comments Received: A significant number of comments suggested removing the 91 Express Lanes or stopping construction of new express lanes. Some suggested replacing the express lanes with general-purpose lanes, carpool lanes, or light rail system. Others noted the high cost of using the express lanes, accused the Commission of profiteering, questioned various design features of the 91 Express Lanes, expressed concerns about using taxpayer funds to pay for express lanes, and advocated for an additional lane on westbound 91 between Green River Road and SR-241. Additional comments noted the need to extend the 15 Express Lanes past Lake Elsinore, the lack of access to the 91 Express Lanes from mid -city Corona, improving the 71/91 Interchange, and adding highways below ground. Summary, Comments by Geography The chart below includes the number of comments received from various geographical areas across Riverside County. Following the chart is a summary of comments received by area. Appendices B and C include maps of the comment origins by zip code for western and eastern Riverside County. COMMENTS BY GEOGRAPHY M tO N 00 N N 1 ,O 1 1 1 1 COACHELLA HEMET-SAN 1-215 NW SW RIVERSIDE RIVERSIDE SAN VALLEY JACINTO CORRIDOR RIVERSIDE CO. GORGONIO CO. PASS Mi OTHER Agenda Item 9C 52 1. Coachella Valley —122 Comments Received: A significant number of comments focused on providing daily rail service to the Coachella Valley via Amtrak, Metrolink, or a light rail system. Others suggested bus service improvements, such as zero emission buses, seamless public transit options, smart phone applications, and more bus stop amenities. Residents generally voiced support for the CV Link project, but a few questioned the need for the project. Some comments noted increasing highway traffic congestion and the need to improve 1-10 and Highway 111. Residents also recommended widening or repaving specific roads, including Avenue 52, Dillon Road, Varner Road, Ramon Road, and others. In addition, residents suggested new sidewalks, bike lanes, lane restriping, more streetlights, and coordinated traffic signals. 2. Hemet -San Jacinto — 82 Comments Received: Residents provided comments about the need for increased public transit options, including expansion of Metrolink to Hemet -San Jacinto, more frequent trains, weekend service on the 91/PVL, train service to San Diego, a dedicated lane for buses, enhanced bus stop safety, and reinstating RTA's CommuterLink Bus 212. Other recommendations included coordinating traffic signals, repairing potholes, repainting lane markings, repaving SR-74, and not building a raised median on Florida Avenue in Hemet. Residents also suggested extending Ethanac Road, realigning SR-79, adding lanes to 1-215, removing express lanes and carpool lanes, double -decking highways, improving SR-60 and 1-215 near Moreno Valley, and building tunnels between Riverside County and Orange County and between Mt. San Jacinto and Palm Springs. 3. 1-215 Corridor —105 Comments Received: Comments from residents along this corridor focused on lengthy commutes and the need to improve highway traffic congestion on both 1-215 and 1-15. Residents suggested improving the 15/215 interchange, redesigning existing interchanges, expanding express lanes south to Temecula, installing reversible lanes, and adding carpool lanes. Residents also suggested building the I-215 North Project to add lanes between Nuevo Road and SR-60, improving SR-60 and 1-215 through Perris and Moreno Valley, limiting truck travel times on highways, and building more frontage roads or back roads to bypass highway traffic. Comments also included the need to expand Metrolink passenger rail or light rail south of Perris, providing weekend service on the 91/PVL, and establishing a dedicated set of tracks to avoid conflicts with freight service. Residents further noted the need for on -time buses, more accessible bus service for students, and more incentives to take public transportation. Further, residents recommended repairing potholes, coordinating traffic signals, installing traffic light cameras, completing the Santa Ana River Trail, extending Van Buren Boulevard to Harley Knox Road, reopening Pigeon Pass Road, adding traffic signals at San Timoteo Canyon Road, and reopening the connector at Watkins Drive and Poarch Road. 4. Northwestern Riverside County —121 Comments Received: Residents expressed a variety of concerns and suggestions, including halting construction of new homes, attracting Agenda Item 9C 53 more high -paying jobs to the area, and offering incentives for telecommuting, four -day work weeks, and flexible work schedules. Others cited the need to complete the Santa Ana River Trail, expand rail and bus options to Orange County, establish mandatory busing to schools to reduce parent drop-offs and pick-ups, create a light rail/street car/feeder bus system to enhance Metrolink ridership, and develop a Corona trolley. A number of residents suggested removing the 91 Express Lanes and voiced concerns about the lack of access from mid -city Corona, traffic delays at the 91 Express Lanes entrances, carpool lane policies, and various express lanes design features. Along the 1-15 corridor, commuters recommended additional widening within the median, extending express lanes past Lake Elsinore, improving the El Cerrito interchange, and widening Temescal Canyon Road. A number of comments noted the need to create an alternate route or frontage road along SR-91 to connect with Gypsum Canyon Road, limit truck travel times, and repair potholes. Others noted the need for improvements to the 71/91 interchange and 15/91 interchange, new lanes on westbound and eastbound SR-91, and better access to SR-241 from SR-91. 5. Southwestern Riverside County — 263 Comments Received: A significant number of residents voiced the need for improvements to 1-15 in the Temecula area, with most of the comments following the "1-15 Traffic Crisis" video produced by the city of Temecula. Motorists noted lengthy traffic delays to and from San Diego County and expressed quality of life concerns. Suggested solutions included rebuilding the 15/215 interchange, widening 1-15 (express lanes, carpool lanes, general-purpose lanes, bypass lanes, reversible lanes), making various design changes to interchanges, and building an interchange at French Valley Parkway. Others recommended expanding Metrolink or providing a light rail service in southwestern Riverside County and connecting with rail service in San Diego County. Some noted the need to bring more high -paying jobs to Riverside County, stop new home construction, limit travel times of trucks, expand bus service operations, create a transit hub in the "triangle area," and build better bike paths. 6. Riverside —198 Comments Received: A number of residents noted the need to improve traffic congestion on the SR-91 corridor by removing express lanes, changing express lanes to carpool lanes, removing carpool lanes, installing reversible lanes, rebuilding the 15/91 interchange, building bridges over the Santa Ana River, and creating another east - west route between Riverside County and Orange County. Some suggested double - decking freeways, improving the merge from SR-241 to eastbound SR-91, fixing the bottleneck and improving pavement at the 60/215 interchange, and limiting truck travel times. Others commented on rail and transit services, including suggestions to eliminate Metrolink altogether, expand train service hours, integrate transit systems, create a light rail or trolley system, offer more late -night service, make service adjustments to RTA's CommuterLink Route 200, reduce fares, add a Metrolink station at UC Riverside, improve on -time performance of public transit, and develop a high-speed rail system. Residents also asked for completion of the Santa Ana River Trail, more bike lanes, coordinated traffic Agenda Item 9C 54 signals, sidewalk repairs, removal of scooters left on sidewalks, and repaving of various roads. 7. San Gorgonio Pass —31 Comments Received: Multiple residents voiced the need for a rail system via Amtrak or Metrolink. Others requested bus service improvements, such as dedicated bus lanes, more transit options to and from Riverside, better on -time performance, more stops in residential, medical and commercial areas, and privatizing rail and buses to remove government influence. Residents further noted growing traffic congestion on 1-10 and the need for new lanes and improvements to multiple interchanges from Calimesa to Cabazon, including Pennsylvania Avenue, Potrero Road, Oak Valley Parkway, Highland Springs, Singleton Avenue, Calimesa Boulevard, and County Line Road. Several people suggested upgrades to SR-79 between Beaumont and the Hemet -San Jacinto area, placing traffic signals on San Timoteo Canyon Road, and coordinating traffic signals. The Commission received seven additional comments that staff could not identify by geography. Those comments covered a variety of topics, including creating efficient public transit, bringing more jobs to Riverside County to equal the volume of housing, completing the Santa Ana River Trail, and encouraging ridesharing. Conclusion Commission staff is pleased with the volume and variety of feedback received, as well as the overall constructive nature of the comments. The public understands where transportation investment is needed and is willing to recommend potential solutions. Staff considers the #RebootMyCommute program to be a success, due not only to this feedback, but also because the program demonstrated that the Commission is listening to residents, which in turn improves rapport with the public. The chart below shows the Commission's public sentiment profile via social media during the 90-day program; the program helped boost public perceptions of the Commission. Agenda Item 9C 55 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 3/1 -0.5 Social Media Public Sentiment March 1 -June 7, 2019 3/15 3/29 V 4/12 4/26 5/10 Reboot Engagement ❑ Other Engagement 5/24 6/7 The Commission will use this information to help guide the next steps for future funding initiatives. Commissioners are encouraged to share local issues with their staff and constituents. Commission staff also will provide feedback to Metrolink, bus transit operators, and local jurisdictions, based on the comments received from residents. Appendix D includes a listing all of the comments received, sorted by geographical area. Appendices Appendix A: Graphic Display, Program Metrics Appendix B: Comment Origins by Zip Code, Western Riverside County Appendix C: Comment Origins by Zip Code, Eastern Riverside County Appendix D: Listing of all comments received Agenda Item 9C 56 APPENDIX A ��THEF1rfUA E ILI #RebootMyCommute Metrics Community Outreach Tele rvn Halls 7,539 5 Participants I Comments Voice Messages Community Booths G Events 10 Media Star ies 3,529 Event Attendance Publications 461,702 Print Ad Circulation Television 1 Video Add Airs 559 Pile Engaged 156,250 Digital Ad Circulation ,061 119,55 473 Number of dumber of Form Sessions Unique Users Submissions Email 1,315 Subscrbers Text Subscribers Print Piece 5,5 Delivered Online Sentiment 4 3.5 a 2.5 z 1,5 1 0.5 0 -0.s March -June 2019 ROTC Overall Tr ndVal livbr€h 1 -June 7, 2019 - Organic d4C%gitalAdCantent ■ Organic Content 3/6 (+1 #Re boot MyCommute campaign launches. 3/301+) Round 2 ends. Ad data is weed to optimize targetirg and messaging. 5121;+) 11RebootMyCanmutedigital advertising ramps dawn. Social Media Ads Facebook Video Views noon] 596,316 licks 31,736 Direct Engagemrnte 2,098 Impressions 3,927,342 Reach 630,409 Twitter Video Views mg.TLi 7.613 Clicks 1,989 Direct Engagements. 54 Im pressi qns 3643,225 Instag ram Video Yiewr . rietr l 30,820 Clicks 4,44$ Direct Ergalemrnts 1,830 Imprasslons 2,898,023 Rah 629,129 YouTube Video View& limo%) 1303.974 Clicks 13,584 I mp resslont, 3.495,r.97 Hgerrua ILerrr 7l. APPENDIX B Eastvale -L Norco Eorona. Jurupa Riverside Moreno Valley Mead Valley Lake Elsinore Perris ,. Menifee Wildoma Temecula Calimesa San Jacinto Radec Aguanga Mountain Center Anza #RebootMyCommute Comment Engagement Western Riverside County Number of Comments 72+ 36 Q Agenda Item 9C APPENDIX C Desert Hot Springs Sky Valley Cathedral City Palm Desert Pinyon Pines La 4uinta 11. Indio Hills rl'ndio =i•I.1111 #RebootMyCommute Comment Engagement Eastern Riverside County Coachella Chiriaoo Summit Number of Comments 72+ 36 0 Agenda Item 9C Attachment: Appendix D — All Comments Sorted by Geographical Area (Posted on the Commission Website) Agenda Item 9C APPENDIX D ZIP City 92234 Cathedral City Comments - Coachella Valley Understand and work with you on neighborhood & public transit. I am a retired transit official from Portland, Oregon. I was the Director of Operations for bus and rail. Perhaps I can offer help and insight on any issues you may have from and ADA perspective. 92234 Cathedral City We still have no real public transit to get people to get people. Money goes to the South side --what about the north side? 92234 Cathedral City VA doesn't provide sufficient transportation to caller's doctor. What options does he have for transportation to doctor for veterans? 92234 Cathedral City Oh good! Another moneypit. 92236 Coachella Transit riders in Coachella need a bench, shade, and lighting. There are new routes but no shade and no seats. The City should have a main stop with misters. Transit connectivity has gotten better. 92240 Desert Hot Springs make palm springs repair conditions that aggravate flooding on gene autry east of the 10 fwy and indian cyn north and south into desert hot springs when there is disastrous flooding due to rain overrun onto passage ways. 92241 Desert Hot Springs Why don't we have commuter rail traffic to all points west --we have a rail line why don't we use it? 92241 Desert Hot Springs A portion of Thousand Palms Canyon Rd near the Coachella Valley Preserve has been widen that includes bike lanes and a new layer of asphalt. This should be the standard for this entire short but important North/South route. It's heavily traveled and fed on the north by Dillon Rd and on the south by Ramon/ Washington Street. I'm hoping that the Thousand Palm Canyon Road could be improved to the level that stretches a mile or so before and after the entrance to the Preserve. This would drastically improve safety for bikes traffic, pedestrians and cars. Any chance? 92241 Desert Hot Springs worst road is VARNER Road at the end of Mountain View and Date Palm in Coachella Valley - declined email address 92240 Desert Hot Springs CAN SHE CALL THIS # TO FIND OUT ROAD CLOSURES? 92203 Indio Find an easier way to get to Cal State San Bernardino and UCR. 92201 Indio How about having a beach train during the summer starting in Indio? Page 1 92203 Indio I am in support of rail/train transportation from Indio to Los Angeles, with a possible stop in the Long Beach area. I remember as a child riding the train from Indio to Yuma, AZ and when I moved to Indio two years ago, I was sadden to see there were no more passenger trains leaving from Indio going toward AZ or Los Angeles. I believe many residents of the Coachella Valley would use the train for areas outside of the valley. 92201 Indio I have been reading about a passenger train coming to our valley for many years now. Economically, environmentally, and personally this needs to happen. Please don't drop the ball on this, get it done. Thank You! 92201 I Indio r 92203 Indio Van Buren and 48th road is a mess. Divet in the road. Put a light at 49th and Van Buren but four-way stop at 48th. Indio or Coachella? Just before Dylan. wondering if there will be more bus transportation in Indio --no Sun Line transportation here but there should be. 1 92201 Indio Suggestion: Worked for Greyhound for a long time. Says many people were coming to Indio/Palm Springs via Greyhound bus. Suggests increased transit to this area. Says they would fill a bus every hour or t 92201 Indio Suggestion: Amtrak platform in Indio or Palm Desert. Concerned that a platform in Indio would be congested, in Palm Desert concerns about land use. 92203 Indio On highways there are not four-way stops. On state highways four-way stops should be allowed, especially in agricultural areas. Saw a fatal accident over the weekend in Blythe. 92201 Indio heavy traffic on Jackson and Avenue 50--will there be new signals? 92201 Indio Dillon Road between Landfill Rd and Berdoo Canyon Rd has numerous large potholes causing traffic issues. 92201 Indio Bicycle shops in Riverside are for middle class people because the prices are too high and poor people just don't bother going to a bicycle shop. If you provide a place where the poor can get their bicycles repaired and maintain then they would be more people riding their bicycles. Page 2 N/A Indio I am one of thousands of seniors that are retired and living in Indio and other areas of the Coachella Valley. Our children and grandchildren live in and around LA. We miss public transportation that we can rely upon to visit our families as well as attend the various cultural, theater and myriad of events in LA. Now, we have to drive 2-3 hours from the desert to LA. I live alone, and I do not feel comfortable driving all that way alone. I would love to participate in helping to get a train or reliable bus routes into LA. I want to be able to attend events and visit my children without the worry of having to stay overnight. My children do not have another bedroom for me and it is not comfortable for me on the couch. I would love to attend the theater and go back home. There are so many reasons to have public transportation into LA. Please let me know if you need me to help with this project. 92201 Indio the erection of a platform in Indio would be big boom to Train travel. A stop down ij Indio so much more accessible. Train travel outside commute in L.A., S.F. is near non existent out West. Do be able to go by Train further West that getting on freeway...YES!! 92203 Indio Improve public transportation for ALL citizens! 92201 Indio What's a good idea just do it 92203 Indio Let's build one like the train to nowhere! Spend billions and complete a tenth of it! 92201 Indio Spend the money on our roads not this crap 92203 Indio How about not letting drunk and crazy people on the sun bus. You have no idea how many times they had to stop the bus because someone peed or started a fight. 92253 I La Quinta L Commuter train from Coachella Valley to Riverside or San Bernardino N/A La Quinta Avenue 52 between Jefferson and Washington in La Quinta. Too many patches, pipe lays, etc. Do they have plans to repave the road completely? 92247 La Quinta I would like to see rail travel in and out of the Coachella. 92253 I La Quinta That would be Ubers, SunBus and Greyhound, or buy a scooter. 92253 La Quinta Oh no, Riverside County getting into this scam. No way, we will see perpetual property tax increases and assessments for another boondoggle. Build a CV link and don't let Indian Wells & Rancho Mirage skip out 192253 I La Quinta because their cities are dangerous for pedestrians. actual bike lanes Page 3 92211 Palm Desert 92260 I Palm Desert If you can waste millions of dollars on the "Benoit Booddoggle" you certainly do not need an additional tax. Just downgrade the CVLink by removing the street legal golf carts from the project, and let it be a simple bike path. Measure A funds were sold to the public as road building and repair funds, not a recreational project. A project that has consistently lied to the public. Palm Desert has said the CVLink will be on current city bike paths; none of these bike paths can/will support the width that would be required for for and aft lanes for bike, two directional lanes for pedestrians, and street legal golf cart lanes. Stop trying to scalp the voters so some unknown special interest can get rich We need more rail going to Riverside and Los Angeles. We already have the rail ROW. Let's put some passenger trains on those lines. 92260 Palm Desert Holiday traffic makes it impossible to get around. The I-10 gets backed up a lot during the holidays. We have a great public transit system, but it pollutes our air. We need 92260 Palm Desert more CNG buses. 92260 Palm Desert 1 1 Comuter Trains need dedicated rail. Trains need to stop at airports. 15s gong from 7 lanes at 91 to 3 lanes at el cerrito is to short of a distance for the lane reduction. Road Lanes and design under 15 at onterio and el cerrito not sufficient. 92260 Palm Desert It would be nice to have a light rail system to connect different parts of the region. A train to LA would also be great! 92260 Palm Desert My son needs a better option to get from the desert to LA. We need rail service here. 92260 Palm Desert Why does it take a long time for projects to move forward and be completed. We need to cut down the amount of time it takes for projects to be approved and completed! 92260 Palm Desert The region needs more public transportation that is seemless to use. One pass to access several modes would be great. 92260 Palm Desert 92260 Palm Desert The area needs more street lights for pedestrians. As i drive my car, it doesn't appear it's friendly to other modes of transportation. We need more trains to get around in the region. J 92260 Palm Desert We need light rail in the desert. Economically disadvantaged people have a hard time getting to medical appoints. It can take them up to 3 hours to travel on local buses. _92260 Palm Desert Traffic on the 10 is getting worse. 4 hours to LA from here is not good 92260 Palm Desert I am very resourceful and i use my smartphone to get around. Page 4 92260 Palm Desert Whatever you build must be able to support itself. We cannot have tax money go to waste. We need more HOV lanes for electric modes. More environmentally 92260 Palm Desert focused transportation options. 92260 Palm Desert 92260 I Palm Desert We need more ADA signs for pedestrians. Too many people drive fast and they don't look for people who are disabled. The Truck Lanes project appears to be interesting 92260 ' Palm Desert L— 1 You guys are doing a great job in California. The I-10 is getting more congested though 92211 Palm Desert STATE HAS DONE NOTHING TO WIDEN FWY, HWY 111 IS NICE BUT NARROW, 110 IS TOO NARROW, NEEDS MORE LANE, FROM MONTEREY TO INDO, MORE LANES. Frm Follow up --what is the environmental study looking for with regard to the Desert high speed rail project? 92211 Palm Desert Lives Sun City - Senior - Difficult to drive into the Valley to see families 92260 Palm Desert 92260 Palm Desert When do they paint the lines down the middle of the streets? The lines are hard to see right now would it be possible to get a platform in palm desert? Excited for the train. 92211 Palm Desert When is Palm Desert getting a train to LA? I like to be able to get to Los Angeles within less than 2 hours, by rail 92260 Palm Desert before I die. 1 A train, bus, ANYTHING from Coachella Valley to LA! Even LAX??? Every 92211 Palm Desert day???? PLEEAAASE!!!! After reading these comments, I still want a bus to LA or LAX!!! A bus to 92211 Palm Desert LAVIN So easy! Why not?!? Once again, a daily bus from Palm Springs (Desert?) to LA or LAX or both? 92211 Palm Desert What's so hard? A bus from Palm Spring to LA /LAX every day! What could be simpler? 92211 Palm Desert What could be easier? Comments, please? 92260 Palm Desert Use the Whitewater Channel as a bus route. 92260 Palm Desert A light rail system from Palm Springs to Coachella? Page 5 Please consider improving the bike lanes and sidewalks leading to the ONLY operational section of the CV link! It's unfortunate that there's a safe beautiful path for my children to ride their bikes and scooters, 92262 Palm Springs however, I don't have a safe method to ride there with them (EITHER END!!) nor a place to park my car if 1 somehow figure out how to shuttle all of our recreational vehicles over there! What a tease! Please consider allocating funds to get this costly project safely accessible for families!! 92264 Palm Springs Thanks to PS, CA city council member Lisa Middleton for the ad on YouTube. She got my attention and now I will get you newsletter :) F 92264 Palm Springs I would consider making serious changes to the 1-10 corridor at the Cabazon/Morongo casino corridor. The bottleneck that is created along this section during peak times has become worse and worse. 92262 Palm Springs Hello, I know about the commuter link between the Coachella Valley and Riverside. But there are many stops, and the drive time is a lot longer than by car. I am in favor tax dollars spent on expanded rail service to the Coachella Valley, like Metrolink or similar. I know that travel to LA via Amtrak is being explored, but think that commuter options to Riverside and San Bernardino would alleviate traffic on the 60 and I-10 as well. 92264 Palm Springs why is palm springs city council spending money on bike lanes that are not being used? even during the tour to palm springs the lanes were not used Why we cannot have more frequent local service through Amtrak? Needs 92264 Palm Springs to be some sort of commuter access to LA. 92262 Palm Springs We would find it very helpful to be able to take rail from Palm Springs to Los Angeles. 92262 Palm Springs Put a dedicated express bus lane just south of the 60 in Moreno Valley from the Badlands to UCR and businesses up Iowa in Riverside to Hunter Park metro station to lessen the crush through the 60/215 interchange. Provide parking at the east end. Alternatively, end the express bus at the Perris line stop in Moreno Valley. 1) An Amtrak Link to the city of Los Angeles from Palm Springs. This would alleviate some of the traffic in the area. 2) A reduction of the speed limit on Hwy. 111 as it winds through Palm Springs. We have had several 92262 Palm Springs accidents (people killed) due to the speed the vehicles are traveling. Perhaps monitoring speeds cars are traveling on the highway through the city and ask PS Police to ticket those using excessive speed through the city. Thank you Page 6 92264 Palm Springs I work for ENTRAVISION Corp. I would like to request a meeting with your team to help with your advertising campaign. Would you please forward this email to your marketing department? I greatly appreciate it. T 92262 Palm Springs L The Vista Chino portion of Hwy 111 is a HUGE problem during morning and evening commutes. At several intersections it is life -threatening to attempt to enter the roadway from the adjacent Neighborhoods. 92262 Palm Springs PALM SPRINGS 200 BLOCK OF ORCHID TREE LANE/ HAS A SPLIT FROM ONE END OF THE BLOCK TO THE OTHER, 1 INCH WIDE. AND COMING FROM HIS DRIVEWAY ALSO . 92262 Palm Springs The residents of the Baristo neighborhood and others desperately need at crosswalk at the intersection of E Arenas Rd and S Calle El Segundo in Palm Springs. Pedestrians traveling between two large residential developments and a church to the east of El Segundo and the downtown area must brave traffic speeding north and south on El Segundo, unimpeded by stop signs or traffic lights anywhere between E Taquitz Cyn Way and E Ramon Rd. There have been pedestrians hurt at this intersection before and it is simply a matter of time before someone is killed. Poor lighting at the intersection makes matters even worse at night, when many diners and bar patrons caravel from their parked cars on E Arenas across El Segundo toward downtown. Presently, the only alternative is to walk approximately 1/8th of a mile north to Taquitz in order to cross El Segundo. Please help before someone is hurt or killed. 92264 Palm Springs Have scheduled express bus service between Palm Springs and downtown Riverside seven days a week to connect to Metrolink trains to /from LA Union Station. Thank you for the update, however - this is nowhere near what we need! "...rail platform in Indio to serve special event trains to the Coachella Music and Arts Festival and Stagecoach Music Festival" -- is only a "drop in the N/A Palm Springs bucket". What we need is frequently, daily service to/from Palm Springs. Trains need to run between Los Angeles and Palm Springs daily, not just to Indio. Palm Springs is one of the top California destinations, and needs reliable passenger train service. Thank you. 92264 Palm Springs I would like to commute from Palm Springs to LA via bus or (preferably) train service. The Flixbus service is good - cheap and fast, but the scheduled PS -LA routes aren't frequent enough. Ideally there would be a commuter train from PS to Union Station, LA with several options for travel times. [N/A tPalm Springs Regular commuter trains from Palm Springs to LA Union Station. L9_2262 1Palm Springs Have the bus run all day and all night Page 7 92262 92262 N/A 92270 92270 92276 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Palm Springs Palm Springs Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Rancho Mirage Thousand Palms N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Have sunline operate 24 hours some residents of the Coachella valley work crazy hours Please consider improving the bike lanes and sidewalks leading to the ONLY operational section of the CV link! It's unfortunate that there's a safe beautiful path for my children to ride their bikes and scooters, however, I don't have a safe method to ride there with them (EITHER END!!) nor a place to park my car if I somehow figure out how to shuttle all of our recreational vehicles over there! What a tease! Please consider allocating funds to get this costly project safely accessible for families!! #rebootmycommute We need a monorail from the city of Palm Springs to the city of Coachella. That would take so many cars off the road. #RebootMyCommute I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LOT MORE CHARGING STATIONS FOR ELECTRIC CARS, PLEASE, AND THANK YOU Are you thinking about getting a commuter train to Los Angeles? 1. Enforce truck lane on 60. Far too many trucks ignore the sign, pass a slower vehicle,and slowdown the left lane. 2.Do what the San Francisco Bay Area did - engage ALL transportation companies in solutions and make travel throughout absolutely seamless. No need for different passes - just one pass covers all. In regards to public transit to LA, what are other options do we have. Can we use buses like they do on the east coast? Or vans. This is conditioning and social engineering of the residents of Riverside County for Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is a global plan to yield your life off of ownership of private vehicles and herd you onto their controlled public transit system. They want total control over your life. Agenda 21 calls for the end of meat eating, air conditioning, appliances, single family homes, and private cars. Agenda 21 is in every municipal building department and now they're coming for your freedom of movement. RCTC wants you confined to a small city sized zone reliant on public transportation that they track, monitor, and operate. Look up Agenda 21/agenda 2030, it's all in there. Daily train operation from Indio to LA!!! RCTC has been studying such a line for 26 years! Hurry up already! A train from Coachella valley to Los Angeles, San Diego, Las Vegas Nothing from SunLine Transit Zero Emissions Buses77777 CV Link! Page 8 N/A N/A I love the CV Li nk! V J N/A N/A Last year I was wheel chair bound for 10 months. Could not walk or drive a car. A social worker from my insurance company was instrumental in getting me a Sun Bus pass. The bus comes to my driveway. But how am I going to get from my house to the end of the drive way. A round trip to the library 3 miles from my home involved 4 hours. The bus does not work for same day Dr. Appt s. The rules and regulations for safety are tightly regulated, the wheel chair has to be strapped down, blah, blah. Needs lots of improvements. N/A N/A Enclosed stations i waited 2 hours in freezing cold waiting at metrolink dtstion riverside N/A I N/A Look if they can do it for Palmdale and Lancaster why not Coachella Valley. I for one would enjoy having this ability. N/A N/A Theve been working on extending the metro link out here for more than a decade. I used to love taking the train all over the greater LA area and have wished I could hop on a train to LA with a movie on my phone over driving in traffic. If only there we N/A N/A I We need train service here in the Coachella Valley N/A N/A This valley can't even build a bike path N/A N/A Ma'am have you given any thought at all to who really commutes by train??? A BIKE path makes more sense N/A N/A Perhaps tax incentives for driving services to use wheelchair accessible vehicles, or even a deduction for purchasing one of the all access vans or otherwise incentives for using those type of vehicles? #rebootmycommute N/A N/A Get rid of the meth heads and homeless at the bus stops N/A N/A Create a slow lane for seasonal visitors and sightseers. N/A N/A FINISH THE CV LINK! N/A N/A Fix Ramon Road nothing has been done in years.More new business same old roads.When there is an accident between El Cielo and Gene Autry dr. Camino Parocela takes all that traffic till the mess is cleaned up.And people still drive like they are on Ramon rd. N/A N/A train to LA N/A N/A Have all the bus stops covered so to keep as cool as possible. Keep them clean and marked easily for routes. Page 9 N/A I N/A What about a more efficient commute of some kind whether bus or train added from Coachella Valley to certain Pockets throughout Riverside CN/A _ N/A Sync the traffic lights 0 , enough infighting among the city council. N/A N/A Better bus system how is it possible that from la quinta cove to ramona and gene autry a total of 16 miles takes 3 hours 3 bus transfers on the bus it's ridiculous the whole bus system out here sucks N/A N/A The bus system is not very progressive. I just moved here from Texas. DFW has a user friendly app that allows you to purchase tickets via your phone and have a credit system. The app also will give a bus route similar to using GPS for your car. Finally it not only tells you where your bus/train is in real time but also notifies you when busses are having issues or running behind. I know its alot for a smaller older community. But perhaps you could take note of some of those possibilities. I would likely commute this way if the bus systems were just slightly better. N/A N/A Please add more stage 2 chademo electric car charging stations! Specifically one in desert hot springs. Desert hot springs is one of the only city halls that doesn't have one and California is one of the leaders in electric car sales and renewable energy N/A N/A Get rid of pretty medians that force people to make U turns. Promote Lyft and Uber services. N/A N/A I saw this in Europe and I'm not sure if the valley has this but there are scooter racks around where people are walking except it's filled with scooters. The person just puts in maybe a few quarters or dollars (I don't know cause I didn't use them) then they can use that scooter and they can return it to another scooter rack (doesn't have to be the same scooter rack) maybe this is a good idea N/A N/A The 1-10 Monroe bridge and others need to be expanded adding more lanes to free up traffic. N/A N/A Please get MetroLink train extension from San Bernadino to Palm Springs. This is a no brainer. This should exist. N/A N/A 100% renewable energy by 2022. No exceptions. Set the example for the rest of transportation around California. More insensitive for taking the bus or moving as a community, and design the valley with either large shaded areas, or for the love of God trees. Page 10 ZIP City Comments - Hemet/San Jacinto 92536 Aguanga Building more lanes will work for maybe 5 years. Bring us train service to SanDiego! 92539 Anza I Offer bus service to the Anza area. 92539 Anza I AM CALLING TO SPEAK TO SOMEONE AT EXTENTION 55222 REGARDING HIGHWAY 371 TRAFFIC. THERE WAS A BIG MEETING ABOUT THE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS UP HERE WHERE I LIVE. I WANT TO TALK TO YOU AND GIVE YOU MY INPUT, SINCE I CANT BE AT THE MEETING AT THE TOWN HALL. GIVE ME A CALL, I HAVE SOME COMMENTS I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE TO YOU . 92583 Gilman Hot Springs PLEASE DO NOT ADD ANOTHER NEW TAX FOR TRANSPORTATION, THERE ARE ALREADY 2 IN PLACE, 1 TO EXPIRE 2039 AND THE OTHER NEW CAR TAX WHICH WAS JUST IMPLEMENTED DUE TO EXPIRE IN 2025...STATE TRANSPORTAION SHOULD BE USING THESE TAX FUNDS FOR ALL TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS AS INTENDED Gilman Hot 92583 Springs We have plenty of dedicated road space IF we double -deck it! I can't believe that would be an insurmountable engineering problem. Obviously, would have to be de -facto express lanes; doubt could put on/off ramps except at certain spots, but we have restricted access now, express lanes, etc. We have big fly-overs in a number of places where freeways cross, and they could be adapted! 92583 Gilman Hot Springs I'd like for the Metrolink to expand into the Hemet/San Jacinto area or have the Perris line run on weekends too. Gilman Hot 92583 Springs I found out about this website from a YouTube ad and wanted to communicate my concerns. I live off of State St just outside the city of San Jacinto. The condition of the road has been deteriorating for some time now and all it just gets potholes patched which has left the road surface bumpy and uneven. Semi trucks travel on this section of road and everytime it rains, chunks of asphalt become dislodged from the road bed and vehicle damaging potholes appear. I feel like this section of road has been ignored by the county since the road is in beautiful shape further north where the road goes by the Scientology compound. I would appreciate it if will you please resurface this section of road. 92543 Hemet Metrolink connecting Hemet/San Jacinto area to Perris. Metrolink to/from Hemet San Jacinto to Palm Springs. Increase frequency of bus routes in Hemet/San Jacinto Moreno Valley areas. More NON STOP or minimal stop commuter buses to and from Hemet San Jacinto. Freeway expansions into Hemet. More lanes on Ramona Expressway and Gilman Springs.' 92543 Hemet How about some real freeway access to Hemet and San Jacinto ?? Page 11 92544 92544 92544 92544 Hemet Hemet Hemet Hemet 92544 Hemet 92544 92544 92544 92544 92544 Hemet Hemet Hemet Hemet Hemet Ride the train if their was a station within 5 minutes of Hemet. Please make the road from Temecula to Palm Springs 4 lanes!!! Save lives!!! At least put those concrete barriers in temporarily. Use eminent domain and environmental impact exclusions. This is a huge safety issue! Attached are some screenshots from recent Facebook posts. Please look at the comments on Face Book and Instagram and reply. Other wise this is just another waste of time and taxpayers money. You can't fix what you can't acknowledge. Is there a way to become a part of the RCTC? I would like to do this as a volunteer. WOULD LIKE TO FIND OUT WHEN ROUNDABOUTS WILL BE DONE IN THE WINE COUNTRY - TEMECULA AREA. WE NEED TO STOP PUTTING IN STOP LIGHTS AND USE RAOUNDABOUTS INSTEAD. Chuck, Juan, I have 3 questions regarding traffic projects in Riverside County. Is there any updates and progress on these projects. Both Line 1&2 have financially impacted by livelihood immensely. So wondering what is happening. 1. Realignment of Hwy 79 2. Center City Parkway going from Sanderson Ave in San Jacinto to 15 freeway in Corona 3. I have heard rumors of the Metrolink system expanding to Beaumont and then continuing into the desert area. Is this accurate. Thank you. notices that street repaving has been done in affluent but not in non - affluent areas --some streets are better maintained than others? Comment on number of stop lights and protected left turns on surface streets. Why is the county putting in so many stop lights and protected left turn on surface roads? Will Metrolink be expanding to Beaumont, Palm Springs, and all the way to Arizona? Can you time traffic lights on major routes so that cars get a green wave if they're going the speed limit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_wave)? I take Domenigoni Parkway to MSJC and normally I hit more than half of the lights when they're red. Once I decided to time how long I spend idling with a stopwatch and found out that I spent a quarter of my commute that day idling at red lights. It seems like the traffic lights are set to make everyone on major routes wait for a few cars to turn on the road from side streets. It would be a lot better for fuel consumption and vehicle emissions to make a few cars wait for a lot of cars to pass through the intersection before they're allowed to go. Page 12 92544 Hemet No Thanks to high Speed Trains or under ground tunnels... Enough!! Here's a idea.., Drive 92544 THemet Nope, no new taxes... why would anyone want to let then take more when they cant manage what they currently get... 92544 Hemet No thank you!!! Hemet has no jobs cause the city gets money to take on the homeless and X cons!! No thank you to that either. Our valley has gone to shit.. Our Major is obsolete!!!! Who is it?? Bonnie Wright?? I hear people take turns..!! What does that tell you?! Never have I seen a Major of Hemet involved with the people..!! Small town.. for a obsoleteMajor. Honestly recently I had enough of dumping of homeless and x cons.. Talked with City "they get paroled here!!! Ruining our Valley!!! City Council.. Ha 92544 Hemet Fix the local roads first. They're horrible 92544 Hemet Major throufares like Domenigoni, Hwy 74 and 79 need to have signals aligned for traffic flow, not just more signals. New housing developments need to exit on to existing roads with signals, not just more signals. 92544 Hemet Remove homeless from around bus stops areas, where they camp out, sleep on the benches, customer's walk a distance to get there only to have to stand because there is no place to sit, some ask for money or threaten you,and younger one's gang up on you for your belongings,the list is long,we need safety again... 92544 Hemet Maybe don't use the transit system to bring in homeless drug addicts? 92544 Shut down Gilman springs till freeway is built from that exit on the 60 all Hemet the way to Ramona Express way and Sanderson Ave. 92545 Hemet Rail system from Temecula, Escondido to San Diego. Complete the Ethanac Rd. extension which connects Highway 74 in 92545 Hemet Homeland to Highway 74 in Lake Elsinore. Then add at least one lane in each direction to the road that connects to the Ortega Highway! 92545 Hemet The I-215 from Perris thru Moreno Valley needs more lanes. The northbound and southbound lanes are almost always jammed. I don't see any future projects planned on this freeway, but the cities keep approving more development that will create more traffic. The freeway needs to be expanded or development needs to slow down Thank you Page 13 92545 Hemet 1. Fix the horrendous traffic on Hwy 60 and Hwy 215 between Mission Blvd. and Cactus Avenue. Afternoon commutes are stop and go along the whole route going west to east. Weekend backups occur at t he 60/215 interchange in both directions but particularly in the west to east direction. Morning commutes between Eastridge/Eucalyptus and Market Street are stop and go as well. Additional lanes should be added along the whole route. 2. The addition of millions of square feet of warehouse space all along the north/south Hwy 215 between Nuevo Road and Cactus Avenue are having a detrimental impact to traffic. Additional lanes in both directions should be added. 3. The Mid -County Expressway should be expedited. This will provide safer alternatives to traffic to and from the San Jacinto Valley in addition to alleviating traffic on Hwy 74 to and from Hwy 215. 4. The realignment of Hwy 79 from Gilman Springs to Domenigoni Pkwy should be expedited. The traffic in both directions with the existing paths of travel are horrendous. The addition of thousands of houses along Domenigoni and Winchester Road, going towards Menifee will create significant traffic. 5. Offer more alternatives to the hours for rail travel to and from the Perris rail station to and from the Downtown Riverside rail station. The current hours are too limiting. 6. I would support an increase to the transportation tax in the range of .5 cents to 1.0 cents in order to prioritize and expedite much needed traffic improvements to the inland region. 92545 Hemet 1-15 N and I-15 S Express Carpool lanes from French Valley to Escondido. Also 1-215 N and 1-215 S express carpool lanes at Newport Ave to Winchester. There are a lot of North Riverside projects but the south is being left out. We deserve equal attention. 92545 F Hemet T How about late night runs? 92545 Hemet Ask Code violations to read their emails or answer the messages left on there voice mail.... If my neighbors huge dead tree ( 3 years) catches on fire, MY house & the mobile homes in sierra Dawn are all going to go up !mil 730 Augusta street HEMET ca ! traffic signals on Ramona expressway as well as Gilman springs road ull1111111 NO PASSING mu 92545 NUMBER ONE MOST IMPORTANT! Get Ca!trans to give up their ill- conceived, illogical and DANGEROUS plan for a raised median on Florida! Residents don't want it, businesses don't want it, city council doesn't want it and first responders hate the idea because it will cause huge delays in Hemet response times. If they really want to build a median, do it on Gilman Springs road where there are way too many head-on fatalities caused by illegal passing. If not a median, then either widen it or install some kind of barrier to prevent passing on hills and curves. Serious enforcement wouldn't hurt, either. Page 14 92545 Hemet Work in tadem with Caltrans and Orange County in establishing 74 East from Lake Elsinore to San Juan Capistrano as a toll road. !92549 Idyllwild Thank you for Commissioner for coming to Idyllwild. 92549 Idyllwild 92549 Idyllwild Caller has disabilities and was snowed in. Why did Caltrans not plow her road in Idyllwild? She was recently trapped in her home. What agency should she call to get relief? Put left turn arrows on all stop lights on Florida. J 92582 Hemet/San Jacinto L92582 92582 I would like to see Gilman Springs Road a safer road to travel by widening both sides with 4 lanes. It is a heavily used road and impacts many people's daily commute. Hemet/San Get rid of HOV lanes. Get rid toll lanes. Widen gilman springs road at least to 2 lanes each direction. Add lanes to every fwy. Build for the future Jacinto population not the past. Hemet/San Jacinto We need better inspectors for road repairs the work is horrible and they pass it who is getting paid beside the contractors. You know that answer Hemet & San Jacinto official are horrible I won't even say anything about the mayors 92583 Hemet/San It is about time that our City leaders drive around town like San Jacinto Jacinto and look the overgrown trees and junk on our streets. 92580 I N/A More stop more light N/A N/A Create a "busway" at least in high traffic areas. A road just for the buses to be on. N/A N/A Yes its about time N/A N/A Yes bring the Trains back to Hemet San Jacinto valley! N/A N/A Bring back the 212 Comuterlink bus N/A N/A How about fix the roads N/A N/A Drill a tunnel under Ortega highway N/A N/A Add commute vehicles to fire stations where people could call a special number for transport. N/A N/A So hard to say. People travel to OC, Palm Desert areas, Riverside, San Diego, yet getting to a hub locally no where to start. N/A N/A Put homeless to work in public utilities Page 15 N/A N/A Some of the roads have been fixed but the company's did a bad job so next time get a good company they will stand up for there work N/A Make people slow down and stop people from running the traffic signals at N/A high speed. Not safe out there as so many run the lights. Most homeless aren't going to work. N/A N/A First replace the public don't workers with real public workers. We all know that they spend more time and money taking about doing than doing. Clean up the streets. I have seen trees growing out of the gutters and drainage basins. They patch a hole and can't see or don't care about the one next to it. Why is it that the road in front of The Scientology compound is almost perfect, compared to the same road before and after it that looks like the craters on the moon. What is the point of landscaping the middle of the road if you can't drive on it safely. We pay for street sweepers that just move the debris around. Hard to sweep at the speed they drive. Citizens that use public transportation should not need to worry their safety at a bus stop as others use them as a bed,toilet and other things I will not mention. Maybe I just old school I grew up understanding that you only crossed the street at a crosswalk unlike those that cross on Florida in Hemet. Also what is the purpose of the installation of new and replacing ADA ramps that go to nothing just dirt? It's almost impossible for someone in a wheelchair to maneuver in dirt and rocks. If you need someone to implement any of the above I would be more than willing. Widen Warren Rd from Florida to Ramona Expressway to 2 lanes in each N/A N/A direction with turn lanes, left and right, at Esplanade and W. Devonshire. Repair or repave Florida from Winchester to Sanderson N/A N/A N/A Start by Fixing traffic signals so they don't stop 15-50 vehicles to let 1 or 2 go. N/A ... Widen the roads!! J N/A N/A Repaint the white lines from 215 fwy to San Jacinto. Last night could not tell which lane I was in. N/A T N/A Improve the roads and freeways just like roads and freeways going to Temecula. Also add traffic signal lights. N/A N/A Reinstate school buses! The traffic from parents taking and picking up their kids is insane and you could keep 30+ cars off the roads per bus load. Do the math for the two districts. By eliminating unnecessary vehicles you should eliminate A LOT of wear and tear on our already destroyed roads. Page 16 N/A N/A I would settle for repaving of 90% of the roads... they're like minefields N/A N/A N/A Fix and resurface all the streets in the city and county limits. They are very dangerous. Pick up the trash and debris. N/A More Police Presence 1 N/A N/A Fix are city streets. Rurals, and major. N/A N/A Don't put a median down the middle of Florida in Hemet! N/A N/A Need a freeway from Hemet to the 215, because it takes 25 minutes to get to the 215 from Hemet. Maybe another freeway on from State Street heading to San Diego and San Clemente or cutting over to San Juan Capistrano. N/A N/A Carpool lanes from San Diego County line through Riverside..15 and 215 N/A N/A Teach people how to drive and ticket ALL JAY walkers IN HEMET.. N/A N/A Remove all the illegals in the state of California. Get them and theirs cars out of here. Remove arbitrary speed limits on the interstates. Same speed for cars and trucks. Put an immediate halt to the UN AGENDA'S 21, 30 and 50. Eliminate all HOV lanes. There purpose is to reduce the number of cars by car pooling 2 or more drivers per car to use the lane, well a soccer mom her her 4 kids are using the lane. Stop trying to force people out of their cars. We don't accept unelected officials determining our driving fate and we hold elected officials accountable! Get your act together! N/A N/A Have the traffic engineer set the signal light controllers for the time of day when traffic direction is the heaviest. Beaumont ave north south takes too long to cycle plus many other intersections are the same way N/A N/A We seem to have all these train tracks that go nowhere. We have freeways that take 30 minutes to get there. N/A N/A I visited Netherlands last year. At all the neighborhoods they have buses passing by every 15 min. And the buses all went to one central hub & then you could take the train/bus to you next destination. Europe figured out public transportation. Everyone takes the buses. I loved it N/A N/A I would like a tunnel through Mt. San Jacinto into Palm Springs. N/A N/A Start with infrastructure fix what we have than expand and modernize the entrances/exits to the valley I'd say start in Beaumont the congestion in the am and pm commute is awful it's nice to see Dartmouth finally being repaved,also in valle vista passed Ramona expressway is so poorly lit I don't know how more people aren't hit jaywalking a d Page 17 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A First, improve the roads (repave). And secondly, have law enforcement that enforce traffic violations. The drivers in Hemet know they will not get a ticket and drive recklessly. We have an idiot who drives like he is doing movie stunts, all up and down Columbia Street leaving skid marks all over the pavement. Local law enforcement will NOT do anything about it. Does it take someone getting killed? Columbia St has an elementary school with bunches of children walking to school. Amtrak/metrolonk One thing I'd love to see is the hey 74 to Hemet repaved completely, makes the town look like hell Add a train station in hemet and a road way out of town that doesn't have a ton of traffic lights Maybe start by fixing the roads. Every major street in town has pot holes. Use the ridicules gas tax money the idiots voted in and fix the roads properly. Not just tossing cheap tar into pot holes to be be washed away in the next rain storm. Also widen Gilman Springs! There is way to much traffic on that road for 2 lanes. I know every time I get on that road, I'm stuck about 8 cars deep behind someone that is to stupid to get out of the way and let people pass. Thus the reason for so many accidents on Gilman Springs. Fix all the dips in hemet. Oil pans are expensive ZIP City Comments - 1-215 Corridor 92570 92584 Mead Valley Menifee I would open up back roads and build back roads between the various cities of our county. I used to live in New York (upstate), Indiana, Colorado, and more, and all these states have more ways to get between cities than the interstates. They have county roads, back roads, they even have county roads that run alongside the interstate to allow for people to go slower and people without vehicles to more easily traverse because you cannot bike or walk on the interstate. Personally I would build more county roads between cities to allow for people to use county roads instead of the interstates. I sit in traffic on the 15 daily during my commute home from San Diego. I leave the heart of San Diego at 3:30 and often times do not arrive home until after 5:30 if I leave after 4 I'm not home until well over 6 pm sometimes even 7 pm. With less traffic I would be able to get home sooner, prepare dinner for my family and spend more time with my kids. Page 18 92584 Menifee I commute from Menifee at Newport and Menifee Rd to my work in riverside at the intersection of van Buren and Arlington. It's about 43 minutes to and a little over an hour home. I worked 1st shift and was considering the train. Nope it doesn't run the hours I need it to run to be at work by 6:30am and I would have had to wait around until almost I believe 5PM to catch a train home. That is just the train, that doesn't even get me to the train station. That is a headache and a half. I could get on a bicycle and ride on unlighted two lane roads in Menifee to get to the train station in Perris, or try to navigate the multiple buses and I dont believe they were running that early. Now I work 3rd shift 11:30PM to 6:30AM and there is basically no public transportation available. So it seems to be the county has made public transportation available to people who don't need it for work, as my shift is pretty typical of a blue collar job. Which this unavailability has caused the people who do use the public buses to be quite frequently homeless perverts who sit at the back of the bus and play with their dick and jerk off. A friend of mine tried to use the bus to commute to Pechanga from the same neighborhood I live in and it took him 4 hours and multiple bus changes. The buses didn't run later at night so he got to work 2 hours early, He had to leave 6 hours early to get to work, and a dude was in the back of the bus playing with himself. Anyways this is my rant. It seems to me the public transportation system is a waste of money and taking valuable money from roadways. (continued) Today I was driving my new car and a chunk flipped up out of a pot hole and gouged the bumper on my $80,000 Lexus. So now I get to fork out probably $1500 to get it fixed. Again money out of my pocket, along with all the tax dollars for the useless public transport system, am I going to get anything for my damage? No. It just seems to me like it's totally mismanaged at a horrific cost to all of us. 92584 Menifee Winchester road at Temecula is garbage. Fix it now. 92584 Menifee I carpool from Menifee to Lakeside, 140 miles round-trip. What we would like to see is the carpool lanes continue all the way up, to at least the 15 / 215 Split. We can usually make the check point in an hour, on our way home. But from there to our exit (Scott) is another hour. Also on ramp metering lights on the Winchester on ramp, 215 North bound. This is another issue with coming home after work, during the weekdays. Without these lights it's just a free for all trying to merge on to the freeway. Page 19 92584 Menifee All the major interchanges are jammed all day now. I commute and drive a truck in the southern California and I see it all over. Why not really connect the development projects to get along with the road capacity? Like why is the 215 North at the 60 West interchange so busy? You have 3 lanes going North that jam in to 3 or 4 lanes going West. It takes me 1.5 hours to go 30 miles to work. Not to mention the roads are crumbling. With all the new taxes could we at least get the roads and traffic fixed? If not tell L me why!!! 92584 I Menifee 92584 92584 Build changeable direction Lanes in center median on the I-15 from Rainbow to the I-15/1-215 merge in Murrieta. HIGHWAY PATROL NEEDS TO PAY MORE ATTENTION TO THE BIG Menifee RIGS CAUSING TRAFFIC DELAYS AND ACCIDENTS ON THE 60 FREEWAY Menifee There are few to non bike lines in menifee city and all the time there are reports of accidents involving bicyclists IF- 92584 Menifee Please don't turn Riverside into a socialist hell hole. Stop focusing on providing services. Allow people to work for what they need and have. If everything is always focused in the handout we will never change. 1 92584 Menifee Biuld the freeway and more roads idiota 92586 Menifee he lives in Menifee, Metrolink trains look empty off of the 215. Is public transit really feasible? Just a comment. 92586 Menifee Impose compulsory population reduction. All non -natives out. Prohibit real estate developers from making contributions of any kind to politicians, municipal and county. There is no other way. If these solutions are not carried out then no complaints are permitted as Menifee, Hemet, and San Jacinto murder the land and the population skyrockets. Page 20 92587 Menifee 115/1215 Mess in Temecula & Murrieta, CA. These are the issues as I see them, I commute through this often as do many others. The 15 northbound onramps to the freeway from Rancho California, and Winchester are WAY too short. Cars don't have enough time to build enough speed to merge with the freeway at speed limits. This causes everyone to slow down and it just escalates after that. Same with the southbound 15 exits. Once that slowdown starts, everyone starts slowing down to look and we're screwed. Combine that with immediate need for cars entering the freeway from Winchester to move over to go on the 15N and cars already on the 15 trying to get over for the 215, it's just a mess. The 15N Winchester on ramp, on westbound Winchester, specifically needs to be addressed most. I'm no engineer but here's what I would do to fix... 1. Make a separate 1-15 North on ramp in the middle of the freeway, similar to the express lane on ramps in Rancho Bernardo in SD County. Cone it or KRail it off so cars can't fly over to the 215 on ramp. 2. Leave the Northbound on -ramp on eastbound Winchester but lengthen the time cars have to merge. 3. Close the current 15N on -ramp on westbound Winchester 4. Create a new on ramp somewhere just north of Winchester off Ynez road that is ONLY For people taking the 215 north. (continued) 5. Lastly, use the middle space of the current freeway (or raised like the 5 in OC) to build REAL express lanes from the checkpoint to Murrieta Hot Springs on the 15. Make these for THROUGH TRAFFIC ONLY. No exits for Temecula & Murrieta. And make them free. This will DRASTICALLY help local commuters. Since most people are "passing through" as said in the video pitch to the federal government, give them a way to pass through and be separated from the local commuters. That's all, best of luck to everyone trying to plan this and get it pushed through government. 92587 Menifee potholes 92587 Menifee Add lanes to 15 in Temecula SD co line to 215 NOT toll! Monorail using the 15 and 215 caltrans right of ways already in use .. an elevated monorail train right down the center of the fwy. Build it in 92596 Menifee sections off site and assemble as you go , like a pipeline for knows you can build a freakin' pipeline that spans thousands of miles overhill and dale. WHY NOT A MOMORAIL? N/A Menifee Make the commute to San Diego better. Either by expanding the lanes or making the service that goes to Oceanside reach all the way to San Diego. Page 21 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 92551 92551 Menifee Menifee Menifee Menifee Menifee Menifee Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Please look into how we can combat traffic in the future in the Menifee area. More people are starting to move out to Menifee and surrounding areas and the traffic problem will become worse so look into how we can improve before it happens Please provide weekend service for the Perris Metrolink line. Metrolink should look into getting ride of way because it makes the train take much longer than it actually should because the freight trains take a really long time to pass. When a freight train breaks riders are forced to wait on the train until they are able to fix it making a 1 hour ride into 3 hour rides. On the Metrolink always have a back up. For example if a freight train breaks down we are stuck there for hours, instead make sure you can get the passengers to their destination in a reasonable amount of time. Make hours on Metrolink more convinent, most people that ride it commute to LA yet the earliest it starts running is 8AM in Perris stations and most people need to leave much earlier. Time the buses with the Metrolink , because as a bus is approaching the station the train is already leaving or vice versa. There is too much traffic between the 15 right where Hot Springs is all the way to Red Hawk. The speed limit is supposed to be 65 but we are all going 45. Create more lanes or do something to reduce traffic. If possible make construction go faster, by the time something gets done traffic has already increased from the time construction started. Also build a station a Menifee. Have more availability in terms of more hours and stops in Metrolink. Add a Metrolink station in Menifee and Lake Elsinore. What are you doing about dial a ride for senior citizens in the county? Or other transportation for people needing to go to grocery store weekend. MOST STUDENTS SENIORS AND STUDENTS HAVE PACKS OR CARTS TO GET THEIR STUFF AROUND,MANY HAVE DISABILITYS BUT HAVE BEEN GIVEN A HARD TIME TRYING TO GET A CART UNBOARD AND ITS HARD ON THOSE TO TAKE EVERYTHING OUTV AND FOLD THEM DOWN,PLEASE MAKE A RAMP FOR THOSE WITH CARTS AND EXCESS THEY CANT NORMALLY HOLD OR CARRY,TY. Page 22 92553 I THINK A DOUBLE DECKER HIGHWAY THROUGH MORENO VALLEY Moreno INTO ORANGE COUNTY WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO REDUCE Valley TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION. KIND OF LIKE THE DOUBLE DECKER FREEWAYS THEY HAVE IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA. 92553 Moreno Valley 92553 Moreno Valley 92554 I Moreno Valley what can we do to increase pedestrian safety? People drive fast and unsafely. Buses need to run on time and more in between. I have seen many times one bus be right behind the other on the same route leaving many people to wait for later buses. The waits for buses makes it such an inconvenient form of transportation and do not always take one to centralized areas such as some government offices. Bike Lanes need to have physical barriers to ensure the safety and uninterrupted access to cycling. Many times I have seen police or trash bins blocking the path. There needs to be a bike highway that makes it easy to move through cities without the risk of running into cars. And that makes it convenient nto bike. Commuters from Moreno Valley and Riverside could be removed form the road with a reliable road interconnecting vital areas like Downtown, our multiple universities and shopping centers with groecry stores. Regarding the police officer question, why does it seem there are no officers on the freeway or streets II- 92555 L Tent -like structures should be placed over the freeway in heavily Moreno residential areas to minimize the negative effects of pollution caused by so Valley much traffic. The tents would serve as a sort of filter for the fumes released from car exhausts 92555 Moreno Valley Every day, I commute from eastern Moreno Valley to Corona. RCTC should get rid of the carpool lane on the 60 West in Moreno Valley, until at least one lane can be added that is dedicated for general, non -truck traffic. With just 3 lanes, the only non -carpool lanes are also truck lanes, because trucks legally can use the right 2 lanes. The 215 South from Moreno Valley to Murrieta, which also has just 3 lanes, has no carpool lane; why does the 60 in Moreno Valley need one? It leads to more movement back and forth from people avoiding trucks, which increases the likelihood of accidents. And there certainly are many accidents on that part of the freeway! That is why, during rush hour, I see many drivers cheating by using the carpool lane with no passengers in their vehicles. They'd rather take their chances getting a ticket than being trapped behind a slow - moving semi. Page 23 92555 92555 92555 92555 92555 92555 92555 Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Reopen The Pigeon Pass Rd backside dirt road that used to connect (and maybe still does) to the north-eastern newer section of Riverside where new houses and warehouses are. This road served residents reliabily as an alternate route when the 60 and it frontage roads were all shut down. Then a few years back ti was closed with a promise to reopen it after a year. Well over 10 years plus later it still is closed!!! what gives???? Pertaining to congestion on freeways, the 60 and 91 Interchange. Question is about this interchange. Ban trucks by weight or axle limit on Redlands Blvd. from Locust Ave. to San Timoteo Canyon Rd. in Moreno Valley. Ban trucks by weight or axle limit on San Timoteo Canyon Rd. in Riverside county. Trucks going to dump can use San Timoteo Canyon Rd. in San Bernardino county. This is a heavily used route during rush hours as a freeway alternative with much congestion. Trucks are also using this as an alternative to the freeway. 1. Put time on when trucks can travel on the roads, not during peek hours. 2. Let Disable Plates use the diamond lane and toll as Motor Cycles do. 3. Cities that have more companies with trucks should provide funds to lessen the traffic jams. 4. Trucks should only use the outside lane (4) when they pass they cause a back up to low profile cars. 5. Caltrans and emergency vehicles need be a lot time to get to accident, better planning on how they can get to the break down asap. Scene there delay cause they not scent to a road that been closed, yet had go with traffic, then stuck in traffic, they could gone reverse way as road was closed as lanes was closed. Light rail to Connect Moreno Valley warehouses to the heavy rail stations. Light rail to connect downtown riverside to Moreno Valley . Light rail that all the way up the 15. Essentially light rail I would like to see exclusive lanes for express commuter bus shuttles on the freeways with stops at major crossings with connection to other buses, parking lots, and/or electric bikes and electric scooters so users can get to their ultimate destination. Another idea would be some type of light rail or monorail along the freeway median similar to the BART in the Bay Area and instead of the dedicated lanes for express shuttle buses, but this could be a more expensive project. F Fix the dam roads. Page 24 92555 Moreno Valley Reset the traffic lights to allow traffic to move onto and off of the freeway and not bottle neck because the traffic lights are not in the same rythem as the surface streets. They are not set to allow traffic to flow efficiently. One only has to reset the traffic lights starting at one end of Moreno Valley and work all the way to the other end. North to South and East to West alternating every other street to allow traffic to flow smoothly and efficiently. In Menifee the traffic signs are so slow 30 miles on 4 lane streets to allow for golf carts. They should have golf cart lanes and up the speed limits to normal speeds. They also could reset their traffic lights coming off of the Freeway ie MaCall it is always congested there. In Perris the traffic lights need to be reset near the shopping centers to pace the vehicles to make the intersections safer for pedestrians and motorists. The traffic needs to move in shorter incriments people start texting at longer lights and get so involved that when the lights finally change they drive to fast to catch up to the car in front of them causing a dangerous situation. One can watch the traffic and see that the rythem of each of these citys can be changed for the better by changing the settings of the traffic lights. r � Please finish the Santa Ana River Trail between Riverside and Orange 92557 Moreno County. The SART is a longawaited feature for commuters and Valley recreational riders all through the Inland Empire and Southern California. Thank you! I 92557 Moreno Valley This would be wonderful to have antelope and Coachella rail link pass . Please make it happen Page 25 92557 Moreno Valley I have three solutions to easing the commute into and out of Moreno Valley. First, I am begging the cities of Moreno Valley, Riverside (Highgrove) and Grand Terrace to re -open Pigeon Pass and connect the two counties as they once were. The commute through Reche Canyon is always backed up in the afternoon and evening hours with traffic coming southbound out of Colton, Loma Linda, and San Bernardino, and and is equally slow crawling out of Moreno Valley in the mornings. It is also quite dangerous to the life and property of drivers and passengers when large animals (burros and coyotes) are frequently struck, resulting in additional cost to the county agencies responsible for services such as police, fire, paramedics, animal control, etc. Re -opening Pigeon Pass would clear thousands, of cars from Reche Canyon. The second suggestion deals with those drivers traveling San Timeteo Canyon into and out of Redlands. The road is heavily congested and the flow managed by stop signs, when traffic lights would be more efficient and alleviate long delays. It seems simple enough to equip the intersections which are already posted with signage, with traffic lights instead. Finally, re -opening the connector road at Watkins Dr. and Poarch Rd./Gernert Rd./Morton Rd. would allow drivers to bypass waiting to enter the freeway at Box Springs Rd/Fair Isle Dr. and instead enter from Watkins Dr./Central Ave. or continue their commute behind UCR. The road was closed to through traffic out of concern for the railroad but access is granted to emergency service vehicles, so the road could be re -opened fairly easily. (continued) Any or all of these suggestions could be taken up by the city, county, and state agencies at the benefit of the environment, the economy, and the public. These are my three ideas for easing traffic and speeding commute times for drivers. 92557 Moreno are there any plans for improving the 60 and the 215? Building more Valley apartments which will make it worse. 92557 Moreno Valley Roads going to the 60 are not in good condition. Potholes are quite large. When will these be fixed? 92557 Moreno Valley What are the plans for new residential development? Is there a plan for the new construction? Is there a way to accommodate more traffic? 92557 Moreno Valley RTA drivers should be more nicer with disable people. Patients on dialysis sometimes they have troubles after treatment and if they are not out the door within 5 minutes when they arrive they will leave them and they're so rude with them. They have to call back and they won't get another bus until 1 or 2 hours if they are lucky 9 Page 26 92557 N/A N/A 92567 !92570 92570 �2570 92570 92570 192570 92570 92570 92570 92570 Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Nuevo Perris Perris Perris Perris Perris Perris Perris Perris Perris Perris Demand the road funding that sacramento diverted. Bureaucrats want public transportation more than the public does. Finish the Santa Ana river trail that we the voters approved money for in 2005 We pay for fast track and it stops in riverside I live in mo valley where help for us, the 215 and 60, 60 and 91 where all being Robbed Finish the 215 project, in particular the last phase, which is "north". This adds a carpool lane between Nuevo road and the 60 interchange. Traffic and congestion both ways are very bad during peak commute times. Fix the roads so there can be less traffic. I think it would be awesome if metro link would provide free days for families on weekends for families who otherwise would find it a financial hardship to visit new places. Less potholes Please finish the Santa Ana River Trail between Riverside and Orange County. It is a "long-awaited" feature for commuters and recreational riders all through the Inland Empire and Southern California for that matter. Thank you! Please finish the Santa Ana River Trail between Riverside and Orange County. It is a "long-awaited" feature for commuters and recreational riders all through the Inland Empire and Southern California for that matter. Thank you! I would like the Santa Ana River Trail to be completed from Riverside to Orange County Why is it so difficult for RCTC to maintain buses in rural areas that don't have sidewalks? Why are there issues on Cajalco road? Why have four lanes been built? Please DO NOT remove call boxes in areas that do not have cell phone service like Highway 74 in the Ortega Mountains. As it is, there are not enough of them. It's dangerous to have to walk along that highway at night to get help. Try riding on the system for a week or two to figure out what you don't like about it. Then expensive consultants with surveys wont be necessary. Page 27 92570 I Perris Lets all vote to finish the SART, connecting Riverside to the OC. There is never going to be enough lanes on the freeway but a lot of safe commuting and recreational riding can be enjoyed if the SART gets finished in our lifetime. Please vote to finish the SART (: 92571 Perris Increase the speed limit so people won't be worried about getting pull over and there would be less accident because people made it to there destination faster on the freeway. 92571 Perris Reduction in gas, street improvement and more accessible public transportation especially for students who don't qualify for school bussing. 92571 Perris Extend Van Buren to Harley Knox. It might require moving the bases boundaries a bit but would help with the morning and evening congestion. 92571 With so many warehouses being built on the eastside of the 215 in Perris, the onramps to the 215 is a major mess in the mornings and afternoons. Currently, cars and trucks have to come up an incline, stop at the signal, Perris then enter onto the ramp, to merge onto the 215 northbound. I suggest that at both Ramona Expy and Harley Knox, there should be a sweeping curved on ramp, to allow cars and trucks to enter at speed, instead of a dead stop. 92571 Perris Open Evan's road up . Complete the street so the is less traffic passing right through the street that is by sky view elm, and football where the are lots of kids. In the morning going towards perris Blvd off Nuevo it is very congested , making it difficult for get kids to school safety and that way traffic can have a continuous street from Moreno Valley .besides Perris Blvd which is too much traffic all over the city . LASSELLE TURNS ONTO EVANS BUT EVANS JUST STOPS AT NUEVO ? ? ? THE STREET LIGHTS ARE ALL THE FOR A ROAD BUT IT'S JUST DIRT. THR NEW ST JAMES CHURCH WILL HAVE ALOT OF TRAFFIC TRYING TO GET FROM WAY ACROSS TOWN NOW AND PEOPLE COULD AVOID PERRIS BLVD AND CUT THRU MAKING IT SAFE AND ACCESSIBLE FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN. Also People tend to cut thru Evan's to avoid perris Blvd. To get to the 215 entrance over the bridge. It's very difficult to enter and exit perris as we have only a very very margin roads. This should be big. Especially since commercial property has been avoided in the past of town due to accessibility from the fwy. Page 28 92571 Fix our roads, stop gas taxing us a dollar for every gallon, work on fixing homeless situation. Stop the water tax oppose new governor new projects Perris stop dumping fresh water into ocean. End sanctuary cities go after child predators end human trafficking lower our registration cost stop registering illegals to vote. Clean our forest before summer arrives J 92571 Perris Metrolink service on the Perris Valley Line which rivals taking the freeway can be easily ruined the moment you run into shared rail with the freight operators. They once sat there in confusion for half an hour while we stood at a halt. This needs to be fixed, or rail in SoCal will be a hindrance to one's commute more than a help. 92572 Perris What's the timetable for adding one additional lane in each direction on the I-215 from Nuevo Road to the 60-215 interchange? I am in the path of the Mid -County Parkway under alternative 9 and own imminent domain property. When can I expect to hear from the RCTC? N/A Perris We need more traffic lights with cameras. Everyone at the booth was very helpful and got a lot of info. N/A Perris Fix bus schedules to be more on time. N/A Perris More stop signs near schools and crosswalks for safety. N/A Perris bus only lanes. Add more busses and stops. N/A Perris Focus on carpooling. Patrol intersections with more cameras 92585 Romoland I think the video submitted my Temecula City sums up the problem. I find myself trying to avoid traveling South to shopping and errands and choosing to shop with online commerce instead. Im sure this creates a financial impact for us locally if others are doing the same. 92585 Romoland I would like to see Bus Routes 61,74, and 40 run later during the summer please I live on the outskirts of Menifee/Sun City the buses stop running early on the weekends and I have to take the 28 home sometimes and that's tiring so I was wondering what can you guys do to have these bus routes run later during the summer??? 92585 Romoland Hello! I just saw your YouTube advertisement and I just wanted to say I agree wholeheartedly with this message. My idea is subsidizing metrolink and other metros in our area and making these services much more known in our community. Thank you! And good luck!! Page 29 92585 Romoland Please create another northbound lane at the I-215 N interchange with SR 60 W. Everyday there is heavy congestion on the approach just north of Eucalyptus Ave as the 215 reduces from three northbound lanes to two lanes at the tie-in with the flow from the westbound 60. There is plenty of room on the inside lane area to create another lane that would merge at the gore area transition. I do not have photos but a Google map search will show the area and impedance that I refer to. Thank you and I look forward to future adjustments to this problem area that has long been a commuter bottleneck. 92596 Winchester i Would like to see improvements on the I-15 through Temecula. Traffic at almost all times of the day and week has been progressively getting worse. 92596 Winchester We (the residents of sw riverside county) desperately need traffic relief on the freeways through our region. The 15/215 junction has become horrible over the past decade, and the projects are not keeping up with population and traffic growth. Not only do we immediately need projects such as the French Valley Parkway, but a longterm plan needs to be put into place to address the needs of the future. Expanded freeways are necessary and helpful but alternative routes or modes of transportation (e.g. a rail system) are also needed. 92596 Winchester Widen/add HOV lanes to the I-15 North and South from Escondido to the I- 215. I commute 70 miles one way south into San Diego and it's not unheard of to spend 6 hours a day in my car; most of that in the same 20- 25 mile stretch of road. Traffic has gotten so bad through Temecula that I leave for work 4 hours earlier than I have to be there just in case of 1 accident. 92596 Winchester 1-15 San Diego - Murrieta pleaseeee fix There should be a connection from the 215N to the 15N which would actually make it the 215w just like the 215s has a connector to the 15s There should also be a light rail connection in Temecula or Murrieta to 92596 Winchester Perris so that people could commute that way instead of having to drive to Perris where many don't want to leave their car Adding additional fast track lanes from Corona through Temecula 92596 Winchester Why don't we have bus that take people to airport from all mall areas. This will eliminate traffic on all freeway. Bus from Temecula mall only go to escondido, it should be all the way to down to San Diego. Page 30 92596 Currently, the 15 Fwy Southbound in the Mornings, and Northbound in the Evenings around Temecula are jammed packed. My commute everyday is reaching toward 6 hours (combined) in to and out of Downtown SD. I would love to see some form of Express Lanes (Toll/HOV) to help alleviate this traffic around Temecula. Additionally, the "Golden Triangle" around Winchester Murrieta Hot Springs (between the 15 and 215, near the split) would be a fantastic place for a Park and Ride. The vacant lot there has been untouched for decades while the owner keeps switching hands. Long term, I feel having a Iightrail train going from the aforementioned "Golden Triangle" to Downtown SD would eventually move hundreds more from the freeway to public transit. We need to create truck lanes on all major highways. With the amount of 92596 Winchester logistical companies growing, truck traffic will continue to grow. These trucks contribute to traffic slow downs and road wear. 92596 Winchester I commute to downtown San Diego. I tried the monthly bus pass to take the RTA 217 from Temecula to Escondido where I then take the San Diego MTS 280 to downtown San Diego. I was unable to endure the painful RTA experience and now drive 1 hr 10 min to Escondido instead of taking RTA 217. And it costs me nothing because my company reimburses me, but I still will avoid the RTA. Why? 1. Uncomfortable, rattle -trap buses that are loud, too hot or too cold, and overcrowded. 2. Schedule issues. Only make my connecting bus in Escondido 60% of the time. 3. Drivers are inconsistent, there's high turnover, and I got tired of training drivers about where stops are and route. Really? 4. Some buses are so hot inside I get a migraine before getting back to Temecula. One day, Commuter Link should have comfortable and reliable coaches like San Diego Commuter Express. Then maybe, I'd be willing to ride again, which revenues you should want to increase to support other transit projects. There were many of us in vanpools because Commuter Link took longer and was less comfortable. Now I just drive myself. It's such a shame I can't ride with RTA. Please fix! N/A N/A We dont need original ideas or some creative solutions call these guys https://trimet.org and do what ever their doing. Its nothing special. Its just oublic transportation. N/A N/A ? My wife would take the train to her 60k a year job of the train ran on her schedule is not a hand out it's helping improve mass transit like every other major city in the country has. The metro link needs earlier start times. N/A N/A Yes hire people that will their job the right way and not be asking so many questions just to get you qualified for what ever reason you are applying to get some help to survive Periodllifi m Page 31 N/A N/A How about a minibus that circles Nuevo( Lakeview and Nuevo Rd) , drops off/picks up at Stater Bros. Plaza ( or Walmart and Stater Bros. Plaza). We need a metrolink station where Nuevo Rd. meets the freeway with shuttle vans to UCR and RCC. Jeff Hewitt- will you advocate for us? Can you come out to underserved communities like Nuevo? N/A N/A I think the Metrolink should be utilized more! More routes and more times. It is such a shame that it is not made more user friendly. Also special routes for events in different areas! N/A N/A Bus drivers need to help the disabled. My son was in a special stroller as a baby and the driver gave me so much crap about taking him out of it and folding up the chair/stroller. I had to tell him multiple times I couldn't. He was so pissed to get up and use the lift. I couldn't believe the drivers behavior. It's hard being a new mom to a child with disabilities but to have someone treat you the way this driver did was very upsetting. I was young and Naive back then so I didn't say anything but I should have gotten his information and reported him. There is a disability act for a reason and the RTA was completely in the wrong. There should be more buses available and pot holes fixed in a timely manner. N/A N/A We need rail, but common sense rail. PERRIS line needs to connect with SB line, which runs every hour to LA. If you build, they will come!! More freeways/lanes? Has 91 problem been solved? N/A N/A An extra lane 215 n interchange at 91 would be nice. Maybe a carpool ramp 60e to 215s would help with the evening rush. A sign on 215 south near university ave that says slower traffic keep right and another one that says trucks right 2 lanes only. To many truck in the left lanes going up hill slowing traffic down. Don't make me do it. N/A N/A Need more fast track routes that are all day N/A N/A How about actually using our transportation tax dollars for our roads? We pay billions every year and dont see any results. Do something CHUCK! N/A N/A We've seen that building bigger freeways doesn't really solve the issue. We really could use more reliable mass transit though. Riverside County is a commuter hub. Folks travel to/from LA, San Diego, and who knows where else. There really is no infrastructure in place to support the growth in population. A train system that connects these two Riverside County, LA County, and San Diego County would do a lot to alleviate the congestion. A program could also be put in place to incentivize the use of mass transit, but currently those systems don't exist. Until they do we will continue to be miserable sitting in traffic. Page 32 N/A N/A Stop bringing in huge warehouses Ior logistics. Its about time to widen the 215fwy. N/A N/A Expand i15 in temecula there is enough room for an extra 2 lanes each way in the middle N/A N/A I don't understand you build a community build all these homes restaurant s grocery store etc. And 2 to 3 lane roads to the freeway wonder why . Build the streets bigger next time you would think we would figured this out by now N/A N/A Traffic. Gridlock. Lights that change quicker based on traffic (ironwood and day and pigeon pass) and the 60 frwy onamp at ironwood. Truck lanes enforced on 60 freeway. N/A N/A Fix the infrastructure before building houses and warehouses. Widen the freeways, especially at the 215/60 merge. N/A N/A What if there was some sort of incentive for commuters to take the train/bus to work? I feel like if we can get more people using those it would clear the freeways a bit. I know some people have to take multiple buses to get to their destination which deters them from chosing that option. Perhaps a service that takes people from train stops to their job and vise versa would make that option more attractive. I've never taken the train out here so I don't know where it stops, but we need to get people on it, and off the freeways. N/A N/A Put cameras in all lights on Nuevo Road, so many accidents ZIP City 92879 Corona Comments - Northwest I feel like the bus transportation is out of date, maybe you should open new bus center drop offs at popular areas like in the Tyler mall. That way more people use the bus and money from the bus goes towards the city's. It would also cause less traffic since less cars are being used. 92879 Corona I would like more regional rail, the Metrolink needs to be electrified and put on regular 30-minute intervals from 6 am to 8 pm throughout the week. There need to be additional interurban rails that connect city centers to each other. This system should be fed by an extensive bus and streetcar/light rail system with its time's coordinated, and it should have signal priority in intersections. Of course, what I say is expensive and unrealistic, but it is the direction you should go if you want to start cutting commutes, increasing Riverside County density, and give the country a vibrant commercial and residential districts. You cannot have a large destination city with horrible mass Page 33 92879 Corona Please finish the Santa Ana River Trail between Riverside and Orange County. The SART is a long awaited feature for commuters and recreational riders all through the Inland Empire and Southern California. Thank you! 92879 Go to U-Tube and search PATSi Transportation, and PATSi 2010. It is a private transit system that will transport travelers and commuters to any other station in the system. It will always travel at freeway speeds and will stop only one time before the passenger reaches their destination and does this for 0.30 cents per mile. For the average commute in the IE of 20 miles that is a daily cost of $12 or monthly of $126 per month. It does this by load management. We need to stop building freeways and build a Corona usable public transit system. I have written a book on the system and I gave one to the Corona Mayor, and Mr. Bailey, the Riverside Mayor. In the book I suggested the trolley running down Magnolia. I am not sure where that stands but it was a to be a feeder system to feed passengers to the stations. I am in contact with the Trump administration currently to present the system to the federal transportation department. I hope you have some luck in your pursuit of traffic easing. Carpooling has never been above 14%. It is a hassle to carpool. Good Luck! 92879 Corona Can we encourage businesses to use slanted parking spots. The slanted parking slots are easier to get into and out of. With angled parking spots you don't have to swing into them. They are also less likely to have two cars back into each other. This probably won't improve traffic but it does make parking faster and safer. Angling the spots is just a matter of painting them that way so it's mostly just a cost of labor and paint. 92879 Corona I don't like the idea of toll lanes and spending hundreds of millions of dollars on any kind of toll lane construction sounds like a mistake to me. I'm strongly against the 15/91 Express lane connector. I think it should be cancelled. I 92879 Corona FIX the GREEN RIVER mess. It has been too long. RCTC created this & RCTC has to solve it. Corona - a vibrant community at Orange County's edge is has stopped, delayed, & harmed residents by not making this a #1 priority. 92879 Corona From Ontario Ave to Temescal Cyn on the I-15 is currently 3 lanes, from Temescal Cyn to Railroad Canyon there are 4 lanes of which we only use 3. It has been that way since the freeway was built, now we are adding express lanes. Why are we not adding the general lane first for the common folks instead of making people pay for express lanes on a daily basis? Page 34 92879 Corona Rumor has it that RCTC is going to try again for a sales tax increase and that the reason for this post is to gather data to help push for said sales tax increase. "Connect you to jobs here in the county" I dont know if RCTC has caught on yet. Most of the jobs are out of the county. At this point we need to figure out how to get people to the other counties. You broke the 91 freeway with your awful toll roads. You spend millions of dollars so 10 people can take the train. This organization is dysfunctional... 92879 Corona It would really help if we could eliminate RCTC. Think of all the tax money the citizens would get back.... 92879 Corona That one time when Anne Mayer the chick in this video lied to congress saying the 91 Toll Roads were a great success... 92879 Corona Ride a bike or metro link 92880 Corona The express lanes/toll lanes have made the commute no better on the 91 frwy. ly instead of improving the commute for all has made it better for some who can pay. In essence has take taken public money and improved conditiins for those who can afford to pay for better conditions. Dedicated truck and motorcycle lanes eould improve the commute for all more. Motor cycle accidents are nearly a daily occurance on the frwys. On bad traffic days as one is on the on ramp entering the frwy a kjne of big rigs signals that traffic will be slow the whole morning drive. Whoever designed the reccent 91/15/71 section simply moved traffic from the street onto the frwy to the on ramps and frwy. It is no better than before. 92880 Corona Fix potholes 92880 Corona I have been frustrated with driving down Hammer bec the lights are not timed as they used to be. Once you start from a red light and go a short distance, the next lift turns red quickly and so on all the way down. It's even worse along the side streets when residents want to turn left out of their developments. They turn left when the light allows them which is fine, but then the light stays green for them for a long time even though there's no one else that needs to turn left. The opposing traffic is just waiting and waiting to go straight but can't bec the lights are not timed to turn red if there's no other traffic that needs to turn left. Very frustating! Please correct this situation to allow the traffic to move more smoothly. Thanks for listening. Page 35 92880 92880 92880 92880 !92880 92880 Corona Corona Corona Corona Corona Corona Bring high end technical jobs like medical, biomedical, pharma, software, aerospace jobs to Riverside County. Attract Irvine and Los Angeles employers to Riverside. The most economic and sustainable way to solve the traffic and commute issue is to bring high end jobs to the Corona, Riverside and Temecula cities that are most populated areas of the county. It would also be nice to attract private educational institutions and expand UCR. The primary reasons people commute are better job and educational opporunities in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. Address the cause not he symptoms. Please no bandage and no increasing tax solutions. Invest in better shuttle system, and vanpool incentives which is more economic and more flexible than trains or building freeways. Add additional Eastbound lanes on the 91 from the 241 to the 71 (Green River Rd. at a minimum) Add additional Westbound lane(s) on the 91 from the 71 to the 241 (Green River Rd. at a minimum) (Traffic on the 91 will not improve dramatically until the carrying capacity through the Santa Ana Canyon is addressed.) - This is the #1 problem! (Additional lanes are needed! options: double -deck through the canyon, bridge over the river, tunnel into the side of the mountain.) Improve the transition from the Eastbound 91 to the Northbound 71. (The current design dramatically slows traffic due to the almost 360 degree loop and backs up traffic on the 91.) Additional transition lane(s) from the Eastbound 91 to both the North & Southbound 15. I AM TRYING TO SEE IF WE CAN GET NORTH WARD BUS SERVICE FROM EASTVALE: FOR SON AUTISM I would love for the 241/91 interchange issues to be solved. Every single day, traffic comes to a screeching halt there as everyone from the right two lanes has to merge over. There is too much congestion to lose two lanes that quickly. Smart lights in Corona. He commute to LA Harbor. Are there plans for smart streets like there are in LA? Timing of lights near freeway seem poor. Is there a way to address traffic through s I am currently a college student at CBU. I commute from Eastvale to Riverside everyday and there has been many times where the Vanburen Clay Street intersection has been blocked off . It'd be great to be given a detour route to make the navigation faster . Thank you . Page 36 92880 Corona Invest in intercounty shuttles, provide strong incentives for vanpooling, increase parking areas for vanpool. Intercounty shuttles on freeways from Riverside county to Orange County/San Bernadino County with good frequency and multiple routes. Expand riverside county shuttle routes to newly developed areas within county. Bring high paying technical and healthcare jobs to the county. 92880 Corona In order of interest: 1) 71/91 Interchange 2) 71 Widening 3) State Route 91 Corridor 92880 I've been commuting on the 91 freeway out of Corona into Orange County for more than 10 years. I won't go into all of the challenges that exist in this region as you are obviously aware. How about implementing a property tax on new home builds to support the new infrastructure required (highways, water, power, etc.)? It seems that every piece of flat land in Riverside county is being developed without any thought to the Corona impact to our freeways and other infrastructure. I'll leave the freeway fixes up to the traffic experts but I think it really comes down to limiting the number of vehicles on the road. How about implementing incentives for Vanpools and travel by Metrolink? What is being done with the revenue generated from the Toll Lanes? If it's not already, shouldn't 100% of profits be spent back into further improving the freeway system? Thank you for your time. Page 37 92880 Corona I think it's great that there are efforts made to make our commute shorter or more efficient. However, the reality is there will be more people moving to riverside county as home builders have continued to build in this county. It's the only county left with affordable housing. So once these efforts are implemented, the traffic will likely have doubled and the impact will be small. Riverside county does have a lot of land. If used properly, we could develop more commercial property that would encourage businesses to come to this county for work. The residents of this county won't have to commute to other counties and will naturally reduce the commute time for all. I have lived in Orange County as well as Los Angeles county, and quite honestly, traffic in those county is never as bad because jobs and infrastructure are already established. The driving distances are shorter as well. Residents in riverside county are forced to drive to LA or Orange County to work because that's where most of the jobs are located. All the entertainment venues are also in those counties. Imagine if we allocate our resources to developing well planned commercial and residential spaces, not only will we stay in this county for work and pleasure, but others will visit to drive the economy of this county. While I understand this is about using the limited budget to overcome traffic issues, but sometimes we need to implement solutions that are more long term, than a short term fix, to resolve issues as complex as our traffic. Page 38 92880 When designing the 91/15 expansion and toll roads, I fail to understand why the eastbound 91 committed through lanes go from 5 to 3 between Main Street and McKinley. IF at least 4 committed lanes, i.e. lanes that remain whole without merging or exiting of additional traffic, had been allotted for, the bottleneck that daily beings at Main Street, and often at Lincoln Street, could have been lessened. This is similar to OC where eastbound lanes after Weir Canyon are reduced and traffic flow does not begin to pick up until the added lane from the merging of the 241. I hear many residents from the northern 15 area are very disappointed that a ramp into the toll road was not built. I hope one is being planned for in both directions. I heard that the state was surprised by the amount of revenue Corona that has already been made on this new expansion of the toll lanes. I hope this money is used to rectify lack of any fore site, for budget concerns, or for design flaws.The design at Surfas Club and 6th Street great in that 5 committed through traffic lanes remain intact and additional lanes for exiting and merging on to the freeway were provided. The design to keep access to Grand Blvd from the Lincoln exit was very well done. For future freeway projects, if traffic flow studies support this idea, consider putting in a ramp from the toll roads to the 71 (in both directions) --similar to what OC has at the 55 and 405. Last, the Green River/Foot Hill extension has been helping. If the congestion at the 71 and 91 can be cleared for the morning commute, then back up on Green River could be lessened or eliminated. (continued) Also, stop building new homes until the roads can handle the increased amount of commuters! Thank you.P.S. I hope the idea of adding a direct ramp from the 241 to the 91 Express Lanes was canned, as the 91 Express Lanes from the 55 to Green River Road are already congested and a frustrating commute. 92880 Corona Prioritize Green River!!!! 92880 Corona Ban all bigrigs from w/b 91 frwy during peak hours,they occupy 2 of the four regular lanes. Page 39 92881 I live in Corona and commute to Irvine via Metro link because of bad traffic. At this point what I miss is commute to Corona North Main Station. I see Route 215 and 216 which will pass my community but its doesn't have a stop. I request to have a stop at Foot Hill Pkwy and Villa Pampolana Ct (New Star Bucks is starting there and Terrassa Community is the land mark.) There is BUS stop available at this point and its a recent one. Here are the more ways. Corona 1. More High paying jobs need to be brought to Riverside Area. (It can be Corona, East Vale, etc..) 2. More frequency of Metro link trains and along with bus connectivity. So that we don't need to park the car in Metro station. I have seen the connectivity in Irvine. 3. Mid term solution, Encourage using Mass transportation like Metro link and Introduce Buses to Major work places. 4. I have seen many cities use METRO Trains Via the Road Connectivity. 92881 We need a corridor from the 15 fwy to the 241, widen Calajco also, Corona Another tax? Is like paying to drive on the fwy. Just to many people trying to get to the OC. I'd suggest that Everytime an Express lane is built, whoever is finding has to find for a regular commute lane for non toll payers. This will keep a 92881 Corona competitive edge for the investor without making easy toll money. Also you should give priority to clear bottle necks, not letting toll investors take advantage of them. I see it happen now. 92881 Corona I would like to see uninterrupted bike trails, without homeless people camping on them, from San Bernardino all the way to the beach. It would also be nice to have some bike trails going towards Temecula. Along the trails have some bathroom and areas to park your car to start your ride. I would also like to see better use of freeway space. Stop building toll lanes. Make extra lanes where everyone or even carpool can use them that dont cost money. Fix the 15/91 interchanges so they dont bottle neck. Put more signs up telling drivers the lanes is going to end atleast a mile back so they do not have to merge at the last minute like on the Ontario South exit. 92881 Corona Stop Toll Lanes. There. Page 40 92882 Corona I have been a corona resident for 26 years and have worked road construction for 5 years. The traffic around the inland empire is absolutely horrendous at all times and is a complicated multi issue problem with no one size fits all solution. If you guys are actually interested in fixing this issue and you aren't just all talk then you need to consider in my opinion these serious issues. 1. No real transportation planning for new housing developments. For too long riverside county has let housing developers do whatever they please and let them plop thousands of homes in any location without forcing the developers to pay for new infrastructure supporting such communities or helping the city come up with new transportation solutions. If big real estate companies want to build them make them pay for better transportation planning. A perfect example of this is the Eastvale community. Yes the roads in the community are pretty but the roads leading into this community are still two lane farm roads. 2. Toll roads are an absolute joke and scam. I know the powers at be will never feel this or hear this but the toll roads are a disgrace to everything California stands for. 3. I'm not anti tax if the money is being used properly but it is clear that California has every incentive to keep people driving cars and to avoid public transportation. With some of the highest registration taxes and gas taxes in the country is anyone surprised that California invests very little money into public transportation? (continued) Compare us to most modern countries or even other large city's our public transportation is a joke or in most areas non existent. The way I see California has no real incentive to get people out of cars and into public housing transportation because it generates too much revenue for the state. If I'm wrong Then please correct me Page 41 92882 92882 92882 Corona Corona Corona Hello: I live in Corona (Sierra Del Oro area) and commute to Anaheim and Monrovia for work. Also, I attend school in Costa Mesa. I try to ride my bike to work and school as often as possible OR take the Metrolink and cycle the remaining distance to my destination. I am an experienced cyclist and live two miles from the Santa Ana River Trail head. I pedal around 50- 70 miles a week, but those two miles to the trail head are ALWAYS treacherous for two reasons. The bike lanes are too skinny/not protected AND the bike lane ends where cyclist are MOST vulnerable, while crossing a VERY busy bridge on Green River Rd. and navigating around quick moving cars that are exiting the 91--not to mention the deep pot holes and water grate in the bike lane! Have you tried cycling in the area? I would be happy to guide anyone who wants a tour. I have taken bicycle safety classes through the League of American Bicyclists. NO bike lane should end in the middle of a road without a connection and they do all over this city! I would like to see more buffered and/or protected bike lanes in the area! It would help if Metrolink offered more trains too! I know that they have added a later train, but more options in the morning and in the evening would be helpful, and on the weekends too. I would love to see a trolly go through the city center. How amazing would it be, if you could travel from one end of Corona to the other and possibly connect to Metrolink on an open air type of electric trolley, with bike lanes at each stop! It would be helpful to educate people within the community about alternative methods of transportation. (continued) An event like CicLAvia might help get people out of their cars, but we need the infrastructure! I am passionate about this topic and have cycled in Paris, London, New York and Portland, so I have ideas about incorporating different types of bicycling infrastructure in our community. If anyone has questions about my comment, feel free to email or call my cell. Thanks for reading! One, no eighteen wheelers on the 91 during rush hours - 6:00 - 9:00 in the AM and 4:00 - 7:00 in the PM. Two, Only emergency road work on Fridays. I see no reason to tie up traffic on Friday, one of the busiest days of the week, to work on the shoulders or cut bush along the sides of the freeway. Create an exit for corona from the 241 and a side road from gypson canyon to green river or foothill. Will the alleviate the corona the commuters from the 91 and leave just the riverside / 15 commuters. Page 42 92882 Corona Signals controlled by Caltrans should be interconnected with those controlled by localities. Far too much congestion, often for blocks, is caused by a total lack of coordination between the two systems, even when traffic flows are relatively light on both freeway and local streets. Nowhere is this more apparent than at the Cajalco/15 interchange. Yes, I know this is a construction zone and the signals are temporary and probably on timers, but when there is no construction and very few cars, traffic is horrible. There is simply no excuse for this. 92882 I Corona Better train service in weekend and Securtiy at the train station at Rancho Cucamanga. 92882 Corona Have the Metrolink run times offered earlier on the Oceanside to San Bernardino line so that I may use it to commute that way. Maybe offer a discount to Regular metrolink users? 92882 Corona Need an option to go west on the 91 besides the the freeway between Green River and Gypsum Canyon! Everything funnels at Green River as it is the last chance to go west on the 91. 3000 cars an hour on the GR ramp! I catch a carpool in Yorba Linda and there is ZERO wait at the Gypsum on ramp, ZERO! I have filmed it many times. 3000 cars an hour and then next on ramp has NO WAIT?? Once an accident happens between GR and GC, all of the IE and Lake Elsinore, Temecula etc are affected badly. And housing is being build like there is no tomorrow. 92882 Corona Attached is waze telling me to backtrack from my home off Greenriver to Serfas Club...and it will take me 1 hour and 24 min to drive to Kaiser off Weir Canyon..6.2 miles from my home...where I have lived since 1995...not only did RCTC screw us by INTENTIONALLY NOT ADDING THE AUXILIARY LANE FROM GREENRIVER TO THE 241....but it is time to build a road and attach the counties....Move the bike path if you have to but DO IT!! 92882 Corona One idea is to give businesses an incentive to let employees work from home that can! Big one. I recently was aloud to work from home, it saved me 1.5 hours commute just 11 miles from Green River to Yorba Linda on the 91!! Also 4 day work weeks, flexible schedules... Page 43 92882 Corona I know how to fix all your traffic problems, and there are 5 of them. 1.) Separate the cars getting off and on the 91 freeway versus just passing through the 91 (between OC line and 15 freeway). Ideally, this would be done with a double-decker freeway with the top level not having any exits in this stretch. If that's too expensive, you can follow what Los Angeles does is have a separate 2-3 lanes parallel to the freeway solely for people getting on/off the 91 versus people passing through. This eliminates slowdown during this stretch and removes the need for meters. Everyone getting on/off the 91 between the OC line and the 15 freeway would be using these lanes only and not interfere with traffic on the main freeway. It would be designed in a way that people from the main freeway can't use it to bypass the main freeway. The 10-E freeway in Los Angeles near the Normandie and Vermont exits do this. 2.) Certain local streets in Corona (such as Foothill / Green River, Main St., Sixth St) need to Do Not Turn Left or Do Not Turn Right signs at certain times of the day to eliminate commuters cutting through and disrupting local traffic. 3.) A big source of traffic is parents picking up kids to/from school. This can be eliminated by a better school bus system or at least a shuttle system where parents can drop their kids off at designated sites, like empty shopping centers, in the morning, so kids can be shuttled to/from school. (continued) To encourage kids to walk more, the city also needs to clarify that the curfew law is a legal defense to allow children to walk alone before 10pm, and that is not child endangerment, so that B.S. police officers and crooked judges cannot twist the law to say that children walking alone is child endangerment. Search for article on Mike Tang in Corona CA to prove this is really what police are doing --arresting parents for letting their children walk outside. 4.) A better Metrolink schedule will get more people to try it. Right now, there are not enough trains at certain times of the day, and they are often late because they give priority to freight trains. Give priority to Metrolink in the daytime and let the freight trains run throughout the late evening. Or build more tracks to separate the two systems. 5.) The 91-15 interchange is poorly constructed. A disproportionate amount of people are heading west in the morning and east/south in the evening. 1-2 lanes for the interchange is not enough to handle the flow when more than half the people are taking these ramps. If half the people are merging from 15N to 91W for example, then half as many lanes need to be used for the interchange to eliminate the bottleneck. Page 44 92882 Corona Hello: I attended the Telephone Town Hall meeting tonight, but did not get a chance to ask my questions and give my input. Are there plans to increase the frequency of Metrolink trains during both weekends and weekdays? There are ONLY two morning options/times that leave the Corona -West station on Sat./Sun., which makes it impractical to use. ALSO, I bike commute from Corona to Anaheim a few times a month. What plans, if any, are being made to improve cycling infrastructure within the community. Thank you 92882 Corona I would like to see a dedicated track for passenger rail that connects Riverside County with all of its neighboring counties. The current system of using BNSF railroads with Metrolink just does not work. Trains are frequently late and train schedules are absolutely awful making. Having a dedicated track will solve both issues as the most frequent cause of delays is "train congestion" from freight trains and the ability to run more regular trains will make riding easier as missing one train won't mean being stranded for an hour. Please consider the future and consider building the appropriate infrastructure for it. Expanding roads is fine, however I think the RCTC's main objective should be to find a way to get people out of their cars by creating a reliable, frequent transit system for commuters and fun goers alike. 92882 Corona I would not be adding toll lanes! Many of the people using these lanes are being repaid by their employers. Not all of us have that benefit. Plus it is very upsetting to see that the carpool lanes we paid for with sales tax (yes I remember) are being taken away and used for these obnoxious toll lanes. If the money we spend on gas taxes actually went to road projects and repairs, there would be plenty of money to repair and/or widen the FR EEways! 92882 Corona I Move 92882 Corona We live in Corona and ever since the addition of the toll lanes on the 91 fwy through Corona, we can no longer access HOV lanes until we drive to either Riverside or Yorba Linda. If we take Green River Road through Corona, we can access the West bound Fastrack lanes on the 91; however if we are Eastbound on the 91, there is no access until we reach the western edge of Riverside. This situation has lengthened my average drive into Riverside to 45 min (used to be 25-35 min). What about putting all of the containers that leave Long beach harbor by road, heading E on the 10, and N on the 15 on trains as far as the state 92882 Corona border. And have distribution centers there. We'd eliminate all of the I trucks on the 10 and 15 for 200 miles. And we'd have safer travel with less congestion and less pollution. Page 45 92882 Corona When will you start construction on the 91 freeway Option 4 Green River Aux Lane? Thanks 92882 Corona I cannot believe Green River is not on the top of this list. We wait 45 minutes to go two miles. Such a failure. 92882 Corona r r 92882 Corona Green River is a mess! I live off Dominguez Ranch and can't even get to the signal! Cars are lined up through that shopping center. What should be a minute drive to get on the freeway, it is now 25 minutes or more. Taking the Metrolink is just as bad as I can't even go right on Green River because of the cars blocking! Please fix the mess. I really wish the Route 200 bus had a stop closer to Corona before the express lanes start. A lot of Disneyland employees live in Corona and being able to take the 200 bus from nearer Corona without having to drive backward to La Sierra would be so helpful!! 92882 Corona Resolve the Failure of the 91 Project in Western Corona. Complete failure! 92882 Corona Fire Anne Mayer. She lied to Congress. The toll roads are a success for MOST people. It's only a success for revenue for RCTC and they are not using the money for the citizens' benefit. The cuts she made including the aux lane from Green River and the 6th Street onramp would have relieved traffic on our roads in the city and access the toll road. Corona citizens can't even access the toll road. The cost is exorbitant so with cost and access being prohibitive, Green River And Serfas Club Drive have become horrific nightmares. 92882 Corona How can you be serious, by not including the "Option 4" Aux lane between Green River and SR 241 in your list of future projects? Make this a priority. RCTC is losing credibility by the day in Corona and we won't stand for it much longer. You need to continue partnering with Orange County... we need REAL solutions. An alternative corridor to Orange County, REAL light rail to Orange County, extending Green River road into Orange County, expanded Metrolink Service... STOP TOLLING us at every opportunity and get to work! the 91 Express Lanes and 15 Express Lanes are horrible projects. You need to think outside of the box and get to work. 92882 Another west bound lane on the 91 in to Orange County to correct the Corona mess you made. We also need another artery in to Orange County. Preferably from the 15 freeway in Lake Elsinore area Page 46 92882 Corona FIX GREEN RIVER! 92882 Corona Teach people how to take a turn on the highway without slamming on their brakes 92883 I Corona Add 2 more lanes on both sides between the border check on 15 to the 215. The median is wide enough already. 92883 Corona 1. First, stop building more houses. 2. An east - west freeway needs to be built somewhere between the 91 freeway and Ortega Highway. I believe there were plans to build one, then someone thought it would be a good idea to build more houses instead (near Eagle Glen, Stater Bros shopping center) 3. Stop building more houses. 4. Perhaps some light rail projects to relieve congestion on the 91 and 15 freeways. 5. Stop building more houses. 6. Widen Temescal Road from Campbell Ranch Road all the way to the already begun widening of Temescal near the 15 freeway. 7. Stop building more houses. 92883 Corona New day programs for special needs 21 years old and over . Make sure they are clean and have what our kids need .Specialy in Corona Ca. The one they have First Step are very discriminatory to some kids with special needs . Thank you . 92883 Corona r are there any plans to do anything about the el Cerrito exits on the 15? 92883 Corona Lives in South Corona and there is a lot of 15 freeway construction. How long will construction last? Will you extend diamond lanes. 92883 Corona Bacerra lied about Yes on 6 and now you have our money. When are lanes going to be added to the 15? I don't mean toll lanes that we have to pay for again. The 15 should be 4 lanes each direction from Ontario to Temecula that everyone can benefit from. Repaving on and off ramps and restriping the 15 is not good enough. That's not progress or traffic improvement. You have plenty of money now. You've always had the money. The public has been duped. Until you add lanes we will have to endure the crushing gridlock of the parking lot formerly known as the freeway. It's unhealthy for the air, not good for our vehicles and not good for us. ADD LANES. There is no other solution. Page 47 92883 Corona Traffic will never be reduced unless a substantial amount of vehicles are removed from our roads. The "Odd Even" plans during Summer 84 Olympics and Gas Crisis in the late 70's worked. Create a tax refund or, registration discount if drivers can prove they reduced their use of vehicles. Insurance companies use photos of vehicle speedometers to record yearly mileage driven . 92883 Corona The 91 fastrak entrances from both directions are terrible during rush hour. If we wait in line it's an extra 20-30 min and if you cut to the front it's dangerous and unfair to other drivers. I'm not a traffic engineer but this needs to be addressed. 92883 Corona I would mandate mandatory busing. My commute from HCR to Riverside is 22 miles and sometimes takes over an hour. The worst part is from Indian Truck Trail to Cajalco. Parents drive their kids to Corona -Norco schools. Many cars have one parent and one child. In the summertime when school is out, my commute decreases by 15-20 minutes. Someone has to have seen this trend besides me. 92883 Corona Oh how I coyld write an essay on this topic, but to keep it short: First and foremost - the grren river aux lane, needs to be given top priority. This is the bottleneck that is killing everyone's commute from the IE to OC. Second - rctc needs to be partnering with city of corona and commiting funds to the McKinley grade separation. Third - Metrolink IEOC line offers the fewest options for commuters, and improvements here need to be prioritized. I'm aware it has been stated studies show the demand and ridership is less but that is simply inaccurate. Regular counts are not taken, I know I ride daily. I do all I can to avoid driving and yet I'm often left with no other choice due to limited service. 92883 Corona 15fwy south improvements and Option 4. 92883 Corona Extend Toll Lanes past Lake Elsinore. 92883 Corona This is not New York. These trains can not deliver you to your job site. Taking additional buses and hoofing the remaining distance would take several hours. I'd rather sit on the 91 and have my car during my lunch break so I can take my nap or run errands. Either way, I need a place to recline during my breaks after the commute. 92883 Corona Understand that all of the effort put into "improving" the 91 through Corona actually broke the freeway and made traffic worse. Whatever engineer came up with the assinine idea of squeezing 5 lanes to 3 on the 15S just past the 91/15 interchange needs to be fired, then shamed, and then blacklisted in the community. Page 48 92951 92880 92880 92880 91752 92860 Corona Eastvale Eastvale Eastvale Jurupa Valley Norco it always more money to fix the problems you got money to fix last time. Don't build homes where the roads can't take the traffic. where is our gas tax money, gone. i guess to let in more homeless. Eastvale traffic is terrible! There's tons of new development and it's only going to get worse. There has been a plan in place to add an interchange at Interstate 15 and Schleisman for decades, but now the city is removing it from their general plan. This is a commuter based city. Our city is making it so difficult to live here!! Hi As a resident of Eastvale working in LA county, we need fast, easy and accessible transportation to keep up with our jobs. Let face it, increasing number of lanes on 91 is not a long term solution. Leaders thing ahead of times please. Faster better trains or metro is a great solution and investment with greater long term benefits. We have no commuter buses going straight to Fullerton or LA or LAX from Corona or riverside. We only have from riverside to orange direct commuter buses. We have only three trains in morning to LA and nothing during day. Please increase frequency of metrolink trains, talk with BSNL for that. Trains and commuter buses will be environment friendly as well. We need over the ground subway system connecting riverside to orange and LA counties. We call ourselves first world but with third world facilities of transportation. This should be unacceptable. Leaders don't think short only, they think ahead . Please leave some legacy that future generations may be thankful about. I sent request to Eastvale city regarding bus stop right in the backyard on Hamner Ave(58th st.&Hamner) causing us lots of disturbance. We will appreciate if you could kindly move that bus stop. Thanks. Finish the bike trail from San Bernardino to Anaheim. I LIVE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE FREEWAY IN NORCO BETWEEN 2ND AND 6TH. I WAS TOLD WHEN I MOVED HERE IN 95 THAT A SOUND WALL WOULD BE PUT UP. IT NEVER WAS, THEN IN 2005 WE WERE ADVISED THAT A SOUND WALL WOULD BE PUT UP WHEN A LANE WOULD BE ADDED ONTO THE FREEWAY. THEN DURING A TOWN MEETING WE WERE ADVISED THAT A SOUND WALL WOULD NOT BE PUT UP AFTER ALL SINCE THERE IS NOT ENOUGH HOMES AFFECTED BY THIS ISSUE. THERE IS A LOT OF US HERE NOT JUST A SMALL HANDFUL. PLS CALL ME I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THIS GROWING CONCERN. Page 49 92860 Norco WOULD LIKE TO GET A SOUND WALL. WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK WITH SOMEONE THAT IS KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT CITY OF NORCO PROJECTS. 92860 Norco // FREEWAY 15 BETWEEN 91 AND 60 BETWEEN 2ND - 6TH STREET IN NORCO - WENT TO A MEETING AND CONCERNED WITH NOISE LEVELS DUE TO TRAFFIC WAS TOLD THAT SOUND WALL WAS NOT NEED AND THIS IS NOT TRUE WANTS TO SPEAK WITH SOMEONE ABOUT THIS 92860 Norco 2nd call asked to speak with Nicole had requested plan for 15 fwy 1546 Elm drive Norco 92860. 92860 Norco Take a train to work and get off the highway, we need more passenger rail that focuses around the inland empire and not all going to LA or the OC 92860 Norco THERE IS A 6:30p TOWNHALL MEETING THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN, THERE IS SOMETHING IN THE NEWSPAPER ABOUT IT,WANTS TO MAKE SURE HE CAN REGISTER FOR THIS,PLS CALL. Add lanes and improve the transition from the 91 to the 71. Add on/off 92860 Norco lanes directly from Greenriver on to the toll lanes thus avoiding the need to cross lanes on the 91 in order to get to the toll lanes headed to the 55. 92860 Norco 15 Freeway and Hidden Valley off- and on -ramps: Why wasn't the interchange completed? Two type cloverleaf ramps should have been constructed there. We have so much traffic at that site, the simple ramps would move traffic more directly onto the freeway. With all the other improvements being made in that area, this should be done. Why hasn't anyone addressed this? 92860 Norco Double the non toll lanes 92860 Norco A new road from lake Elsinore over the hill to Irvine! Not many jobs in Corona or Riverside everything is elsewhere which is why we live here then travel to work N/A N/A You're too focused on maximizing your profits from toll roads that actually hinder the flow of traffic with dangerous poorly designed merging lanes... N/A N/A 1-7\lot everyone works 9-5 in Irvine. People work swing shift and graveyard and everything else. People also need to get to airports and other busy areas. It just seems that our entire transportation system in Southern California is ridiculous. Page 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ha, I got fired from my job because the bus was late it's not reliable The higher rate is ridiculous! N/A Applying this would help the riverside area freeways! J N/A N/A Make @bird & @limebike6 ®'s more accessible throughout the city. Create public charging stations / noticeable drop off / pick up stations. _ N/A N/A I Get rid of the toll roads, simple How about metrolink service outside of banker's hours. Even ONE run mid day and something accommodating for third shift people would help a lot of people who could/would take the train but can't because it doesn't run according to their schedules.. N/A N/A Get rid of the damned golf course and add enough lanes for the demand! N/A N/A Then serve all of us!! No more toll roads!! N/A N/A It would be great if the Metrolink would start earlier. Like 2am N/A N/A look into correcting/adjusting the overly quick traffic lights. many i have noticed turn very quickly for only 1 car coming onto or crossing a more major road, in which that 1 cat hasn't even reached a full stop at that signal light. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A How about a complete reorganization of strategy. The current one has reached an ever increasing rate of diminishing returns. Quit dedicating the vast majority of precious time and resources on mass transit, widening and toll lane gimmicks. It's time to go BIG and push to extend the 105 to the 60/91/215 interchange, or vice versa. These areas have been in a perpetual catch-up mode for at least a generation. It's getting worse by the day, because, as we all know, broadening the tax base to pay for public sector salaries, benefits and "Golden Prachutes" isn't going to end anytime soon..."Just Do It" Wipe out all islands , and change lights so you can turn on greens. Double deck the 91 fwy Stop building that will help with the traffic and open the toll roads so people's le can use them like a carpool like it use to be Page 51 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Stop dumping the Toll Rd onto the 91. That ties up the whole canyon and makes it the major bottle neck. Enforce the law that says big trucks can not use 4 lanes to run in. They are only supposed to run in the first two right hand lanes. But no one enforces that and they tie up and slow traffic into bottlenecks and unsafe conditions trying to get away from them. Design flaw with the toll road access should be allowed through that area with lane control in the troll road so cars can continue on the left side of the control lane. If you notice traffic eases up once cars are allowed to enter after green river road. Make this area completely unaffordable to live in, like Orange County. That should do the trick. Get some professional help for your tax revenue addiction that makes you allow land developers to build thousands and thousands of additional homes in the very areas with the worst traffic. Your unrestrained greed has blinded you. Put more buses that go orange county we need another lane going on country village road between 60fwy and philadelphia in the city of jurupa valley. It can take about 20-30 min just to pass it with traffic everyday, without traffic 5-7 min, and there is a lot of space to make another lane... Needs to widen 91 freeways from 115 to 60 Freeway. Have trucks off frwy until 9:30am on 91. Have buses, plural, to go from Eastvale to popular work sites in Orange County, courthouse, UCI, all colleges, post offices etc., and downtown areas. STOP building houses, until this problem is resolvedtititii RCTC and the Board of Supervisors do not actually want to find solutions. They are beholden to developers. The solution is to stop building houses and build INFRASTRUCTURE. Bring jobs to the area so people don't have to commute to OC everyday and clog the freeways. Also, fire Anne Meyer and her staff for the mess that is the 91. A bunch of overpaid shills who have no interest in serving the residents of the county. Because the toll roads were built with taxpayer money are currently being maintained by taxpayer dollars via caltrans wouldn't it make sense to make them public Access we could add an additional Lane and a carpool lane to the entire stretch of the freeway and all we have to do is take down the cones Page 52 N/A N/A Unconstitutional toll roads freeways were never meant to be tolled the toll roads create more traffic and even for subscribers only offer a quicker ten min or so for the commute its pure robbery &taking advantage of peoples work commutes roads were made to be free & when they made the lames everyome expected faster commutes for all not just the privileged that can pay some are forced to use toll roads now and thats just wrong #FREEways1950s #TOLLways2020sad & infuriating N/A N/A Transform the bike path along the river that begins in Corona at Green River near the golf course into a connecting road into Anaheim Hills. There is no direct side street route between the two cities and it is desperately needed. N/A N/A Stop building houses. If you are going to keep building houses then you have to widen the roads too. It's just common sense! Freeways are one thing but roads are another. In Corona, Norco, and Eastvale specifically there are too many one or two lane roads with too many cars and the traffic just keeps getting worse. Also, please build a road between Anaheim Hills and Corona. I'm sure it would be backed up just like the 91 freeway but you have to give people another alternative to sitting on that terrible freeway because it is the only way to get from Riverside to Orange County. N/A N/A I suggest we stop building homes and focus on building quality hospitals and healthcare systems that our region desperately needs. I would also like to see us generate more jobs and keep the pay competitive so that our residents don't commute to OC or LA counties. We should live, play and work in our County. N/A N/A Have buses, plural, to go from Eastvale to popular work sites in Orange County, courthouse, UCI, all colleges, post offices etc., and downtown areas. STOP building houses, until this problem is resolvedilm ZIP City Comments - Riverside CAN YOU MAKE A METRO LINK STOP IN HIGHGROVE? PLS CALL ME 92501 Riverside BACK. CALLER DECLINED EMAIL ADDY. IN ORDER TO SUBMIT REQ, I PUT PCN'S EMAIL. i 92501 Riverside Sidewalks on Columbia Ave. to Strong St. atrocious needs improvement. 92501 Riverside 6_ I take magnolia Ave in Riverside. It's congested on main intersection that have freeway onramps and around CBU 92501 Why not offer employers a tax break to hire people who live within a Riverside certain zip code? Hire local keep jobs local and commuter traffic down. Page 53 Boring Company by elon musk underground freeway system. Make an awesome video ad to support tax money allocated for this project and or 92501 Riverside also crowd fund GoFundMe campaign. Hyperloop partnerships with DTLA, i_ DT San Diego, and Anaheim. Also be considering Youtube this -> Starship -_ Earth to Earth being early adopter for it from Spacex 92501 Riverside I would take Metrolink if more trains or shuttles heading from Downtown Riverside to Irvine and back were offered. 92501 Riverside Hello, my name is Gregory Garcia I leaves in Riverside my whole life and love this city, but I would love to see stores(clothing and food), gym, restaurants... etc. where that old abandoned golf course is, in Riverside on the corner of Main st and Columbia ave. North Riverside has no real plaza or shopping center. We have factories. When we need to get something we have to drive to other parts of town and neighborhoods to get them. I've been eating Bakers, Del taco and recently Jack in the Box for years now because that's all we have in the area. I have to drive to Casa Blanca neighborhood (Madison st) just to go to a gym (24hour fitness). Just think about it. Thank you for your time. 92501 Riverside Sync the stoplights. Try not to close Market Street for weekend events. Also, during the weekend, especially during the special events, open up some restricted parking lots for businesses that are not open during the weekend. Stop road diets, carpool lanes and toll roads. You make traffic to make 92501 Riverside people think they must pay more to solve it. If trains and busses worked their would not be so many cars on the road. We will not give up our cars! 92502 Riverside I Railroad crossings on madison need lights to slow down fast drivers and increase safety of pedestrians. 92503 Riverside "Please finish the Santa Ana River Trail between Riverside and Orange County. The SART is a long awaited feature for commuters and recreational riders all through the Inland Empire and Southern California. Thank you! 92503 Riverside Fixing potholes 92503 Riverside More Metrolink train times from La Sierra -Riverside station. I 92503 Riverside More metro routes. A route to long beach area 92503 Riverside Complete the Santa Ana River trail through to Orange county Page 54 92503 92503 Riverside Riverside 92503 92503 Riverside Riverside Riverside needs more cutting of red tape! Excessive regulations makes it too difficult for the improvements the city needs to be executed. Fixing our roads is the biggest tangible necessity we need! No more asphalt, we need concrete roads. Low maintenance and well -maintained street trees need to be made mandatory to help with pollution while also benefiting the community by reducing the heat island effect resulting in more comfortable temperatures and reducing the occurrence of heat -related complications. I would extend the Pierce Avenue on -ramp to the 91 west another 100 yards. The backup from those trying to merge onto the 91 westbound at the Pierce on -ramp is now extending almost back to Van Buren Boulevard at any given time during the day. Traffic just comes to a halt because that on -ramp is too short and cars just bunch together. And PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE stop dead -ending lanes on the freeways. When people are traveling at high rates of speed and a lane just ends, there is ALWAYS a bottleneck traffic jam, no ifs, ands, or buts. STOP!!! 1. West 91 at La Sierra is frequently congested around the Magnolia curve. Is there a plan to replace the Buchanan bridge and widen the section from la Sierra to past the bridge. There is plenty of shoulder room and the issue is too much traffic joining the freeway in that zone. 2. Your new traffic signal programmer is incompetent over the last 2+years we have watched as junction after junction has been reprogrammed and made worse the worst by far is Tyler - not an easy junction I know but I avoid it now as traffic often James the exits. 3 an increasing number of people run red lights by significant amounts. Is it time to bring back county owned cameras - they work very well in the rest of the world - yes politicians and lawyers break the law that does not make it their right to be exempt! Is there a plan to widen Van Buren Boulevard --only a two lane Page 55 92503 Riverside None of the current projects will help resolving the commute problems the Inland Empire and Southern California in general are facing. The planning and construction phases take too long and by the time these projects have been completed, the number of housing projects and commuters have increased disproportionately. There is no way to build your way out of this mess with a 10+years timelines for these projects. Possible ways to help alleviate the problem is by enticing the industry to provide good paying jobs locally so that people don't want to commute to OC. Another possibility is to force BNSF to allow more commuter trains on their tracks so that Metrolink or another provider can provide fast, reliable and efficient public transportation to the OC, like other cities provide. In the morning, there should be train service every few minutes with a much faster speeds. Trains are driving at 45 -55 mph which takes too long to get to Irvine, Tustin or other destinations in OC and LA County. With more trains, there are more seats available and people should be enticed to use the train by subsidizing the tickets or passes, maybe by making the commute via public transportation tax deductible or the county can provide a refund from SB1 . We can't build our way out of this mess, no matter how many freeway lanes you build. Any project, current or planned is just a drop in the bucket and will not help at all. And certainly taxing people twice (gas tax and toll lanes) is not going to solve anything. It creates hate, discrimination and a two class commute, those who can afford to pay for the tolls and those who can't. Provide better public transportation and use the cias tax to five the local road issues (continued) I don't know if the decision makers of the RCTC live here, but I don't know why you can't work on projects that are quick to resolve, for example put the traffic lights in sequence so that the traffic flows. Magnolia, Van Buren, La Sierra are a nightmare for drivers. Look at the freeway exists off the 91, Adams Street. The lights are not synchronized between the freeway exit and Indiana, making it a nightmare to exit there. None of the lights are synchronized, making the drive there a stop -and -go. I have seen systems in Europe, called "green wave" where you start at the first light and if you drive the allowed speed, you would almost never have to stop. and in residential areas, build roundabouts instead of adding more lights that are also prohibiting free traffic flow. The system currently in place may have worked in the 60s, 70s or maybe 80s, but with today's traffic density, you need to change your thinking. Look at other areas in the world, Italy, Germany, Spain, France. Many traffic signals have been replaced by roundabouts. I could give you dozens more examples, if needed. Page 56 92503 Riverside I work in a hospital in Paramount and I have to be at work at 6 a.m.. Is there a metro link train that can take me there by that time? I also work 12 hour shifts and I get off work at 7 p.m.. I have lived here in Riverside since 2003. I live off of La Sierra where there is the metro link station down the street. I love this city and would love the different ways to make my commute safer, more affordable and faster to be able to spend more time with my family. Thank you for letting people like me voice our situation. 92503 I think any type of work on the 91 needs to be done, from potholes to fwy widening to some type of easy interchange, the reason why there is so Riverside much traffic on the 91 fwy is because no one wants to let anyone in when they merge on to the fwy, somehow we need to figure out what to do, it maybe impossible but it's worth a try. 92503 Riverside Fix east west travel between inland empire and orange county and between highway 74 and 60 freeway. Most good high pay jobs are points west, but many live in points east and 1000's of homes are being built eastward. Commute times of 1 1/2 hours each way are typical trying to go from downtown Riverside into Orange County. Highway 74 needs improvements to make Riverside county portion safer, Orange County has completed improvements to their side. 91 west needs the mess at Green River fixed. Scaling back the original 91 Corridor project to elimanate designated lanes from GR to 241 has created a bottleneck and made this billion dollar project a failure. Fix the mess Anne created by allowing this portion of project to be omitted. In fact, Anne needs to go, we need fresh blood at the helm that has a better vision and perspective of this counties needs to move residents on our roadways. Page 57 92503 Riverside Eliminate toll roads. Whoever designed the the entrance/exit at the OC/Riverside county line (both directions) should be fired and forced to give back all money they were paid. Plus, they should be forced to drive it every day to see how stupid their idea was, and how much it ruins the drives for everyone who can't afford $40 dollars a day in toll. $200/week. Or more than $10,000 a year! I can't pay that, but I am forced to pay extra in gas, sitting in an absolute mess while the lanes to my left are barely used. Traveling east on the 91, traffic eases up AFTER this disaster. Same with traveling west, traffic eases after. Two lanes of lightly used traffic while the "free" (tax payers paid for them) lanes are at a standstill. Getting into those lanes (westbound) at the 15 is a nightmare with two or more lanes of cars all trying to squeeze in at the last minute, blocking and holding up the "free" lanes. But, why should we have to pay to drive on lanes that we already paid to build. Cash grab? Westbound at the county line has cars trying to get out of the toll lanes to the right to make the 241 exit, and cars on the right coming from the 71 and Green River trying to get to the toll road entrance, creating an "x" pattern of cars criss crossing. Might explain why there are so many accidents right there. The toll road creates a sense of urgency that makes people disregard the safety of others making unsafe lane changes, to makes their own commute easier. (continued) Take down the barriers and booths and the need for cars to cross cross across five lanes, and make everyone's drive easier and safer. But in California, that will never happen as the only thing that matters is where to get more money from more people. Which is why they are building more toll lanes. 92503 Riverside To fix the road 92503 Riverside Love the 200 take it to Disneyland from Riverside all the time 92503 If you're going to raise prices for Commuter Link, then have more bus times Riverside available. 92503 Riverside How `bout just normal people, which would in turn supplement the commute of special needs individuals. It takes an hour to get from Central Ave. to Green River in the morning commute. This is embarrassing as a community. Subway, tunneling, bridges. Come on. 92503 Riverside Put a signal at El Sobrante and La Sierra. Make El Sobrante a 2-lane parkway each direction from Cajalco to La Sierra. 92503 Riverside A double layered freeway like in China, super expensive for sure Page 58 92504 Riverside A 24hr bus service throughout the city L J 92504 I Riverside Improvement can be made on the train coming so frequently in the morning on Madison, Jefferson and Washington. Its horrible not matter how early you keave to worlk or school. 92504 Riverside Need more stop signs on dewey ave. racing takes place weekly. 92504 Riverside `92504 Riverside Lower prices for bus. More trash cans, shelters, and signs for the bus stops. Mejores horarios mas transportation publica. 1 92504 Riverside Close or block freeways at appropriate times where there is minimal commuters 92504 Either keep traffic lights open to go for van Buren and Alessandro or make freeways out of them. Also Cajalco is beginning to get a lot of traffic so we need better road.91 freeway in itself is problem. 15@ Corona; 91 @60 Riverside interchange; 215@60 , 215@ 15 is a perpetual traffic jam. So many more people living here but not much change in ease of movement How can it take us 45 minutes to get around riverside. Example: just traveling Van Buren to Woodcrest slow commute. 92504 Riverside Inland Empire residents need commuter train service to and from Palm Springs. At present it can take over six hours to get from Riverside to Palm Springs by train or bus. There is no real train station in Palm Springs... not even a ticket booth/dispenser. I understand that part of the problem with increasing commuter train services is conflicts between Union Pacific & BNSF vs. passenger services involving track sharing, particularly during rush hour. This has been going on for a long time. Public transportation is the future and money needs to be allocated to improve and expand on these rail lines. Besides environmental concerns, commuter trains are easier on seniors and disabled people who cannot drive or might have trouble driving. Improved train service would also benefit Palm Springs' tourist industry, and would encourage people from nearby towns who just want to come in and shop or attend cultural events. 92504 Riverside Repaving on Dewey street in Riverside the street is very very rough and also 5700 block Walter st needs Repaving as well 92504 Riverside Restripe and put pylons on the eastbound expresslanes from Lincoln to the 91/15 split. This would improve travel times for both lanes. Page 59 92504 I would engage with the boring company. We need to be modern like the EU. Everything there is linked by the Eurorail and bus transport. All trains Riverside should be linked in the US. Amtrak, Metro, RTA.... We need underground rail. Boring company can deliver. Riverside is the HUB for all of IE. We need to set the infrastructure for the future of this location. 92504 Riverside I have a few ideas about providing a better need for the community of riverside. 92504 Riverside proposal for making the toll road all the way to Riverside --please clarify 92504 Riverside I drive from Riverside to Colton daily, why did you put a diamond lane in? Big waste of money the cars I see in this lane, at least half, only have 1 driver. This diamond lane on 91 all the way into San Berdo 215, we all use the freeways and I pay thousands in taxes and can't use this lane. Let's get real not everyone can commute with other people. Another big blunder was on the 91 e/b in Riverside approaching downtown, approaching Mission Inn exist, the giant bridge which connects 60 to 91 creates a very dangerous back up. Vehicle comes off the bridge (connector from 60) merge onto 91 e/b and during rush hour this becomes a big dangerous mess. I rarely see CHP! You see them when there has been a very bad accident (after the fact) or if Cal Trans is blocking's a lane. Where are they? 92504 L_ Riverside Create more engineering jobs in Riverside so we don't have to travel so far for a job. More projects and it it a rule that it has to local companies that can bid on the he projects. Don't sub things out to other LA base companies for the work. A dedicated mortorcycle lane will work. 92504 Riverside fix the 91 eastbound at the 15 frwy... since the fastrack project on the 91 east to the 15 frwy has been completed the traffic from all the lanes merging is horrible I know with all the studies done they know when you merge 3 or 4 different lanes at the same location it causes problems. so why would they do this and are there any plans to fix this situation. 92504 Riverside Repave Market St in Riverside as well as Van Buren Blvd between Limonite and the 60 Fwy. 92504 Riverside I'm nterested in finding out exactly what it is that this website is going to provide before I'm able to comment. Thank you in advance it's always great to have anything towards developing a better life in our community. Page 60 92504 Riverside I want to see regular dedicated light rail from Riverside into Orange County following the 55 and 91. The trains need to several times a day, both directions, and late. While this project is underway, the Metrolink could run several more trains a day and also bring back the 10-pass ticket. 92504 Riverside Metro link is too expensive and too crowded at peak times. Make it more user friendly! 92504 Riverside L Have to get Sacramento to give up some et e . 215 is a mess. Stop building warehouses. 92505 Riverside Control traffic signals so that the areas with more traffic go more often. For example if theres one car one side and the other has 10 cars time signals. Where theres heavy traffic repair roads more. 92505 Riverside Less traffic 92505 Riverside Please finish the Santa Ana River Trail between Riverside and Orange County. The SART is a long awaited feature for commuters and recreational riders all through the Inland Empire and Southern California. Thank you. he freeway we should have a subway system stop the traffic 92505 Riverside we need more transit services 92505 • Riverside Study doing better traffic signal synchronization. Especially main artery streets to 91 Fwy like Madison, 91, Indiana Ave. It's horrible!!! Eastbound Arlington Ave. signal timing is non-existent. I'm stopped by every signal in the mornings from La Sierra to the 91/Arlington!! 92505 Riverside Stop road construction. Stupid workers caused a sinkhole near my house and the roads weren't paved well. It's bumpy and already cracking. We need to get rid of Sabrina Cervantes for pushing laws that tax the people to "improve roads" when reall it makes traffic worse. Homeless people are a huge issue as well. Also stop gun control. Let people have freedom ya damn dictators 92505 Riverside RCTC is responsible to build the SART connecting Riverside and Orange counties. Please take a moment to request they make this project a priority. ' 92505 Riverside Complete the Santa Ana River Trail linking Riverside and Orange County 92505 Riverside No more fast track, my tax dollars already paid to drive on the freeway. 1 Page 61 92506 Riverside The problem of improper city/county planning, regarding transportation has evidently worsened. Over the years, the growth of people vs infrastructure, vs the freeway system, has been a failure. We as homeowners, are paying the price dearly, for your lack of proper addressing of this threat and detriment to our lives. The problem commuters face, should be addressed, and not at the cost of our needs and homes. We too have to pick up our kiddos from school. We have to risk backing out from our driveways, and pull out onto traffic, with exasperated commuters, honking their horn, on the overly congested streets, that is turned into parking lots. We, as homeowners along the Arlington corridor, in Riverside, are jeopardizing ourselves daily. What happens is, the out of city/county residents/commuters, act as this is their street. There's road rage, that endanger our lives, and it shouldn't be happening. They contribute to a problem that should've been remedied and we pay the price at this expense. We have to plan accordingly to commuting hour. It's 4:18 pm, as I speak and carloads of frustrated drivers, bumper to bumper, who won't let me back out of my own driveway! I can't last minute go grab a pizza or order a pizza in time for 5 pm dinner, because of course, I must endanger ourselves with honking horns, or shouting through their rolled down window, or something hurled at us! (continued) Forget ordering pizza for delivery, because a block walk to Pizza hut, turns into 1 hour delivery of cold, hard pizza! Why should we be paying the price dearly for improper funding/freeway planning? I only recently became active with voicing my frustration and fear. Last month, I submitted my formal complaint to the city. If necessary, you all come and park in our driveways, at 4:00 pm-6:45 pm, and see how long you linger before you can be `allowed' to back out into menacing traffic! 92506 Riverside More bike lanes, protected bike lanes, and having lights at intersections be cyclist friendly will increase biking as a mode of transportation. To start, adding bike lanes to connect existing bike routes will enable safer cycling. The intersection at canyon crest and central has bike routes in 3 directions but a disconnect with the 4th direction. Several people have cited this lack of infrastructure and resulting safety concerns as their reason for using a single occupancy vehicle instead of biking. 92506 Riverside L Too many street improvements at one time. Seems like a project is started, not completed then another is started, etc. etc. etc. finish what u start before beginning another. 92506 I Riverside Fix pot holes and better freeway merger transitions Page 62 92506 92506 92506 92506 92506 92506 92506 Riverside Riverside Riverside Riverside Riverside Riverside Riverside I work for RTA and theres so many potholes and its hard to drive around in Moreno Valley so improve the roads. We need more buses and times in the AM that run from the Pass area to Riverside. I live in Beaumont and work in Riverside off Magnolia and Arlington. Right now the bus commute would be almost two hours and I'd still get to work late every day. I would take the 200 bus yo my job at California adventure which I have done a few times. But as a new employee I get late shifts a d the last bus from Anaheim is too early. If there was an 11:30 pm bus I could commute by the 200. I know cast members who would the same. We need to remoce all obstacles that prevent free flow of traffic. Southern California is spread out over miles and not densely packed like New York City, so we cannot solve our traffic problems the same way New York City has. What we need to do is, build wider freeways, remove toll and carpool lanes because they cause more traffic than reduce it. Most people are single occupants in their vehicles and tool roads are a burden on people who pay high gas prices. Widen roads by increasing lanes, therefore people are spending less time idling in traffic. You can add to mass transit, however ridership is done as most people drive to places. So instead of penalizing people for driving and making the driving experience terrible, we need to increase our roads and freewsys. If you really care about the environment make it easier for citizens who work or have businesses are able move freely they in other states for less. We keep throwing money at the problem but keeps getting worse, so listen to the people we are the ones using the roads everday. I would take a job making a little less salary in order to free myself of the daily commute. I am away from my house 14 hours a day and I only work 9-10 hours. The rest of the time is commuting. HAVE YOU EVER THOUGHT ABOUT OFFERING A STIPEND TO COMMUTERS? I have a lot of friends that work in the arts, entertainment and restaurant industries. With the city growing and our entertainment section of Riverside expanding many people that use public transportation can get to work easily but then have to struggle for a ride home in the early hours. The city should provide late night public transportation specifically for late night workers. Page 63 92506 Riverside As someone who spent nearly 30 years in the planning field for Riverside County (urban planning, environmental planning, and park planning), I sincerely believe that it is our irrational desire to rubber stamp every housing project that comes in for processing that is fueling much of the commute issues. At the same time, we do nothing to encourage businesses to set up satellite offices to reduce the need for the commute. In this day of computers, e-mail, skype, video conferencing etc., there is absolutely no need for someone to drive from Riverside or Moreno Valley to Orange County or Los Angeles to sit in front of a computer. Yes, it will take a change in the thinking of managers also, but the county could be offering incentives for legal, engineering, and other firms to allow people to work out of a centralized satellite office closer to home and not have to make the commute. If we add more lanes to the freeway, the mentality that has existed for the last 50 years will continue, and we will continue to approve more and more housing developments with no consumate number of good, high -paying jobs nearby. I can point to many such developments - Oak Valley near Beaumont for example, that approved thousands of homes with only a single commercial center for "jobs." (continued) This kind of idiotic planning has to stop. Just as we now evaluate projects for their impacts to greenhouse gas emission, we should also be evaluating (objectively) how a project will impact the freeways and commute times for not only the proposed residents but the current ones also. If that project will negatively impact commute times etc., then we have to have the backbone to stand up to the development community and tell them we no longer want such projects in our county (the vast majority of developers are out of LA and Orange County and never witness the impacts of their projects). I hope I haven't rambled on for too long, but I fear that we are looking at the wrong end of the problem - namely how to effect the commute. We should be looking at how to avoid it in the first place. Page 64 92506 Riverside My issue is the 15 fwy. Both north and south of the 91 Fwy. I do not understand how we are taking Public byways, and creating TollRoads. We Californians already pay the highest Taxes of any state, including gas, and Vehicle registration taxes and Fees. Yet the lanes we are building on the 15 Fwy. are Toll Lanes. We should be adding regular travel lanes for cars, and the gas tax should go Exclusively for road improvements Only. The group that runs the Toll roads had a $2.4 million Deficit 20 years ago, and now its over $6.4 Million. None of this money was spent on road improvements. They are wasting money on Expensive Orange County "Consultants" most of whom have some type of "relationship" with the Board members. $175.00 an hour to read news stories?? A waste of Taxpayer money. Also why is 2 people a "Carpool" in Orange County, but when it comes to the 15 Fwy. corridor, suddenly it takes 3 people to form a"Carpool"?? People work hard everyday, they should not be Charged to drive the Freeway to get to their Jobs. All new Housing construction should be halted, until we have the Infrastructure to deal with the resulting traffic. 92506 Riverside Dial -A -Ride needs improvement. Health insurance helps but doesn't cover all costs. What are the caller's paratransit options? 92506 Riverside 5.5 mile commute--4 of those miles are all potholes --why can't we take care of our streets? 92506 I would like to see more bike trails within the city and county of Riverside. On streets like Victoria I would like to see Yield signs, rather than stop signs as the flow of traffic on Victoria (especially to bike traffic and bike Riverside groups) should be the priority. With regard to regular roads, I'd like to see larger bike lanes and perhaps even sectioned off areas of the road (with a curb) on major streets. 92506 Riverside I would like to have dedicated biking paths throughout the city. This will promote transportation diversity and healthy living. It is not necessary, efficient, or beneficial to drive in a vehicle when traveling within a city (within 6 miles). There are countless times that I would like to ride my bike to my destination, yet I choose not to because I am worried about my safety on the roads. Page 65 Clogged early morning traffic on westbound 91 which begins after Tyler makes for very slow going. Drivers constantly change lanes and this congestion makes it difficult to enter the toll road. Perhaps 2 lanes dedicated to entering the westbound 91 toll road would help some. 92506 Riverside Another aid might be to limit 18 wheelers to specific late evening hours. Require home builders to contribute to road building & maintenance. And make certain that all vehicle registration fees & gas taxes go exclusively to road building. Thank you. 92506 Riverside This insane feeling that houses, strip malls, fast food joints, etc. need to be built on every square foot of land in the Inland Empire needs to change. Stop building sprawl and maybe there won't be a need for more congested roads. I think Riverside should work to increase metrolink services, in both directions , on all lines. Right now the choices are very limited if you want to travel west from Riverside after 8:30 am or east to Riverside,before 3:OOpm. As the population grows, the demographics may well be changing, 92506 Riverside where there are more people wanting to travel in the opposite directions of the traditional commuters going to OC and LA counties. We have 5 college campuses where students might commute more on trains, if they were available and a growing retirement population that would benefit from more choices. 92506 Riverside I commute to downtown LA. The commercial truck traffic has taken ove our freeways leaving cars to drive in one lane as a solo driverl, that's it, all the other lanes are filled with tractor trailers. We need to have an express train to downtown. It takes over two hours to take the train at a cost of over $300 a month., that's too much to pay for slow train service. An express train and small subsidy from the County may entice drivers like me to leave their cars in Riverside County. Also, a campaign targeted at government agencies (like the State) to permit regular telework would be very helpful. One way or another we have to help our citizens work without the stress of driving over two hours to work or paying for slow train service that takes two hours. Page 66 Hello. This seems like a great initiative. I do believe that the projects for widening and unclogging freeways are necessary and important, but what we really need are alternatives to taking cars everywhere. We need much better train service to LA (with trains not only going out in the morning and coming back in the afternoon/early evening, but running throughout the 92506 Riverside day at predictable - possibly half-hour - intervals). If at all possible, a new train line to San Diego would also be able to take quite a few cars off the roads. In Riverside itself, we need good bike paths criss-crossing the city (not the ones shared with cars on multi -lane streets, but paths for bikes only). I would be happy to leave my car at home if I could bike -commute to work in relative safety. AL 92506 Riverside One thing I notice is people who work late can get a ride to work but then are stuck with no ride after! We need to consider most people working at restaurants and theaters probably aren't the wealthiest to even consider an Uber or Lift. 92506 Riverside They want to steal your money and pocket it. Give them nothing. 92507 Riverside I would like to meet with Ann Mayer to talk about the "Reboot My Commute" program. I agree with her statement that says "We will need to think outside the familiar white and yellow lines, all ideas are welcome" This program sounds like a good plan to help solve our transportation problems. Please schedule a meeting with her and I will come to her office. 92507 Riverside Please fix the potholes in the roads. I keep getting flat tires. Especially the ones on Canyon Crest, which is the road I take to school. Chicago is pretty bad too. I just want smooth roads please. I'm a college student that can't afford anymore flat tires. 92507 Riverside I would like to change the times for busses, have them arrive quicker so familes and independent workers and depend on them and create a dedicated lane on magnolia ave for RTA only and or emergency vehicles. F;2507FRiverside t Gas, traffic, potholes 92507 Riverside I think more busses more transpertation options. Would help everyone. Despite the massive reconstruction of the 91/60/215 interchange, this connector is perpetually clogged with traffic both during the rush hour 92507 Riverside periods and even on weekends/off-times. The worst is the bottleneck effect with the merging of traffic from eastbound 91, southbound 215, and the eastbound 60. Page 67 92507 Riverside Would like to see different agencies across the county finally come together and not only focus on tackling and solving commute problems,but also focus on homeless and urban blight solutions 92507 Riverside I am a commuter on the 91/15 fwy exchange on the weekends mostly and on several weeknights in the week. I go to my church and some other events for my networking with Military Veterans in Tustin, Irvine and also Teacher events at Cal State Fullerton. This past Thursday, March 21st was a nightmare, I left my house in ample time to go to Huntington Beach via 91 w and then 55 Newport beach to the 39 fwy to the 5 fwy, to 405 w. I am sorry but I didn't make it to my event, I was in crazy traffic for 1 and half hours and just got to Imperial Hwy and got off to do the streets, I was listening to the sigalert on the radio, there was a water leak on the 55 fwy so there was not a chance I would get to my distination, so I turned around to go back to Riverside, that was not too bad I make it home by 9:30 p.m.. Thanks 92507 Riverside Change the traffic flow sensors on major thoroughfares from pressure to timed regulators. And synchronize the traffic lights along the way to change at the posted speed limit, so there isn't a continuing stop and go pattern. Instead, a smooth flow of cars throughout the city. This would save gasoline, time, pollution, and long waits for signals to change. 92507 Riverside With the increase in housing, Van Buren needs more care and has many potholes. When will this be addressed? 2. Intersection at 215 and 60 is an issue. Traffic is horrible. 3. Flow of traffic is 92507 Riverside Take the train. 91/PVL line times aren't ideal Canyon Crest to downtown Riverside should not require paying bus fare twice. Lyft/Uber partnership to and from train stations needed. Better train station needed for UC Riverside. Hunter Park is too far away. Train should 92507 Riverside be faster than driving. Look to Ca!train and how they automate boarding announcements, etc to speed up process. Train partnership to Huntington Beach needed. Current train+bus ride takes too much time. Work with Lyft & Uber to get them to offer cheaper shared rides. Page 68 92507 Riverside Hello. I had an idea that would really help with my commute every morning. I live over by Quail Run Park off of Sycamore Canyon Blvd. Unfortunately, but understandably, a lot of commuters will use this road as an alternative to the freeway. My problem is that the road becomes so congested with speeding drivers that I can't turn out from my neighborhood street (Quail Run Road). I would suggest putting in a stop sign at the intersection of Sycamore Canyon Road and Quail Run Road. That way everyone who lives down my road can have a chance to get out onto Sycamore Canyon Road without having to wait in a long line of cars (which currently backs up every morning as cars wait for a safe opportunity to turn). Thank you for your consideration and everything you do for this community. 92507 Riverside A class 1 bike network linking UCR, downtown, the plaza, tyler mall, la sierra university. Specifically I would like class one paths on chicago, spruce, university, magnolia/market, Iowa, Victoria ave (expand and refine). If you create a system you would feel comfortable letting your children use, people would flock to it. Create light rail for the city. Metrolonk is pretty useless if I want to go from UCR to the plaza or downtown or tyler mall. Link class one bikeways with light rail stops and parks. Give incentives for biking and disincentives for driving. Maybe rebates or discounts on utility bills or maybe rent (yeah, rent increases are another can of worms) or gift cards for groceries. 92507 Riverside I would bring high paying career jobs to the inland empire. Alas this is not likely to happen any time soon. I commute to Irvine for work and driving would take me 1.5-2 hrs one way. I take the metrolink but it hasn't reduced my commuting time since i have to take the OCTA bus as well. What i would like to see is a wider range of train times and more public transport that's affordable. How is it even possible that im spending the same on a metrolink monthly pass compared to the amount of gas money per month when I was commuting to Irvine! 92507 Riverside Replace the pavement on SR 60/ 1-210 east of the Riverside Interchange. - between the interchange and the Central Ave UC. The concrete pavement, especially the #3, #4 & #5 lanes is badly broken up and is barely drivable. I have seen the prospective construction contracts by Dist 8 in the near term and do not see any remedial work programmed. This will be a very difficult area to fix! 92507 Riverside Go to Santa Barbara and see. Small electric buses, every few minutes, on short routes. 92507 Riverside Giant empty buses. Page 69 92507 Riverside Electric buses, running more frequently on shorter routes. 92507 Riverside RTA bus route are long loops running infrequently in one direction only. There is a bus stop by my house, it would take me 20 minutes to take it to work, but then it would take an hour and a half to get home. 92507 Riverside Keep the sidewalks clean. There is an area of sidewalk that is impossible to walk on because of a lot of mud. It is on Canyon Crest Drive near Central, on the east side of the street. 92507 Riverside Yes , build the wall. Fix the roads 92507 Riverside cry me a santa ana river about the gas tax, its not like the groups listed above can always depend on driving themselves. Don't worry Maurice! They will probably take the carpool away on the 92507 Riverside 215, 91, & 60 soon enough & add fast trak to them as well to rob us some more! 92507 Riverside Have the people in charge have to use only public transportation for 3 months. No Taxi or Uber 92507 Riverside Seriously encourage RideShare Thursday's again and on Mondays & Fridays reduce toll fees for 2 or more commuters , my state job allowed me to come in at 8:30 AM to allow stagnation driving, buses need to be cooler, bus transfer fees should be less - many jobs sites take more than one bus to commute. 92508 I Riverside Please widen the I-15 freeway in the Temecula & Murrieta city areas to improve the flow of traffic. Thank you! 92508 Riverside L Please improve dedicated bike lanes and trails in Riverside County!:) As a bike commuter, I risk my life every week to get to work. Commuting by bike is extremely dangerous. Anything you can do to help make bike commuters; in Riverside County, more safe, would be greatly appreciated. I would like to include this quote from a Washington Post article on cycling safety: "Nationwide, you're more than twice as likely to die while riding a bike than riding in a car, per trip, according to a 2007 study led by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention epidemiologist Laurie Beck. Bike riding is also about 500 times more fatal than riding in a bus." Thank you for your help and have an amazing day. 92508 Riverside 60 freeway shouldn't be that congested.. 9, 2508 Riverside Complete the Santa Ana River Trail between Riverside and Orange County as soon as possible. 92508 I Riverside Add more Bike Cars during large scale bike events. Page 70 92508 Riverside Build the CV Link as soon as possible! 92508 Riverside It is a shame that the public is so ill informed that they believe more lanes will solve our problems. In every major city across the Country, those corridors with the most traffic jams are slowly being changed to a timed stoplight system. Anyone who knows traffic knows that at our stage, "Timing" is everything. If the lights on Van Buren were timed, traffic backup would nearly be eliminated. Please do the proper studies that will actually provide for an improvement, not studies that are of a political liking. 92508 Riverside Fill the pot holes its putting out cars in danger of early deterioration 92508 Riverside After the 60 N merges with the 215 N it is RIDICULOUS traffic day or night. Weekday or weekend. I commute from Riverside Mission Grove to Loma Linda 5 days a week and spend 1.5+ hours every commute in traffic that is primarily located in this region. PLEASE help! 92508 Riverside 1. Since you have this in English/Spanish and I only speak English/Hindi, hopefully you still care about my opinion. 2. No new taxes. 3. Use the current taxes that are taken from us at the local & state level to take care of the streets instead of selling your soul to the union bosses and giving away the farm. 4. NO NEW TAXES. LET MEASURE 'A' EXPIRE. BETTER IDEA - CANCEL MEASURE 'A' 92508 Riverside Consider that if I drive into LA - choices are taking the 210, the 10 or the 60. Driving into orange county I have one choice: the 91. There isn't another freeway choice into South Orange county unless I want to take Ortega highway (which is not a freeway), The only way you will ever relieve pressure off the 91 is to build a freeway with access directly from the 15 into the 241. Adding more lanes to the 91 is only a band aid. In addition, adding additional time slots to the metrolink. The 20 to 25 minute gaps are too long - check out New York City - trains are running all the time, 92508 Riverside Bike or skateboard ! Page 71 92509 Riverside Better integration between counties would be good. Keeping bus stops well maintained and covered shelter from the elements such as sun and rain would be nice. Trash receptacles would be good. Lighting would be good. To be honest, there is a perception of unsanitary conditions, dealing with people who might be violent or unstable associated with riding the bus system. Take a look at our bus stops. Do they invite you or tell you otherwise. Review other cities or counties that have well traveled public transportation. 92509 Riverside I lived in the Bay Area for a spell, for work. It was amazing for a lot of reasons, one specifically was being able to move around the area without a car. This was especially important when I suffered an injury that affected my ability to drive. I still have difficulties driving. Here, in Jurupa Valley, I'm very isolated. The bus is.... Undesirable. Being a physically vulnerable, young-ish, attractive, female is already a dangerous situation, in public. Busses are just a cesspot of potential terrible, that take ages to get anywhere. When appointments, errands, a work shift, or social call would be exhausting on it's own- the idea of walking to, boarding a bus, taking hours to arrive - then do the item - and do that difficult journey all over again. Good god, no thank you. Many of us who have disability stay in isolation, instead. I don't feel safe, the people on busses aren't people I typically want to be around, it takes far too long to get anywhere, and it's humiliating act, in this area. A lower income postion to be in, not a great option to take. No reasonable person takes a bus around here, if they have other options. On the peninsula, in the Bay Area, I could get to many city centers quickly and safely. It was clean, you don't really risk assult, it was mostly on time and, most importantly it was normal to do. Rich folks, poor folks, students and the elderly rode with me - a disabled person- with zero incidents in the years I lived there. My car was never broken into, in a train parking lot, if I had driven, at all. I had a train stop about 1/3 of a mile from my home. Our public transportation is the bare minimum to service the minority that cannot drive. It's not a thing we all use, it's what disadvantaged people who could not scrounge a ride resorted to. Page 72 (continued) Rail expansion is a topic that California is always proding around. I would be extatic if we could expand passenger serivice around here. Our freeways are so, so congested. I live directly adjacent to the 60 so, I breathe the result of the congestion every day. My block has also had several hit -and -runs and DUI collisions with parked vehicles. Better rail serive would pull some of those DUI drivers off the road, as well. It would at least bring them closer to home - with a hired car for 'the last mile' of travel. This isn't a wealthy area - we can't afford a Lyft or Uber, all the way to a city center. It costs me about $40-45 to get a hired car from Jurupa Valley to downtown Riverside and back. We very well may be able to budget better public transportation and short hired car rides, though. Jurupa Valley has seen many casualty collisions, especially on Van Buren and Limonite. My city is expanding and have been trying to entice new residents. Our roadways are as full as they can be, now. How are we going to handle these other commuters? Clean, safe, not shameful, used by everyone, widely available light rail. Metrolink is great! I've used it for years, but it's very limited in scope of stop. It's a longer commute design, not local travel. Infrastructure should be publically owned and not privately profitable. Please expand on the IE's passenger rail system. Yes add more sidewalks in places that don't have them the disable are 92509 Riverside forced to operate their wheelchair in the street. More disable parking downtown. It is limited for the amount of disabled living in the county. 92509 I Riverside I wants more bus service/transportation access 92509 Riverside 92509 Riverside Jurupa Valley the 15 south to Irvine to Coronoa have to pass 91 3-4 miles and do a u-turn in order to get back on the Express lane why is it like this the 60 is backed up in the morning. We need relief on the 60. Too many trucks. I live on a fixed income. Transportation should be free for people who have 92509 Riverside disabilities and are on a fixed income. It shouldn't take 8 hours to Claremont from riverside. Buses should Tun more often. 92509 Riverside I we need more signage on transitions from one freeway to another. 92509 Riverside we need more public transit between Rialto and Riverside. 92509 Riverside we need to fix van Buren through jurupa valley. There is too much traffic during rush hour. 92509 Riverside I like the SR-60 truck lanes project. J 92509 Riverside it costs too much to build here. We need to get rid of some state and local regulations. Page 73 92509 Riverside we need more buses and trains. L J 92509 I Riverside on the weekends. I don't want to drive but the transit schedule (metro link) makes it difficult to get around. I don't like toll lanes. Too expensive and doesn't help with traffic. 1- 92509 Riverside CB freeway entrances need to be better because cars cause traffic congestion and jams (60 fwy on Valley way) 92509 Riverside the 215 needs more lanes near Moreno Valley. Washington has electric cars. I don't see where our transportation taxes are going. we need local transit from Moreno Valley to riverside that runs frequently 92509 Riverside like trolley. We need to educate kids on how to use transit early to foster new generation of transit riders. 92509 Riverside in New York I never had to drive. I had to buy a car when I moved here. We need better transit. IF- 92509 Riverside My daughter lives in riverside off magnolia and when she got in an accident she was left with no car and uses the electric rent scooter to get to work (Sear at Arlington) and it's really convenient I like that program 92509 Riverside add more freeway lanes. 92509 Riverside we need to add a third lane on Van Buren J 92509 Riverside make the freeways wider. the wb 60 lanes near the 15 are in bad shape. There are pot holes and it 92509 Riverside makes it difficult to drive regular pick trucks. The streets on near Van Buren always get flooded. 92509 Riverside I work in construction and I drive a lot. There are too many cars and accidents on the streets 92509 Riverside CB truck driver who thinks there's no remedy to traffic due to congestion and angry drivers only time there is no traffic is at night 92509 Riverside traffic is getting worse. 92509 P Riverside Providing ideas or my personal opinion about current projects or suggestions for new projects. Page 74 92509 Riverside Make public transportation more affordable. OCTA ROUTE 794 to Costa Mesa is convenient but expensive at 14 dollars per day. RTA ROUTE 200 only goes to Anahiem. I feel that cheap, practical and dependable public transportation is the solution. I have been commuting from Riverside for the last 10 years and public transportation just keeps getting more and more expensive to take the bus or metrolink. This will help take vehicles off the roads make the freeways safer and create long term jobs for all the conductors. 92509 Riverside It is clear that the county of Riverside does not think the metro -link service is necessary. it is a system that does not benifit the community due to its lack of speed, and freedom, unlike driving your own car to the orange county area, the worst amount of traffic in the morning and coming back at night. RCTC should be focusing on rewarding those who take the bus or carpool to and from riverside. more luxurious buses and ways to get people to carpool to and from work should be the focus. Construction projects also make the freeways or even major streets unbearable during peak hours. Construction times must drop drastically, whether if that is through working on massive road projects 24/7 (more hires) or working the project in small sections to allow traffic to only be affected in a small area rather than for a mile long stretch (La Sierra heading up to Lake Matthew is a perfect example, a long stretch that still is not complete.) 92509 Riverside Better integration between counties would be good. Keeping bus stops well maintained and covered shelter from the elements such as sun and rain would be nice. Trash receptacles would be good. Lighting would be good. To be honest, there is a perception of unsanitary conditions, dealing with people who might be violent or unstable associated with riding the bus system. Take a look at our bus stops. Do they invite you or tell you otherwise. Review other cities or counties that have well traveled public transportation. N/A Riverside Remove big rigs from the roads during morning and afternoon rush hour commutes N/A I no longer drive And my only hope was the bus. I love it. You have given Riverside my independence back. I dont have to depend on anybody for a ride. Thank you very much. Page 75 N/A more buses and trains. should be 1 bus every 10 minutes at each bus stop. if there was enough public transportation people wouldn't have to rely on Riverside driving cars, there would be less cars on the road which would mean: -less traffic -less accidents (less injuries/death) -less wear on the road/less need to repair wear -less polution need I go on? N/A Riverside More train service! If there was more reliable transportation to Orange and Los Angeles counties via rail, we could chip away at the horrible state of the freeways. I've recently been taking the train into downtown LA for meetings and have been grateful for the convenience but frustrated by how limited of an option it is. We could build rail lines to connect the county as well and get more people using public transit. Light rail through clogged corridors could also help significantly. N/A Riverside Stop Taxing the crap out of us! Actually do your jobs and fill potholes you can start there. N/A I Riverside N/A N/A Riverside Riverside Start investing in articulated busses for popular routes Yeah don't park the damn scooters in the sidewalk so you can get your wheelchair around them Many people have died in Alessandro blvd, one just last week, this has been due to the failure to fix the bottle neck at the 60 and 215 interchange. Want to fix something why don't you start there! F/A Riverside Turn the toll roads into light rail lanes. J N/A I Riverside There comes a point when there are so many people in an area there is nothing you can do . Think about that before you burn tons of money. BE WISE N/A Riverside Go Fix pot holes properly, Or you can give are money back that your wasting. N/A Riverside Get rid of so many bike lanes. I see cars going bumper to bumper in one lane while I almost never see any bicycles in the bicycle lanes. On another subject, I wonder if these electric scooter companies are paying anything to use the public sidewalks to store their scooters. They are a business and store their wares on city property. They need to pay a fee to do so. I have been talking the bus when I can but sometimes my hours are later N/A Riverside than the last 1015 stop at Disneyland and I get off at 1115 would be nice l if the time got changed and I would be taking the bus every day N/A Riverside How about stopping the train at UCR. That's a start! Page 76 N/A We should buy cars at dealerships that arent selling and make them Riverside riverside taxis, you can pay a standard fee to go a certain distance like the rta' only it's not on a fixed route' N/A Riverside Need more access for metrolink tell us where we stop not use microphone announcement bec I can't hear and need more for deaf service like trip or on bus too 1st' You have a homeless boom here, and some of these people are pushy, violent and their pissing everywhere, on top of utilizing our ambulance N/ Riverside system daily. I own a business here and it's getting worse every year, we can't handle anymore and they keep coming here. Maybe I'll just move, that would be easier I guess. N/A Riverside I Build a city trolly that rides on tracks or cables N/A Riverside Fix pot holes N/A I Riverside N/A Riverside N/A Riverside T I didn't know we had a problem. I second that fix potholes and re -pave van buren As someone who rides public transit in CA, before you ask this, try getting the pub trans to simply run on time @therctc how about explaining why public funds for the 91 freeway expansion were used only to have said expansion be the addition of new toll lanes which charge the tax payer to use new lanes that they already paid taxes to build in the first place? Abolishing toll lanes on roads that already used public funding for construction seems like the fair thing to do and would certainly improve traffic flow & transportation for those with disabilities #rebootmycommute N/A Riverside No it is not. N/A Riverside Well definetly senior communities should have a stop for disability right in front or even offered to get them from their apartment or house. N/A Riverside Re pave all the crap roads N/A Riverside Earlier and later departure times. Like 5AM and midnight N/A Riverside Make the merge lane East bound on the 91 from Pierce/Riverwalk longer. And fix the whole 91 /15 mess ! N/A Riverside It's easy quit building,. It's starting to look just like los Angeles,. It sucks Page 77 N/A More frequent buses, more bus stops, and a light rail system connecting all Riverside of the inland empire with Riverside as its HUB. Look at the Portland, Or MAX system if you need inspiration. N/A Riverside I Rail system Improve the 241 merge onto the 91E - it's the worst clog along that part N/A Riverside of the route for too many hours! L N/A Riverside Take out the stupid car pool lanes so all of the country can use the freeways our tax dollars paid for. Engineer smarter interchange system for freeways. N/A ik They should've built all those lanes to be flow lanes where the flow d' f h I h based flow f h ff Riverside erection o the lane changes ase on ow o heavy traffic. N/A Riverside I hope Sacramento keeps ignoring us. They pay for parking everywhere. N/A Don't dead-end a lane on a freeway that's traveling 70 miles per hour!!! Riverside EVER!!! You want a bottleneck, there you go! N/A Riverside Open the fast track lanes to be carpool as well like San Diego does N/A Riverside i Widen the freeways cause we are NOT taking public transportation Get rid of toll lanes N/A Riverside I Put the bus station back Get rid of the toll lanes. We pay enough in gas gas and registration fees. N/A Riverside Also start writing tickets to people blocking traffic just to cut in line for the toll roads. N/A Riverside N/A Riverside There's 5 miles of Santa Ana River between the 15 and Van Buren. Another 5 miles to Mission Inn Ave. When there's an accident and Van Buren gets closed, Pedley and Arlanza might as well be separate countries. We need more bridges across the river. A high speed rail, connecting from San Francisco to San Diego, of course it should also pass through Riverside and Inland Empire N/A Riverside I Fix the potholes they tend to mess with the cars and cost people money. N/A High speed rail connecting Riverside, LA, OC, San Diego. It's proven that Riverside adding lanes to expressway doesn't fix gridlock; need alternative means of commuting Page 78 N/A N/A N/A Riverside Riverside Riverside Fast track is for those who can afford that expense. It is better to widen the freeways and encourage the double up of commuters, and main drags such as allesando add a carpool there so people can lighten the load of frwy traffic during high volume hours. Major change would be to find a path between the 91 and 215 that goes to 60 fwy with minimum stop lights Open the fast track lanes to be carpool as well like San Diego does This looks like it's all about road and highway improvements/additions. It literally refers to the participants as "motorists!" So we're just gonna act like the profile of #InducedDemand doesn't exist? Let's get some regional railway and last mile improve! #rebootmycommute ZIP City Comments - San Gorgonio Pass 92220 92220 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 92223 92223 Banning Banning Banning Banning Banning Banning Banning Banning Beaumont Beaumont Well, for now the new connections can grow our communities longer and wider. From there we will see its pros and cons, as well of thinking if we make longer so we connect the whole United States. How about we start a go fund me page to get some of these projects kick started. Just a thought. Make more road improvements. There is a misappropriation of funds that should be going into road improvement. No texting while driving, make the fines bigger for violators. I like the buses, one suggestion is to place times on the bus signs at the stops. Make it easy to find out what time the next bus is coming. For example put "this bus comes at the 15 mark" People should walk more or bike more Provide buses for Coachella music festivals. We are concerned for safety during these festivals. We need more buses, and try to keep people off the road. We need bus Lanes and a real train system. I would use the bus all the time if we had decent public transportation. It would take me over an hour to get to my college by bus, but only 15 minutes by car. That has ridiculous. For one of the most wealthy economies on the planet, how can we be so far behind. I feel that carpooling and/or public transportation options from Beaumont to downtown Riverside would be beneficial. Page 79 92223 Beaumont This is more of please asking you to expand the San Bernardino Metrolink line to either Beaumont or Calimesa. Not sure if you guys oversee Redlands or Yucaipa but if the San Bernardino line could be extended to much closer to Beaumont it would be super awesome. Also of there's a better channel for this type of request please let me know Thank you! 92223 Beaumont In addition to the Intercity connection from LA to Indio with maybe a stop in Cabazon, we also need a commuter train that connects Beaumont & Yucaipa with Redlands and the larger LA metro Area, OC and SD. 92223 Beaumont 1. Widened Interchange bridge, on ramps with signals at Cherry Valley/1- 10 serving Calimesa and Beaumont is needed now with the amount of housing already built and being built with the commercial on the southeast corner coming soon. 2. Widen 1-10 from Calimesa to Banning. It's a traffic jam going west every morning and night, and getting worse every year. 3. Full widening of Oak Valley/1-10 Interchange in Beaumont is needed —not just the signals that are being installed now. I-10 needs widening through Yucaipa so RCTC needs to coordinate with SBCTA 4. Improve Singleton, Calimesa Blvd and County Line Road 1-10 interchanges in Calimesa. 5. Full improvements at Protero/SR60 rather than just bridge and interim ramps 6. San Timoteo Canyon Road needs improvements such as a signal at San Timoteo and Redlands Blvd because the peak traffic is backed up at the stop signs. The road should be widened. It's no longer a `country road' with all the use it has now from development. 7. Improve and widen Beaumont Avenue and Hwy 79 1-10 Interchange 8. Extend Metrolink or light rail to Beaumont/Banning/Cabazon/Palm Springs 9. More Safety improvements are needed on Hwy 79 from Beaumont to Hemet/San Jacinto. 10. Create new 1-10 interchange at Pennsylvania Ave in Beaumont. 92223 Beaumont The growth in Beaumont continues and with all of the residential and commercial construction it will clearly continue. The new Potrero interchange will certainly will help the traffic congestion, a complete interchange at Pennsylvania / 1-10 is long overdue. Even those two projects are not enough to solve the continued congestion at Highland Springs / 1-10 which is already critical with more homes being built. My concern is these projects should already be beyond the talking stage. Thank you. Page 80 92220 N/A There are only 3 types of vehicle traffic -Commercial, Emergency Service and Private. Each has a wide variety of users. The San Gorgonio Pass is a funnel for all of them and the majority are exceeding the speed limits even on the main city/county streets. Access to a commuter rail service would be helpful to the growing economy. Expanded bus service with more stops in residential, medical and commercial neighborhoods would be helpful. Particularly if the buses were handicapped accessible and with extended service hours. The basics to be helpful to local citizens are already in place but, in my opinion need to be expanded. 92320 N/A Monorail 92320 N/A Add a normal 4th lane between yucaipa and beaumont N/A N/A You have to be kidding me. Back in the day they tried to buy up all the homes including my parents' and then had meetings on traffic. No one listened to the neighbors including my mom and her best friend. My dad said enough of this bs and sold my childhood home and moved out of the area. Those traffic engineers had their own ideas and could of cared less what the "community" had to say. N/A N/A Have uber donated free rides to handicapped. N/A N/A How about we privatize the trains and busses (governments are notoriously bad business owners), open the carpool lanes to ALL traffic (every time it's been tried it's been successful), use the money that we vote to set aside to ONLY to fix the roads EVERY election cycle to actually fix and expand the roads (instead of that cash going to politicians' pet projects), and let people freely CHOOSE how they get to work without government influence/insistence/social engineering. Government control of transportation is a key factor in forcing a state to accept the socialist economic system, an economic system that has failed EVERY TIME it has been used. Can we PLEASE learn from the mistakes of the past WITHOUT reapeating them? N/A N/A Nah, we dont ned another failed rail system N/A N/A Metrolink. We need more Metrolink N/A N/A Get the Metro extended.... N/A N/A Be on time.. not too early or too late. Add more bus stops. Dont change routs all the time. N/A N/A Metrolink Page 81 N/A N/A You gotta be kidding Don,t build a swarehouse truck farm at CV Blvd & 1-10 !!!!! N/A N/A Quit building more mundane, expensive housing... there's plenty of housing and waaaay too many people living here. The 10 underpass in Banning has become completely choked due to traffic overload. Get the homeless people out, and what is this survey for? The city fathers haven't ever looked around Banning? It's a dirty, poorly run mess. N/A N/A Look at how the signal lights are timed. You have a green light and can't go because the next light is red and theres to much traffic. Get out from behind your desk and go look at the city Maybe we should encourage people to pull off the freeway if they're being pulled over by CHP. People can't help but stareeee at the flashing police lights... it backs up traffic for miiiiles. Also, there are so many traffic lights N/A N/A that take forever to change. For example, turning left onto the 10E on Yucaipa Blvd takes way too long. The left turn arrow will be red even though there are no cars coming. I have to wait until the next cycle to go! There's lots of lights like that, that just are not timed correctly. N/A N/A Stop stage coach, Coachella, building more homes and voting Democrat. Solved. N/A N/A metrolink Indio, palm springs banning, Beaumont to Riverside ZIP City Comments - Southwest 92530 Lake Elsinore I wish there was a train that went from Nichols exit or lake st exit to south Corona. My family and I make that commute together and it takes almost an hour to go those 13 miles. Stop the building of new homes, let's work on & maintain the roads to handle the traffic we already have & build more highways, before building more homes. Let's not promote events that we know will cause serious 92530 Lake Elsinore traffic problems, such as the beautiful flowering poppies. Let the people find out on their own. Stop electing ignorant persons into office, find out the truth about them first. Stop the corruption, lies & pay offs in our own state government. Page 82 92530 Lake Elsinore Hello, I'm a resident of Lake Elsinore. I live in a track that is very popular, multi -cultural and safe, but I feel like I live in the "boonies" as I don't have a car and feel stuck in a box. And there is absolutely NO Public Trans in the vicinity. I have to walk 35 to 45min (keep in mind, in shoes for "work") to get to a bus stop, to limited areas and connections (downhill, then uphill back home, which add's 10 more minutes). If I want to go to any other county I have to connect from the "Outlets" in Lake Elsinore off the 15. And even then, if I need to take a train to LA County (where my vocation is), they have limited runs ONLY in the morning and limited runs back in the early evenings. And to get to the Inland Empire (lets say, to Fontana), its going backwards (Riverside), then forwards - the way the buses/trains are set up and their availability. Meanwhile everyday on the road to jobs with my supervisor on my 9 to 5 regular job, we are stuck in traffic on various Fwy. routes. It is obvious that IF there were sufficient ways to get to our destinations, there would be less traffic if there were more routes for buses (modern LARGER buses than these "vans" locally) and longer schedules, as well for Trains that also have longer hours so that we don't stress to catch the connections on time. (continued) This is the very reason I want to go back to LA County, I can hop on buses I know that run till 12am+ and hop the Goldline and go from Montclair to "Santa Monica" if I wanted (If I could afford it, I'd move to San Diego county). I have taken public trans in SoCal for 25 years, I am used to long commutes, but to have "nothing" here in Lake Elsinore is a crime. I'll not be here forever, but its those that make this their permanent home that will suffer, and not want to venture out of their comfort zone. I for one am sick and tired of living in this box. I hope that this helps, but WHERE is this money coming from? As said, the politicians can talk but we've seen and heard the same b.s. since 1988 in California. - Thank you for your time. 92530 Lake Elsinore We need more freeway lanes not till roads, Californians already pay enough in taxes why tax more ? I believe if you removed the toll roads to make for regular roads then it would ease congestion . I live off the 15 freeway in lake Elsinore and why would the state add a toll road ? We need more standard roads . Maybe dig tunnels and go underground where the existing freeways are . Just my opinion but I hope our elected officials figure it out as we are considering moving out of state . California has billions come into the states via tourism as well as via our local residents . You need to watch closer where the state spends money at . r r 92530 Lake Elsinore We need a ring road Page 83 92532 Lake Elsinore I think for to long California has wasted money on building roads (specifically widening roads) that are already obsolete by the time the project is completed. More focus needs to be concentrated on commuter/light rail in the county. I was probably one of the first commuters to start using the Perris Valley Metrolink line when it opened. For months the trains were empty with maybe 10 to 15 people per trip. I commute from the South Perris Metrolink Station to Riverside UCR and occasionally the Riverside -Downtown Metrolink stations to get to Santa Ana/Los Angeles and the amount of people now talking the train HUGE compared to what it was three years ago . The Perris Valley Line is a modern freight - free (for the most part) commuter line that has very limited service. This morning (04/11/2019), I missed my Metrolink train in South Perris and decided to drive into work. What takes 27 minutes on the train took 1.5 hours along the I-215 and side streets this morning! I love the train!... but Metrolink's service in Riverside County has always catered to 9-5 commuters. I would ask the RCTC to look into how many people actually work typical 9-5 jobs anymore, its much less than in previous years. Metrolink is a fast option to bypass traffic and get to your destination, but if your work day starts in the late morning/afternoon and ends in the late evening, you're screwed for Metrolink in Riverside County. Additionally, the I-215 northbound into San Bernardino is heavily congested in the morning as well. (continued) A right-of-way with track exists that could allow Perris Valley trains to transport riders to San Bernardino which has multiple trains per hour that connect to Los Angeles until 8pm in the evening and 930pm on Friday's and weekends. Metrolink's San Bernardino Line is the only line Metrolink operates that offers multiple trains per hour during peak times and at least one train per hour during off peak times. This model should be used in Riverside County with the IEOC line, 91/Perris Valley Line and the Riverside Line (I understand the Riverside Line difficulties due to SCRRA not owning the right-of-way and being at the mercy of the Union Pacific). Point being is I believe commuter rail to be the answer. More fre quent Metrolink service to more destinationsis the key in my opinion. Riverside County is growing rapidly due to affordable housing and the roads will never be able to keep up. Now to quote a line from Field of Dreams but geared towards rail commuters, "IF YOU BUILD IT, THEY WILL RIDE." Page 84 92532 Lake Elsinore Please provide public transit commuter services through Temecula. The I- 15 is such an untapped resource for public transit. There are outlets in Temecula and Lake Elsinore and Corona. Temecula could be a location where a number of lines meet up connecting workers, families, businesses, and communities. In addition, public transit infastructures that would support mass evacuation in the case of flooding or fires- making roads wider does not help this issue when the roads are unsafe and flooded. 92532 Lake Elsinore I feel the 15 freeway from Temecula to Corona desperately needs to be widened. With the countinued growth of the Southwest area of Riverside County, the freeway continues to get worse. As commute times get longer people looking to move to the area will start looking else where due to the poor commute times. Thanks for listening. Stop with the Express Lanes!!! Quit banking off of the tax payers! Add 92532 Lake Elsinore extra lanes to the freeway to unlock congestion withOUT charging. This is just an observation, with the death of that individual on the 15/91 bridge that makes it 3 suicides in these overpasses could you add signs along that stretch of the bridges maybe a hotline number, maybe some sayings to help the individuals contemplating suicide. The other thing 92532 Lake Elsinore might be installing cameras in those areas where this is occurring if a car " breaks down " in these areas emergency personnel can be notified. This also affects the fastrak so maybe they can help with the costs. I don't know but something needs to be done because unfortunately it will happen again. 92532 Lake Elsinore Start building train tracks now before we become LA 92562 Murrieta More frequent rta busese between Murrieta and university of California riverside. 92562 Murrieta Easing the congestion on the 15 fwy in the Temecula area should be the top priority. The 15 fwy in the Temecula Valley is a major artery for anyone traveling from the Inland Empire to/ from San Diego. It is beyond frustrating to travel on the 15N in afternoon traffic and see my car navigation indicate that it will take me 90 minutes+ to travel 13 miles from the Fallbrook area to Murrieta. It's inconvenient and disruptive to my business to have to plan my business meetings San Deigo around the traffic so that I can avoid 3 hours of traffic for what should be an hour drive. 92562 Murrieta PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE!! We need at LEAST one additional lane, each direction, on I-15 though Temecula! Page 85 92562 Murrieta Continue Fast Track fr San Diego thru to the 91 something needs to be done Especially thru the Temecula to Murrieta area It's so bad & adds so much extra time to our commute!!!! 92562 Murrieta lEm It has taken me an hour and a half to drive from murrieta to Camp Pendleton in the morning. 92562 I Murrieta When will an appropriate commuter HIGHWAY go in between southwest Riveriside County and South Orange County? The Ortega highway is no longer feasible for commuting. 92562 ***NEW HIGHWAY TO SOUTH ORANGE COUNTY*** Murrieta The Ortega is no longer enough, it's no longer safe, and it was never meant to be for commuters... 92562 Murrieta Improve public transportation and create more options 192562 Murrieta Reduce traffic through Temecula to the 115/1215 interchange. 92562 Murrieta The 15 North and South between Temecula and Rainbow Valley needs major help. The onramps at SR 79 and Winchester need meters so cars are staggered coming on to the freeway. This traffic is abhorrent and will ruin the quality of life in SWRC, destroy real estate values, and hurt the tourism economy! Reboot my commute! 92562 Murrieta Widen the 15 freeway through Temecula and Murrieta 92562 Murrieta I would take trucks off the road during commute times. Don't need a tax for that. And take money from the train to nowhere. 92562 Murrieta I 2 additional lanes 15 N/S bound from Indian Truck Trail to 91 1 92562 Murrieta Please spend some time driving northbound on Interstate 15. It takes an hour to drive from the Riverside County line, just 7 miles on Interstate 15, to get to 215. Horrible. Please consider Southwest Riverside County I-15 improvements. 92562 Murrieta How about not charging an arm and a leg for ridiculous toll fees and let the tax payers have the lanes that are desperately needed, Anne Myer?!? V 92562 Murrieta How about fix the pot holes on California Oaks Road and paint the white strips. You can hardly see the white lines at night. I 92562 Murrieta Seeing that you guys bring in so much revenue from the toll roads, fix the freeways!! A billion dollar disaster that you guys wasted in Corona and no one lives have improved. You guys, especially Anne Myer should be fired. Page 86 92562 Murrieta Idea: A multiple lane highway that will allow automobiles to travel with I ease as there will be no intersections, stop signs, stop lights and pedestrian crossing until they reach an off ramp. But yet we can still find a reason to touch the brakes and come to a complete stop. 92562 Murrieta 3 highways come together in Temecula (79, 215, 15) and only 3 1/2 ramps to service the city. Need a Temecula bypass for SD commuters, or a cross town freeway similar to SR30 in San Bernardino before it became the 210. A direct connection from Temecula to camp Pendleton would make a huge difference since we have such a large military presence living in the area and commuting to SD. Even a rail line from Temecula that connects to the rail line on 5, for Navy commuters. Build it along the creek that dumps into the Pacific in Oceanside and put a stop at Basilone st. 92562 Murrieta RTA commuter buses do help, but cannot be effective when the freeway gets congested. If we can get the Metrolink to propose a plan to connect a service line from Corona to Escondido Transit center via parallel the 15. Imagine no longer having to sit in traffic because of poppies flowers or commuters from SD county going home. Traveling northbound on I-15 through Temecula is always a mess. We 92563 Murrieta need more exits off and on the freeway in this area. We also need some kind of mass transit to San Diego and Orange County and Los Angeles. 92563 Murrieta Fix the horrible traffic on the 15 in Temecula. Looks like there is plenty of room for another lane or carpool lane. Need additional off ramps too. 92563 Murrieta Anything really! The 15 coming through Temecula is crazy. We need to widen the 15 and make yield lanes for on ramps 92563 I Murrieta Expand the freeways or add a passenger lane. The commute is not only awful during the week but it can be very congested on the weekends passing through Temecula. 92563 Murrieta Please help with that 15 fwy Temecula corridor. It is becoming a nightmare! 92563 Murrieta As much as I dislike, we need metered on ramps. So many people trying to get on at one time. Carpool lanes would great. I travel 35 miles to work and it takes a minimum or 1 HR 15 mins. Page 87 92563 The I-15 needs some serious help! Communities surrounding the 15, Temecula, Murrieta, Menifee, Wildomar, Lake Elsinore, have been and continue to explode with new home construction but no thought has been Murrieta put into the impact of all these new homes (aka commuters). Travel throughout the region has become increasingly difficult and is only expected to get worse. We need improvements: carpool lanes, more lanes for commuter, or even dedicated semi -truck lanes. i 92563 Murrieta The I-15 corridor through Temecula, CA is in dire need of upgrades. That freeway is congested at all times of the day. It is unacceptable. 92563 Murrieta The I-15 through Temecula / Murrieta to and from San Diego county must be adressed. There is no single answer to fix this. Rail is an excellent idea and should be seriously considered. The 15 should be widened at every place possible. There should be dedicated non-stop HOV lanes through the whole valley for those just driving through. The surface street traffic must also be addressed. Every home builder should be forced to build the supporting infrastructure for the new homes they are adding such as roads, fire stations, etc. Stop allowing special interests to push all traffic away from their neighborhoods onto the already gridlocked major thoroughfares such as Winchester and Temecula Parkway. Sync the traffic lights on major roadways to keep a more consistent flow of traffic. Give tax incentives to businesses who allow alternative work schedules that take their employees off the roadways at peek times. Stagger school hours so parents won't all be dropping off or picking up their children at the same time. Vehicular traffic is like water. The more you put in front of it the more it backs up. The more it backs up the more stagnant it becomes. Any plan must allow traffic to flow as much as possible. 92563 Murrieta The i15 commute to and from san diego needs to be fixed. The commuting congestion is awful and would really help people working in san diego 92563 Murrieta Fix the 15 freeway > Temecula -San Diego PLEASE. 92563 Murrieta I love the idea of express lanes from LE to Corona. 1 guess like most people, I don't understand why it's a 5 year plan, gas taxes increased so these urgent projects could happen ASAP. The other urgent need is Riverside County to the 15/215 through Temecula and Murrieta. 1 literally spend hours of my life in these two areas each week. 92563 Murrieta Please help with traffic congestion. Large trucks bringing in goods can travel on non peek hours only not between the hours of 10 to 3 pm 92563 Murrieta Please shorten my commute! Currently it takes 1.5 hours in the morning and 2 hours in the evening. Crazy! Always stops in Temecula. Page 88 92563 I moved to Temecula area 5 years ago. It was an hour to San Diego then. It's an hour and half now. On a good day. If you leave early enough. Traffic is now 5-6 hours in the evening. It starts at 1 and often doesn't let up until 7. Temecula needs a two lane carpool bypass in the worst way. As well as a trucks only lane. A longer acceleration lane at Winchester that goes all Murrieta the way to the 215 split would help too as that is where the bottleneck begins. I don't know what "genius" thought dumping 4 lanes of 45 mph traffic onto a 70 mph freeway was a good idea but it was not. The only other option would be a loop. A bypass of some kind. More lanes will just be more non moving traffic. 92563 T Murrieta 92563 Murrieta Please expand the 15 highway. It has gotten so bad since I have moved to murrieta I work in Poway and three hours of my day is taken away just for the drive The 15 freeway corridor through Temecula is parking lot. Every morning, every afternoon starting at 2, every weekend. It's a maddening experience. There just isn't enough lanes to handle the volume of traffic coming through that corridor. 92563 Murrieta I think RCTC needs to rethink and replan the CIP because those projects and studies are obsolete when it comes to fruition. There needs to be a revised comprehensive transportation plan. The plan should expanding Metrolink beyond Perris and extend it south like Murrieta and Temecula where majority of the residents commute north and southbound to their work. 92563 Murrieta I definite wouldn't recommend toll lanes. We need a great railway system that would connect the Inland Empire to San Diego, Orange County, and LOS ANGELES. Metro link train is a start, but we need a railway system similar to the Bart system in the Bay Area. Page 89 92563 Murrieta I commute from North San Diego County to Murrieta. The Temecula/Murrieta area is well on it's way to a million people and these roads and streets cannot handle the current traffic. Here are some urgent suggestions. 1. Work with San Diego County to extend car pool lanes north from Escondido and either extend MTS north to Temecula or expand RTA service south to include weekends and day hours. 2. Rebuild 115 through Temecula with diamond interchanges 14-16 lanes to handle both 15 and 215 traffic and continuous exit lanes between interchanges. 3. Extend Metrolink from Perris to San Jacinto on abandoned track, extend hours and add weekends, and make good connections on RTA to the rail line from Temecula. 4. Add commuter rail line from Corona down I-15 median to L.A. and Orange County to Temecula and extend Perris line along 215 to Temecula. 5. Build 74 and 79 corridors to either freeway or toll road from Temecula to South Orange County and from Temecula to the 60 or 10 to relieve the 215. 92563 Murrieta What would I do? The question should be what is the county &/or state doing to improve the ridiculous congestion & dangerous driving conditions us taxpayer's endure. I moved to Temecula in 04 when traffic in the Temecula - Murrieta area wasn't that bad & as the 15 from Escondido & south was adding Fastrak lanes, the population growth in my area Tem/Mur was completely ignored. The roadwork to the Temecula pkwy on/off ramps have done absolutely nothing to improve traffic flow on the 15 in our area. Surely you don't need me to suggest the simple math that more commuters require more lanes. 92563 Murrieta The 115 from North San Diego border through Murrieta has become a seriously congested corridor that has paralyzed traffic coming and going even on weekends. We see nothing in the works to correct this and there will be lawsuits and a public uproar if something is not done fast. It never used to be this way and our tax dollars are being spent elsewhere while this problem is hemorrhaging. Please advise what options we have and what our long term traffic and urban planning is. 92563 Murrieta I live Murrieta and it takes too long to travel 92563 Murrieta VERY EASY QUESTION. I SCREAM IT every day NB on 115 heading into Temecula. Create 2 lanes in the median with a movable barrier. 2 heading N in the afternoon and 2 going S in the morning. ALSO, CRITICAL NEED for a truck only lane on SB 15 heading out of Temecula and one NB from 76 all the way to the border checkpoint. Traffic problem SOLVED. Quit WASTING our money on bullshit Agenda 21 traffic control schemes. TRAC should be free. We already paid for it!!!! Page 90 92563 92563 Murrieta Murrieta 92563 iiii Murrieta 92563 92563 Murrieta Murrieta 92563 Murrieta 92563 92563 92563 92563 Murrieta Murrieta Murrieta Murrieta 1. Convert all freeways to toll roads with a toll booth at every entrance. 2. Remove all HOV lanes, and replace them with rail, with stations on top of roadway and stairs/escalators/elevators down to tracks. 3. Provide trains from Temecula to Corona, Riverside, and San Diego. 4. Increase frequency of trains to L.A. and Orange County. That will fix everything! It takes me about 1.25 hours during rush hours to travel about 35 miles from Murrieta to our main office in Downtown Riverside. That's 2.5 hrs round trip for 70 miles. In comparison, it takes me about 1.75 hours during rush hours to travel 80 miles from Murrieta to our construction project in Downtown Indio. That's 3.5 hrs round trip for 160 miles. I would not oppose a 1% tax hike to substantially improve traffic going from Murrieta- Temecula area to Downtown Riverside. The I-15 and 1-215 are LONG overdue for carpool lanes. Both north-and- southbound on the 1-15 and 1-215 should have 3 commuter lanes and 1-to- 2 carpool lanes. This alone would alleviate a ton of rush hour traffic in mornings and late afternoon/early evenings. It shouldn't take me 1 hour to drive from Murrieta to Perris (15 miles) in the mornings at 6:OOam. Anything but trains. Bus drivers making over 100 a year and literally only seeing 1 or 2 people on the bus Need more widening especially the ranch's CA. And Winchester exit too much traffic there Why not widen the 91 from Escondido to corona? Also you need more veins of hi way going to the Menifee Winchester area. Tell Gavin Newsome to come up for air, and use the bullitt train money to fix this issue. Newsome needs a glass stomach to see what's going on these days... The left hand turn lanes on Winchester from MHS to Dominegoni are to short. They force people to cross the double lines, potential traffic ticket, to get out of the way of cars going straight Public transportation Besides a bus would be nice. We need rail services to Perris station. Page 91 Prioritize the main streets you idiots. Enough of this BS when someone hits the sensor on Dum Bass Ct the light on Main St immediately turns yellow. Then Dumbass has a 2-3 sec delay where as Main St has none. S000 ass 92563 Murrieta backwards. The daytime red light rate is a consistent 75% in Tem/Murr. hit 10 red lights in a row on a regular basis (that should happen once every 1024 times) and scream hallelujah if I get 3 greens in a row. And we're paying $4/ga1 to accelerate/brake/idle all day... 92563 Murrieta We need a light rail straight down I-15 from San Diego County to Corona. Also on Winchester, from 115 to to Dominegoni Parkway / Hemet. A train from I-15 alongside the 215 to Riverside. WE NEED MASS TRANSIT, PERIOD!!! So many new homes being built from Temecula/Murrieta to Winchester with no way out of this valley 1 92563 Here's a novel idea 1. Stop fixing handicap side walks that already work and have worked for 40 years. It so nice to see that the new handicap sidewalks actually limit mobility more than improve it. Would love to find out who the politicians in our local community that voted to take care of .001% of the population over the rest of us. This is the reason no roads get fixed and we have terrible infrastructure problems. 2. Mass transit is a failure and doesn't work. However our politicians once again sink millions of our tax payer dollars into it supporting the .001% of the population. Please feel free to show me or educate me on any mass transit system that Murrieta actually profits and give back to the community it supports. 3. With the current political environment and the continued high taxing of the rich/middle/low income classes in California and our city won't have to wait long before the population starts leaving. On average there's about a million California's leaving because they can no longer afford to live here. 4. Independent audits of our city government across the board needs to happen to curb the needless and wasteful spending that continues to happen do to incompetents. That can be fixed by only voting for representatives that actually have merit and experience doing the jobs they are running for. Have a wonderful day 92563 r Murrieta 92589 Temecula Finish Butterfield Stage to Pourroy. Finish Clinton Keith to Winchester. Finish French Valley Parkway to Murrieta Hot Springs. More bus stops along Winchester from French Valley to Temecula. And, if I can dream big...a direct route to the 5 freeway. The beach is so close yet so far away. Traffic to work from MURRIETA to. Carlsbad is very very congested. Wish we had a bullet train. Too many. Lone drivers on road Connecting us to the already existing train lines could help. Maybe adding 192590 I Temecula some HOV roads to the 15 both directions. Page 92 92590 92590 92590 92590 92590 92591 92591 92591 Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula WE NEED TRAFFIC CONTROL IN TEMECULA!!! We have thousands of cars coming through our city that are just passing through daily and it is CLOGGING OUR ACCESSIIIII PLEASE FIX THIS PROBLEM ON THE 15 FWY in TEMECULA VALLEY!!! How about a more improved public transportation system. The current public transportation system is a joke compared to other countries. 15 southbound from Temecula to SD county is a total disaster every morning and the same thing for 15 northbound coming from SD county to Temecula. So much road rage and people doing illegal lane driving on freeways just so they can skip or avoid traffic. A vanpool is too expensive for most and is not the solution for all. I would love for their to be train access up the 15 fwy with access to san bernardino and rancho cucamonga. right now there is no way to get there. i go to csusb and there is no way aside from car. the county should provide monetary incentive to carpool to work. My company gives me $20 a week per person when I take them to work. I'd like traveling to be made easier and more simple and pleasant for everyone - more travel options for all, not just people who drive cars - more walkable communities and neighborhoods such that folks aren't so reliant on cars or public or paratransit to get their basic daily needs met and live a good quality lives - better quality RTA buses in Temecula and the surrounding ares (busses that area truly accessible and safe for people in wheelchairs to travel on - extended bus service - shorter wait times - stronger public transit links from county to county - more reliable, efficient and less tedious paratransit service - shorter wait times for people who use paratransit - more transportation options (like Uber and Lyft) for people who use power wheelchairs and other mobility devices. Build a bike lane in the middle separation of the freeway. Bicycles and motorcycle thru-ways. This is not a safe place to bike. The bike lane on the 76 should have been separated from the cars, much like the one off the 56. Winchester should be much safer, you take your life in your hands. If we could commute safely by bicycles, we could be much healthier and reduce pollution, and avoid traffic. Quit trying to force people to change. Not been successful. Open up toll roads and car pool lanes until the proper number of highways have been built based on gas tax revenue! Oh which means stop wasting gas tax $ on alternative ideas or programs. We need more lanes now not anything else! La Serena is a disaster! Page 93 92591 Give light priority to main roads. Lights turn red on main roads instantly Temecula when a car approaches a light on a crossroad or residential road. This causes traffic congestion. 92591 1 Temecula Give us a MONORAIL system low cost maximum usage...a monorail has worked for millions since it's inception and you could set your clock by it.. 92591 Temecula Put commuter trains all along the 15 and the 91 which connects with the Metro. If your build it, we will ride! 1 925911 Temecula F Better and safer bike paths You start by raising the speed limit on semi trucks to 70 mph and get them out of the right to lanes . With the right two lanes open to exiting and 92591 Temecula merging traffic will have a better flow . And for God's sakes make all vehicles with blue tooth standard equipment and educate people on how to use it. 92591 Temecula Widen the 115 and install metered northbound on ramps for Temecula/Murrieta. 92591 Temecula I'd like to see improved and or increased off ramps through Temecula. 92591 Temecula I would like funds allocated for the stretch of the 15 freeway and 215 freeway in Temecula, CA. The traffic is beyond ridiculous and we can use the help in making our commutes manageable. Traffic on the I-15 Freeway through Temecula and Murrieta is horrible. Northbound, it starts backing up before Fallbrook. I used to go to the Doctor at Scripps in Rancho Bernardo, but if I started home after 1:30 pm, it took me 2+ hours to get to Temecula. I decided not to go to that doctor any more because it ended up being a whole day's trip. Yesterday (Sunday) at 4:00 pm the traffic was backed up on the I-15 northbound through Temecula. People were exiting onto surface streets in Temecula just to get around the log jam that had no cause. No matter what day or 92591 Temecula time, the traffic on the I-15 is impossible. 75 cars are trying to get on the freeway at the same time and there are no on ramp signals. People are trying to get on the Freeway at Winchester, but cars on the freeway are trying to move to the right to enter the I-215 freeway. Because the freeway runs cuts between 2 mountains in Temecula, there aren't many ways to get around the traffic. Cars try to go through Rainbow or on Old 395, but that is jammed too. If there is a fire or major accident, people are stuck on the freeway or end up on City streets, making them over crowded. I imagine the logjam also affects the Border Patrol Station. Page 94 92591 92591 92591 92591 Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula 92591 I Temecula 92591 92591 92591 92591 92591 I 92591 I 92591 Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Fast track the Interstate 15 / French Valley Parkway interchange ... this would greatly improve the traffic flow through several on/off ramps in the area. Add lanes, widening and interchange improvements along entire length of the interstate15 corridor between Escondido and Corona. Please support infrastructure improvements for I-15. The commute has gotten absolutely terrible. In fact my husband had been rear ended 2x in the last year due to increased congestion and my sister in law has been out on disability for 9 months due to being rear ended on the 1-15 just trying to get to her job to provide for her family. It's a huge problem! Why doesn't California also have any mass transit like trains? https://apple.news/AAF-1w43QSegzPLu281eyyg Massive investment in rail not roads! Accidents in this highway segment are often times deadly and occur daily. The congestion is dangerous and causes aggression for drivers. I've seen so many people enraged trying to take it out on other drivers too. Freeway 15 passing through Temecula is a disaster. Because of the horrendous commute, my husband and I retired sooner than we had planned. Temecula needs at least one or two more offramps because the three existing ones are severely impacted. More freeway lanes I strongly endorse the City of Temecula's effort to improve traffic flow on Interstate 15 through the city. Population growth in this region has led to a chronic and severe problem and there already exists very promising construction solutions. Commute home between San Diego county line to Winchester road exit (just south of 215) takes so long and misses baby's bedtime! The NB 115 is a parking lot through Temecula starting in the early afternoon, not just rush hour. Add another lane or a left lane that goes directly to the 215. I have been commuting on the 15 freeway from Temecula to San Diego for 9 years. I have seen the drive get significantly worse over the years. I spend on average over 3 hours in the car. Please work to get this section of freeway improved. The corridor of the I-15 through from south of Temecula to the 215 is a nightmare and needs to be prioritized. Page 95 92591 Temecula Fix the 15 fwy through Temecula Ca. 92591 Temecula The commute home to Temecula from San Diego is miserable. The freeway moves along nicely until you get close to the boarder crossing then It takes over one hour to go from Fallbrook to Winchester. The 215 merge is causing the back up. Something has to be done !! 92591 Temecula I live in Temecula, CA and commute to Escondido, CA. This should be a 35 minute commute but is not! I carpool with 2 others and our average time in the car is 2 1/2 hours a day (good day). On a bad day we have spent over 3 hours trying to get home. We are in desperate need of a carpool lane from the 215 fwy to the 78 fwy, where a carpool lane starts. 92591 Temecula L Please make this project a priority. 92591 r Please remedy the horrendous traffic on the I-15 in Temcula. Traffic is a Temecula huge problem for our area and prohibits getting anywhere in a timely fashion, especially during the weekday commute and also on weekends. 92591 Temecula Build an additional offramp between Rancho Cal and Rainbow for Pechanga and Wine Country traffic. And more importantly build toll lanes from Escondido to Cajalco along the 15 and have the lanes moveable so you can have "rush hour" lanes like they do down in San Diego. 92591 Temecula We don't need to focus on road widening projects or road upgrades. Instead, all our focus and resources should be dedicated to fast tracking the train and rail plans all over Southern California. That a region this densely populated doesn't have a rail system on a par with those in Europe (like in the U.K. as a really good example) is just a disgrace. Our priorities should be on moving large numbers of people efficiently and quickly instead of trying to keep 1 or 2 individuals in their cars clogging up the roads and slowing everything down. Infrastructure like this is what is going to drive jobs and growth, health and prosperity. Not the tired, old and greedy policies that only benefit big oil. Page 96 92591 Temecula Traffic on the 15N from the San Diego county line into Temecula is becoming unbearable. As a result, people are leaving and will not return to this area, causing long term devastating economic impacts. Aside from widening the freeway, my recommendation is to adopt a truck ban during periods of high congestion. This is done already in the I-5 corridor near Sacramento, so there is already precedent in California. For example, from 5am-9am and 3pm-.7pm, trucks over a certain length would not be allowed in the I-15 corridor from Temecula to Hwy 76. This could be instituted within a year or less with the proper representation from our city. Thanks for your strong consideration of my approach. 92591 r 92591 Temecula Purpose that a 2 lane city bypass , not a carpool, be placed between the 115 Border check station and the 115/1215 split. There is enough space between the NB and SB 115 Lanes to place these Bypass lanes. This would allow the many vehicles that are just passing through to use those lanes and make the flow a bit smoother Temecula 7 you already got money, it was called SB1. is this SB2 or 3 or 4. 92591 Temecula lam a daily commuter to San Diego from Temecula. I don't see a good bus connectivity to San Diego region. There are thousands go to work from Temecula/Murrieta everyday. If there are frequent bus services at least up to Escondido Transit center, it would help lots of commuters and reduce congestion on I-15 between CA-76 and Temecula. FillielaKFemecula Continue the carpool lane for 15N past the 78 towards Temecula 92591 Temecula Round-abouts are very efficient in the Temecula Wine Country. On weekends there are HUGE lines of cars on Rancho California Road and this REALLY HELPS to keep the traffic moving! There is no electricity needed other than streetlights, and no maintenance. When done correctly, these should become mandatory instead of stoplights. 92591 Temecula 15/215 split --when will this be addressed? Page 97 92591 Temecula I am a Riverside County employee (DPSS) and we recently received an email promoting Telecommuting opportunities. I believe that Telecommuting is a great resource & beneficial to everyone all the way around. Unfortunately, I've noticed that management isn't always open to this idea and I don't think that it's because they believe it will negatively impact business, but they are not well informed as to the great benefits of offering telecommuting to staff (I believe this is the case with the department/unit that I currently work in.) I would suggest that RCTC look into doing research on teleworking, partner up with other Riverside County Departments to explore the great benefits of Teleworking and present the material to the various Riverside County Depts. to promote teleworking. Not all departments will be able to do teleworking, as business needs always come first, but I believe there are many departments/units that would be great for teleworking. 92591 Northbound I-15 beginning at Rancho California Road interchange and points north, which is 4 lane at present: Signage installed to show the left lane "1-15 North", Lane 2 "1-15 & I- 215" and right lanes "Winchester Road". Beyond Winchester Road interchange, signage to indicate the left lane is "1-15", next lane "1-15 & 215", next two lanes "1-215". Add one additional lane from the 1-15/215 split past Murrieta Hot Springs Road,Upgrade the speed limit on the I-215 to 65+. At present, people get in the right lane at Rancho California Road and slow to 55-60 to "not miss" the 215, at least three miles ahead, Temecula restricting access to the northbound freeway from both Rancho California and Winchester. I believe more improvement can be done with signage than additional lane construction, since those funds seem to be split more towards Sacramento and the Bay Area than SoCal. At present, people get in the right lane at Rancho California Road and slow to 55-60 to "not miss" the 215, at least three miles ahead, restricting access to the northbound freeway from both Rancho California and Winchester. I believe more improvement can be done with signage than additional lane construction, since those funds seem to be split more towards Sacramento and the Bay Area than SoCal. 92591 Temecula Have all trucks only on freeways from 12 midnight to 6 a.m.. The last L.A. Olympics had certain hours for trucks around the Coliseum and other locations and were very successful in reducing the crowded streets for autos. During the hours with less autos on the freeways, allow all autos to use the HOV lanes. Page 98 92591 Temecula Have later times in the morning and in the night to 217 bus which will allow more students to commute back and forth from San Diego State San Marcos and even Palomar College. Making the route more effective and more successful. 92592 Temecula Transportation is a great idea, but I think we all know it wastes money. If it even broke even, it would be great. I get real tired of seeing so many buses empty, knowing it is costing the real taxpayers money. Show us your budget. Then let us decide if the system is worth it and put it to a vote. Stating this for a friend. Attract businesses to this valley that offer professional level jobs so we're not all commuting. Add on on/off ramps at Overland and Santiago and 92592 Temecula finish Diamond Valley interchange. Synchronize the traffic signals on Rancho Cal so I don't have to stop at every single stop light between the 15 and my house. 92592 Temecula Begin to see the problem from the ground up. First, pedestrians. Second, benches and shelters for public transportation. Third, buses that go to more places. It has to be safe, convenient, and practical. or nobody will use it. Better suggestion: get rid of ALL school buses. Divert that money and resources to public transportation. Let all students begin to use public transportation in kindergarten. Raise up a generation that uses public transportation naturally. 92592 Temecula Sacramento has little to do with our transportation issues. Start by redirecting time and money back to middle and working class people so they don't have to leave the county for a livable income. Cancel all new non -emergency road work. Force cities to redesign their city plans for walkability and alternative transportation. Work to bring regional transit (that people will actually want to use) to the county. Use roundabouts and yield signs more often. Advertise tax incentives for taking alternative transportation to work. 92592 Temecula Put in a carpool lane or create more lanes where the dirt is in the center of the freeway between rancho can and the 215 split. That section is ridiculous with the oncoming cars coming on from multiple points so close to the split Page 99 92592 Our freeways can't keep up with the amount of traffic we are getting daily. The City keeps allowing more building with out the thought of the infrastructure in our area. We have come home from Los Angeles at Temecula 11:OOpm and the freeway is still packed going north, south isn't too bad. We need more lanes. I feel bad for the commuters going to Riverside that knuckle is horrible with only a couple of lanes. Our roads and streets need repair in the city too. 92592 Temecula I would like the 15 freeway that goes through Temecula to be upgraded to ease the tremendous load of traffic, especially during the times when people are going to and from work, as well as on weekends. This would add to safety also. I understand that there's a federal grant and that the city of Temecula is requesting a portion of it. This would benefit not only Temecula, but surrounding areas as well. Thank you for your consideration. Put in additional lanes -not that hard to figure out -come out and see for 92592 Temecula yourself. 92592 Temecula Add more capacity on the 15 in Temecula. 92592 92592 Temecula Temecula Please direct design and funding resources to relieve the daily I-15 gridlock. It currently takes 1-hour to drive the same 15-miles on approach and through Temecula, CA. I'm very thankful that I personally do not have to commute to work since I retired. However, the #15 jam up does affect me when I need to get to/from the airport or any other business in San Diego. God forbid that I might want to go to the beach sometime! I would have to leave by 1:OOpm, or wait until after 6 or 6:30 to be able to get home in less than three hours! It also impacts me in that the surface streets are also jammed with people trying to get off the freeway. Whatever impact this log jam has on ME, however, is minor. I feel for the folks who have no choice but to travel that corridor for work and other necessities. I hope that a solution can be found and implemented in the near future!! 92592 I would like to see from the Rainbow Canyon exit to the 215 interchange past temecula have auxillary lanes added or additional lanes. I also think Temecula that there needs to be more ways to and from Fallbrook which is where the traffic starts almost every day in the evening. Rainbow Canyon Road becomes overly congested once you are past the Rainbow Canyon exit. ' 92592 Temecula Add I-15 lanes through Temecula to and from the I-215 & I-15 intersection. 92592 Temecula i Temecula fwy 15 Page 100 92592 Temecula I have many, MANY suggestions, which I hope will become useful. Here they are: 1. BRING MORE RAIL. I am an avid Metrolink user, and since I go to UCLA I use the system to go from Union Station/Downtown LA to Perris, Corona or Oceanside, since they are closer to Temecula. We need to find a way to extend Metrolink south from Perris or Corona or northeast from Oceanside and build new stations in cities such as Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Murrieta, and/or Temecula. If this doesn't work, then we need to build auxiliary rail lines in the region, such as Sprinter or Coaster in North San Diego County, that will connect to those larger rail systems and transit centers in order to keep more cars off the road. 2. WIDEN I-15 and 1-215. In addition to the toll lanes that are currently being planned/constructed between SR 74 and SR 60, Interstate 15 needs to have at least four general-purpose lanes in each direction from Murrieta to Corona (or at least from 1-215 to Clinton Keith Road and Temescal Canyon Road to Ontario Avenue), rather than the existing three, and 1-215 should have four in each direction between Van Buren Boulevard and SR 60 near Moreno Valley. Carpool lanes should be added to both I-15 and 1-215, but there need to be direct -access ramps (DARs) at intermediate places like Bedford Court, Santiago Road, Overland Drive and Nutmeg Street where interchanges for general-purpose lanes may not be feasible. There should also be a direct connector between the 1-15 carpool lanes and the 1-215 carpool lanes. The 91 Toll Lanes extension project, which was completed in March 2017, has seen higher -than -projected ridership and has overall been very well -received, and I am confident that such a system on 1-15 Page 101 (continued) 3. ADD AND FIX INTERCHANGES. We need to cooperate with Pechanga and find a new way to connect South Temecula/Redhawk with Interstate 15 instead of backing up traffic on Rainbow Valley Boulevard, Rainbow Canyon Road, Pechanga Parkway, and Temecula Parkway. This could be through a western extension/alignment of Via Eduardo or Deer Hollow Way and/or a tunnel through the hills. We should complete French Valley Parkway but call it something more logical like "Twin Cities Parkway" since a) it isn't projected to go to French Valley, and b) it mostly runs along the Temecula-Murrieta boundaries. We should also add and lengthen turn lanes from the 1-15 off -ramps at major roads such as Rancho California Road and Winchester Road, which would help improve traffic flow during rush hour. Further north, add interchanges at Franklin Street in Lake Elsinore and at Horsethief Canyon Road in Temescal Valley. On I- 215, we need to add more turn lanes at the off -ramps at Los Alamos Road and Clinton Keith Road (especially in the northbound direction) and build an interchange at Keller Road. The City of Menifee also needs to preserve room for another interchange at Garbani Road (between Scott and Newport), since it is unknown just how much traffic will increase with continued home development and proposals for the new Walmart and a large lifestyle center called The Junction at Menifee, both located on Scott Road. Page 102 (continued) 4. WIDEN AND IMPROVE HIGHWAYS 79 AND 74. The erroneous "Speed Limit 55" sign heading southeast, between I-15 and Bedford Court, needs to be removed or replaced with a "Speed Limit 50" sign, since it doesn't make any sense at all for people to go 55 for such a short stretch, only for the speed limit to drop. Add turn lanes at major cross -streets such as Avenida de Missiones, Margarita Road/Redhawk Parkway, Meadows Parkway, and Butterfield Stage Road. Widen Highway 79 to six lanes (three in each direction) from the end of the city limits to Anza Road, relieving traffic bound for the Temecula Valley Wine Country, and widen it to four lanes (two in each direction) from Anza Road to the entrance to the Vail Lake Resort. Add traffic signals at Los Caballos Road, Pauba Road, Vail Lake, Sage Road, and Highway 371. Further north, widen Highway 79 (this time as Winchester Road) to eight lanes (four in each direction) from I-15 to Murrieta Hot Springs Road, and thereafter make it a six -lane facility (three lanes in each direction) to I-10, or at least Hemet. Improve the intersections at Ynez Road, Margarita Road, Murrieta Hot Springs Road, Hunter Road, Benton Road/future Clinton Keith Road, Thompson/Leon Road, and Washington/Scott, and fully fund the upgrade to expressway standards between East Newport Road and Gilman Springs Road. For Highway 74, add passing lanes between the Santa Ana Mountains and Lake Elsinore, and widen Grand Avenue, Riverside Drive and Collier Avenue for a guaranteed minimum of two lanes in each direction between here and I-15. Page 103 (continued) Realign Highway 74 so that it follows Ethanac Road and sign it as a state route, rather than directing traffic along the Highway 74 alignment through downtown Perris and keeping the overlap with 1-215. Improve Ethanac Road (prospective Highway 74) so that it continues directly east over the railroad tracks and Antelope Road in Romoland, and widen Highway 74 (as Florida Avenue) between the western Hemet city limits and Lyon Avenue (or at least Sanderson Avenue) to three lanes in each direction. 5. IMPROVE BUS TRAVEL/AVAILABILITY. The City of Temecula lacks a true, central transit hub, which I believe is harmful to the City's outlook. Build the Old Town South Parking Garage on Front and First Streets but add a large bus/shuttle/trolley depot (and possibly a rail station?) to help better manage local traffic. Add similar bus/transit hubs in the other surrounding cities, and improve bus frequencies throughout the region. Also, offer more routes that serve South Temecula, and offer more routes that go to the Promenade Mall rather than County Center. Add bus cutouts where they are not present but badly needed, such as Pechanga Parkway (southbound) past Rainbow Canyon Road. Coordinate Riverside County bus services with those in North San Diego County. 6. FIX LOCAL/ARTERIAL ROADS. There are many inconsistencies with the roads in Temecula, the most infamous example being where Butterfield Stage Road (northbound) narrows to one lane passing Temecula Parkway and Big Horse, only to open back up to two at De Portola Road, which creates a severe bottleneck for afternoon traffic bound for the Temecula Valley Wine Country. Page 104 (continued) We need to make sure that our major roads are wide enough and have adequate turn lanes and lane widths, bike lanes, and medians not only for increased safety, but better traffic mobility. 7. REGULATE SPEEDS AND SAFETY. There is no reason that cars should be able to travel at 55 mph (the posted speed limit) on Temecula Parkway between the Temecula Valley Hospital and the Walmart/Petsmart/Sprouts area. This segment should be lowered to 50 mph to match the existing speed limit west of this point. There are too many areas in the area where the speed limits are too high, and others where the speed limit is too low. I have created (and attached) my own list of what I believe should be the speed limits in Temecula and vicinity. While this is not a full list or formal traffic study, this is how I believe people should be following speed laws in my area. For freeway traffic, reducing the speed limit on 1-215 from 70 to 65 mph is a start, but do this for I-15 from the San Diego County Line to the Wildomar city limits. The area has gotten so built-up that the freeways are less fit for rural traffic, and doing this would also improve public safety. Also, due to the characteristics of the roadway in Temescal Valley/Corona, the speed limit on I-15 should be lowered to 65 mph from the Temescal Canyon Road exit to Ontario Avenue. While this is not an exhaustive list of the ways I would like to Reboot my Commute, I hope that some of these concepts will come to fruition in the very near future. Thank you and I look forward to receiving more information! 92592 15 Freeway passing Temecula. It's always traffic during pick hours. Temecula Intersection on 15/215 freeway is always traffic. Please do an improvement to lessen the traffic that's passing Temecula. Thank you. 92592 Temecula The I-15 from SD County line to Murrieta, past 1-215 Interchange is in desperate need of funding to alleviate rush hour traffic that keeps our freeway backed up for hours! No toll lanes! Give us regular carpool or more general lanes. 92592 Temecula I would love a train from Temecula to downtown SD (with a few stops in between — Escondido, RB, Mira Mesa, downtown). With the commuters who travel into SD and then trolley stops within metro SD we could ease a ton of congestion and prevent accidents. 92592 Temecula Please help us MOVE 1 15 from Winchester to TEMECULA parkway. This is such a dangerous area and the traffic is unmeasurable. Page 105 North 15 back up going through Temecula every single day from border patrol to 215. On Friday afternoon the backup is to San Diego. Temecula 92592 Temecula area worse due to 215 backup. Let's face it when people leave town 15 is the freeway they take to go to Vegas and river. Please allocate funding for carpool lanes through Temecula. 92592 Temecula The I-15 problem starts well before Temecula and has continued to get worse. The band aid approach to fix the exits was of little help and only addressed people finally getting home from there long commute. It did not speed there long hours of commuting. Our federal representatives have ignored the problem and have used the lack of funding as an old excuse. Nonsense. Look around Riverside and see the prior projects. The 15 freeway needs help. I drive 15 south in the AM and both in the PM 92592 Temecula between Rancho Bernardo and temecula. Over the past 14 years traffic is 3x's as bad as it was in the bringing. Thank for your help!! 92592 Temecula Seeking your support to upgrade the 15 freeway in Temecula. The city of Temecula is requesting 50 million dollars from that grant to support Hwy 15 improvements to mitigate traffic congestion. 70% of the traffic during peak drive times is just passing through Temecula. They do not live here, they live in our surrounding communities. As such, fixing the 15 freeway will be a benefit not only to our residents, but the entire region. 92592 Temecula If better transit options were available, I would take them to get to my job at San Diego State University. As things exist now, it would take too many hours for me to take transit from Temecula to SDSU. Additional runs of existing bus routes would make an enormous difference to me. 92592 Temecula Please fix traffic , congestion on 15 freeway in Temecula.. I drive all over SoCal and it HAS to be one the worst spots around. 92592 Temecula L Express lanes on the I-15 in the Temecula area. It's Incredibly congested between The Temecula Parkway exit all the way to the 215 a great deal of the time esp during commute hours and sometimes even on the weekends. 92592 Temecula The 15 throughout all 4 exits in Temecula. Just a parking lot 3-6. 92592 Temecula The daily gridlock on I-15 Temecula really could use a reboot. It's a problem everyday for Temecula residents. Even more frustrating is that the majority of drivers in the gridlock arejust passing through. It makes using the 15 a complete headache. Thank you for listening. Page 106 92592 Temecula funds to mitigate traffic congestion on the 15 freeway through Temecula. The commute has become intolerable, not only during peak commute hours, but all the time now. I have been involved in accidents due to the heavy traffic, delays, missed flights and it's becoming increasingly worse with time. This ridiculous traffic impacts the quality of our lives, safety issues, etc. 92592 Please provide at least $50 million dollars to mitigate traffic congestion on Interstate 15 going through Temecula to the 15/215 split. Most of the Temecula people going through there, causing some of the worst traffic in the Nation, doesn't live in Temecula but DO live in Riverside County. This will help out EVERYONE in Riverside County. Thank you! 92592 Temecula The worst congestion in the state is the K-15 through Temecula. It is gridlock most of the day because of the number of cars heading north or south of Temecula. Most are NOT residents of Temecula. Best bet would be to add additional lanes; I do think there is enough land to do this. 92592 Temecula We have lived in South Temecula since the early 90s. What use to be a 30 minute commute to San Marcos for my husband in the afternoon has now became a 1 to 1.5 hour commute (sometimes longer) just in the last few years. So many people complain the traffic is because of Temecula's growth but I beg to differ. Although the traffic has increased in Temecula because of the growth over the years, I truly believe it is from the huge growth of the surrounding communities of the unincorporated French Valley, Winchester, the cities of Murrietta, Wildomar, and especially Menifee. With so many cars and especially transport trucks on a highway that has only 4 lanes it becomes a bottleneck into the valley. One accident, either morning or afternoon, and the commuters are screwed as well as the city of Temecula's infrastructure. I work near GOHS and when I leave to go home, I have seen the impact of a major accident on the 15 affect Pechanga Parkway. Traffic backs -up in front of the casino and what would be normally a 3 minute drive becomes a 20 drive just to drive less than one mile. Ridiculous! I hope the county of Riverside sees what is going on down here. So much money has been put into the areas north of us but I have not seen any improvements to our area (other than the new Temecula Parkway off/on ramps) since I moved up here. Something needs to be done TODAY!! Page 107 92592 92592 92592 Temecula Temecula Temecula 92592 92592 92592 Temecula Temecula Temecula 92592 92592 92592 Temecula Temecula Temecula I would like to see some work on relieving the large amount of daily traffic along the 15 fwy in the City of Temecula. The traffic has been getting worse by the year and most of the commuters are passing through the city but causing so much congestion. We do not have enough exits to accommodate the amount of residents in the city and the traffic flow is always The majority of commute problems in Riverside are caused by the backups on the I-15 in Temecula. If that problem is solved it will ease traffic all along. We need to ease congestion on 15 in the Temecula area by adding lanes and HOV. 1-15 upgrade specifically in the Temecula region. As far south as the 76 Freeway, traffic begins (northbound), and specifically backs up during the ascent up the hill towards Mission. Traffic becomes dreadful from Rainbow Valley all the way through the 1-15/1-215 split. Adding additional lanes, fixing exit ramps, etc. would help benefit the health and safety of all commuters' lives, whether Temecula residents, or residents of surrounding communities. lam contacting you concerning the rush hour traffic on I-15 NB in Temecula. On most days traffic is backed up almost 10 miles, from the Winchester exit to the 76. Would be interested in creating a zipper lane allowing communities north of Temecula to by-pass the Temecula exits. Given that Murrietta and her surrounding communities are still primed for large growth it would make sense to get ahead of the problem now. Thank you for taking our feedback. The 15 fwy in Temecula needs help. 1 live off of a Pechanga Pkwy in S Temecula. I need to take my children to activities in North Temecula. This can take me 30 minutes ( during times you'd expect should be fair empty. But starting at like 3pm already it's packed) to get on Freeway on Temecula pkwy and exit on Winchester. ( heading back it's a 10 min drive). We must expand the I-15 and 1215. Most traffics is not coming to Temecula they are driving though. Please help our area. Thank you Help ease the traffic congestion on I-15 thru Temecula California. I would figure out how to alleviate some traffic on the I-15 corridor going north from the San Diego county border through Temecula to the 215. The back up, even midday and on the weekends is ridiculous! Page 108 92592 Temecula In the twenty years we have lived in Temecula the freeway traffic has increased exponentially, what used to take 20 minutes ( from Rancho California Rd to Murietta Hot Springs road) now can take up to an hour on freeway. The problem has become so bad that they( commuters) are taking the back roads through neighborhoods where kids are playing on their street. Please help solve this problem. Thanks 92592 Temecula Please help ease congestion through Temecula Valley. It takes valuable time from families in the evenings that used to be spent together. I have lived in Temecula since 1992. At this time we moved from San Diego in order to afford our first home. We decided at this time that my husband, a police officer, would make the one hour commute. That 92592 Temecula commute can now take 2 hours! The car pool lanes in San Diego are great, but one he hits the 76 in Fallbrook it is horrible. I think the first step would be to put carpool lanes in starting at the 76 heading north. This problem just keeps getting worse. 92592 Temecula Add more lanes and carpool lanes,express lanes on the 15 South from Temecula to Escondido We need more lanes of traffic on the 15/215 corridor and we need a 92592 Temecula carpool lane from Menifee to Escondido! More mass transit from Riverside to San Diego would help alleviate the car congestion. 92592 Temecula Pleasehelp ease the pain temecula residents suffer with a widening of the 15 through Temecula @ 92592 Temecula I_ Expand the I-15 between San Diego and 215. Add another exit between Temecula Pkwy and Rancho California. 92592 Temecula I will help in anyway I can to get relief from the commute through the I-15 corridor through Temecula Valley. I travel everyday and it's terrible. There is room to add an additional lane or even better, a fast track carpool lane. How can I help? ru- 92592 1-15 north is in real need. I live in a city that if we have an emergency, our Temecula freeways won't support the traffic. Freeway looks like a parking lot. Is time to work in the freeway and stop building homes. 92592 Temecula The commute on the 15 north into Temecula, Ca is horrible. 1 live in Temecula but work in Escondido and have to commute back and forth this way every day and it just seems to be getting worse. There are so many trucks on the road too, and motorcycles. I see accidents all the time. Something needs to be done to alleviate the congestion. 92592 Temecula Widen the 15 freeway from 76 to the 215! Page 109 92592 Temecula The 15 freeway south to San Diego and north back into Temecula has grown so much worse in the last 10 years. It's unbearable to commute. It makes my family consider leaving California altogether. We need expanded lanes 115 near Temecula needs more lanes to keep up with increased population. 92592 Temecula There is plenty of land and this is achievable. People moved away from the coast because of lack of affordable reasonable middle class housing. L 92592 Temecula As a military member, I commute between 79S in Temecula down to the San Diego area. I moved to Temecula in July of 2015 when a non -rush- hour drive home was about 45-1hr, and a rush-hour drive was 1:15 to 1:30 if there was an accident. Today, my typical commute starts at about 1hr30m if traffic flow is good. Sometimes, this is with the HOV. Due to the horrible drive, I no longer just have to plan for my work hours, I also have to plan for my daughter to be picked up before the childcare center closes, school events, emergency calls at work, etc. I have considered taking the dangerous risk of a motorcycle, but will only help so much due to having to make it home, change vehicles, and then pick my daughter up from work. The hassle is becoming not worth the commute, and my family and I have considered just moving on to base, causing us to miss out on the benefits of such a beautiful city, but service to country is a requirement that I cannot put as a second priority. Stretching the HOV lane, or adding a tram system, or adding a bypass to take drivers from Rainbow Valley, around Temecula, and up to the northern side of the 215 may help ease the commute. Thank you for looking into possibilities. 92592 Temecula Please do something about interstate 15 from San Diego border to the 215. It takes so long just to go a few miles. It makes it so hard to even have dinner as a family since I am in the Navy and work in San Diego. I miss out on family time and the kids sporting events because of traffic. Page 110 92592 92592 92592 92592 92592 92592 Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula have lived in the Temecula Valley for over 29 years. I remember when the 15 freeway going through town was nearly empty. Not to mention a few hundred thousand less people livening in this valley. Now I see the pinch point of traffic on the 15 freeway going through our once little town and traffic stopped or nearly stopped several times throughout the day regardless of what day of the week it is! The way I see it there are just too many homes built north of the 15 / 215 split and there is no other route to get from north county San Diego to the England Empire. I believe the 15 freeway must be expanded by at least two lanes each way to accommodate the amount of traffic traveling from all areas of the Inland Empire to Any where in the San Diego or North County area. The amount of homes being built in Menifee is unreal. Many of those people must travel South of Temecula for work and the only route available is the 15 freeway going right through town. The problem is only going to get worse. Please expand the 15 freeway going through Temecula by at least 2 lanes going both North and South. Thank you, Tracy Avina Help us relieve congestion on I-15 in Temecula it's only getting worse. RAILWAY Please! San Diego's aggressive new plan brings their rail north of Escondido. PLEASE work to connect the Perris line down to Escondido, with a station in Murrieta or Temecula. An extra lane or even 2 on 115 in 10 years isn't going to solve anything, but taking thousands off the road every weekday will. The daily traffic between the City of Temecula and San Diego is overly conjested on a daily basis. Since we moved here in 2012, traffic has exponentially increased and there are 20 mile backups during both the morning and late afternoon commutes. We will not even venture out to the 15 freeway to go to lunch in San Diego anymore. The 15 desperately needs additional lanes north and southbound , preferably HOV lanes and improvements to the entry to get onto the 215 north. Quit approving high density housing in Menifee, Murrieta and the French Valley area. Or, if funding can be found, build a train with stops in Corona, Riverside and, connect with the San Diego transit. And, don't take 20 years to do it.] Widen 115/1215. Put in more on and off ramps, especially one to the Pechanga casino. Page 111 92592 92592 92592 92592 92592 92592 92592 92592 92592 7 92592 92592 Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula I have lived in Temecula for over 10 years and have commuted to San Diego the entire time. When there is a major accident or fire in the area, it has taken me 3-4 hours to get home. This is unacceptable! Without traffic I can make it home in 45 minutes. A normal day is 1 hour and 15 minutes. The average time it takes as of the last year is 1 hour 30 minutes. And there are zero alternatives to taking the 15 freeway to my exit Temecula Pkwy. Please please please help improve this! fix the congestion on I-15 between SR76 / and the 1-215 junction I commuted from Temecula to Rancho Bernardo area in San Diego for many years. I finally had to retire a year ago because I could no longer tolerate the traffic jams on the 15. It was effecting my health, both physically and mentally. This is a serious problem that needs immediate resolution. Thank you. Expand 15N to the 91 always a mess! As we know, the 15 through Temecula is one of the worst congestion areas in Riverside County if not Southern Cal. I am submitting an idea that I have for review by someone who actually knows what they're talking about. My idea has a new 15N ramp from Winchester that is between the North and South bound lanes. 15N bound traffic would merge to the right. The current Northbound ramp would be for the 215N traffic use only. This would stop vehicles having to cross lanes to enter or exit the 15 or 215. Why is the carpool lane taken away and made a part of the toll road? Why is the carpool lane taken? are there any plans to put in east -west between the 15 and the 5 On the 15 freeway to Corona, why are there no diamond lanes, HOV lanes? 15 freeway in Temecula connecting Riverside County to San Diego County. I would love to be able to take transit from Temecula to Lemon Grove (San Diego County) It is time for RCTC and WRCOG to merge so that one organization, with one vision, and shared resources can move the area forward. Mass transit also needs to consider critical mass projects where enough frequency makes it an option. Light rail to Temecula and or San Diego is a must from Perris! Page 112 92791 92952 N/A N/A 92595 92595 92595 92595 i 92595 Temecula Temecula Temecula Temecula Wildomar Wildomar Wildomar Wildomar Wildomar I live in Temecula and commute to Fallbrook each day for work. I am stuck in over an hour of traffic each day, on a good day. The distance I travel each day is less than 15 miles, but the traffic on the 15 creates such a slowed pace that it is usually bumper to bumper the whole way. Something has got to change. This should not be the case. There have been many efforts to ease traffic congestion on the 15 closer to SanDiego, we need that same consideration in this section. Please make this improvement plan a priority! The traffic just in Temecula off the 15 freeway is ridiculous and something should be done. A normal 10 minute drive takes over 30 minutes during peak hours and there seems to be room to expand lanes, nothing has happened and traffic is just getting worse. 115- THROUGH TEMECULA NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. BACKS UP FOR 20 MILES. ITS TERRIBLE. ONLY WANTING TO LEAVE COMMENT. The light timing at the Winchester exit on Northbound I-15 and follow on light at Ynez & Winchester are out of sync causing back up traffic. Please #rebootmycommute Find New Leadership, Lower Taxes and bring real jobs, stop building multifamily apartments get away from Welfare State Policies Schedule some buses up to The Farm in Wildomar. We Seniors need affordable transportation. Thank you very much! Need an on and offramp between railroad canyon and bundy canyon. Continue the fast track lane on the 15 coming from the 91 that ends around Ontario Ave. Let it continue to at least toms farms. I would fix the congestion on the 15 freeway in Temecula. It is so painful driving to work each day, Please send help! Thank you There is plenty of room to add lanes. If you don't want to do that. Cone off the fast lane starting at the San Diego/riverside border all the way past 215 So those who are going straight through Temecula can flow through. The people wait until the last minute to get over to get to the lanes for 215 and that is a big part of the back up Page 113 92595 92573 Wildomar N/A To whom it may concern, Diamond Drive exit #73 on Interstate 15 southbound highway definetely needs an additional freeway exit lane constructed to reduce the dangers of driving past the current exit as many drivers risk the lives of many by blocking the safety lane and sometimes even stopping or slowing down drastically on the slow lane in an effort to try and get in front of all the traffic patiently waiting to exit while bieng stuck in the safety lane ; Furthermore, cars are constantly using the safety lane as an exit due to the actual exit bieng extremely packed with traffic waiting at the street light to officially exit the #73 southbound highway exit. Clearly, exit #73 on interstate 15 southbound is unfit for driving conditions and presents a huge risk especially when drivers slow down or even stop on the slow lane because they might miss the freeway exit. In conclusion, Diamond Drive exit #73 on interstate 15 Southbound should be reconstructed or modified in a way to properly flow traffic through and out the exit. As a result, everybody using exit #73 on interstate 15 southbound can have a much better driving experience and not have to worry or feel guilty about blocking the safe lane, and people who drive past the exit won't have to worry about drivers slowing down or stopping in front of them in the slow lane so they don't miss the exit. Finally, the safe lane that is normally traffic packed for more than a mile long sometimes, would be kept clear and open for people who urgently need to pull over as well as emergency vehicles who depend on the saftey lane during heavy traffic to rush where they need to go when duty calls. (continued) This is important to ensure that firefighters, ambulance, and police are able to use the safe lane as needed during an emergency. Although it may not seem like such a big deal, this problem should be looked into and fixed as soon as possible. That is all for now. I appreciate all the hard work and effort bieng put into improving driving conditions. Thank you for your time and consideration. I would like to hear back any thoughts, opinions, or questions about my idea as i know i am not the only one who thinks the Diamond Drive exit #73 on interstate 15 Southbound is all messed up. Good day. build up Ortega highway so for people working in Murrieta to Orange County. Page 114 N/A N/A I think you put real people to report back to you in all current bus routes for a week. They talk to everyone on the bus about what they want and need. Do those things first. They are the best people to please because the currently use the service. Once improvements are made, advertise the heck out of how you listened and improved. I will volunteer my time to be a "bus reporter" for you everyday after I get off work for a week. I truly believe we need reform to make people want to ride the bus and change our need a car culture. Hit me up to help. N/A N/A 206. Tom's farm / dos Lagos needs to go. It is not an Express anymore with a stop so close. Use local routes as suggested before. When those were added is when you lost your rider ship. You have the data to show this. And car break in at the stops is a huge issue. N/A N/A Biggest issue right now is the 15 to the 91. Ever since the fast track expanded to the 15 fwy, the traffic now backs up to temescal Canyon Rd. Exit no matter what. Fast track is ridiculously expensive, costs up to, $30 ONE way and only saves 20 minutes, if that. Who can afford an extra $300/week in just fast track tolls? The more houses they build out here, the worse this will all get. Do better! N/A N/A Loved the bus! Route 206/205. Problem is the park & ride lot My friends and I have experienced some loss due to vehicle break-ins and vehicle theft. In my immediate friends circle I can count five -six people that have been affected by this. If parking for our personal vehicle is more secure, more people will ride. Am I correct Aram Kazarian & Fred Haag Jr.? N/A N/A Its not a traffic problem, its jobs problem when folks have to drive to LA, OC or SD to get a decent wage. Stop building homes unless there are jobs offered locally to support workers to keep them off the road. Buses, trains and rapid transit are putting a band -aid on a hemorrhage. Local county politicians are allowing overbuilding in unincorporated areas so that the taxes do not have to be shared with cities. They have failed their constituents because every new house built, requires three jobs and house are being built and jobs are not. Put a moratorium on building, attract high paying employers and stop creating bedroom communities that serve and exploit workers that have to spend hours a day on the road working in areas that they cannot afford to live in. Itys not a roads issue, its a jobs issue. Wake UP! Page 115 N/A N/A Start making those commuter -useful 1-lane roads into 2-lane roads so as to be able to pass some of the IE's slow -rolling numbnuts legally. Then add more lanes to the freeways. Get rid of the toll roads and let us benefit from them without raping commuters' pocketbooks both at the lane and tax time. N/A N/A Perris, Already has a train, start talking about a train from Temecula to Corona, soon, do not forget south Riverside county.. N/A N/A Bring more businesses to the IE so people won't have to commute. N/A N/A I say begin at the last mile. Planning should incorporate sidewalks, bike lanes/paths and walk/bike friendly access to routes. The county and cities should invest in the last mile first. Then find better ways to get there. N/A N/A N/A To make bus time more efficient, consider redesigning the ADA ramp to slide out. The current discharge of "catapulting" out seems to take a long time . N/A No 18 wheelers allowed on fwy from 0500-0800 and 3 PM- 7pm J N/A N/A Easy, Uber drivers are subsidized by the state of California for Riverside for 62 and over. For all grocery stores and hospital visits. Riverside would be way out in front of every other City/ county Give all Uber drivers a tax break for helping the elderly. N/A N/A No one rides the buses shut it down N/A N/A N/A N/A Create 2 lanes in the 115 median. Using a movable barrier, you could create an additional 2 lanes heading South in the AM and 2 heading North in the afternoon. WHY CAN'T ANYONE OF AUTHORITY FIGURE THIS OUT? Also a truck ONLY lane is DESPERATELY needed on 15S heading out of Temecula and one Northbound from 76 to the border scales. This is a NO BRAINER SOLUTION. Makes me feel as if none really wants to solve the freeway traffic issues. Too much construction has taken place with too small of an effect. Agenda 21/30 have anything to do with it? No busses. Stay out J N/A N/A A fix for the northbound 15 traffic. Put the northbound Winchester onramp lane all the way through to the 215. Make the northbound 215 3 lanes from the 15. There is plenty of room for both. This is where the traffic backup starts. #rebootmycommute N/A N/A Again stop building so many apartments and houses. I remember just stop signs.on cap orks. Fix the pot holes .ca of us road! Stop building!!! Page 116 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A We need two more lanes and a carpool lane on each side of the freeway. Also, the lights need to be synchronized. I worry if we had a natural disaster there is no way out! We would be sitting in absolute gridlock ! Road widening More frequent buses and more bus routes around temecula. Two bus routes and A bus every hour is not mass transit Better Rail! I tried to get to Monrovia from Temecula, and it was impossible. The connecting train I would have had to take in riverside left the station 5-10 minutes before my train arrived. And not because it was late, but because the schedule is designed this way! After the morning rush, there are zero train options available without waiting hours for connecting trains. I would have had to find an uber/lyft at 4 AM to take me to Perris, so I could connect in Riverside without waiting for hours. But then I would have had to wait hours for the dealership to open. Rail from Riverside County to San Diego is CRUCIAL. With one highway in or out of San Diego, adding 1 or 2 lanes isn't going to fix anything. We need Railways and we need them NOW! Quit building more homes without increasing the size snd number of roads necessary to seevice them. Double deck the 1-15 Simple solution to the HORRENDOUS North bound 15 traffic. A truck only lane is needed from 76 to the Border Patrol scales. An additional 2 lanes needs to be made down the center divide well past the 215 split. 2 lanes Sout in the AM and 2 for.North bound in the PM. No BRAINER SOLUTION!! NO MORE car pool lanes EVER!!! I am sure all of you COG Agenda 30 Globalists would like to have electric driverless vehicles where you could simply make our vehicles inoperable during certain times forcing people to use mass transit or car pooling. A tunnel linking the 15 and 5 would be nice. Shouldn't have to wait 2 minutes for the light to turn green at 3am when there are no cars around. I've seen towns that from 12am to 4am make their traffic lights flash red one direction as a stop sign and yellow on the other for proceed with caution. Also, it's annoying when you come to an intersection and all directions are red until you stop and then it turns green. Temecula does this a lot. Why are the sensors right on the line. Move the sensors back 100 feet so we don't have to stop before the light turns green. Page 117 N/A N/A This is the worst place for traffic I have ever seen. Have lived here 4 yrs from San Diego, which has tons of traffic, but it's to be expected because the size of the city! This city and the traffic is heinous! People drive like maniacs, run red lights all the time, never see cops anywhere! They have to do something with this heinous traffic!!! N/A N/A Uh. Quit building more apartments and houses. Fix the 15 215 split. Quit wasting money and get the damn on and off ramps fixed. Temecula city council must be full of idiots. Temecula should be ashamed. Wildomar even got there on off ramps fixed!! All the while Temecula council is running around with their heads in their asses saying dur dur who wants another water meter screw the town infrastructure. Aren't yall the dip shits who steal our tax dollars to figure this out? up yours idiot city council members. Every town surrounding Temecula has fixed their on and off ramps but Trmrcula and idiot Naggar has nothing but lame excuses for why we cant. up yours Naggar and crew! N/A N/A Fix my road, not your friends roads first. Then, we'll talk. N/A N/A Stop Building. Stop building houses until road capacity is adequate. Expand the 15 first. Temecula is full and you keep approving developments around it on county land that choke the roads more . Stop bus service. No one uses it. Bike lanes also prevent obesity N/A N/A Stop building usless buildings?? I didn't want the condos --or apartments near my house then or now lol, it just bogs us up because there's no jobs here for locals to get! N/A N/A gas stations on one street....think about that for a minute N/A N/A Better stop light timing I swear I hit every single light in Temecula„ N/A N/A Add rail along 215 and 15. We need more north/south rail. We don't all work in la N/A N/A Time all the lights down Winchester, murrieta hot springs and Rancho California rd. It is absolutely ridiculous that it takes almost 20 mins to get down Winchester from murrieta hot springs rd to the freeway. There are too many people who live here to not have a timed light schedule N/A Create 2 lanes on 15 median with a movable barrier. Create a truck only N/A lane on Nb 15 from the 76 to the Border Patrol scales AND Sb 15 from 79S to the Scales. Page 118 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A There has to be another Option to drive to Orange County aside from the 15 FWY to the 91 FWY and the Ortega HWY , the 15 is always congested and the Ortega can get back up by one Car Accident Need a highway that goes from Lake Skinner to the 15 near Rainbow with many exits. For one how about improving the size of the Maine roads two pedestrian over pass at cross walks so cars don't have to weight for pedestrians to cross the roads or underpass which ever works best it is all so safer. Improving road maintac better publick transportation like electric monorails that are suspended above ground level so not to slow down ground trific with train crossing and is more economical and better for the inviorment and quite over bus's and not as noisy as diesel train's and can run them to the other citys to save presser on the ever growing freeway problum. Build save bike paths that run thew out the city that dont interfere with cars so it is safer for bikes riders to commute this would all so help permot more ppl to bike ride and also help with the traffic . I can go on but you would run out of money for all of my ideas. .how to help pay for it thair are. Over four citys all next to ech other the fund's could be combined to. Produce a transportation net work to all of them..also most of this can be payed for buy haveing comuters pay a bit exstra on tickets for the first 2 year's then drop the price down to normal fees once the two uears is up. Add more roads to meet the massive increase in population. Stop building apartments Add another road for those coming from Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Temecula, etc... Going up toward the 91fwy. Our only way is by taking either the 15fwy North or Temescal Canyon Rd (another road would help a lot). Also focus on Creating jobs down here so people living here can get jobs out here and not have to travel to OC or LA for work. If there was more jobs out here less people would travel OC and LA which will decrease fwy congestion. Another thing is widen the 15fwy, (from 91 fwy connection in Corona all the way to Temecula City) you have the space to widen the fwy but you don't Um...how about add 2 or 3 more lanes to the 15 fwy? I dont mean the stupid fastrak lanes either Make the triangle a transit hub!!! Page 119 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Get rid of the artificial bottlenecks that keep the 91 congested from the 15 to the 71 in the morning that keep people paying $20. Or would that affect your bottom line too much? Example being the lane ending at Lincoln and the Serfas club on ramp. I'm sure there are others, people pay big toll money to travel that six mile stretch. Open 22 fwy to connect to 215 fwy Get jobs down there so people don't have to sit in cars for hours a day. Train service would be nice...clear down to San Diego. Widening of the 15 FWY aside from toll lanes which do not replace the need for growth expansion to support the tons of housing tracts going in...maybe a metro like they have down the 105? More available stops for local shuttle buses and employees for Transit who can provide answers...I could never ride because I couldn't get an answer as to when the bus stopped by the post near my house as it wasn't on the schedule printout and come to find out sometime later they bagged the sign and eliminated the stop from the route for non-use. Of course no one used it if you have no idea what time to be there. Better park and rides with security, gated entry and lighting. We can't even park our timeshare vehicle at the Elsinore locations because we had tags stolen, license plate stolen, gas tank drilled, window busted for attempted stereo robbery...enterprise said park there again and you're responsible for the damage. Expand public transportation in the Temecula Valley. Create public transportation routes that connect the Temecula Valley with major cities in the North and South, particularly to Escondido. I commuted to Escondido for 5 years and the the last 3 years I had to take alternate routes due to major traffic issues. Stop opening up fast track and open up a lane for traffic instead of profit a lot of us can't afford the fast track. Fast track is to expensive WIDEN THE 15! Start by bringing back mandatory busses to school and back! Bypass lanes northbound to 15 freeway with no exit to Temecula Unless there is a politician that sits in the crap traffic everyday it wont change. And there isnt one. If there was the freeways would be widened and transportation fixed. Out of sight out of mind in the temecula valley Page 120 N/A N/A An 1-15 shuttle connected to Park & Rides. A functional bus service would be better than Temecula's "charming" trolley buses. But seriously, we'll get toll lanes because RCTC now has a cash cow*. Nice to ask the question -- it almost seemed sincere. *FYI the County regularly borrows against future revenue. N/A Re route the 215 N/A N/A Stop building homes and widen the roads including the 115 and 215 N/A Quit building or approving houses and developments u til you have fixed N/A the freeway even when you get campaign donations for the developer. Quit wasting our funds on busses no one rides N/A N/A Add lanes regular lanes from Cajalco to Lake Elsinore. Not toll road lanes. Fee less lanes. N/A N/A Get rid of the TOLL lanes that do nothing but mess traffic up! Its ridiculous! N/A N/A Two more lanes in each direction on 1 15 plus HOV/Fastrack N/A N/A How about doing something for French valley. Produce plenty of taxes. But seems to g to other projects. N/A N/A STOP BUILDING TOLL LANES! N/A NA Please add 3 extra lanes on the 15 N going from Riverside County/San Diego border to the 215/15 interchange. Also please make a freeway with 65 mph speed limit going from Temecula to San Juan Capistrano with 2 lanes in each direction. ZIP City Comments - Other N/A N/A We need more efficient public transportation options for example Mexico City has developed one bus lane only for buses and comes every few minuetes. We need more public transportation within the city and it would be more eco friendly to go from one point to the other. We rely too much on our vehicles. More efficient public transportation options. Other places are far ahead of us in these areas. N/A N/A More jobs, less houses. We need a factory again. J N/A N/A Jobs should equal the amount of housing. Please, no more housing. Good tax money for the city presently. But the future needs local jobs. LOS Angeles has the 5, 405, 105, 60 ... we have the 91 keyhole Page 121 N/A N/A Southern California's transportation system is BROKEN. Stay tuned for why...So, this morning I would have had to leave my house by 7:30AM for a 1PM meeting in LA. The LAST morning Metrolink train leaving my city to LA is 8:10AM. I was willing to do so because I've been putting a lot of miles on my car, and well, I just don't feel like driving today... I could do work on the MetroLink, read my new book by @brunanessif, hell, SLEEP because I had to wake up so damn early. There's outlets on the trains g , no WiFi d , but your standard mobile has an option to have HotSpot internet. It's 2019! Well between trash day, my espresso machine acting up, feeding my dog, and then to find her take a giant piss on my floor... I missing that 8:10am MetroLink train for mttg that is 5 HOURS away. You'd figure I'd just catch the next train but, nope. They don't exist. N/A N/A How would you plan to address transportation through a potential sales tax? Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Page 125 AGENDA ITEM 9D RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Jillian Guizado, Legislative Affairs Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the following bill position: a) HR. 2939 (Napolitano) — Support; 2) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State Update State Budget Governor Newsom and the State Legislature announced on June 9 a state budget deal for Fiscal Year 2019/20 had been reached. There is little to note about transportation funding in the new budget. Transportation policy changes are often contained in budget trailer bills, which staff is monitoring as closely as possible and is poised to act quickly following the Commission's adopted 2019 State and Federal Legislative Platform should an important matter be proposed. The Legislature voted to approve the state budget on June 13 and sent it to Governor Newsom's desk for signature (or veto). The Governor has until June 25 to take action on the budget. In the meantime, the Legislature is working on more than a dozen budget trailer bills to accompany the state budget. Federal Update HR. 2939 (Napolitano) — Staff Recommended Position: Support The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) finalized a rule on December 8, 2014, that the self- help counties in California (and other states) believe misinterprets a statute related to taxes on aviation fuel. In 1987, Congress passed the FAA authorization amendments that required airports to spend aviation fuel excise tax revenue on airport uses. The conference report for the 1987 Agenda Item 9D 60 amendments to the FAA statute clearly stated that the requirement that local taxes on aviation fuel must be spent on airports "is intended to apply to local fuel taxes only, and not to other taxes imposed by local governments, or to state taxes." The FAA rulemaking in 2014 contradicts the Congressional intent and 27 years of practice by stating that the provisions of the 1987 statute "apply to any state or local tax on aviation fuel, whether the tax was specifically targeted at aviation fuel or was a general sales tax on products that included aviation fuel without exemption." The FAA's 2014 rulemaking overturns the decision of Riverside County voters to tax themselves for a specific purpose by dictating district and local taxes paid on aviation fuel must be spent on airport uses. Due to the controversy caused by the FAA rulemaking five years ago, the FAA had not been enforcing the policy until the state received a letter on May 17, 2019, threatening to withhold $250 million annually in FAA grants received by airports throughout the state. HR. 2939 would protect Riverside County from the FAA's recent threat by statutorily voiding the FAA's rulemaking. Staff is recommending a support position on HR. 2939, consistent with the Commission's 2019 State and Federal Legislative Platform, which includes a principle to protect our authority and revenue by opposing efforts to infringe on the Commission's discretion in collecting and administering its revenue sources including, but not limited to: Measure A, tolls, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees. Federal Budget On June 4, the House Committee on Appropriations approved the FY 2020 spending bill for Transportation. This version of the spending bill is very favorable to transportation in that it would authorize $1.1 billion more than what is designated in the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act transportation funding program for 2020. This Transportation, Housing, Urban Development and Related Agencies bill has since been combined with four other spending bills to become a mini -bus. As of the writing of this agenda item, the full House of Representatives was expected to hear the package of spending bills on the floor before July 4. It is important to note the Senate still needs to move a bill of its own before a transportation spending bill can be adopted for Federal FY 2020, which begins October 1, 2019. Staff will continue to report on Congress' progress in the coming months. Attachments: Legislative Matrix - July 2019 Agenda Item 9D 61 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITIONS ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION — JULY 2019 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption AB 252 (Daly, Frazier) Removes the sunset date from the NEPA Reciprocity program. Passed Senate Transportation Committee; referred to Senate Appropriations Committee. (June 11, 2019) SUPPORT 3/13/19 AB 1402 (Petrie -Norris) Makes substantive changes to the Active Transportation Program administered by the State, allocating 75% of funds to be distributed by large MPOs. Referred to Committee on Transportation. (March 27, 2019) SUPPORT 4/1/19 SB 152 (Beall) Makes substantive changes to the Active Transportation Program administered by the State, allocating 75% of funds to be distributed by large MPOs. Held in Senate Appropriations Committee under submission. (May 16, 2019) SUPPORT 4/1/19 AB 626 (Quirk -Silva) Seeks to dictate that professionals who provide professional services on one phase of a project be deemed not to have a conflict of interest in subsequent project phases, disregarding the Commission's adopted Procurement Policy. Ordered to inactive file at request of member. (May 30, 2019) OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED 4/10/19 AB 456 (Chiu, Bonta, Low) Removes the January 1, 2020 sunset provision on claims resolution processes. Passed Senate Judiciary; referred to Senate Appropriations Committee. (June 11, 2019) OPPOSE 5/8/19 SB 498 (Hurtado) Takes funds dedicated in the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund and repurposes them for a new short -line railroad project grant program. Passed Senate floor. (May 28, 2019) OPPOSE Staff action based on platform 5/30/19 SR 742 (Allen) Authorizes existing state funds for Amtrak to be used on intercity passenger bus transportation, regardless of whether the passenger is connecting to or from intercity rail service. Passed Senate floor; referred to Assembly Transportation Committee. (May 30, 2019) SUPPORT 6/12/19 AB 1149 (Fong) Eliminates the ability of petitioners to opt to prepare the record of proceedings and would place that responsibility solely on the lead agency. Re -referred to Assembly Natural Resources. (April 24, 2019) SUPPORT 6/12/19 AGENDA ITEM 9E RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Martha Masters, Senior Management Analyst Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Committee SUBJECT: Fiscal Years 2019/20 — 2023/24 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans for the Local Streets and Roads Program BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the Fiscal Years 2019/20 — 2023/24 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Local Streets and Roads (LSR) as submitted by the participating agencies. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2009 Measure A provides member agencies with local funding for street maintenance and operations, street repairs, street improvements, and new infrastructure of their local streets and roads systems. As outlined in the Ordinance No. 02-001, Measure A funds are allocated within the three geographic areas: Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. LSR receives 29 percent of the Measure A distribution in Western County, 35 percent in Coachella Valley, and 100 percent in Palo Verde Valley. In the Western County and Palo Verde Valley, funds are distributed by a formula based on 75 percent of proportionate population from the State Department of Finance and 25 percent of Measure A sales tax revenues generated within each jurisdiction. In Coachella Valley, funds are distributed based on 50 percent of proportionate dwelling units and 50 percent of Measure A revenues within each jurisdiction. Since the commencement of the 2009 Measure A in July 2009 through March 31, 2019, the cities and the county of Riverside have received over $442 million. Measure A imposes the following requirements on local agencies in order to receive LSR funds: • Participation in the Western County or Coachella Valley Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program, as applicable; • Participation in the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority's Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), as applicable; • Annual submittal of a 5-Year CIP list of projects; Agenda Item 9E 63 " Annual Maintenance of Effort certification; and " Annual Project Status Report for the prior fiscal year CIP. DISCUSSION: On February 19, 2019, staff provided the local agencies with a Five -Year Measure A LSR revenue projection, which is attached, to assist in preparation of the required CIP. The required plans and supporting documentation have been received from all participating Measure A agencies and have been reviewed by staff to ensure compliance with Measure A requirements and confirm CIP Measure A LSR expenditures are consistent with the State's guidelines for gas tax expenditures. Staff recommends approval of the local agency FYs 2019/20  2023/24 Measure A Five -Year CIPs. The FY 2019/20 Measure A LSR disbursements to eligible local agencies with a Commission - approved CIP are expected to begin in September 2019. Eligibility determinations related to participation in the TUMF and MSHCP programs, as applicable, are complete for Coachella Valley agencies and Western County agencies. Attachments: 1) Five -Year Measure A Revenue Projections for Local Streets and Roads 2) Cities and County FYs 2019/20  2023/24 CIPs (Posted on the Commission Website) Agenda Item 9E 64 ATTACHMENT 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A PROGRAM ALLOCATION (PROJECTION) LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FY 2018/19 FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 FY 2021/22 FY 2022/23 FY 2023/24 Western County BANNING $ 618,000 $ 627,000 $ 643,000 $ 659,000 $ 675,000 $ 692,000 BEAU MO NT 970,000 1,000,000 1,025,000 1,051,000 1,077,000 1,104,000 CALIMESA 176,000 182,000 187,000 192,000 197,000 202,000 CANYON LAKE 195,000 197,000 202,000 207,000 212,000 217,000 CORONA 4,364,000 4,486,000 4,598,000 4,713,000 4,831,000 4,952,000 EASTVALE 1,387,000 1,436,000 1,472,000 1,509,000 1,547,000 1,586,000 HEMET 1,862,000 1,856,000 1,902,000 1,950,000 1,999,000 2,049,000 JURUPA VALLEY 2,123,000 2,221,000 2,277,000 2,334,000 2,392,000 2,452,000 LAKE ELSINORE 1,426,000 1,441,000 1,477,000 1,514,000 1,552,000 1,591,000 MENIFEE 1,823,000 1,847,000 1,893,000 1,940,000 1,989,000 2,039,000 MORENO VALLEY 4,240,000 4,248,000 4,354,000 4,463,000 4,575,000 4,689,000 MURRIETA 2,561,000 2,577,000 2,641,000 2,707,000 2,775,000 2,844,000 NORCO 715,000 713,000 731,000 749,000 768,000 787,000 PERRIS 1,718,000 2,003,000 2,053,000 2,104,000 2,157,000 2,211,000 RIVERSIDE 8,073,000 7,886,000 8,083,000 8,285,000 8,492,000 8,704,000 SAN JACINTO 926,000 927,000 950,000 974,000 998,000 1,023,000 TEMECULA 3,354,000 3,211,000 3,291,000 3,373,000 3,457,000 3,543,000 WILDOMAR 675,000 680,000 697,000 714,000 732,000 750,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY 5,819,000 5,920,000 6,068,000 6,220,000 6,376,000 6,535,000 SUBTOTAL -Western County 43,025,000 43,458,000 44,544,000 45,658,000 46,801,000 47,970,000 Coachella Valley CATHEDRAL CITY 1,569,000 1,537,000 1,575,000 1,614,000 1,654,000 1,695,000 COACHELLA 640,000 628,000 644,000 660,000 677,000 694,000 DESERT HOT SPRINGS 503,000 507,000 520,000 533,000 546,000 560,000 INDIAN WELLS 280,000 267,000 274,000 281,000 288,000 295,000 INDIO 2,062,000 2,054,000 2,105,000 2,158,000 2,212,000 2,267,000 LA QUINTA' 1,606,000 1,590,000 1,630,000 1,671,000 1,713,000 1,756,000 PALM DESERT 2,948,000 2,842,000 2,913,000 2,986,000 3,061,000 3,138,000 PALM SPRINGS 2,232,000 2,240,000 2,296,000 2,353,000 2,412,000 2,472,000 RANCHO MIRAGE 973,000 965,000 989,000 1,014,000 1,039,000 1,065,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1,866,000 1,886,000 1,933,000 1,981,000 2,031,000 2,082,000 SUBTOTAL -Coachella Valley 14,679,000 14,516,000 14,879,000 15,251,000 15,633,000 16,024,000 Palo Verde Valley BLYTHE 821,000 782,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY 199,000 208,000 SUBTOTAL -Palo Verde Valley TOTAL 802,000 822,000 843,000 864,000 213,000 218,000 223,000 229,000 1,020,000 990,000 1,015,000 1,040,000 1,066,000 1,093,000 5 58,724,000 $ 58,964,000 $ 60,438,000 $ 61,949,000 $ 63,500,000 $ 65,087,000 1 Under an agreement between CVAG and La Quinta, CVAG receives 50% of La Quinta's allocation and La Quinta the remaining 50% until such time La Quinta has reimbursed CVAG for TUMF fees CVAG would have received from La Quinta if La Quinta had joined the TUMF program when the TUMF was established. Note: Estimate for Planning Purposes, subject to change and rounding differences 65 ATTACHMENT 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF BANNING 1 This page left intentionally blank. City of Banning Public Works Department STAGECOACH TOWN USA Proud History.Progwous Tnmurrrrw April 16, 2019 Jenny Chan, Management Analyst Planning and Programming Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Subject: Five -Year (FY 2019/2020 — 2023/2024) Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plan Dear Ms. Chan: The City of Banning respectfully submits its Five -Year Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2019/2020 — 2023/2024 as approved by the City Council during its regular meeting on April 9, 2019. Also enclosed with this letter you will find the City's MOE Certification Statement, Project Status Report for FY 2018/2019 along with a copy of the adopted Resolution approving the Five -Year Measure "A" CIP Plan. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at avela@banningca.gov or (951) 922-3130. Sincerely, Art Vela, P.E. Director of Public Works Copy: File Enc. Adopted Resolution Five -Year Measure "A" Plan Project Status Report MOE Certification Statement 99 E. Ramsey St. P.O. Box 998 • Banning, CA 92220-0998 • (951) 922-3130 • Fax (951) 922-3141 3 FY 2019/2020 MEASURE A PROGRAM MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the CITY OF BANNING (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Measure "A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $164,325.00, approved by the Commission at its July 11, 2012 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary Local Funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure "A" funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: _41/71,,ei1- , 2019 Doug hulze, Cit anager Attest: Daryl Betancur, Deputy City Clerk 1 4 M EASURE A LOCALSIhittl5 AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/20 Agency: BANNING Prepared by: Kevin Sn Phone #: (951) 922-3140 Date: 3/ 19/ 2019 FY2017/18Audited Measure A Balance: $ 2,201,513 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 618,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (708,968) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 2,110,545 Estimated FY 2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 627,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 2,737,545 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Indian School Lane: 8th St to San Gorgonio Ave AC Overlay $ 200,000 $ 200,000 2020-02 Lincoln Street: San Gorgonio Ave to Hararave St AC Overlay 300,000 300,000 2020-03 City-wide Slurry Seal Slurry Seal 91,000 91,000 2020-04 Ramsey & Sunset Imp. (Constr.) Rehabilitation 100,000 100,000 2020-05 Ramsey St: 4th St to 12th St AC Overlay/Rehab 300,000 300,000 2020-06 Cottonwood Rd: 8th St to 12th St AC Overlay 100,000 100,000 2020-07 George St: 8th St to 12th St AC Overlay 100,000 100,000 2020-08 10th St: WilliamsSt to George St AC Overlay 115,000 115,000 TOTAL $ 1,306,000 $ 1,306,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 5 M EASURE A LOCALSIhittlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: BANNING Prepared by: Kevin Gn Phone #: (951) 922-3140 Date: 3/ 19/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 1,431,545 643,000 2,074,545 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Monroe St: 22nd St to Jefferson St AC Overlay/Rehab $ 100,000 $ 100,000 2021-02 Jefferson St: Monroe St to 22nd St AC Overlay/Rehab 90,000 90,000 2021-03 Lincoln St: Sunset Ave to 22nd St AC Overlay 180,000 180,000 2021-04 George St: Hargrave to Hathaway AC Overlay 140,000 140,000 2021-05 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension: Highland Home Road to Sunset Document and PS&E only 1,200,000 1,200,000 2021-06 Ramsey Street: 12th St to 16th St AC Overlay/Rehab 200,000 200,000 TOTAL $ 1,910,000 $ 1,910,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 6 M EASURE A LDCALSIFihhIS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: BANNING Prepared by: Kevin 9n Phone # : (951) 922-3140 Date: 3/ 19/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 164,545 659,000 823,545 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021 / 22 2022-01 City-wide Slurry Se a I Slurry Se a I $ 120,000 $ 120,000 2022-02 First St: Livington St to Williams AC Overlay 85,000 85,000 2022-03 Second St: Hays St to WilliamsSt AC Overlay 13,000 13,000 2022-04 Third St: Hays St to Williams AC Overlay 30,000 30,000 2022-05 Fourth St: Livington St to George AC Overlay 85,000 85,000 2022-06 Second St: Nicolet St to George AC Overlay 35,000 35,000 2022-07 Omar Street &Ramsey St Int Improvement AC Overlay/Rehab 50,000 50,000 TOTAL $ 418,000 $ 418,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 7 M EASURE A LOCALSIhittlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: BANNING Prepared by: Kevin Gn Phone #: (951) 922-3140 Date: 3/ 19/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 405,545 675,000 1,080,545 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/ 23 2023-01 Ramsey Street: 16th St to 22nd St AC Overlay/Rehab $ 225,000 $ 225,000 2023-02 City-wide Slurry Se a I 9u rry Se al 440,000 440,000 TOTAL $ 665,000 $ 665,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4 of 6 8 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: BANNING Prepared by: Kevin an Phone # : (951) 922-3140 Date: 3/ 19/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 415,545 692,000 1,107,545 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 Ramsey Street: 22nd St to Sunset Avenue AC Overlay/Rehab $ 800,000 $ 800,000 2024-01 TOTAL $ 800,000 $ 800,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 9 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PRO JECTSTA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: BANNING Prepared by: Kevin an Phone # : (951) 922-3140 Date: 3/ 19/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 1 Cottonwood Rd: 8th St to 12th St AC Overlay $ - 5/1/2020 moved to FY 19/20 2 George St: 8th St to 12th St AC Overlay 5/1/2020 moved to FY 19/20 3 10th St: WilliamsS to George St AC Overlay 5/1/2020 moved to FY19/20 4 12th St: Williamsto George St AC Overlay 122,000 12/1/2019 Preparing PS&E 5 14th St: Williamsto George St AC Overlay 120,000 12/1/2019 Preparing PS&E 6 Sun L.akesBoulevard Extension: Highland Home Road to Sunset Document and PS&E 12/1/2021 moved to FY20/21 Avenue only 7 Su Ramsey & nset Imp. (Design) PS&E 40,000 40,000 6/1/2019 Advertising RFP/Awarding 8 City -Wide Various Streets Improvements AC Overlay 668,968 668,968 4/18/2019 Completed TOTAL $ 950,968 $ 708,968 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page6of6 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF BEAUMONT 11 This page left intentionally blank. BEFIMONT CaP,i,�dirua May 1, 2019 Attn: Lorelle Moe -Luna, Senior Management Analyst Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 CITY OF BEAUMONT 550 E. 6th Street, Beaumont, CA 92223 Phone (951) 769-8520 Fax (951) 769-8526 www.Beaumont-Ca.gov Subject: City of Beaumont Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plan Dear Ms. Moe -Luna, The City, hereby, submits the below listed documents for your consideration and respectfully request that the Riverside County Transportation Commission accept and approve the City's Measure "A" Five -Year CIP and find the City eligible to continue to receive its fair share of Measure "A" revenues. • Submittal Letter on Agency Letterhead • Five -Year CIP for FYs 2020-2024 and Project Status Report for FY 2019 • MOE Certification Statement Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at (951)769- 8520. Thank you, City of Beaumont Jeff Hart City of Beaumont Public Works Director CC: Todd Parton, City Manager Kristine Day, Assistant City Manager Melana Taylor, Finance Director Incorporated November 18, 1912 13 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Beaumont (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $515,908 approved by the Commission at its November 8, 2017 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 1 %/p _2019 ATTEST: CITY MANAGER 14 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: BEAUMONT Prepared by: Laurie Miller Phone # : 951-769-8520 Date: 4/ 26/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 541,889 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 970,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (80,820) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 1,431,069 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 1,000,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 2,431,069 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal FY19- 20 (No. 2019-001) Citywide Surry Seal $ 1,000,000 $ 400,000 2020-02 Annual Citywide Street Rehab FY19-20 (No. 2019-002) Street Rehab 800,000 500,000 2020-03 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal FY18- 19 (2018-001) Citywide slurry seal 600,000 300,000 2020-04 Beaumont Ave Reconstruction (2018-004) Street Rehab 1,953,000 734,000 TOTAL $ 4,353,000 $ 1,934,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 15 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: BEAUMONT Prepared by: Laurie Miller Phone # : 951-769-8520 Date: 4/ 26/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 497,069 1,025,000 1,522,069 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal FY20- 21 (2020-001) Cit idS we ur Seal y ry $ 1,000,000 $ 400,000 2021-02 Annual Citywide Street Rehab FY20-21 (2020-002) greet Rehab 800,000 500,000 TOTAL $ 1,800,000 $ 900,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 16 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: BEAUMONT Prepared by: Laurie Miller Phone # : 951-769-8520 Date: 4/ 26/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 622,069 1,051,000 1,673,069 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal FY21- 22 (2021-001) CitywideS ur Seal ry $ 1,000,000 $ 500,000 2022-02 Annual Citywide Street Rehab FY21-22(2021-002) greet Rehab 800,000 400,000 TOTAL $ 1,800,000 $ 900,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 17 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: BEAUMONT Prepared by: Laurie Miller Phone # : 951-769-8520 Date: 4/ 26/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 773,069 1,077,000 1,850,069 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal FY22- 23 (2022-001) CitywideS ur Seal ry $ 1,000,000 $ 500,000 2023-02 Annual Citywide Street Rehab FY22-23(2022-002) greet Rehab 800,000 400,000 TOTAL $ 1,800,000 $ 900,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 18 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: BEAUMONT Prepared by: Laurie Miller Phone # : 951-769-8520 Date: 4/ 26/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 950,069 1,104,000 2,054,069 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal FY23- 24 (2023-001) Citywide y slurry seal $ 1,000,000 $ 500,000 2024-02 Annual Citywide Street Rehab FY23-24 (2023-002) greet Rehab 800,000 400,000 TOTAL $ 1,800,000 $ 900,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 19 M EASURE A LOCALS1REEfS AND ROADS PRO GRAM PRO JEC T STA 71JS REPORTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: BEAUMONT Prepared by: Laurie Miller Phone # : 951-769-8520 Date: 4/ 26/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal FY18- 19 (2018-001) Citywide 9urry Seal $ 600,000 $ 80,820 12/31/2019 In processof design 2019-02 Beaumont Ave Reconstruction (2018-004) Street Rehab $ 1,953,000 - 7/1/2020 In processof design TOTAL $ 2,553,000 $ 80,820 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6 of 6 20 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF BLYTHE 21 This page left intentionally blank. CITY OF BLYTHE DEPARIIVENT OF PUBUC WORKS /M O SOUTH MAIN STREET BLYTHE, CALIFORNIA 92225-2717 PHONE (760) 922-6611 FAX (760) 922-0278 May 2, 2019 Jenny Chan Management Analyst, Planning and Programming Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92505-2208 Subject: City of Blythe Measure A Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan for FY 2019/20 — 2023/24. Dear Ms. Chan, Enclosed please find the City of Blythe Measure A Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for FY 2019/20 — 2023/24, Maintenance of Efforts Certification FY 2019/2020, and Project Status Report for CIP FY 2018/2019. Ane, P Director o Public Wor s, City of Blythe Enclosures 23 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Blythe (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $170,000, approved by the Commission at its April 2016 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: YYtc�,� Z , 2019 ATTEST: at.4.2 (ham, CITY MANAGER Litt,,,,It SECRETARY 24 M EASURE A LOCALSIN EIS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: City of Blythe Prepared by: Armando Baldiaone Phone #: (760) 922-6611 Date: 5/2/2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 1,526,126 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 821,000 FY2018/19 Project Status Report expenses: (799,875) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 1,547,251 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 782,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 2,329,251 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Wheelchair Ra mps (ADA) Construction -Annual Improvements $ 20,000 $ 10,000 2020-02 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance 125,000 100,000 2020-03 Fog, Chip & 9urry Seal Preventive maintenance 150,000 100,000 2020-04 Lovekin/Chanslorway Loan Advance Payment Debt Service (2009/2019) 39,370 39,370 2020-05 Main Street from 14th Ave to Chandorway AC Pavement Thick Overlay 1,310,000 660,000 Construction FY18/ 19 and FY19/ 20 2020-06 WellsStreet/Willow Street Improvement: Construction 165,000 54,000 2020-07 Storm Drain Pumps Pump Repalcement 56,000 56,000 2020-08 Outside Equipment Rental (Crack Sealer) Preventive maintenance 15,000 15,000 2020-09 PW Streets& Road Maintenance Costs Preventive maintenance 205,000 205,000 2020-10 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead 62,560 62,560 TOTAL $ 2,147,930 $ 1,301,930 Estimated FY2018/19 STIP Trade Balance: $ 608,024 FY2018/19 Project Status Report expenses: $ 497,024 Estimated Prior Year STlPTrade Funds Balance: $ 111,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost SIIPTrade Funds 2019/20 Wells Street/Willow Street Improvement: AC Thick Layer Overlay -Construction $ 165,000 $ 111,000 2020-11 TOTAL $ 165,000 $ 111,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 25 M EASURE A LOCALSib:LEIS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: City of Blythe Prepared by: Armando Baldiaone Phone #: (760)922-6611 Date: 5/2/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2020/21 Measure AAllocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 589,391 802,000 1,391,391 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Wheelchair Ram ps(ADA) Construction -Annual Improvements $ 30,000 $ 10,000 2021-02 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance 150,000 100,000 2021-03 Fog, Chip & Surry Seal Preventive maintenance 150,000 100,000 2021-04 San Luis Way from Bamard St. to Wisconsin St. AC pavement, thick overlay 296,000 296,000 2021-05 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead 64,160 64,160 TOTAL $ 690,160 $ 570,160 FY 2020-21 Page 2of6 26 M EASURE A LOCAL SIKLE AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: City of Blythe Prepared by: Armando Baldiaone Phone #: (760)922-6611 Date: 5/2/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 821,231 822,000 1,643,231 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Wheelchair Ram ps(ADA) Construction -Annual Improvements $ 30,000 $ 10,000 2022-02 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance 150,000 100,000 2022-03 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements Grind and overlay on alleys 100,000 50,000 2022-04 Fog, Chip & Suny Seal Preventive maintenance 150,000 100,000 2022-05 Acacia Street from Hobsonwayto Bamard St Majorreconruction,AC pavement, base and drainage 479,000 479,000 2022-06 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead 65,760 65,760 'MAL $ 974,760 $ 804,760 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 27 M EASURE A LOCAL SIKLE AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: City of Blythe Prepared by: Armando Baldiaone Phone #: (760)922-6611 Date: 5/2/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 821,231 843,000 1,664,231 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 Wheelchair Ram ps(ADA) Construction -Annual Improvements $ 30,000 $ 10,000 2023-02 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual dock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance 150,000 100,000 2023-03 Fog, Chip & Burry Seal Preventive maintenance 150,000 75,000 2023-04 Traffic Bgnal Rehabilitation (va rious locations) Camera traffic detection system 50,000 25,000 2023-05 Defrain Blvd from 4th Ave to 10th Ave AC pavement thick overlay 1,768,000 884,000 Construction FY22/23and FY23/24 2023-06 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead 67,440 67,440 Tt)TAL $ 2,215,440 $ 1,161,440 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 28 M EASURE A LOCAL SIKLE AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: City of Blythe Prepared by: Armando Baldiaone Phone #: (760)922-6611 Date: 5/2/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 1,027,321 Estimated FY2023/24 Measure A Allocation: $ 864,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24Projects: $ 1,891,321 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Wheelchair Ram ps(ADA) Construction -Annual Improvements $ 30,000 $ 10,000 2024-02 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual dock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance 150,000 100,000 2024-03 Fog, Chip & Burry Seal Preventive maintenance 150,000 75,000 2024-04 Traffic Bgnal Rehabilitation (va rious locations) Camera traffic detection system 50,000 25,000 2024-05 Defrain Blvd from 4th Ave to 10th Ave AC pavement thick overlay 1,768,000 884,000 Construction FY22/23and FY23/24 2024-06 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead 69,120 69,120 Tt)TAL $ 2,217,120 $ 1,163,120 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 29 M EASURE A LOCAL SIIEtIS AND ROADS PRO GRAM PROJECT STA R'S REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: City of Blythe Prepared by: Armando Baldiaone Phone #: (760)922-6611 Date: 5/2/2019 Item No. Project Name/Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Estthru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 1 WheelchairRamps(ADA) Construction $ 20,000 $ 5,000 Jun-19 50%completed 2 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) Construction 120,000 50,000 Jun-19 Annual Improvements 3 Fog, Chip & Slurry Seal Construction 150,000 100,000 Jun-19 Annual Improvements 3 Traffic Sgnal Rehabilitation (various locations) Rehabilitation 161,862 89,367 Dec-18 Completed 4 Main Street from 14th Ave to Chanslorway Construction 1,310,000 256,976 Aug-19 To be completed Aug, 2019 5 Lovekin/Chanslorway Loan Advance Payment Debt Payment 236,212 236,212 Sep-19 Last Payment due Sept. 2019 6 Administrative Overhead Admin. Overhead 62,320 62,320 Jun-19 Annual Admin charges TOTAL $ 2,060,394 $ 799,875 Item No. Project Name/ Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated S11P Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 7 Main Street from 14th Ave to Chanslorway Construction $ 1,310,000 $ 393,024 Aug-19 Annual project 8 Wells Street/Willow Street Improvements Construction 150,000 - Dec-19 Const. moved FY2019-2020 9 3rd Street from 14th Avenue to City Limits Construction 104,000 104,000 Aug-19 In Progresswith Riv. Co. Transp. TOTAL $ 1,564,000 $ 497,024 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6of6 30 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF CALIMESA 31 This page left intentionally blank. City of Calimesa May 6, 2019 Jenny Chan Management Analyst Planning and Programming 4080 Lemon St., 3rd Floor Riverside, Ca 92502 Re: City of Calimesa Measure A Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2019/20- 2023/24 Dear Ms. Chan: Enclosed please find the City of Calimesa Measure A Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Fiscal Years 2019/20-2023/24, Maintenance of Effort Certification for Fiscal Year 2019- 20 and the Project Status Report for Fiscal Year 2018-19. Please let me know if you should have any questions. Sincerely, Bonnie Johnson City Manager 908 Park Avenue • Calimesa, California 92320 • (909) 795-9801 33 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Calimesa (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $2,401, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 2019 ATTESTP L) i A /I _ J SECRETARY 34 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: CALIMESq Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone # : 909-795-9801 Date: 6-May-19 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 549,601 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 176,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (67,585) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 658,016 Estimated FY 2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 182,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 840,016 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Indirect Costs- Administration Indirect Costs $ 14,560 $ 14,560 2020-02 Brady Lane Pavement Rehab R& RPavement 145,923 145,923 County Line Rd - 3rd St to 135,000 135,000 2020-03 California St Pavement Rehab County Line Rd - California St to 70,000 70,000 2020-04 Bryant St Pavement Rehab 2020-05 Cherry Ln, Holly Ln, Mulberry Ln Pavement Rehab 405,000 405,000 TOTAL $ 770,483 $ 770,483 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 35 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: CALIMESq Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone #: Date: 909-795-9801 6-May-19 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 69,533 187,000 256,533 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Indirect Costs- Overhead Indirect Costs $ 14,960 $ 14,960 California St - County Line Rd to 120,000 120,000 2021-02 Myrtlewood Pavement Rehab TOTAL $ 134,960 $ 134,960 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 36 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: CALIMESq Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone #: Date: 909-795-9801 6-May-19 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 121,573 192,000 313,573 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Indirect Costs- Overhead Indirect Costs $ 15,360 $ 15,360 2022-02 Citywide Pavement Rehab Pavement Rehab. 150,000 150,000 TOTAL $ 165,360 $ 165,360 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 37 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: CALIMESq Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone #: Date: 909-795-9801 6-May-19 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 148,213 197,000 345,213 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 Indirect Costs- Overhead Indirect Costs $ 15,760 $ 15,760 2023-02 Citywde Pavement Rehab. Pavement Rehab. 150,000 150,000 TOTAL $ 165,760 $ 165,760 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 38 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: CALIMESq Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone #: Date: 909-795-9801 6-May-19 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 179,453 202,000 381,453 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Indirect Costs- Overhead Indirect Costs $ 16,160 $ 16,160 2024-02 Citywide Pavement Rehab. Pavement Rehab. 150,000 150,000 TOTAL $ 166,160 $ 166,160 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 39 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 1US REPORTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: Prepared by: Phone #: Date: CALIM ESA Lori J. Askew 909-795-9801 5/ 2/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Bcpended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 19-01 Citywide Pavement Mgmt Plan Planning $ 15,000 $ 6,875 3/25/2019 Completed 19-02 Avenue LSlurry Seal Pavement Rehabilitation 108,855 35,350 NOC-5/20/2019 Const. Completed 19-03 Brady Lane Pavement Rehab R& RPavement 157,923 12,000 9/1/2019 Final Design 19-04 County Line Rd -3rd to California Pavement Rehabilitation 135,000 - 5/1/2020 Rolled over to FY19/20 19-05 Indirect Costs Admin Costs 13,360 13,360 6/30/2019 TOTAL $ 430,138 $ 67,585 2064 Construction wascompleted in April. Final billingsare being processed. NOC anticipated on 5/20/19. 2066 Pavement recommendation changed to remove and replace existing pavement Amendment #1 Joint Project with City of Yucaipa. Rolled overto FY2019/2020. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page6of6 40 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF CANYON LAKE 41 This page left intentionally blank. CITY OF CANYON LAKE May 6, 2019 Riverside County Transportation Commission Attention: Jenny Chan, Management Analyst PO Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502 Dear Jenny: Please find the attached Five -Year CIP for FY 2019/20 — 2023/24, Project Status Report for FY 2018/19 (Excels file) and the signed City of Canyon Lake MOE Certification Statement. If you have any questions or concerns please feel free to give me a call (909) 889-0871. Yours truly, City of Canyon Lake Terry S, Finance Director 31516 Railroad Canyon Road, Canyon Lake, CA 92587 • 951/244-2955 • FAX 951/246-2022 admin@cityofcanyonlake.com • www.cityofcanyonlake.com 43 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Canyon Lake (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $28,873, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: `2019 .. 22e-7 CITY MANAGER SECRETARY 44 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: CANYON LAKE Prepared by: Terry Shea Phone # : 951-244-2955 Date: 4/ 30/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 361,858 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 195,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (147,000) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 409,858 Estimated FY 2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 197,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 606,858 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Debt Service Measure A Loan $ 19,290 $ 19,290 2020-02 Debt Service County 27,184 27,184 2020-03 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab, Signal Maintenance, Landscaping, Lighting 120,000 40,000 & Other Maintenance TOTAL $ 166,474 $ 86,474 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 45 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: CANYON LAKE Prepared by: Terry Shea Phone # : 951-244-2955 Date: 4/ 30/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 520,384 202,000 722,384 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab, Signal Maintenance, Landscaping, Lighting & Other Maintenance $ 120,000 $ 40,000 2021-01 TOTAL $ 120,000 $ 40,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 46 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: CANYON LAKE Prepared by: Terry Shea Phone # : 951-244-2955 Date: 4/ 30/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 682,384 207,000 889,384 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab, Signal Maintenance, Landscaping, Lighting & Other Maintenance $ 120,000 $ 40,000 2022-01 TOTAL $ 120,000 $ 40,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 47 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: CANYON LAKE Prepared by: Terry Shea Phone # : 951-244-2955 Date: 4/ 30/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 849,384 212,000 1,061,384 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab, Signal Maintenance, Landscaping, Lighting & Other Maintenance $ 120,000 $ 40,000 2023-01 TOTAL $ 120,000 $ 40,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 48 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: CANYON LAKE Prepared by: Terry Shea Phone # : 951-244-2955 Date: 4/ 30/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 1,021,384 217,000 1,238,384 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Railroad Canyon Road Slurry Seal $ 400,000 $ 400,000 2024-02 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab, Signal Maintenance, Landscaping, Lighting 100,000 40,000 & Other Maintenance TOTAL $ 500,000 $ 440,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 49 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PRO JECTSTA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: CANYON LAKE Prepared by: Terry Shea Phone # : 951-244-2955 Date: 4/ 30/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Debt Service for Measure A loan $ 84,000 $ 84,000 $ 84,000 Completed 2019-02 Debt Service County Loan 63,000 63,000 63,000 Completed 2019-03 Railroad Canyon Road 120,000 - - Ongoing TOTAL $ 267,000 $ 147,000 $ 147,000 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page6of6 50 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY 51 This page left intentionally blank. III �� v` c3 c • May 2, 2019 Riverside County Transportation Commission Attention: Jenny Chan, Management Analyst, Planning and Programming P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Re: MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS REVENUE PROJECTIONS, MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT (MOE) CERTIFICATION, and FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (FY 2019/20 — 2023/24) Dear Ms. Jenny Chan: The City of Cathedral City is pleased to submit documentation in support of the above referenced request. Please let me know if you need additional information. Sincerely, Senior Administrative Analyst Engineering Division 68-700 AVENIDA LALO GUERRERO • CATHEDRAL CITY, CA 92234 • 760/770-0360 • FAX: 760/202-1460 53 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Cathedral City (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $391,688, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 2019 CITY MANAGER 54 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: Cathedral City Prepared by: Vincent Lopez Phone # : (760) 770-0349 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 431,328 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 1,569,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (2,000,328) Estimated Prior Yea rMeasure A Balance: Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 1,537,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 1,537,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds City -Wide Maintenance and City wide 2020-01 Operations p maintenance operations includ ing pavement, medians, street light energy, traffic signals; transportation and traffic planning activities; pavement management planning; street design and engineering activities. $1,628,520 1,414,040 2020-02 Measure A Administrative Costs Administration 122,960 122,960 TOTAL $1,751,480 1,537,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 55 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: Cathedral City Prepared by: Vincent Lopez Phone #: (760) 770-0349 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 1,575,000 1,575,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds City -Wide Maintenance and Citywide 2021-01 Operations maintenance operationsincluding pavement, medians, street light energy, traffic signals; transportation and traffic planning activities; pavement management planning; street design and engineering activities. $ 1,669,923 $ 1,449,000 126,000 126,000 2021-02 Measure A Administrative Costs Administration TOTAL $ 1,795,923 $ 1,575,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 56 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: Cathedral City Prepared by: Vincent Lopez Phone #: (760) 770-0349 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 1,614,000 1,614,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022-01 City -Wide Maintenance and Operations Citywide maintenance operationsincluding pavement, medians, street light energy, traffic signals; transportation and traffic planning activities; pavement management planning; street design and engineering activities. $ 1,710,964 $ 1,484,880 2022-02 Measure A Administrative Costs Administration 129,120 129,120 TOTAL $ 1,840,084 $ 1,614,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3 of 6 57 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: Cathedral City Prepared by: Vincent Lopez Phone #: (760) 770-0349 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 1,654,000 1,654,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023-01 City -Wide Maintenance and Operations Citywide maintenance operations including pavement, medians, street light energy, traffic signals; transportation and traffic planning activities; pavement management planning; street design and engineering activities. $ 1,753,738 $ 1,521,680 2023-02 Measure A Administrative Costs Administration 132,320 132,320 TOTAL $ 1,886,058 $ 1,654,0091 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 58 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: Cathedral City Prepared by: Vincent Lopez Phone #: (760) 770-0349 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 1,695,000 1,695,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2024-01 City -Wide Maintenance and Operations Citywide maintenance operations including pavement, medians, street light energy, traffic signals; transportation and traffic planning activities; pavement management planning; street design and engineering activities. $ 1,841,425 $ 1,559,400 2024-02 Measure A Administrative Costs Administration 135,600 135,600 TOTAL $ 1,977,025 $ 1,695,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5 of 6 59 M EASURE A LOCAL S1REEfS AND ROADS PRO GRAM PRIOJEC T STA 11JS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: Cathedral City Prepared by: Vincent Lopez Phone # : (760) 770-0349 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 19-01 City-wide Maintenance and Operations City-wide street maintenance $ 1,588,800 $ 1,339,223 6/30/2019 Ongoing 19-02 Measure AAdministrative Costs Administration 125,520 125,520 6/30/2019 Ongoing 19-03 Dinah Shore Street Improvements Pavement rehabilitation 1,200,000 470,079 12/12/2018 Complete 19-04 EPC Median Hardscape Street Improvements 115,000 53,406 9/26/2018 Complete 19-05 EPC REASSIuny Seal Street improvements 24,200 12,100 5/8/2019 Scheduled TOTAL $3,053,520 $2,000,328 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6 of 6 60 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF COACHELLA 61 This page left intentionally blank. April 11, 2019 Lorene Moe -Luna Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street 3rd Floor PO Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Re: City of Coachella's Measure A Expenditure Plan FY 2019/20 — FY 2023/24 Dear Ms. Moe -Luna: Please find enclosed the Fiscal Year 2019/20 — 2023/24 Measure A Expenditure Plan for the City of Coachella. Also enclosed are the FY 18/19 Project Status Report and the City's MOE Certification Statement for FY 19/20. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact myself Jonathan Hoy, P.E., City Engineer at jhoy(a,coachella.org or Lynn Germain lgermain@coachella.org (760) 398-5744. Thank �w an Hoy, P.E., Engineer ity of Coachella 760-398-5744 63 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Coachella (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $92,205, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated:L 2019 ATTEST: 04VARy . b,�,� ECRETARY 64 MEASURE A LOCALbIF1F_EIS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: City of Coachella Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E, City Assistant Manager/ City Engineer Phone # : 760-398-5744 Date: 3-26-19 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 1,473,786 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 640,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (1,300,498) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 813,288 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 628,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 1,441,288 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/20 2020-01 ST-100 CaltransAlP2 14 Locations, Bike Lanes, Crosswalks, Pathwaysfor $ 2,731,000 $ 531,000 Pedestrians, Sidewalks, and Asphalt Work. the project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap 2020-02 ST-88 Street Resurfacing, Phase 15 rampsasrequired.lhe street pavementsare identified from the 102,000 102,000 Pavement Management Update. Avenue 52 and Avenue 2020-03 ST-116 Ave 52 & Ave 54 Road Reconstruction 54 Street Reconstruction. the existing pavement requiresreconstruction from Harrison Street to 1,300,000 526,000 Grapefruit Blvd. 2020-04 ST-119 La Ponderosa The project will improve street surface 600,000 200,000 TOTAL $ 4,733,000 $ 1,359,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 65 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: City of Coachella Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Assistant Manager/ City Engineer Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 3-26-19 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 82,288 644,000 726,288 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/21 The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of 2021-01 ST-104 Street Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 16 handicap rampsas required. The street pavementsare identified from the $ 118,000 $ 118,000 Pavement Management Update. Avenue 52 and Avenue 54 Street Reconstruction. The 2021-02 ST-116 Ave 52 & Ave 54 Road Reconstruction existing pavement requires reconstruction from 1,300,000 526,000 Harrison Street to Grapefruit Blvd. TOTAL $ 1,418,000 $ 644,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 66 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/ 22 Agency: City of Coachella Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Assistant Manager/ City Engineer Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 3-26-19 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 82,288 660,000 742,288 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 ST-105 Street Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 17 The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap rampsas required. The street pavementsare identified from the Pavement Management Update. $ 660,000 $ 660,000 2022-01 TOTAL $ 660,000 $ 660,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3 of 6 67 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: City of Coachella Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Assistant Manager/ City Engineer Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 3-26-19 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 82,288 677,000 759,288 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 ST-113 Street Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 18 The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap rampsas required. The street pavementsare identified from the Pavement Management Update. $ 677,000 $ 677,000 2023-01 TOTAL $ 677,000 $ 677,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 68 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: City of Coachella Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Assistant Manager/ City Engineer Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 3-26-19 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 82,288 694,000 776,288 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/24 The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of 2024-01 ST-118 Street Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 19 handicap rampsas required. The street pavementsare identified from the $ 694,000 $ 694,000 Pavement Management Update. TOTAL $ 694,000 $ 694,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5 of 6 69 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PRO JECTSTA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: City of Coachella Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Assistant Manager/ City Engineer Phone # : 760-398-5744 Date: 3-26-19 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 2019-02 ST-100 CaltransAlP2 ST-77 Street Resurfacing, Phase 14 14 Locations, Bike Lanes, Crosswalks, Pathwaysfor Pedestrians, Sdewalks, and Asphalt Work. The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap rampsas required. The street pavementsare identified from the Pavement Management Update. TOTAL $ 2,731,000 2,000,498 $ 4,731,498 $ - 1,300,498 $ 1,300,498 FY 19/20 FY 18/19 Project wasmoved to FY 19/20 for completion Project is Complete Project Status Report FY18-19 Page6of6 70 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF CORONA 71 This page left intentionally blank. (951) 736-2266 (951) 279-3627 (FAX) Nelson.Nelson@ci.corona.ca.us May 2, 2019 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 400 SOUTH VICENTIA AVENUE, P.O. BOX 940, CORONA, CALIFORNIA 92879-0940 CITY HALL - ON LINE ALL THE TIME (http:/lwww.cliscovercorona.com) Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 SUBJECT: MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR PLAN, MOE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT, AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT Ms. Medina: The following documents are enclosed for your review: . Measure A proposed Five -Year Capital Improvements Plan • Project Status Report for current Fiscal Year 2018/19 • Maintenance of Effort (MOE) signed certification statement • Measure A Annual Disbursement Projects received at the City The City's minimum MOE is set at $2,208,200; however, as of June 30, 2019, the City will have spent $3,462,496 from Measure A and $37,284,150 from other funds to support Measure A project expenditures. The document supporting the MOE calculations can be found attached, entitled "FY 2018/19 Construction and Maintenance Expenditures." The Measure A proposed FY 2019/20 through 2023/24 Capital Improvement Plan will be presented to our City Council for review at the Budget Workshop on May 23, 2019 and for adoption at the regularly scheduled City Council Meeting on June 5, 2019. if you have any questions please contact Kim Sitton, Finance Manager at (951) 279-3532. Sincerely, ,1_,,, V.,,___ �Jelson D. Nelson, P.E. Public Works Director Attachments c: Kim Sitton, Finance Manager Theresa Daily, Financial Analyst 73 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION S TA TEMEN T The undersigned agrees and certifies for the City of Corona (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $2,208,200 approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 41 7, 2019 C�ldi Mitch-Lansdell, Acting City Manager ATTEST: NA a Ufa 17/t6 City( lerk, City of Corona 74 M EASURE A LOCALSIKLEIS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/20 Agency: CORONA Prepared by: Luis Navarro Phone #: (951) 817-5742 Date: 4/17/2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: 12,784,764 4,364,000 (1,722,928) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 15,425,836 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 4,486,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 19,911,836 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Bridge Evaluation Streets& Storm Drains 500,000 500,000 2020-02 Changeable Traffic Message Sgn Replacement Streets& Storm Drain: 14,000 14,000 2020-03 Citywide Benchmark Update Streets& Storm Drains 50,000 - 2020-04 East Grand Boulevard Storm Drain Streets& Storm Drain: 300,000 300,000 2020-05 Local Street Pavement Rehabilitation Streets& Storm Drains 3,790,175 1,000,000 2020-06 Magnolia Avenue Widening Streets& Storm Drain: 750,000 - 2020-07 MclGnley Grade Separation Streets& Storm Drains 1,000,000 1,000,000 2020-08 Miscellaneous Repair and Replacement of Traffic Sgnals Streets& Storm Drain: 180,000 - 2020-09 Ontario Avenue Widening Streets& Storm Drains 500,000 500,000 2020-10 Pavement Maintenance and Resurfacing Streets& Storm Drain: 225,000 225,000 2020-11 Pavement Management Study Streets& Storm Drains 10,000 10,000 2020-12 RverRoad Median Landscape Improvements Streets& Storm Drains 450,000 450,000 2020-13 Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (RAC) Project Streets& Storm Drains - - 2020-14 Sdewalk/Curb/GUtterInstall Streets& Storm Drains 700,000 325,000 2020-15 Sxth Street Revitalization Streets& Storm Drains 1,000,000 1,000,000 2020-16 Striping Rehabilitation Streets& Storm Drains 100,000 50,000 2020-17 Traffic Sgnals Lighting Upgrade Streets& Storm Drains 150,000 75,000 2020-18 Citywide Traffic Sgns Streets& Storm Drains 15,000 15,000 2020-19 Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA)-SR91 Corridor Project: Streets& Storm Drains 1,000,000 500,000 2020-20 West Rncon Street Improvement: Streets& Storm Drains 500,000 250,000 Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) Operational 179,475 179,475 IDTAL $ 11,413,650 $ 6,393,475 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 10 75 M EASURE A LOCALSItittis AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: CORONA Prepared by: Luis Navarro Phone #: (951) 817-5742 Date: 4/ 17/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 13,518,361 Estimated FY2020/21 Measure A Allocation: 4,598,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 18,116,361 Item No. Project Name / limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Butterfield Drive Road Relocation Streets& Storm Drains $ 1,150,000 $ 1,150,000 2021-02 Local Street Pavement Rehabilitation Streets& Storm Drains 1,000,000 1,000,000 2021-03 McKinley Grade Separation Streets& Storm Drains 20,000,000 - 2021-04 Miscellaneous Repair and Replacement of Traffic Sgnals Streets& Storm Drains 190,000 - 2021-05 Ontario Avenue Widening Streets& Storm Drains 500,000 500,000 2021-06 Pavement Maintenance and Resurfacing Streets& Storm Drains 300,000 150,000 2021-07 Pavement Management Study Streets& Storm Drains 10,000 10,000 2021-08 Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (RAC) Project Streets& Storm Drains 2,700,000 - 2021-09 Sdewalk/Curb/Gutter Install Streets& Storm Drains 600,000 300,000 2021-10 Striping Rehabilitation Streets& Storm Drains 325,000 175,000 2021-11 Traffic Sgna Is Lig hting Upgrade Streets& Storm Drains 150,000 75,000 2021-12 Citywide Traffic Signs Streets& Storm Drains 15,000 - Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) - SR-91 Corridor 2021-13 Projects Streets& Storm Drains 1,000,000 500,000 Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) Operational 184,859 184,859 TOTAL $ 28,124,859 $ 4,044,859 FY 2020-21 Page2of10 76 M EASURE A LOCALSIKteIS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: CORONA Prepared by: Luis Navarro Phone #: (951) 817-5742 Date: 4/ 17/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 14,071,502 Estimated FY2021/22 Measure A Allocation: 4,713,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 18,784,502 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021 / 22 2022-01 Local Street Pavement Rehabilitation 3reets& Storm Drains $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 2022-02 Magnolia Avenue Widening Streets& Storm Drains 700,000 600,000 2022-03 Miscellaneous Repair and Replacement of Traffic Signals 3reets& Storm Drains 200,000 - 2022-04 Pavement Maintenance and Resurfacing 3reets& Storm Drains 150,000 150,000 2022-05 Pavement Management Study 3reets& Storm Drains 50,000 50,000 2022-06 Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (RAC) Project Streets& Storm Drains 2,700,000 - 2022-07 Sdewalk/Curb/Gutter Install 3reets& Storm Drains 600,000 300,000 2022-08 Striping Rehabilitation Streets& Storm Drains 325,000 175,000 2022-09 Citywide Traffic SgnE 3reets& Storm Drains 15,000 - Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA)-SR91 Corridor 2022-10 Projects Streets& Storm Drains 1,000,000 500,000 2022-11 West Rincon Street Improvements Streets& Storm Drains 1,500,000 750,000 Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) Operational 190,405 190,405 TOTAL $ 8,430,405 $ 3,715,405 FY 2021-22 Page 3 of 10 77 M EASURE A LOCALSIFittIS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: CORONA Prepared by: Luis Navarro Phone #: (951) 817-5742 Date: 4/17/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 15,069,097 4,831,000 19,900,097 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measun A Funds 2022/ 23 2023-01 Local Street Pavement Rehabilitation Streets& Storm Drains $ 1,000,00C $ 1,000,00C 2023-02 Magnolia Avenue Widening Streets& Storm Drains 3,000,00C 1,000,00C MiscellaneousRepairand Replacement of Traffic 2023-03 Signals Streets& Storm Drains 200,000 - 2023-04 Pavement Maintenance and Resurfacing Streets& Storm Drains 150,000 150,000 2023-05 Pavement Management Study Streets& Storm Drains 10,000 10,000 2023-06 Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (RAC) Project Streets& Storm Drains 2,700,000 - 2023-07 Sidewalk/Curb/Gutter Install Streets& Storm Drains - - 2023-08 Striping Rehabilitation Streets& Storm Drains 325,000 175,000 2023-09 Citywide Traffic Signs Streets& Storm Drains 15,000 - Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) -SR91 2023-10 Corridor Projects Streets& Storm Drains 1,000,000 500,000 Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) Operational 196,117 196,117 TOTAL $ 8,596,117 $ 3,031,117 FY 2022-23 Page 4of10 78 M EASURE A LOCALSIFtheIS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: CORONA Prepared by: Luis Navarro Phone #: (951) 817-5742 Date: 4/ 17/ 2019 Estimated Prior Yea rMeasure A Balance: $ 16,868,980 Estimated FY2023/24 Measure A Allocation: 4,952,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY 2023/24 Projects: $ 21,820,980 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Magnolia Avenue Widening 3reets& Storm Drains $ 700,000 $ 600,000 2024-02 Miscellaneous Repair and Replacement of Traffic Sgnals Streets& Storm Drains 200,000 - 2024-03 Pavement Management Study 3reets& Storm Drains 10,000 10,000 2024-04 Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (RAC) Project 3reets& Storm Drains 2,700,000 - 2024-05 Sdewalk/Curb/Gutter Install 3reets& Storm Drains - - 2024-06 Citywide Traffic Sgn: Streets& Storm Drains 15,000 - Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) Operational 202,001 202,001 TOTAL $ 3,827,001 $ 812,001 FY 2023-24 Page 5 of 10 79 RIF M EASURE A LOCALSIta tlS AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJEC T STA TUS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: CORONA Prepared by: Luis Navarro Phone #: (951)817-5742 Date: 4/17/2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds 6cpended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 1 2017 Street Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation Streets& Storm Drains $ 4,176,917 $ - December2018 Complete The 2017 Street Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation Project includes rehabilitation of approximately 18lane-milesof major streets in the following areas Lincoln Avenue between Rincon Street and Parkridge Avenue; Main Street and HamnerAvenue between Grand Boulevard and Hidden Valley Parkway; and River Road between Corydon Street and Main Street. Completion of this project will preserve the existing pavement, extend the useful life of the asphalt, and provide a smoother travel surface for motoristsand pedestrians. 2 Auto Center Drive/Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Grade Separation Streets& Storm Drains 4,904,172 - - Close out process Construction of grade separation (bridge)over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracksat Auto Center Drive to eliminate the current at -grade crossing. 3 Bridge Evaluation Streets& Storm Drains 300,000 - On -going On -going Maintenance on bridgesthroughout the City asrecommended by the State of Califomia Department of Transportation. 4 Butterfield Drive Road Relocation Streets& Storm Drains 850,000 - January 2021 Design Relocate Butterfield Drive to provide access over proposed Army Corps of EngineersAlcoa Dike at Butterfield Park with transition to 3nith Avenue on the east side of the Alcoa Dike and transition to the existing roadway alignment on the west side of the Alcoa Dike. Roadway relocation will be designed by Orange County Public Worksdesign consultant and constructed as part of the Corpsof Eng ineersd ike construction project. The extent of pavement rehabilitation/repair will include approximately 33,500 square feet of existing pavement. The scope of work to be determined by the consulting engineering firm contracted to prepare the design. Project aatus Report FY18-19 Page 6of10 80 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 M EASURE A LOCALSitatlS AND ROADS PROGRAM Chase Drive Improvements- Phase III Installation of a storm drain swale system and construction of sidewalk and bike path improvements on Chase Drive from Sonrisa Drive to Garretson Avenue. Changeable Traffic Message Sign Replacement Replacement of four(4) obsolete traffic message sign trailers. Citywide Benchmark Update Update of Citywide benchmarksand adjustmentsto NAD 83. Citywide Sidewalk and ADA Improvements- Phase I Replacement of curb, gutter, sidewalk, and drive approaches; installation of missing sidewalk, curb, gutter, accessramps, bike paths, root pruning, engineering, and incidental work; and construction, replacement, or installation of ADA-compliant facilitieswithin the public right-of-way. Citywide Traffic Model Update General Plan Circulation Element update. Corona Storm Drain Line 52 Construction of a 72-inch storm drain line in Joy Street from the Temescal Channel to East Grand Blvd. to East Third Street. RCFCWCD Project Number2-8-00350. Citywide Sidewalk and ADA Improvements- Phase II Replacement of curb, gutter, sidewalk, and drive approaches; Installation of missing sidewalk, curb, gutter, access ramps, bike paths, root pruning, engineering, and incidental work; and construction, replacement, or installation of ADA-compliant facilitieswithin the public right-of-way. East Grand Boulevard Storm Drain Construction of a 36-inch storm drain line in East Grand Boulevard from Third Street to Seventh Street. Household Waste Collection Facility Street Improvements Street Improvementsto Quarry Street and Rimpau Avenue in support of the Maintenance %rvicesDepartment. Magnolia Avenue Widening Widening of Magnolia Avenue between 0 Camino Avenue and All American Way which includeswidening of the bridge that crossesthe Temescal Wash. 3reets& Storm Drains 3reets& Storm Drains 3reets& Roam Drains 3reets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains 3reets& Storm Drains 3reets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains 3reets& Storm Drains 868,599 50,000 180,000 362,590 225,000 3,438,173 2,560,820 339,941 45,500 1,944,709 100,000 132,944 5,000 Close Will not construct June 2020 On -going On -going On -going July 2018 Complete On -going June 2019 March 2020 On -going Under Construction Design October2021 Design On -going On -going On -going On -going Project aatus Report FY18-19 Page 7of10 81 RIF 15 16 17 18 19 20 Magnolia Median Rehabilitation M EASURE A LOCALIS AND ROADS PROGRAM This project will provide forthe redesign and rehabilitation of the existing Magnolia Avenue medians The project consistsof approximately 97,000square feet of landscaping from Ontario to Rimpau Avenue. The medianson Magnolia Avenue have experienced die -off overthe past several years asthe plant material reachesthe end of its life. Additionally, the irrigation is old and inefficient, causing runoff that damagesthe roadways The project will provide for several design conceptsthat will include high efficiency irrigation, use of hardscape orDG, and low water use plants Major Streets Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement rehabilitation for majorthoroughfaresin accordance with the Pavement Management Program. Rehabilitation may include reconstruction paving, crack sealing, slurry, etc. McFGnley Grade Separation Construction of new bridge over the BNSFRailroad tracksat McKinley to eliminate the current at -grade crossing. Miscellaneous Repair and Replacement of Traffic Signals Unscheduled repair/replacement of traffic signalsand related facilitiesatvariouslocations Citywide. Includesthe repairorreplacement of traffic signals, safety lights, street name signs, traffic control signs, signal poles, heads, etc.; rewiring old signalsand damaged loops; and maintenance of the advance traffic management system. Ontario Avenue Street Improvements Cold in -place recycling (CIR) of existing pavement along Ontario Avenue between Califomia Avenue and Magnolia Avenue. Ontario Avenue Widening Widening of Ontario Avenue between Compton Avenue and State Street. Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains 500,000 184,209 88,965,252 286,882 2,091,698 3,184,861 9,871 10,988 999,650 17,000 8,000 October2019 October2019 On -going On -going December2018 November2021 Design Design Design On -going Complete Design Project aatus Report FY18-19 Page 8of10 82 RIF 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Overlook Street Improvements Pavement rehabilitation forva rious road s in the Overlook area over several years M EASURE A LOCALSIFzttIS AND ROADS PROGRAM Overlook Road Maintenance Maintenance and grading of existing roads in the Overlook area to ensure accessibility for emergency Police and Fire vehicles Pavement Management Study Ongoing field survey of local streetsto be included in the Street Saver Program for the purpose of completing the City'sstreet inventory, and maintaining current information for rehabilitation project planning. Annual Street Saver license and maintenance. Local Street Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement rehabilitation for local streetsin accordance with the current Pavement Management Study. Rehabilitation may include reconstruction paving, crack sealing, slurry, etc. Pavement Maintenance and Resurfacing Resurface and repair potholesand miscellaneouspavement failureswith City staff and/or contracted services River Road Median Landscape Improvements Landscape and irrigation improvementson River Road Center median from Corydon to Lincoln. The project will remove approximately 80,690 sq. ft. of turf and old plant material and replacing it with a drought tolerant landscape. It will also add ress inigation runoff that isdamaging the road. Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (RAC) Project Street and pavement rehabilitation using rubberized asphalt concrete (RAC). Sidewalk/Curb/ Gutter I nsta II Street maintenance program for as -needed repairsorreplacement ofcurb, gutter, sidewalk, and drive approaches 3reets& Storm Drains 3reets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains 3reets& Storm Drains 3reets& Storm Drains 721,665 48,957 89,573 4,116,495 219,781 50,000 835,814 566,046 2,000 58,000 10,000 30,000 7,000 5,000 40,000 October2019 On -going April 2019 October2019 On -going October2019 October2019 On -going Design complete On -going Complete Design On -going Design Design On -going Project aatus Report FY18-19 Page 9of10 83 29 30 31 32 33 MEASURE A LOCAL SIFzttIS AND ROADS PROGRAM Sxth Street and Yorba Street Waterline Replacement and Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement rehabilitation following waterline construction in Yorba Street between Pleasant View Avenue and West Sixth Street. The extent of pavement rehabilitation/repair will include approximately 35,000 square feet of existing pavement. The scope of work to be determined by the consulting engineering firm contracted to prepare the design. Striping Rehabilitation Upgrade and maintenance of Citywide striping using City staff and/or contract services; and rehabilitation and maintenance of the City'straffic system and transportation infrastructure. Traffic Signal at Green Riyer Road / Montana Ranch Road Installation of new traffic signal on Green River Road at Montana Ranch Road. Traffic Signal Maintenance Facility Construction of a traffic signal maintenance facility on the southwest comer of W. Grand and Bollero Road forthe storage of traffic signal poles, arms, heads, cabinets, and other traffic related partsand equipment. Traffic Sgna Is Lighting Upgrade Upgrade traffic signal safety lighting and Internally Illuminated Street Name Sgns(IISNS) to energy efficient, long-lasting, lighting fixturesto reduce energy usage and maintain costs. Upgradeswill be phased overa 3-year period. Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains Streets& Storm Drains 500,000 531,570 459,324 260,000 175,000 - November2019 Design 40,000 On -going 10,000 March 2019 On -going Construction Complete - October2020 Design 58,,000 On -going On -going Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) 179,475 179,475 On -going On -going TOTAL $ 124,213,023 $ 1,722,928 Project aatus Report FY18-19 Page 10 of 10 84 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS 85 This page left intentionally blank. City of Desert Hot Springs 65-950 Pierson Blvd. • Desert Hot Springs • CA • 92240 (760) 329-6411 www.cityofdhs.org May 6, 2019 Jenny Chan Management Analyst Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 RE: City of Desert Hot Spring Measure "A" Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 2019/20-2023/24 and Maintenance of Effort Dear Ms Chan, Attached is the City of Desert Hot Springs' Measure "A" Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 2020-2024, a Project Status Report for our FY 2018/19 and the City's Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Certification. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (760) 329-6411 Ext. 216. Sincerely, Daniel Porras Public Works Director Attachrnents: Measure "A" Five Year (CIP) FY 2018-2023 Project Status Report FY 2017/18 CIP Maintenance of Effort Certification Cc: Finance Department Engineering 87 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Desert Flot Springs (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $75,147, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: WO , 2019 CITY MANAGER 88 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: DESERTHOTSPRINGS Prepared by: Daniel Porras Phone # : 760-329-6411 Ext 216 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 78,387 FY 2018/ 19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 503,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (503,011) Estimated Prior Yea rMeasure A Balance: 78,376 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 507,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 585,376 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter& sidewalk repairsand Improvementsand signage and striping Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance $ 200,000 $ 175,000 2020-02 Debt Service forTRI.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services2012A COP'x (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service 401,000 200,000 2020-03 9dewalk Palm Drive - Between 8th St and 12 th St Construction 100,000 85,000 2020-04 Jefferson/I-10 and Date Palm/1- 10Interchange Construction 5,000 5,000 2020-05 Indirect Costs Overhead 38,000 38,000 TOTAL $ 744,000 $ 503,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 89 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: DESERTHOTSPRINGS Prepared by: Daniel Porras Phone # : 760-329-6411 Ext 216 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 82,376 520,000 602,376 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter& sidewalk repairsand Improvementsand signage and striping Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance $ 800,000 $ 250,000 2021-02 Debt Service forTRI.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services2012A COP'x (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service 403,000 200,000 2021-03 Indirect Costs Overhead 39,000 39,000 TOTAL $ 1,242,000 $ 489,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 90 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: DESERTHOTSPRINGS Prepared by: Daniel Porras Phone # : 760-329-6411 Ext 216 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 113,376 533,000 646,376 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021 / 22 2022-01 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter& sidewalk repairsand Improvementsand signage and striping Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance $ 700,000 $ 260,000 2022-02 Debt Service forTRI.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services2012A COP'x (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service 403,000 200,000 2022-03 Indirect Costs Overhead 40,000 40,000 TOTAL $ 1,143,000 $ 500,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 91 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: DESERTHOTSPRINGS Prepared by: Daniel Porras Phone # : 760-329-6411 Ext 216 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 146,376 546,000 692,376 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/ 23 2023-01 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter& sidewalk repairsand Improvementsand signage and striping Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance $ 700,000 $ 260,000 2023-02 Debt Service forTRI.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services2012A COP'x (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service 403,000 200,000 2023-03 Indirect Costs Overhead 40,000 40,000 TOTAL $ 1,143,000 $ 500,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 92 M EASURE A LOCALS1REEfS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: DESERTHOTSPRINGS Prepared by: Daniel Porras Phone # : 760-329-6411 Ext 216 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 192,376 560,000 752,376 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/24 2024-01 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter& sidewalk repairsand Improvementsand signage and striping Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance $ 700,000 $ 260,000 2024-02 Debt Service forTRI.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services2012A COP'x (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service 403,000 200,000 2024-03 Indirect Costs Overhead 40,000 40,000 TOTAL $ 1,143,000 $ 500,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 93 M EASURE A LOCALSIFittib AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA MIS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: D I HOTSPRINGS Prepared by: Daniel Porras Phone # : 760-329-6411 Ext 216 Date: 5/6/2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Estthru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter& sidewalk repairsand Improvementsand signage and striping Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance $ 87,384 $ 87,384 2/14/2019 Completed 2019-02 Debt Service forT.RI.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services2012A COP'x (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service 401,000 200,000 on -going On -going 2019-03 Palm Drive Entry Way Median Upgrades- Palm Dr north of Interstate 10 Construction - Road Rehabilitation 108,000 100,000 6/30/2019 On -going 2019-04 Replacement of Traffic Signal Street Name Sgnsand Traffic Sgnal Casings Traffic Signal Maintenance 75,000 75,000 6/30/2019 On -going 2019-05 Jefferson/I-10 and Date Palm/I-10 Interchange Construction 2,627 2,627 7/9/2018 Completed 2019-06 Indirect Costs Overhead 38,000 38,000 6/30/2019 On -going TOTAL $ 712,011 $ 503,011 Project Status Report FY18 Page 6 of 6 94 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF EASTVALE 95 This page left intentionally blank. City of Eastvale 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite #910 • Eastvale, CA 91752 (951) 361-0900 • Fax: (951) 361-0888 • www.EastvaleCA.gov May 23, 2019 Mrs. Shirley Medina Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Re: City of Eastvale's Measure A Expenditure Plan FY 2019/20 — FY 2023/24 Dear Mrs. Medina: Please find enclosed the Fiscal Year 2019/20 — 2023/24 Measure A Expenditure Plan for the City of Eastvale. Also enclosed is the FY18/19 Project Status Report and the City's MOE Certification Statement for FY19/20 for your review. Should you have any questions, or need further information on the above, please feel free to contact Ann Herner at aherner(a�interwestgrp.com or myself at whemsley.eastvale(a�interwestgrp.com at (951) 703-4473. Sincerely, Bill emsley Bill Hemsley City Engineer Enclosures ,,..4r---17 97 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Eastvale (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $38,949, approved by the Commission at its July 8, 2015 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 5/23 , 2019 ATTEST: CITY MANAGER SECRETARY 98 MEASURE A LOCAL StRetib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: EASIVALE Prepared by: Bill Hemsley, City Engineer Phone # : (951) 703-4473 Date: May 23, 2019 FY 2017/ 18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 4,405,953 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 1,387,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (2,711,264) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 4,517,689 3,081,689 1,436,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/20 2020-01 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Roadway safety and traffic improvementsto include traffic signs, pavement markings, signal synchronization, and pedestrians accessibility $ 748,100 $ 153,910 2020-02 Street Improvement Program Improvement of roadway and associated trasportation systemsto include widening, repair, and reconstruction. 2,015,000 757,500 2020-03 Citywide Maintenance and repair within the 788,000 700,500 Maintenance Program City'sright of way to include crack sealing, slurry seals, drainage facilitiesand flood control improvements. 2020-04 Administrative Costs Administrative costsfor operating capital projects 542,907 96,715 TOTAL $ 4,094,007 $ 1,708,625 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 99 M EASURE A LOCALSIh�tlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: EASIVALE Prepared by: Bill Hemsley, City Engineer Phone #: (951) 703-4473 Date: May 23, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 2,809,064 1,472,000 4,281,064 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Roadway safety and traffic improvementsto include traffic signs, pavement markings, signal synchronization, and pedestrians accessibility $ 557,000 $ 100,000 2021-02 Street Improvement Program Improvement of roadway and associated trasportation systemsto include widening, repair, and reconstruction. 2,015,000 1,133,800 2021-03 Citywide Maintenance Maintenance and repair within the 550,000 550,000 Program City'sright of way to include crack sealing, slurry seals, drainage facilitiesand flood control improvements. 2021-04 Administrative Costs Administrative costsfor operating capital projects 542,907 107,028 TOTAL $ 3,664,907 $ 1,890,828 FY 2020-21 Page 2of6 100 M EASURE A LOCALSIh�tlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: EASIVALE Prepared by: Bill Hemsley, City Engineer Phone #: (951) 703-4473 Date: May 23, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 2,390,236 1,509,000 3,899,236 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Roadway safety and traffic improvementsto include traffic signs, pavement markings, signal synchronization, and pedestrians accessibility $ 7,245,000 $ 1,645,000 2022-02 Street Improvement Program Improvement of roadway and associated trasportation systemsto include widening, repair, and reconstruction. - - 2022-03 Citywide Maintenance Maintenance and repair within the 550,000 550,000 Program City's right of way to include crack sealing, slurry seals, drainage facilitiesand flood control improvements. 2022-04 Administrative Costs Administrative costsfor operating capital projects 542,907 120,720 10TAL $ 8,337,907 $ 2,315,720 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 101 M EASURE A LOCALSIh�tlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: Prepared by: Phone #: Date: EASIVALE Bill Hemsley, City Engineer (951) 703-4473 May 23, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2022/23 Measure AAllocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 1,583,516 1,547,000 3,130,516 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/ 23 2023-01 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Roadway safety and traffic improvementsto include traffic signs, pavement markings, signal synchronization, and pedestrians accessibility $ 25,000 $ 25,000 2023-02 Street Improvement Program Improvement of roadway and associated trasportation systemsto include widening, repair, and reconstruction. - - 2023-03 Citywide Maintenance Maintenance and repair within the 550,000 550,000 Program City's right of way to include crack sealing, slurry seals, drainage facilitiesand flood control improvements. 2023-04 Administrative Costs Administrative costsfor operating capital projects 542,907 34,500 10TAL $ 1,117,907 $ 609,500 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 102 M EASURE A LOCALSIh�tlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: EASIVALE Prepared by: Bill Hemsley, City Engineer Phone #: (951) 703-4473 Date: May 23, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 2,521,016 1,586,000 4,107,016 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Roadway safety and traffic improvementsto include traffic signs, pavement markings, signal synchronization, and pedestrians accessibility $ 25,000 $ 25,000 2024-02 Street Improvement Program Improvement of roadway and associated trasportation systemsto include widening, repair, and reconstruction. - - 2024-03 Citywide Maintenance Maintenance and repair within the 550,000 550,000 Program City's right of way to include crack sealing, slurry seals, drainage facilitiesand flood control improvements. 2024-04 Administrative Costs Administrative costsfor operating capital projects 542,907 34,500 10TAL $ 1,117,907 $ 609,500 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 103 M EASURE A LOCALSIhttlb AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2018/ 19 Agency: EASIVALE Prepared by: Bill Hemsley, City Engineer Phone #: (951) 703-4473 Date: May 23, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Roadway safety and traffic improvementsto include traffic signs, pavement markings, signal synchronization, and pedestrians accessibility $ 109,100 $ - $ - Thisincludesan annual program and specific projects. Unexpended costs are carried overto next FY. 2019-02 Street Improvement Program Improvement of roadway and associated trasportation systemsto include widening, repair, and reconstruction. 4,184,250 2,651,792 2,651,792 lhisincludesan annual program and specific projects. Unexpended costsare carried overto next FY. 2019-03 Citywide Maintenance Program Maintenance and repairwithin the City'sright of way to include crack sealing, slurry seals, drainage facilitiesand flood control improvements. 710,000 59,472 59,472 Thisincludesan annual program. Unexpended costs are carried overto next FY. TOTAL $ 5,003,350 $ 2,711,264 $ 2,711,264 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6of6 104 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF HEMET 105 This page left intentionally blank. FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Hemet (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $18,924, approved by the Commission at its October 12, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: V 1N-1 1 , 2019 "^" CITY MANAGER ATTEST: SECRETARY (' 107 This page left intentionally blank. M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: HEMET Prepared by: Chase Keys Phone # : 951-765-2360 Date: 3/ 26/ 2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 5,816,526 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 1,862,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (2,600,000) Estimated Prior Yea rMeasure A Balance: 5,078,526 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 1,856,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 6,934,526 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 2019/20 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehab. $ 3,500,000 $ 3,000,000 2020-02 2019/20 Citywide Slurry Seal Pavement Maint. 1,200,000 1,200,000 2020-03 2017/18 Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehab. 1,000,000 1,000,000 2020-04 Kirby Street Improvements Pavement Rehab. 250,000 250,000 2020-05 2018/19 Surry Seal Pavement Maint. 700,000 700,000 TOTAL $ 6,650,000 $ 6,150,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 109 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: HEMET Prepared by: Chase Keys Phone # : 951-765-2360 Date: 3/ 26/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 784,526 1,902,000 2,686,526 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/21 2021-01 2020/21 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehab. $ 2,100,000 $ 1,100,000 2021-02 2020/21 Citywide Slurry Seal Pavement Maint. 1,000,000 1,000,000 TOTAL $ 3,100,000 $ 2,100,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 110 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: HEMET Prepared by: Chase Keys Phone # : 951-765-2360 Date: 3/ 26/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 586,526 1,950,000 2,536,526 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 2021/22 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehab. $ 2,000,000 $ 1,000,000 2022-02 2021/22 Citywide Slurry Seal Pavement Maint. 1,000,000 1,000,000 TOTAL $ 3,000,000 $ 2,000,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3 of 6 111 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: HEMET Prepared by: Chase Keys Phone # : 951-765-2360 Date: 3/ 26/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 536,526 1,999,000 2,535,526 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 2022/23 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehab. $ 2,000,000 $ 1,000,000 2023-02 2022/23 Citywide Slurry Seal Pavement Maint. 1,000,000 1,000,000 TOTAL $ 3,000,000 $ 2,000,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 112 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: HEMET Prepared by: Chase Keys Phone # : 951-765-2360 Date: 3/ 26/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 535,526 2,049,000 2,584,526 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/24 2024-01 2023-24 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehab. $ 2,000,000 $ 1,000,000 2024-02 2023/24 Citywide Slurry Seal Pavement Maint. 1,000,000 1,000,000 TOTAL $ 3,000,000 $ 2,000,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5 of 6 113 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PRO JECTSTA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: HEMET Prepared by: Chase Keys Phone # : 951-765-2360 Date: 3/ 26/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 1 2017/18 Slurry Seal Pavement Maint. $ 1,100,000 $ 1,100,000 Jun-19 Added Project Construction 2 2017/18 Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehab. 1,500,000 500,000 Sep-19 Design/Construction 3 Krby Street Improvements Pavement Rehab. 750,000 500,000 Sep-19 Design/Construction 4 2018/19 Slurry Seal Pavement Maint. 1,200,000 500,000 Sep-19 Added Project Design/Construction TOTAL $ 4,550,000 $ 2,600,000 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page6of6 114 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF INDIAN WELLS 115 This page left intentionally blank. May 2, 2019 Riverside County Transportation Commission Attn: Jenny Chan 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Re: Measure "A": Local Streets and Roads Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan and Status Update Dear Ms. Chan, Attached is the City of Indian Wells' Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Five- Year Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2019/20-2023/24. Sincerely, )CG.,(L.L Ken A. Seumalo, P.E. Public Works Director cc: Finance Director 44-950 Eldorado Drive • Indian Wells • California 92210-7497 • V (760) 346-2489 • F (760) 346-0407 • www.cityofindianwells.org 117 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Indian Wells (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $963,640, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: Atf,,y , 2019 ATTEST: CITY MANAGER 118 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: INDIAN WELLS Prepared by: Ken A. Seumalo, P.E., Public Works Director Phone # : (760) 776-0237 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 71,467 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 280,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (263,000) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 88,467 Estimated FY 2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 267,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 355,467 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement $ 585,000 $ 355,467 2020-01 TOTAL $ 585,000 $ 355,467 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 119 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: INDIAN WELLS Prepared by: Ken A. Seumalo, P.E., Public Works Director Phone # : (760) 776-0237 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 274,000 274,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement $ 585,000 $ 274,000 2021-01 TOTAL $ 585,000 $ 274,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 120 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: INDIAN WELLS Prepared by: Ken A. Seumalo, P.E., Public Works Director Phone # : (760) 776-0237 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 281,000 281,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement $ 585,000 $ 281,000 2022-01 TOTAL $ 585,000 $ 281,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 121 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: INDIAN WELLS Prepared by: Ken A. Seumalo, P.E., Public Works Director Phone # : (760) 776-0237 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 288,000 288,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement $ 585,000 $ 288,000 2023-01 TOTAL $ 585,000 $ 288,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 122 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: INDIAN WELLS Prepared by: Ken A. Seumalo, P.E., Public Works Director Phone # : (760) 776-0237 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 295,000 295,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement $ 585,000 $ 295,000 2024-01 TOTAL $ 585,000 $ 295,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 123 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM PRO JEC T STA 71JS REPORTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: INDIAN WELLS Prepared by: Ken A. Seumalo, P.E., Public Works Director Phone # : (760) 776-0237 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 1 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement $ 585,000 $ 263,000 6/30/2019 Ongoing TOTAL $ 585,000 $ 263,000 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6 of 6 124 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF INDIO 125 This page left intentionally blank. May 7, 2019 Ms. Jenny Chan Management Analyst Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Subject: Five Year Measure A Capital Improvement Plan (FY19/20 — FY23/24) Dear Ms. Chan: Enclosed is the City of Indio's submittal of the Five Year Measure A Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 19/20 to 23/24 to the Riverside County Transportation Commission for review and approval. The City's Maintenance of Effort certification is also enclosed, as well as a status report for projects utilizing Measure A funds in Fiscal Year 2019-2020. If you have any questions, please call me at (760) 391-4017. Sincerely, (.cam Timothy T. Wassil, PE, PMP, CCM Public Works Director cc: Juan Raya, PE City Engineer Hector Orozco, Accountant 127 p: 760.391.4000 • f: 760.391.4008 • 100 Civic Center Mall Indio, CA 92201 • www.INDIO.org FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Indio (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $2,048,564, approved by the Commission at its July 11, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: May 6, 2019 MARK SCOTT, CITY MANAGER ATTEST: Y - 4- MARIA SIAN CRETARY 128 M EASURE A LOCALSII1±IS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: INDIO Prepared by: Gloria Hernandez Phone #: 760-391-4013 Date: 4/24/2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 639,901 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 2,062,000 FY 2018/19 Project Status Re port expenses: (2,105,500) Estimated Prior Yea rMeasure A Balance: 596,401 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 2,054,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 2,650,401 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-1 Dr. Carreon and Oasis Traffic Sgnal Modification/Monroe Street Traffic Sgnal Interconnect (TS1701) Traffic Sgnal Modification $ 983,200 $ 332,849 2020-2 Annual Street Maintenance Contract /Supplies(ListA) Roadway Improvement 985,000 475,000 2020-3 I-10 @Jefferson Street Interchange Project (ST0110) Freeway Interchange Improvement 86,300,000 200,000 2020-4 Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements Sgnal/Sgnage 50,000 50,000 2020-5 Avenue 48 Bike La nes (ST1805) Sgnal/Sgnage 1,414,780 480,427 2020-6 Grant Applicationsfor Transportation Projects(612002) Various 50,000 50,000 2020-7 Pedestrian Countdown Timers (TS1703) Traffic Sgnal 337,500 62,500 2020-8 Complete Streets Plan (ST1705) Master Plan 400,000 17,218 2020-9 Avenue 44 Road Diet (ST1708) Road Diet 534,002 153,882 2020-10 Neighborhood Pedestrian Improvements(SW1801) Transportation/ADA Improvement 3,042,950 37,290 2020-11 Multi -Modal Feasibility Study (PL1801) Master Plan 462,500 64,933 2020-12 Indio Bike Siare (PL1901) Master Plan 35,000 10,000 2020-13 Avenue 50 and Jackson Street Traffic Sgnal & Street Improvements (TS1901) New Traffic Sgnal/Roadway Improvement 8,500,000 62,500 2020-14 HSP9Traffic Sgnal Improvements Traffic Sgnal Modification 1,502,200 40,000 2020-15 Measure "A" Advance Debt Repayment Roadway Improvement 168,345 168,345 2020-16 Salaries& BenefitsforPW Employees Project Mngmt & Mntnce 425,700 212,000 2020-17 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries & Benefits 76,104 76,104 TOTAL $ 105,267,281 $ 2,493,048 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 9 129 M EASURE A LOCALSIFat1S AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: INDIO Prepared by: Gloria Hernandez Phone # : 760-391-4013 Date: 4/ 24/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 157,353 2,105,000 2,262,353 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/21 2021-01 Annual Street Maintenance Contracts/aipplies(List A) Roadway Improvement $ 985,000 $ 475,000 2021-02 Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements Sgnal/Sgnage 50,000 50,000 2021-03 Grant Applicationsfor Transportation Projects(ST2002) Various 50,000 50,000 2021-04 Pavement Management System (SI2101) Roadway Improvement 5,400,000 200,000 2021-05 Herbert Hoover Elem. School Neighborhood Pedestrian Improvements(SW1801) Active Transportation/ADA Improvement 3,042,950 400,000 2021-06 Avenue 50 and Jackson Street Traffic Sgnal & Street Improvements(TS1901) New Traffic Sgnal/Roadway Improvement 8,500,000 800,000 2021-07 HSIP9Traffic Sgnal Improvements Traffic Sgnal Modification 1,502,200 50,000 2021-08 Salaries& BenefitsforPW Employees Project Mngmt & Mntnce 509,930 162,000 2021-09 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries& Benefits 84,784 46,000 TOTAL $ 20,124,864 $ 2,233,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 9 130 M EASURE A LOCALSIhittlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: INDIO Prepared by: Gloria Hernandez Phone # : 760-391-4013 Date: 4/ 24/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 29,353 2,158,000 2,187,353 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Brige Preventative Maintenance Program (BR1701) Roadway Improvement $ 7,763,835 $ 45,880 2022-02 Annual Street Maintenance Contracts/SLpplies(List A) Roadway Improvement 985,000 475,000 2022-03 Jackson St./Monroe St. @I-10 Fwy Interchanges(SI0801 & ST0701) Freeway Interchange Improvement 211,000,000 200,000 2022-04 Misc. Traffic Safety Imps Signal/Sgnage 50,000 50,000 2022-05 Grant Applicationsfor Transportation Proje c ts (ST2002) Various 50,000 50,000 2022-06 Madison Street Improvements (Ave 48- Hwy 111) (ST503C) Roadway Improvement 3,500,000 100,000 2022-07 Pavement Management System (ST2101) Roadway Improvement 5,400,000 600,000 2022-08 Herbert HooverEem. School Neighborhood Pedestrian Improvements(SW1801) Active Transportation/ADA Improvement 3,042,950 10,000 2022-09 Avenue 50 and Jackson Street Traffic Sgnal & Street Improvements(7S1901) New Traffic Signal/Roadway Improvement 8,500,000 300,000 2022-10 HSIP9Traffic Sgnal Improvements Traffic Sgnal Modification 1,502,200 50,000 2022-11 Salaries& BenefitsforPW Employees Project Mngmt & Mntnce 509,930 174,000 2022-12 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries& Benefits 84,784 49,000 TOTAL $ 242,388,699 $ 2,103,880 FY 2021-22 Page 3 of 9 131 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: INDIO Prepared by: Gloria Hernandez Phone # : 760-391-4013 Date: 4/ 24/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 83,473 2,212,000 2,295,473 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 Brige Preventative Maintenance Program (BR1701) Roadway Improvement $ 7,763,835 $ 45,880 2023-02 Annual Street Maintenance Contracts/Slapplies(List A) Roadway Improvement 985,000 475,000 2023-03 Jackson St./Monroe St. @I-10 Fwy Interchanges(ST0801 & ST0701) Freeway Interchange Improvement 211,000,000 500,000 2023-04 Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements Sgnal/Sgnage 50,000 50,000 2023-05 Grant Applicationsfor Transportation Projects(812002) Various 50,000 50,000 2023-06 Pavement Management System (ST2101) Roadway Improvement 5,400,000 600,000 2023-07 Avenue 50 and Jackson Street Traffic Sgnal & Street Im p rove m e nts (- 51901) New Traffic Sgnal/Roadway Improvement 8,500,000 100,000 2023-08 HSIP9Traffic Sgnal Improvements Traffic Sgnal Modification 1,502,200 50,000 2023-09 Salaries& Benefitsfor PW Employees Project Mngmt & Mntnce 509,930 228,025 2023-10 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries& Benefits 84,784 65,000 TOTAL $ 235,845,749 $ 2,163,905 FY 2022-23 Page 4of9 132 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: INDIO Prepared by: Gloria Hernandez Phone # : 760-391-4013 Date: 4/ 24/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 131,568 2,267,000 2,398,568 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/24 2024-01 Brige Preventative Maintenance Program (BR1701) Roadway Improvement $ 7,763,835 $ 400,000 2024-02 Annual Street Maintenance Contractsi&pplies (List A) Roadway Improvement 985,000 475,000 2024-03 Jackson St./Monroe St. @I-10 Fwy Interchanges(ST0801 & Si0701) Freeway Interchange Improvement 211,000,000 300,000 2024-04 Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements Sgnal/Sgnage 50,000 50,000 2024-05 Grant Applicationsfor Transportation Projects(812002) Various 50,000 50,000 2024-06 Pavement Management System (ST2101) Roadway Improvement 5,400,000 700,000 2024-07 Salaries& Benefitsfor PW Employees Project Mngmt & Mntnce 509,930 265,000 2024-08 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries& Benefits 84,784 75,000 TOTAL $ 225,843,549 $ 2,315,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5 of 9 133 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA MS REPORTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: INDIO Prepared by: Gloria Hernandez Phone # : 760-391-4013 Date: 4/ 24/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Indio Blvd. Bridge NB@Storm Channel- Seismic Retrofit (BR0801) Seismic Retrofit $ 3,423,000 $ 4,519 20/21FY Under design; construction to start Spring 2020 2019-02 Indio Blvd. Bridge SB@Storm Channel- Scour Protection (BR0802) Scour Protection $ 549,902 $ 1,275 20/21FY Underdesign; construction to start Spring 2020 2019-03 Jackson St. Bridge @Storm Channel- Seismic Retrofit (BR0109) Seismic Retrofit $ 4,305,417 $ 31,192 20/21FY Design complete; construction fall of 2019 2019-04 Indio Blvd. Bridge over UPRR (ra ilroa d ) (BR0302) Seismic Retrofit $ 4,731,316 $ 19,312 19/20FY Construction complete; pending litigation/bond claim 2019-05 Avenue 44 Bridge at the Wash (BR1101) New Bridge Construction $ 19,230,000 $ 158,429 21/22FY Rig ht-of-Wa y Acquisition; Design complete 2019-06 Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program (BR1701) Bridge Mntnce $ 7,763,835 $ 40 24/25FY Design 2019-07 Shields Road Connection (south of Hwy 111) (ST1202) Roadway Connection $ 659,000 $ - Complete Complete. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page6of9 134 M EASURE A LOCALSIFat13 AND ROADS PROGRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-08 Hwy 111 Improvements(Madison St. - Rubidoux St.) (ST1305) Roadway Improvement $ 14,345,000 $ 27,244 Complete Construction complete; project close out phase 2019-09 Hwy 111 Median and Landscaping (ST1709) Roadway Improvement $ 950,000 $ - Complete Construction complete 2019-10 North Indio Pavement Improvements (ST1503) Roadway Improvement $ 2,443,581 $ 54 20/21FY Under Construction 2019-11 Grant Applicationsfor Transportation Projects Various $ 50,000 $ 50,000 on -going On -going 2019-12 Jackson St./Monroe St. @I-10 Fwy Interchanges(ST0801 & ST0701) Freeway Interchange Improvement $ 211,000,000 $ 2,481 24/25FY Design Complete; in Env. Phase PA/ED 2019-13 Madison Street Improvements (Ave 50- Ave 52), Ph. 2 (ST503H) Design & ROW $ 14,000,000 $ 7,766 Complete Under Construction 2019-14 Madison Street Improvements(Ave 50- Ave 52), Ph. 3 (ST503K) Construction $ 10,765,689 $ 81,964 20/21FY Starting Construction 2019-15 Annual Street Maintenance Contracts/Supplies(List A) Roadway Improvement $ 985,000 $ 28,920 on -going On -going 2019-16 City Wide Pavement Rehabilitation Program (ST1802) Roadway Improvement $ 4,750,000 $ 400,000 on -going On -going 2019-17 1-10 @Jefferson Street Interchange Project (ST0110) Freeway Interchange Improvement $ 86,300,000 $ - Complete Construction complete; pending final invoice from county. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 7of9 135 M EASURE A LOCALSIFat13 AND ROADS PROGRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-18 Andrew Jackson Elementary Pedestrian Improvements(SW1504) Active Transportation/ADA Improvement $ 2,620,000 $ 412,099 Complete Construction Complete. Project closeout 2019-19 Jackson Street Signal Upgrades& Synchronization (TS1301) Traffic Signal $ 3,482,100 $ 606 20/21FY Under Construction 2019-20 Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements Sgnal/Sgnage $ 50,000 $ 50,000 on -going On -going 2019-21 Dr. Carreon Blvd. and Oasis Street Traffic Sgnal Modification (TS1701) Traffic Sgnal Modification $ 983,200 $ - 21/22FY Ready to construct 2019-22 Monroe Street Sgnal Modification and Interconnect from Oleander Avenue to Comet Lane (TS1702) Traffic Signal $ 461,000 $ - Combined with TS1701 Ready to construction 2019-23 Avenue 44 Road Diet (ST1708) Road Diet $ 534,002 $ 2,387 20/21FY Design complete. To be constructed. 2019-24 Safe Routesto School Master Plan (PL1701) Master Plan $ 240,000 $ 37,043 Complete Complete. 2019-25 Indio Blvd. Bridge over UPRR Replacement PSR Bridge Replacement $ 395,000 $ - 21/22FY Design 2019-26 Jackson Street Bridge Over UPRRand Indio Blvd. PSR Bridge Replacement $ 590,000 $ - 21/22FY Design 2019-27 Calhoun Street Improvements(ST1804) Roadway Improvement $ 1,048,270 $ - Complete Under construction 2019-28 Herbert Hoover Dementary School Neighborhood Pedestrian Improvements(SW1801) Active Transportation/ADA Improvement $ 3,042,950 $ - 21/22FY Under design 2019-29 Multi -Modal Feasibility Study (PL1801) Master Plan $ 462,500 $ - 20/21FY Under design Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 8of9 136 M EASURE A LOCALSIFat15 AND ROADS PROGRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-30 Avenue 50 and Jackson Street Traffic Signal and Street Improvements CES1901) New Traffic Sgnal/Roadway Improvement $ 8,500,000 $ - 22/23FY To be designed 2019-31 Measure "A"Advance Debt Repayment Roadway Improvement $ 673,000 $ 673,000 on -going Payment 2019-32 Salaries& BenefitsforPW Employees Project Mngmt & Mntnce $ 510,000 $ 51,000 on -going Project Management & Maintenance 2019-33 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries& Benefits $ 77,100 $ 66,169 on -going Percentage of Salaries& Benefits TOTAL $ 409,920,862 $ 2,105,500 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 9of9 137 This page left intentionally blank. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY 139 This page left intentionally blank. pity of jurupa Valley Brian Berkson, Mayor . Anthony Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem . Micheal Goodland, Council Member . Lorena Barajas, Council Member . Chris Barajas, Council Member April 25, 2019 Jenny Chan Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon St, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502 Subject: Jurupa Valley Five -Year Measure "A" CIP (2019/20 — 2023/24) Dear Ms. Chan, The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley, at its regular meeting on April 18, 2019, adopted the City's Five Year Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2019/20 - 2023/24. Included with this letter are the following documents: • Five-year Jurupa Valley CIP for Fiscal Years 2019/20-2023/24 • Measure "A" Local Funds Program Project Status Report for Fiscal Year 2018/19 The City requests that the Riverside County Transportation Commission accept and approve the City's Measure "A" Five -Year CIP and find the City eligible to continue receiving its fair share of Measure "A" revenues. If you should have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me via email at sloriso@jurupavalley.org or via telephone at (951) 332-6464 x233. Sincerely, Steve R. Loriso, P.E. City Engineer /Director of Public Works Cc: Gary S. Thompson, City Manager George Wentz, Assistant City Manager Carolina Fernandez, Assistant Engineer 8930 Limonite Ave., Jurupa Valley, CA 92509-5183, (951) 332-6464 www.jurupavalley.org 141 This page left intentionally blank. M EASURE A LOCALSItILLIb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/20 Agency: JURUPA VALLEY Prepared by: CHASE KEYS Phone #: 951-332-6464 Date: 4/1/2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 120,195 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 2,123,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (2,017,975) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 225,220 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 2,221,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 2,446,220 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Limonite Ave Widening, Etiwanda to Bain - Debt Service Roadway Widening $ 183,500 $ 183,500 2020-02 Mission Blvd Bridge, Crossing Santa Ana River Bridge Reconstruction 265,000 265,000 2020-03 Bain St Pavement Rehabilitation, Jurupa to Belleg rave Pavement Rehab. 40,000 40,000 2020-04 Ped ley Rd Improvement Project, Limonite to Jurupa Intersection Improvements 1,136,500 75,000 2020-05 Certificates of Participation (COP) Pavement Rehab. 1,057,350 1,057,350 Series2016A - Debt Service 2019-2020 Pavement 2020-06 Maintenance (Slurry/Crack Seal), LocationslBD Pavement Maint. 600,000 300,000 2020-07 Sannyslope Area SR2SSdewalk Gap Closure Sdewalks 2,000 1,000 2020-08 Citywide Guardrail Replacement Guardrail 50,000 50,000 2020-09 Citywide Retroreflectivity Testing Study 30,000 30,000 2020-10 5%Overhead/Administration Inter -fund Transfer 111,050 111,050 TOTAL $ 3,475,400 $ 2,112,900 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 143 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: JURUPA VALLEY Prepared by: CHASE KEYS Phone # : 951-332-6464 Date: 4/1/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 333,320 2,277,000 2,610,320 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/21 2021-01 Mission Blvd Bridge, Crossing Santa Ana River Bridge Reconstruction $ 265,000 $ 265,000 Certificatesof Participation 2021-02 (COP) Series2016A - Debt Pavement Rehab. 1,059,400 1,059,400 Service 2021-03 Sunnyslope Area SR2SSdewalk Sdewalks 431,000 43,000 Gap Closure 2021-05 Mission Blvd Pavement Rehabilitation - Ph. 1, Limits TBD Pavement Rehab. 1,600,000 300,000 Van Buren Blvd Pavement 2021-06 Rehabilitation - Ph. 3, Bellegrave to Etiwanda Pavement Rehab. 100,000 100,000 2020-2021 Pavement 2021-07 Maintenance (Surry/Crack Seal), LocationsTBD Pavement Maint. 400,000 400,000 2021-08 Citywide Guardrail Replacement Guardrail 30,000 30,000 2021-09 5%0verhead/Administration Inter -fund Transfer 113,850 113,850 TOTAL $ 3,999,250 $ 2,311,250 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 144 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: JURUPA VALLEY Prepared by: CHASE KEYS Phone # : 951-332-6464 Date: 4/1/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 299,070 2,334,000 2,633,070 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Mission Blvd Bridge, Crossing Santa Ana River Bridge Reconstruction $ 265,000 $ 265,000 Certificatesof Participation 2022-02 (COP) Series2016A - Debt Pavement Rehab. 1,057,800 1,057,800 Service 2022-03 Sunnyslope Area SR2SSdewalk Sdewalks 2,740,000 274,000 Gap Closure 2022-05 Mission Blvd Pavement Rehabilitation - Ph. 2, Lim its TBD Pavement Rehab. 1,750,000 350,000 2021-2022 Pavement 2022-06 Maintenance (Surry/Crack Seal), LocationsTBD Pavement Maint. 400,000 400,000 2022-07 5%Overhea d/Administration Inter -fund Transfer 116,700 116,700 TOTAL $ 6,329,500 $ 2,463,500 FY 2021-22 Page 3 of 6 145 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: JURUPA VALLEY Prepared by: CHASE KEYS Phone # : 951-332-6464 Date: 4/1/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 169,570 2,392,000 2,561,570 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 Certificatesof Participation 2023-01 (COP) Series2016A - Debt Pavement Rehab. $ 1,060,000 $ 1,060,000 Service 2023-02 Mission Blvd Pavement Rehabilitation - Ph. 3, Lim its TBD Pavement Rehab. 1,900,000 500,000 2021-2022 Pavement 2023-03 Maintenance (Surry/Crack Seal), LocationsTBD Pavement Maint. 400,000 400,000 2023-04 5%0verhead/Administration Inter -fund Transfer 119,600 119,600 TOTAL $ 3,479,600 $ 2,079,600 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 146 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: JURUPA VALLEY Prepared by: CHASE KEYS Phone # : 951-332-6464 Date: 4/ 1/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 481,970 2,452,000 2,933,970 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 Certificatesof Participation 2024-01 (COP) Series2016A - Debt Pavement Rehab. $ 1,055,800 $ 1,055,800 Service 2021-2022 Pavement 2024-02 Maintenance (Slurry/Crack Seal), LocationsTBD Pavement Maint. 400,000.00 400,000.00 Van Buren Blvd Pavement 2024-03 Rehabilitation - Ph. 3, Belleg rave to Etiwanda Pavement Rehab. 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 2024-04 5%0verhead/Administration Inter -fund Transfer 122,600.00 122,600.00 TOTAL $ 2,578,400 $ 2,578,400 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 147 MEASURE A LOCAL51t�tIS AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJEC T STA MS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: JURUPA VALLEY Prepared by: CHASE KEYS Phone #: 951-332-6464 Date: 4/1/2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Estthru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019.1 Limonite Ave Widening, Etiwanda to Bain - Debt Service Roadway Widening $ 183,500 $ 183,500 NA Complete Mission Blvd Bridge, Crossing over Bridge Reconstruction 54,000 54,000 6/30/2023 PA/ED Santa nta Ana River 2019.3 Jurupa Valley High Scool 9R2S SR2S 1,007,000 280,039 4/30/2019 Complete Martin, 48th and Troth Certificatesof Participation (COP) Series2016A -Debt Service Pavement Rehab. 1,059,700 1,059,700 NA Complete 2019.4 2019.5 2018 2019 Pavement Pavement Maint. 414,000 300,000 11/31/18 Complete Maintenance (Sung/Crack Seal) 2019.6 Ped ley Rd Improvement Project Intersection Widening 201,321 73,940 6/30/2019 PS8 E Added Project 2019.7 Market St Bridge Analysis Bridge Safety Analysis 62,700 62,700 NA Underway Added Project Inter -fund Transfer Per Overhead/Administration 4,096 4,096 NA NA 2019.8 Measure A TOTAL $ 2,986,317 $ 2,017,975 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6of6 148 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF LA QUINTA 149 This page left intentionally blank. - CAI fl'ORNI,A - May 3, 2019 Jenny Chan Management Analyst Programming and Planning Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Subject: City of La Quinta Fiscal Year 2019/2020 - 2023/2024 Measure A Five - Year Capital Improvement Plan and Maintenance of Effort Certification Dear Ms. Chan, The City of La Quinta respectfully submits its Measure A Capital Improvement Plan, Project Status Report and Maintenance of Effort Certification for the Commission's review and approval. The City of La Quinta is a full participant in the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Programs. Please do not hesitate to contact Bryan McKinney, P.E., City Engineer, at (760) 777-7045 or Nick Nickerson, Project Manager, at (760) 323-5344 if you have questions or require additional information. Enclosures: 1. Five -Year CIP for FY 2019/20 - 2023/24 and Project Status Report for FY 2018/19 2. FY 2019/20 Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement 70495 Calle lampico I to amnia, California 92253 I /69.171.1000 I www.laquintaca.guv FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of La Quinta (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02- 001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $937,007, approved by the Commission at its June 12, 2013 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 2019 rank ATTEST: cek, City Manager Monika Radewa, CiClerk 152 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/20 Agency: LA QUINTA Prepared by: Bryan McFGnney, City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7045 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 1,245,548 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 803,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (620,219) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 1,428,329 Estimated FY 2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 1,590,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 3,018,329 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 19/ 20 2020-01 Citywide Traffic Sgnal Maintenance Program Annual Recurring Program $ 368,158 $ 368,158 Dune Palms Road Improvements 2020-02 (Black Hawk Way to Approx. 330 Street Widening 2,650,000 105,778 LFN. of the CVSWC) Carryover 2020-03 La Quinta Village Complete ATPCarryover 13,587,986 1,341,890 Streets -A Road Diet Project 2020-04 HSIPIntersection Improvements HSIPTraffic Safety 1,260,400 104,003 Carryover Washington Street at Fred Congestion Relief 2020-05 Waring Drive Triple Left Turn 2,180,134 232,595 Lanes Carryover 2020-06 Jefferson St. at Ave. 53 Complete Streets 2,101,617 499,074 Roundabout Carryover TOTAL $ 22,148,295 $ 2,651,498 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 153 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM • FY 2020/21 Agency: LA QUINTA Prepared by: Bryan McFGnney, City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7045 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 366,831 1,630,000 1,996,831 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 Citywide Traffic Signal Maintenance Program La Quinta Village Complete Streets -A Road Diet Project Monroe Street Pavement Rehabilitation (Ave 52 to Ave 53, and near Ave 61) Annual Recurring Program ATPCarryover Pavement Rehabilitation $ 235,000 13,587,986 941,000 $ 235,000 440,560 941,000 2021-01 2021-02 2021-03 TOTAL $ 14,763,986 $ 1,616,560 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 154 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM • FY 2021/22 Agency: LA QUINTA Prepared by: Bryan McFGnney, City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7045 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 380,271 1,671,000 2,051,271 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Citywide Traffic Signal Annual Recurring $ 235,000 $ 235,000 Maintenance Program Program Fred Waring Dr. Pavement Pavement 2022-02 Rehabilitation (Washington St. to 681,940 681,940 Palm Royale Dr.) Rehabilitation 2022-03 Washington St. at MilesAve Dual Congestion Relief 765,000 382,500 Left Turn Lanes 2022-04 Ave 47 Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement 385,000 385,000 (Washington St. to AdamsSt.) Rehabilitation TOTAL $ 2,066,940 $ 1,684,440 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 155 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM • FY 2022/23 Agency: LA QUINTA Prepared by: Bryan McFGnney, City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7045 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 366,831 1,713,000 2,079,831 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 Citywide Traffic Sgnal Maintenance Program Ave 50 Pavement Rehabilitation (Washington to Eisenhower) Dune Palms Road at Corporate Center Drive (New Traffic Sgnal) Annual Recurring Program Pavement Rehabilitation Traffic Sgnal Improvement $ 235,000 1,000,000 430,000 $ 235,000 1,000,000 430,000 2023-01 2023-02 2023-03 TOTAL $ 1,665,000 $ 1,665,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 156 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM • FY 2023/24 Agency: LA QUINTA Prepared by: Bryan McFGnney, City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7045 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 414,831 1,756,000 2,170,831 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 Citywide Traffic Signal Annual Recurring 2024-01 $ 235,000 $ 235,000 Maintenance Program Program Avenue 58 Pavement Pavement 2024-02 Rehabilitation (Jefferson to 1,400,000 1,400,000 Madison) Rehabilitation Seasons Way Pavement Pavement 2024-03 Rehabilitation (Calle Tampico to qpringtime Way) Rehabilitation 85,940 85,940 TOTAL $ 1,720,940 $ 1,720,940 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 157 M EASURE A LOCALSIIttib AND ROADS PROGRAM PRO JECT STA1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: LA QUINTA Prepared by: Bryan McFGnney, City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7045 Date: 5/ 2/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Estthru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Citywide Street and Traffic 9 nal Y 9 Annual Recurring $ 281,282.60 $ 81,162.02 6/30/2019 On -Going Annual Maintenance Program Dune PalmsRoad Street Improvements Program greet Widening - Recurring Program Construction Phase 2019-02 (Black Hawk Way to Approx. 330 LFN. of the CVSWC) Carryover 595,750.00 489,971.92 12/30/2019 Underway Project advertised 2019-03 La Quinta Village Complete Streets -A ATPProject Carryover 289,900.00 - 10/30/2020 for Construction. Road Diet Project Award anticipated June 2019. 2019-04 HSIP Intersection Improvements HSIP Traffic Safety- 126,100.00 22,097.23 8/31/2019 Construction Phase Carryover Underway Multi -Agency 2019-05 Washington St. at Fred Waring Dr. Triple Congestion Relief - 551,985.00 11,487.50 11/30/2020 Agreements Left Turn Lanes Carryover Approved. PS&E Underway 2019-06 Systemic Safety Analysis Report Traffic Safety Analysis 15,500.00 15,500.00 6/30/2019 Ana lysis95% Complete 2019-07 Jefferson St. at Ave. 53 Roundabout and Road Diet Complete Streets Carryover 726,708.00 - 6/30/2020 PS&E 85% Complete TOTAL $ 2,587,225.60 $ 620,218.67 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6of6 158 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 159 This page left intentionally blank. CITY OF i/N LADE 0,)LSINOU DREAM EXTREME May 1, 2019 Ms. Lorelle Moe -Luna Programming & Planning Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Subject: City of Lake Elsinore Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (FYs2019/2020-2023/2024) Dear M s. Moe -Luna: The City of Lake Elsinore has updated the Five Year Plan and the following documents are enclosed for your review: • City of Lake Elsinore Maintenance of Effort (M OE) signed Certification Statement for FY 2019-2020 • Measure A Five -Year CIP plans for FYs 2019/2020-2023/2024 • Project Status Report for FY 2018-2019 Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (951) 674-3124 Ext. 362. Sincerely, son Simpson Assistant City Manager 951.674.3124 130 S. MAIN STREET LAKE: ELSINORE. CA 92530 W W W. LAKE- E LS I NORE.ORG 161 FV 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Lake Elsinore (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $960,771, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: (I/2 fin , 2019 ATTEST: 162 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: LAKE ELSINORE Pre p a red b y: BREN D A N RA FFERIY Phone # : (951) 674-3124 x298 Date: 3/ 29/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 1,746,002 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 1,426,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (1,609,674) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 1,562,328 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 1,441,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 3,003,328 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 Annual Citywide Sdewalk 2020-01 Improvement Program INSTALLATION $ 435,696 $ 217,848 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal 2020-02 Program MAINTENANCE 464,878 464,878 Annual Curb, Gutter& 2020-03 Sdewalk Repair MAINTENANCE 300,000 300,000 Annual Roadway Drainage 2020-04 Repair& Maintenance MAINTENANCE 420,000 170,000 Annual Traffic Striping 2020-05 Maintenance MAINTENANCE 275,000 275,000 2020-06 I-15/SR 74 Interchange CONSTRUCTION 2,451,327 251,567 2020-07 Main Street Interchange CONSTRUCTION 150,000 150,000 2020-08 Missing Link Bike Lane Striping CONSTRUCTION 253,518 126,759 Downtown Active 2020-09 Transportation CONSTRUCTION 1,893,866 168,276 DEBT SERVICE- LOCAL MEASUREA S4LESTAX REVENUE C ERTI FIC A TES O F PAR -RC IPA110 N, SERIES2014A DEBT SERVICE 495,538 495,538 (T.R.I.P. - TOTAL ROAD 2020-10 IM PRO V EM ENT PRO G RA M TOTAL $ 7,139,823 $ 2,619,866 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 7 163 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: LAKE ELSINORE Pre p a red b y: BREN D A N RA FFERIY Phone # : (951) 674-3124 x298 Date: 3/ 29/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 383,462 1,477,000 1,860,462 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 Annual Curb, Gutter& 2021-01 9dewalk Repair MAINTENANCE $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Annual Roadway Drainage 2021-02 Repair& Maintenance MAINTENANCE 190,000 190,000 Annual Citywide Sdewalk 2021-03 Improvement Program INSTALLATION 200,000 200,000 Annual Citywide Surry Seal 2021-04 Program MAINTENANCE 390,000 390,000 Annual Traffic Striping 2021-05 Maintenance MAINTENANCE 275,000 275,000 D EBT SERV IC E - LOCAL M EA SURE A SALES TAX REVENUE CERTIFICATESOFPARTICIPATION, SERIES2014A (T.R.I.P. - TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 495,938 495,938 2021-06 ROAD IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM TOTAL $ 1,850,938 $ 1,850,938 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 7 164 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: LAKE ELSINORE Pre p a red b y: BREN D A N RA FFERIY Phone # : (951) 674-3124 x298 Date: 3/ 29/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 9,524 1,514,000 1,523,524 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 Annual Curb, Gutter& 2022-01 9dewalk Repair MAINTENANCE $ 300,000 $ 200,000 Annual Roadway Drainage 2022-02 Repair& Maintenance MAINTENANCE 200,000 125,000 Annual Citywide Sdewalk 2022-03 Improvement Program INSTALLATION 200,000 125,000 Annual Citywide Surry Seal 2022-04 Program MAINTENANCE 485,000 375,000 Annual Traffic Striping 2022-05 Maintenance MAINTENANCE 275,000 200,000 D EBT SERV IC E - LOCAL M EA SURE A SALES TAX REVENUE CERTIFICATESOFPARTICIPATION, SERIES2014A (T.R.I.P. - TOTAL DEBTSERVICE 495,938 495,938 2022-06 ROAD IMPROVEMENT PRO GRAM TOTAL $ 1,955,938 $ 1,520,938 FY 2021-22 Page 3of7 165 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: LAKE ELSINORE Pre p a red b y: BREN D A N RA FFERIY Phone # : (951) 674-3124 x298 Date: 3/ 29/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 2,586 1,552,000 1,554,586 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 Annual Curb, Gutter& 2023-01 9dewalk Repair MAINTENANCE $ 250,000 $ 175,000 Annual Roadway Drainage 2023-02 Repair& Maintenance MAINTENANCE 215,000 175,000 Annual Citywide Sdewalk 2023-03 Improvement Program INSTALLATION 200,000 150,000 Annual Citywide Surry Seal 2023-04 Program MAINTENANCE 490,000 405,000 Annual Traffic Striping 2023-05 Maintenance MAINTENANCE 275,000 150,000 D EBT SERV IC E - LOCAL M EA SURE A SALES TAX REVENUE CERTIFICATESOFPARTICIPATION, SERIES2014A (T.R.I.P. - TOTAL DEBTSERVICE 495,838 495,838 2023-06 ROAD IMPROVEMENT PRO GRAM TOTAL $ 1,925,838 $ 1,550,838 FY 2022-23 Page 4of7 166 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: LAKE ELSINORE Pre p a red b y: BREN D A N RA FFERIY Phone # : (951) 674-3124 x298 Date: 3/ 29/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 3,748 1,591,000 1,594,748 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 Annual Curb, Gutter& 2024-01 9dewalk Repair MAINTENANCE $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Annual Roadway Drainage 2024-02 Repair& Maintenance MAINTENANCE 230,000 200,000 Annual Citywide Sdewalk 2024-03 Improvement Program INSTALLATION 200,000 180,000 Annual Citywide Surry Seal 2024-04 Program MAINTENANCE 500,000 350,000 Annual Traffic Striping 2024-05 Maintenance MAINTENANCE 275,000 169,760 D EBT SERV IC E - LOCAL M EA SURE A SALES TAX REVENUE CERTIFICATESOFPARTICIPATION, SERIES2014A (T.R.I.P. - TOTAL DEBTSERVICE 494,988 494,988 2024-06 ROAD IMPROVEMENT PRO GRAM TOTAL $ 1,899,988 $ 1,594,748 FY 2023-24 Page 5of7 167 M EASURE A LOCALS1REEfS AND ROADS PRO GRAM PRO JEC T STA 71JS REPORTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: LAKEELSINORE Pre p a red b y: BREN D A N RA FFERIY Phone # : (951) 674-3124 x298 Date: 3/ 29/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status ANNUAL CITYWIDECURB, GUTTER 2019-01 & SIDEWALKMAINTENANCE PROGRAM MAINTENANCE $ 155,000.00 $ 145,000.00 6/30/2019 Project isannual and ongoing. ANNUAL CITYWIDE ROADWAY 2019-02 DRAINAG E REPAIR & MAINTENANCE PROGRAM MAINTENANCE 150,000 - 6/30/2019 Project isannual and ongoing. ANNUAL CITYWIDE SIDEWALK Project isannual 2019-03 IMPROVEM ENTS PROGRAM INSTALLATION 989,471 494,736 6/30/2019 and ongoing. 2019-04 ANNUAL CITYWIDESLURRYSEAL PROGRAM MAINTENANCE 464,878 - 6/30/2019 Project isannual and ongoing. ANNUAL C ITYW I D E TRAFFIC 2019-05 STRIPING MAINTENANCE PROGRAM MAINTENANCE 275,000 150,000 6/30/2019 Project isannual and ongoing. DEBT SERV IC E - LOCAL M EA SURE A SALESTAX REVENUE 2019-06 CERTIFICATESOFPARTICIPATION, SERIES2014A (TRI.P. - TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 499,938 499,938 Ongoing. ROAD IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6 of 7 168 2019-07 2019-08 2019-09 I-15/ SR 74 INTERC HANG E MAIN STREEfINTERCHANG E MISSING LINK BIKE LANE STRIPING (Machado St b/w Grand to Lakeshore; Mission Trail b/w Diamond to Campbell; Downtown segmentsof Lakeshore Dr, Graham Ave, and Main St) M EASURE A LOCALSIFat15 AND ROADS PROGRAM CONSIKUCTION CONSIKUCTION CONSIKUCTION 2,934,251 275,410 268,600 60,000 160,000 100,000 6/30/2020 On Schedule. 6/30/2020 On Schedule. 8/31/2019 On schedule. TOTAL $ 6,012,548 $ 1,609,674 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 7of7 169 This page left intentionally blank. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF MENIFEE 171 This page left intentionally blank. Ar/ MENIFEE AIF 7 New. Better. Best. May 6, 2019 Jenny Chan Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Dear Ms. Chan: 29844 Haun Road I Menifee, CA 92586 951-672-6777 I Fax 951-679-3843 cityofinenifee.us Enclosed is the City of Menifee's 5-year CIP for Measure "A" funds and MOE Certification form for FY2019/20 signed by our City Manager, Armando Villa. If you have any questions concerning the enclosed information, feel free to contact Bob Morin of CivilPros who assisted the City with completion of this document. Bob can be reached at Bob.morinacivilpros.com or 951-538-2267. Sincerely, Jonathan Smith PE Director of Public Works City Engineer C: Carlos Geronimo, PE Senior Engineer Yolanda Macalalad, PE, Assistant City Engineer Wendy Preece, Deputy Finance Director 173 hr.MENIFEE , New. Better. Best. May 6, 2019 Jenny Chan Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 29844 Haun Road Menifee, CA 92586 951-672-6777 Fax 951-679-3843 cityofinenifee.us FY2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Menifee (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $214,225, approved by the Commission at its September 11, 2013 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 75/ ` , 2019 .� Armando G. Villa, City Manage erk, City of Menifee 174 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: MENIFEE Prepared by: Wendy Preece Phone # : 951-672-6777 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 1,009,454 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 1,823,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (2,510,285) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 322,169 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 1,847,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 2,169,169 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Bond Payment for TRIP Financing Debt Service $ 20,000,000 $ 1,304,088 2020-02 Local Roads Maintenance 1,198,000 860,000 TOTAL $ 21,198,000 $ 2,164,088 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 175 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: MENIFEE Prepared by: Wendy Preece Phone # : 951-672-6777 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 5,081 1,893,000 1,898,081 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Bond Payment forTRlPFinancing Debt Service $ 20,000,000 $ 1,302,838 2021-02 Holland Road Overpass Construction 28,066,000 497,000 TOTAL $ 48,066,000 $ 1,799,838 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 176 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/ 22 Agency: MENIFEE Prepared by: Wendy Preece Phone # : 951-672-6777 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 98,243 1,940,000 2,038,243 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021 / 22 2022-01 Bond Payment for TRIP Financing Debt Service $ 20,000,000 $ 1,305,588 2022-02 Scott Road Widening Construction 8,300,000 594,000 TOTAL $ 28,300,000 $ 1,899,588 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 177 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: MENIFEE Prepared by: Wendy Preece Phone # : 951-672-6777 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 138,655 1,989,000 2,127,655 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/ 23 2023-01 Bond Payment forTRlPFinancing Debt Service $ 20,000,000 $ 1,305,588 2023-02 McCal1/1-215Interchange Design & ROW 10,353,000 697,912 TOTAL $ 30,353,000 $ 2,003,500 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 178 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: MENIFEE Prepared by: Wendy Preece Phone # : 951-672-6777 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 124,155 2,039,000 2,163,155 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Bond Payment forTRlPFinancing Debt Service $ 20,000,000 $ 1,305,588 2024-02 Valley Boulevard Missing Link Design 6,000,000 798,637 TOTAL $ 26,000,000 $ 2,104,225 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 179 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PRO JECTSTA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: MENIFEE Prepared by: Wendy Preese Phone # : 951-672-6777 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 1 Bond Payment TRIP Financing Debt Service $ 20,000,000 $ 1,301,088 30 years Active 2 Pavement Management Program Maintenance 475,000 82,197 Yearly Active 3 Bradley Bridge Design 730,000 - 2018 Completed 4 Rustlers Ranch Phase 1 Resurfacing 965,000 85,000 2018 Completed 5 Murrieta Road Resurfacing Resurfacing 1,615,000 265,000 2020 Active 6 Murrieta & Scott Intersection Improvement 581,000 122,000 2020 Active 7 Slurry Seal Maintenance 635,000 290,000 2018 Completed 8 Mira Lago & Lakepointe Slurry seal Maintenance 565,000 365,000 2019 Completed TOTAL $ 25,566,000 $ 2,510,285 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page6of6 180 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF MORENO VALLEY 181 This page left intentionally blank. TEL: 951.413.3100 WWW.MOVAL.ORG April 11, 2019 MORENO VALLEY WHERE DREAMS SOAR Ms. Jenny Chan Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502 14177 FREDERICK STREET P.O. BOX 88005 MORENO VALLEY, CA 92552-0805 Subject: City of Moreno Valley's Five -Year Measure A Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2019/20 — 2023/24, Project Status Report for FY 2018/19 and Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement for FY 2019/20 Dear Ms. Chan: The City of Moreno Valley is pleased to submit its Fiscal Year (FY) 2019/20 — 2023/24 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), Project Status Report for FY 2018/19 and Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Certification Statement for FY 2019/20, approved by the City Council on April 2, 2019. An amended five-year Measure A CIP will be submitted to RCTC if changes are made to the listed Measure A projects. Please contact me if there are any questions or concerns. Sincerely, gew(A4A- Launa Jimenez Senior Management Analyst (951) 413-3128 launaj@moval.org Enclosures: Measure A Local Funds Program FY 2019/20 - 2023/24 Measure A Local Funds Program FY 2018/19 Project Status Report MOE Certification Statement FY 19/20 c: File Michael L. Wolfe, Public Works Director/City Engineer Marshall Eyerman, Chief Financial Officer/City Treasurer PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 183 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the City of Moreno Valley (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $1,459,153, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: f, c‘ 2019 ATTES SANTIS, CITY MANAGER ITY CLERK 184 mr M EASURE A LOCALSIII=EIS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/20 Agency: MORENO VALLEY Prepared by: Launa Jimenez Phone #: (951)413-3128 Date: 3/ 13/ 2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ FY 2018/ 19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 3,974,362 4,240,000 5,332,233 2,882,129 4,248,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 7,130,129 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 Public Works -Capital Projects Prog ra m Budget (Provide cost effective administrative functionsfor essential transportation projects and services: annual update of the Rve-YearCIP, revisionsto Standard Plans Disadvantaged BusinessEnterpri% (DBE) Program Management, Pavement Management Program, preparation of grant applications, quarterly utility coordination, and project engineering and right of way servicesfor unfunded new projects. Project Administration $ 207,487 $ 207,487 2020-01 2020-02 Public Works -Citywide Slgn/Striping Maintenance 1,067,155 1,067,155 2020-03 Public Works- Citywide Tree Trimming Maintenance 568,827 568,827 2020-04 Axed Charges/ Indirect Cost Overhead Cost 243,399 243,399 2020-05 Transtersto 2013-2014 Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds Debt Service 1,055,000 1,055,000 2020-06 Transfersto 1RIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,490,000 1,490,000 2020-07 Annual ADA Compliant Curb Ramp Upgrades -Citywide Street Improvements 789,878 189,878 2020-08 Annual Pavement Maintenance -Crack Seal Street Improvements 60,000 60,000 2020-09 Citywide Pavement Management Program Street Improvements 133,681 133,681 2020-10 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Program FY18/19 Street Improvements 3,483,810 201,074 2020-11 Cycle 1 A1PCitywide SR1SPedestrian Facility Improvements Street Improvements 119,729 6,152 2020-12 Heacock St South Extension -Widen Heacock St from 2 lanesto 6lanesfrom San Michelle to Harley Knox Blvd, including the bridge Street Improvements 925,364 24,953 2020-13 Property Acquisition for Street Purposes Street Improvements 10,553 10,553 2020-14 Residential Traffic Management Program (Speed Humps) Street Improvements 161,090 11,090 2020-15 SR60/ World Log istics Center Parkway Interchange Street Improvements 1,360,773 5,114 2020-16 Heacock St Channel Improvements Drainage 288,755 1,661 2020-17 Moreno MDPUne F18and F19 Drainage 168,806 168,806 2020-18 Moreno MDPUne K 1 Stage 3 K-4 Drainage 124,406 124,406 2020-19 amnymead - Raming Arrow Drive Storm Drain Drainage 621,646 374,490 2020-20 amnymead MDPUne B-16A Drainage 9,000 9,000 2020-21 Dynamic Traveler Alert Message Boa rd s (Perris Blvd south of CactusAve, Alessandro Blvd east of Fredrick St, Cactus Ave east of Frederick St) - Deploy 3 dynamic message signs/ changeable message signson new sign structures, including new electrical service connections Traffic Enhancements 393,138 11,938 2020-22 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon on CactusAve at Woodland Park Traffic Sgnals 203,993 203,993 2020-23 Systemic Safety Ana lysis Report Program Traffic Sgnals 10,000 1,000 2020-24 Traffic Sgnal Equipment/ Upgrades Traffic Sgnals 19,517 19,517 TOTAL $ 13,516,007 $ 6,189,174 FY2019-20 Page 1 of 185 M EASURE A LOCALSIhittlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: MORENO VALLEY Prepared by: Launa Jimenez Phone #: (951) 413-3128 Date: 3/ 13/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 940,955 4,354,000 5,294,955 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 Public Works -Capital Projects Prog ra m Budget $ 214,545 $ 214,545 (Provide cost effective administrative functions for essential transportation projectsand services: annual update of the Five-YearCIP, revisionsto Standard Plans, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program Management, Pavement Management Program, preparation of grant applications, quarterly utility coordination, and project engineering and right of way servicesfor 2021-01 unfunded new projects. Project Administration 2021-02 Public Works -Citywide Sgn/Striping Maintenance 1,116,050 1,116,050 2021-03 Public Works -Citywide Tree Trimming Maintenance 593,784 593,784 2021-04 Fixed Charges/ Indirect Cost Overhead Cost 243,399 243,399 Transfersto 2013-2014 Refunding Lease 1,055,000 1,055,000 2021-05 Revenue Bonds Debt Service 2021-06 Transfersto TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,492,000 1,492,000 TOTAL $ 4,714,778 $ 4,714,778 FY 2020-21 Page 2of7 186 M EASURE A LOCALSIhttlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: MORENO VALLEY Prepared by: Launa Jimenez Phone #: (951) 413-3128 Date: 3/ 13/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 580,177 4,463,000 5,043,177 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 Public Works -Capital Projects Prog ra m Budget $ 214,545 $ 214,545 (Provide cost effective administrative functions for essential transportation projectsand services: annual update of the Five-YearCIP, revisionsto Standard Plans, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program Management, Pavement Management Program, preparation of grant applications, quarterly utility coordination, and project engineering and right of way servicesfor 2022-01 unfunded new projects. Project Administration 2022-02 Public Works -Citywide Sgn/Striping Maintenance 1,116,050 1,116,050 2022-03 Public Works -Citywide Tree Trimming Maintenance 593,784 593,784 2022-04 Fixed Charges/ Indirect Cost Overhead Cost 243,399 243,399 Transfersto 2013-2014 Refunding Lease 1,055,000 1,055,000 2022-05 Revenue Bonds Debt Service 2022-06 Transfersto TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,492,000 1,492,000 TOTAL $ 4,714,778 $ 4,714,778 FY 2021-22 Page 3of7 187 M EASURE A LOCALSIhttlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: MORENO VALLEY Prepared by: Launa Jimenez Phone #: (951) 413-3128 Date: 3/ 13/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 328,399 4,575,000 4,903,399 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/ 23 Public Works -Capital Projects Prog ra m Budget $ 214,545 $ 214,545 (Provide cost effective administrative functions for essential transportation projectsand services: annual update of the Five-YearCIP, revisionsto Standard Plans, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program Management, Pavement Management Program, preparation of grant applications, quarterly utility coordination, and project engineering and right of way servicesfor 2023-01 unfunded new projects. Project Administration 2023-02 Public Works -Citywide Sgn/Striping Maintenance 1,116,050 1,116,050 2023-03 Public Works -Citywide Tree Trimming Maintenance 593,784 593,784 2023-04 Fixed Charges/ Indirect Cost Overhead Cost 243,399 243,399 Transfersto 2013-2014 Refunding Lease 1,055,000 1,055,000 2023-05 Revenue Bonds Debt Service 2023-06 Transfersto TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,492,000 1,492,000 TOTAL $ 4,714,778 $ 4,714,778 FY 2022-23 Page 4of7 188 M EASURE A LOCALSIhttlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: MORENO VALLEY Prepared by: Launa Jimenez Phone #: (951) 413-3128 Date: 3/ 13/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 188,621 4,689,000 4,877,621 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 Public Works -Capital Projects Prog ra m Budget $ 214,545 $ 214,545 (Provide cost effective administrative functions for essential transportation projectsand services: annual update of the Five-YearCIP, revisionsto Standard Plans, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program Management, Pavement Management Program, preparation of grant applications, quarterly utility coordination, and project engineering and right of way servicesfor 2024-01 unfunded new projects. Project Administration 2024-02 Public Works -Citywide Sgn/Striping Maintenance 1,116,050 1,116,050 2024-03 Public Works -Citywide Tree Trimming Maintenance 593,784 593,784 2024-04 Fixed Charges/ Indirect Cost Overhead Cost 243,399 243,399 Transfersto 2013-2014 Refunding Lease 1,055,000 1,055,000 2024-05 Revenue Bonds Debt Service 2024-06 Transfersto TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,492,000 1,492,000 TOTAL $ 4,714,778 $ 4,714,778 FY 2023-24 Page 5of7 189 M EASURE A LOCALSIFe.tio AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 7USREPORTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: MORENO VALLEY Prepared by: Launa Jimenez Phone #: (951)413-3128 Date: 3/13/2019 Item No. Project Name/Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 1 Public works -capital Projects Prog ram Budget (Provide cost effective administrative functionsfor essential transportation projects and services annual update of the Five-YearCIP, revisionsto Standard Flans, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program Management, Pavement Management Program, preparation of grant applications, quarterly utility coordination, and project engineering and right of way wrvicesfor unfunded new projects Project Administration $ 216,742 $ 216,742 N/A Annual Budget 2 Public Works- Citywideagn/Striping Maintenance 1,092,889 1,092,889 N/A Annual Budget 3 Public Works -Citywide Tree Trimming Maintenance 450,218 450,218 N/A Annual Budget 4 Fixed Charges) Indirect Cost Overhead Cost 243,399 243,399 N/A Annual Budget 5 Transfersto 2013-2014 Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds Debt Service 1,055,000 1,055,000 N/A Annual Budget 6 Transfers to TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,491,000 1,491,000 N/A Annual Budget 7 Alessandro Blvd/ Esvorth a Intersection Imply - new traffic signal and signal technology, new drainage system, elimination of cross gutters, upgraded ADA ramps Street Improvements 2,444 2,444 Mar-18 Project Completed 8 Annual ADA Compliant Curb Ramp Upgrades -Citywide Street Improvements 40,000 40,000 N/A On -going Annual Project; future funding will come from GasTax 9 Annual Pavement Maintenance -Crack Seal Street Improvements - - N/A On -going Annual Project 10 InstaI110 bicycle rackson Sunnymead Blvd between Frederick 3 and Penis Blvd Construction of bicycle Ianesat 9locations -Alessandro Blvd (westem city limit to Indian 3) -CactusAve (Heacock 3 to Lasselle 3) -Heacock 3 (Alessandro Blvd to JFK Dr, and Ironwood Ave to 3unnymead Ranch Pkwy) -Ironwood Ave (Barclay Drto Pigeon Pass Blvd) -SLnnymead Blvd (Frederick St to Penis Blvd) -IGtching 3 (Iris Ave to Krameria Ave) -Krameria Ave (Kitching 3 to MV Community College) -Towngate Blvd (Frederick a to Memorial Way) -Eucalyptus Ave (Memorial Way to Day 3) Installation of bicycle shared lane markings at 2locations: -Bay Ave (Frederick St to Graham 3) -Indian 3 (Cottonwood Ave to Sinnymead Blvd) Street Improvements (Bike Lanes) 28,789 28,789 Jan-19 Project Completed 11 Citywide Annual Pavement Resurfacing Street Improvements 3,025 3,025 Feb-19 Discontinued; Measure A budget tranferred to Citywide Pavement Mgmt Program 12 Citywide Pavement Management Program Street Improvements 10,000 10,000 N/A On -going Annual Project 13 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Program FY18/19 Street Improvements 10,000 _ p-19 Working on Construction Bid Documents 14 Cycle 1 AIPCitywide 3RTSPedestrian Facility Improvements Street Improvements 1,170,288 50 Dec-19 Construction 15 Gentian Ave and Eucalyptus Ave Classll Bike Lanes -Construction of bicycle lanesat 2 locations Street Improvements 43,690 18,000 Apr-19 Construction 16 Heacock a/ PenisVallyStonnDrain LateraIAtoCactusAve Street Improvements 6,370 6,370 Jan-18 Warranty walk 17 Heacock a South Extension -Widen Heacock St from 2 lanesto 6 lanesfrom 3en Michelle to Harley Knox Blvd, including the bridge Street Improvements 11,000 5,000 Dec-20 Preliminary Engineering 18 Moreno Townsite Area Storm Drain & Street Improvements/ Alessandro Blvd to Drainage Facility Street Improvements 788 788 Feb-19 Discontinued; Measure A budget transferred to Moreno MDP Line F-18 and F-19 19 Property Acquisition for Street Purpose: Street Improvements 915 915 N/A On -going Annual Project 20 Reche Vista Dr Realignment/ Penis Blvd/ Heacock Stto NCL Street Improvements 872 872 Mar-18 Completed 21 Residential Traffic Management Program (Speed Humps) Street Improvements - - N/A On -going Annual Project 22 SR-60/ World Log istics Center Parkway Interchange Street Improvements 983,668 460,218 Mar-20 PA/ED 23 Heacock St Channel Improvements Drainage 15,871 11,000 May-19 Construction Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6of7 190 M EASURE A LOCALSim=tis AND ROADS PROGRAM 24 Hubbard S Sorm Drain Line H-1A Sage 3 Drainage - - Jun-18 Warranty walk 25 Moreno MDP Line R18 and F-19 Drainage 10,000 10,000 Dec-21 Preliminary Engineering 26 Moreno MDP Line K-1 Sage 3 K-4 Drainage 142,514 142,514 Dec-21 Design 27 Sinnymead - Flaming Arrow Drive Sorm Drain Drainage 75,000 - Jun-20 Design 28 SLnnymeadMDP Line B-16A Drainage 3,000 3,000 Unknown Preliminary Dedgn and Environmental Clearance 29 Dynamic Traveler Alert Message Boards (Pems Blvd south of Cactus Ave, Alessandro Blvd east of Fredrick a, CactusAve east of Frederick a)- Deploy 3 dynamic message signs/ changeable message dgnson new sign structures, including new electrical service connections Traffic Enhancements 15,000 1,000 Dec-19 Bidding for Construction 30 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon on CactusAve at Woodland Park Traffic Sgnals Apr-20 Awaiting full funding; On Hold 31 Systemic Safety Analysis Report Program Traffic Sg na Is 140,000 14,000 Aug-19 Work underway (study) 32 Traffic Sgnal Equipment/ Upgrades Traffic Sg na Is 25,000 25,000 N/A On -going Annual Project TOTAL $ 7,287,482 $ 5,332,233 Project 3atus Report FY18-19 Page 7of7 191 This page left intentionally blank. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF MURRIETA 193 This page left intentionally blank. CITY OF MURRIETA !� EC!_EuV f .1\. MAY t 31019 RIVERSIDE COUNTY May 6, 2019 TRANsPORTATI€ N COMMISSION Lorelle Moe -Luna, Planning and Programming Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Subject: Measure A Local Streets and Road Revenue Projections, Maintenance of Effort Certification, and Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (FY 2019/20-2023/24) Lorelle: Enclosed are the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Certification Statement, proposed Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and Project Status Report for the City of Murrieta for your consideration and approval. Since the City Council has not adopted a formal Capital Improvement Plan budget for FY 2019-23, the enclosed Five - Year CIP is based on staff recommendation and may be subject to change upon further consideration by the City Council. We will contact you if there are any changes requested by the City Council. The Measure A balance carried over to FY 2018/19 is largely due to several large projects that are expected to start construction later this year and into 2020. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter further, please contact me at (951) 461-6036 or bmoehlincamurrietacalov at your convenience. Sincerely, Bob Moehling, P.E. Director of Public Works / City Engineer Attachments cc: Kim Summers, City Manager Ivan Holler, Assistant City Manager Jeff Murphy, Director of Development Services Stacey Stevenson, Director of Administrative Services Jeff Hitch, Principal Civil Engineer a 1 Town Square • Murrieta, California 92562 phone: 951.304.CITY (2489) • web: www.MurrietaCA.gov 195 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Murrieta (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $595,702, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: At)4° 2019 ATTEST: SECRETARY 196 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: Murrieta Page: 1 of 5 Prepared by: Jeff Hitch, Principal Civil Engineer Phone #: 951-461-6076 Date: 5/6/2019 FY 2017-18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ FY 2018-19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: FY 2018-19 Project Status report expenses: Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects $ 8,515,899 2,561,000 (1,095,083) 9,981,816 2,577,000 12,558,816 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 2020-1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing Maintenance $ 2,000,000 $ - 2020-2 8079 Murrieta Hot Springs Widening- Margarita to Winchester Rd Widen from 4 to 6 lanes 3,000,000 1,500,000 2020-3 8137 Resurfacing - Slurry Seal Maintenance 3,700,000 3,700,000 2020-4 8257 Citywide Signal Mods Signal Modifications 150,000 75,000 2020-5 8283 Traffic Striping Modifications Traffic Striping 30,000 30,000 2020-6 8293 Sidewalk Replacement- Citywide based on inspection Sidewalk Improvements 300,000 300,000 2020-7 8330 Traffic Signal Optimization Traffic Signal 140,000 70,000 2020-8 8335 Jackson Ave Bridge (at Warm Springs Creek) Bridge Installation 30,000 30,000 2020-9 8389 Whitewood: Hunter to Clinton Keith Pavement widening - - 2020-10 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Management Pro Traffic Management 85,000 15,000 2020-11 8448 Meadowlark Lane Improvement- Baxter to Keller Roads Pavement Extension 10,000 2020-12 8456 Whitewood Extension- MHS Road to Jackson Ave Pavement Extension 100,000 - 2020-13 10012 Jackson Ave Median Construction 68,000 68,000 2020-14 13031 Warm Springs Parkway Construction 1,150,000 450,000 2020-15 COP 2007 for 15/215 MHS Interchange Debt Service 723,639 723,639 TOTALS $ 11,486,639 $ 6,961,639 197 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2020 - 2021 Agency: Murrieta Page: 2 of 5 Prepared by: Jeff Hitch, Principal Civil Engineer Phone #: 951-461-6076 Date: 5/6/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020-2021 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2020-2021 Projects: $ 5,597,177 2,641,000 8,238,177 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2020-2021 2021-1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing - Asphalt Maintenance $ 2,000,000 $ - 2021-2 8079 Murrieta Hot Springs Widening Widen from 4 to 6 lanes 4,000,000 2,700,000 2021-3 8137 Pavement Resurfacing - Slurry Maintenance 1,150,000 1,150,000 2021-4 8257 Signal Mods- Citywide Signal Modifications 150,000 75,000 2021-5 8293 Sidewalk Replacement - Citywide Sidewalk Improvements 100,000 100,000 2021-6 8330 Traffic Signal Optimizations Traffic Signal 140,000 70,000 2021-7 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Manage Traffic Management 85,000 15,000 2021-8 COP 2007 for 15/215 at MHS Int. Debt Service 728,239 728,239 TOTALS $ 8,353,239 $ 4,838,239 198 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2021 - 2022 Agency: Murrieta Page: 3 of 5 Prepared by: Jeff Hitch, Principal Civil Engineer Phone #: 951-461-6076 Date: 5/6/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021-2022 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2021-2022 Projects: $ 3,399,938 2,707,000 6,106,938 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2021-22 2022-1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing - Asphalt Maintenance $ 2,000,000 $ - 2022-2 8137 Pavement Resurfacing - Slurry Maintenance 1,150,000 1,150,000 2022-3 8257 Signal Mods- Citywide Signal Modifications 150,000 75,000 2022-4 8293 Sidewalk Replacement - Citywide Sidewalk Improvements 50,000 50,000 2022-5 8330 Traffic Signal Optimizations Traffic Signal 140,000 70,000 2022-6 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Manage Traffic Management 85,000 15,000 2022-7 COP 2007 for 15/215 at MHS Int. Debt Service 726,489 726,489 TOTALS $ 4,301,489 $ 2,086,489 199 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2022 - 2023 Agency: Murrieta Page: 4 of 5 Prepared by: Jeff Hitch, Principal Civil Engineer Phone #: 951-461-6076 Date: 5/6/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022-2023 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2022-2023 Projects: $ 4,020,449 2,775,000 6,795,449 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2022-2023 2023-1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing - Asphalt Maintenance $ 2,000,000 $ - 2023-2 8137 Pavement Resurfacing - Slurry Maintenance 1,150,000 1,150,000 2023-3 8257 Signal Mods- Citywide Signal Modifications 150,000 75,000 2023-4 8293 Sidewalk Replacement - Citywide Sidewalk Improvements 50,000 50,000 2023-5 8330 Traffic Signal Optimizations Traffic Signal 140,000 70,000 2023-6 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Manage Traffic Management 85,000 15,000 2023-7 COP 2007 for 15/215 at MHS Int. Debt Service 722,969 722,969 TOTALS $ 4,297,969 $ 2,082,969 200 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2023 - 2024 Agency: Murrieta Page: 5 of 5 Prepared by: Jeff Hitch, Principal Civil Engineer Phone #: 951-461-6076 Date: 5/6/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023-2024 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2023-2024 Projects: $ 4,712,480 2,844,000 7,556,480 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2023-24 2024-1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing - Asphalt Maintenance $ 2,000,000 $ - 2024-2 8137 Pavement Resurfacing - Slurry Maintenance 1,150,000 1,150,000 2024-3 8257 Signal Mods- Citywide Signal Modifications 150,000 75,000 2024-4 8293 Sidewalk Replacement - Citywide Sidewalk Improvements 50,000 50,000 2024-5 8330 Traffic Signal Optimizations Traffic Signal 140,000 70,000 2024-6 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Manage Traffic Management 85,000 15,000 2024-7 COP 2007 for 15/215 at MHS Int. Debt Service 722,969 722,969 TOTALS $ 4,297,969 $ 2,082,969 201 Agency: Murrieta Page: 1 of 1 Prepared by: Jeff Hitch, Principal Civil Engineer Phone #: 951-461-6076 Date: 5/6/2019 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2018-2019 "Completed Projects have been removed from the list Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing Maintenance $ 509,718 $ 43,556 Jun-19 Ongoing annual project 2 8079 Murrieta Hot Springs Widening- Margarita to Winchester Rd Widen from 4 to 6 lanes 230,000 220,000 Dec-20 Design, Acquire ROW, start Con 2020 3 8137 Resurfacing - Slurry Seal Maintenance - - Jun-19 Ongoing annual project 4 8257 Citywide Signal Mods Signal Modifications 102,283 420 Jun-19 Ongoing annual project 5 8283 Traffic Striping Modifications Traffic Striping 16 16 Jun-19 Ongoing annual project 6 8293 Sidewalk Replacement- Citywide based on inspection Sidewalk Improvements 15,000 15,000 Jun-19 Ongoing annual project 8 8330 Traffic Signal Optimization Traffic Signal 52,750 137 Jun-19 Ongoing annual project 9 8335 Jackson Ave Bridge (at Warm Springs Creek) Bridge Installation 25,000 10,000 Jul-14 Construction complete/ongoing mitigation 10 8389 Whitewood: Hunter to Clinton Keith Pavement widening - - Jun-19 Design, ROW Acq 11 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Management Pro Traffic Management 100,000 20,000 Jun-19 Ongoing annual project 12 8448 Meadowlark Lane Improvement- Baxter to Keller Roads Pavement Extension 13,330 3,654 Sep-17 Construction Completed 13 8456 Whitewood Extension- MHS Road to Jackson Ave Pavement Extension 4,000 4,000 Dec-19 TUMF Network Addition request, Design 14 10012 Jackson Ave Median Construction - - May-19 Start const. in Mar 2020 15 13031 Warm Springs Parkway Construction 50,000 50,000 Jun-20 Design, start Con 2020 16 COP 2007 for 15/215 MHS Interchange Debt Service 728,300 728,300 Jun-27 Construction complete / Annual Debt Service TOTALS $ 1,830,397 $ 1,095,083 202 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF NORCO 203 This page left intentionally blank. CITY OF NORCO CITY HALL • 2870 CLARK AVENUE • NORCO CA 92860 • (951) 735-3900 • www.norco.ca.us • II III a May 6, 2019 Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 RE: 2019 — 2024 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Five -Year Capital Improvement Program Plan Dear Ms. Trevino: The City of Norco is pleased to submit for your consideration and approval our Five - Year Measure "A" Capital Improvement Program Plan projections, commencing with Fiscal Year 2019-20. We have included for your records a copy of the City of Norco approved Five -Year Measure A Capital Improvement Program Fund, and the Annual Certification of the City's "Maintenance of Effort" document signed by City Manager, Andy Okoro. If you have any additional questions, regarding the City of Norco 2019 submittal, please contact me at 951-270-5678. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance with the City of Norco's planned expenditures for maintenance and capital improvements to our local streets and roads. Respectfully, ad Blais Director of Public Works City of Norco Attachments: City of Norco Five -Year CIP Measure "A" 5-Year CIP Maintenance of Effort Letter CITY COUNCIL ROBIN GRUNDMEYER Mayor BERWIN HANNA Mayor Pro Tem KEVIN BASH Council Member TEO HOFFMAN Council Member GREG NEWTON Council Member 205 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Norco (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $22,536, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 1" LetAA -� , 2019 fr"0477 ATTEST: ITY MANAGER r SECRETARY 206 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: NORCO Prepared by: CHAD BLAIS Phone # : 951-270-5678 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 1,686,195 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 715,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (1,866,902) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 534,293 Estimated FY 2019/ 20 Measure A Allocation: 713,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 1,247,293 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Crestview Ave - Sxth St to North Complete $ 750,000 $ 750,000 Dr Reconstruct Serra Ave -Sixth St to end of cul- Complete 2020-02 de -sac Reconstruct $ 450,000 $ 450,000 TOTAL $ 1,200,000 $ 1,200,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 207 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: NORCO Prepared by: CHAD BLAIS Phone # : 951-270-5678 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 47,293 731,000 778,293 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 Norconian Dr- Fifth St to Norco Dr Reconstruction $ 775,000 $ 775,000 2021-01 TOTAL $ 775,000 $ 775,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 208 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: NORCO Prepared by: CHAD BLAIS Phone # : 951-270-5678 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 3,293 749,000 752,293 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 Trotter Trail -Second St to Cul-de- sac Belmont Cr-Kips Corner Rd west to cul-de-sac Ranset Ct -Shadow Canyon Cir to Cul-de-sac Quiet Hill Ct -Alhambra St to End Fortuna Rd -Serra Ave to End Reconstruct Grind and Overlay Grind and Overlay Reconstruct Grind and Overlay $ 285,000 75,000 130,000 160,000 85,000 $ 285,000 75,000 130,000 160,000 85,000 2022-01 2022-02 2022-03 2022-04 2022-05 TOTAL $ 735,000 $ 735,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 209 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: NORCO Prepared by: CHAD BLAIS Phone # : 951-270-5678 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 17,293 768,000 785,293 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 Slyer Cloud Cir- Norco Drto Cul- Grind and Overlay $ 125,000 $ 125,000 2023-01 d e -sa c Slyer Cloud Cir- Broken Lance Dr 160,000 160,000 2023-02 to Norco Dr Grind and Overlay Broken Twig Dr- Broken Lance Dr 240,000 240,000 2023-03 to Norco Dr Grind and Overlay Vine St -Corydon to East Cul-de- 200,000 200,000 2023-04 sac Grind and Overlay TOTAL $ 725,000 $ 725,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 210 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: NORCO Prepared by: CHAD BLAIS Phone # : 951-270-5678 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 60,293 787,000 847,293 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 River Ridge Cir-Alhambra St to Rim Crest Dr Reconstruct $ 600,000 $ 600,000 2024-01 TOTAL $ 600,000 $ 600,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 211 M EASURE A LDCALSIFihhIS AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJEC TSTA RIS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: NORCO Prepared by: CHAD BLAIS Phone # : 951-270-5678 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Bluff St - River Rd to Vine St Rehab and Overlay $ 250,000 $ 234,496 Dec-18 Completed 2019-02 Hamner - Third St to Fourth St Rehab and Overlay 750,000 650,000 Feb-19 Completed 2019-03 Ped ley -Seventh to Sxth Rehab and Overlay 210,000 210,000 Jun-19 In Construction Project moved to 2019-04 Pedley- Seventh to 6gth Rehab and Overlay 250,000 - Sep-19 alternate funding source 2019-05 Corona Ave - First St to Second St Rehab and Overlay 300,000 292,906 Completed 2019-13 Crestview Ave - Sxth to North Complete Reconstruct 600,000 20,000 Nov-19 In Construction 2019-14 Hamner -Hidden Valley to City Boundary Rehab and Overlay 159,500 159,500 Nov-18 Completed 2019-15 Citywide Slurry Seal Locations Slurry Seal 300,000 300,000 Apr-19 Completed TOTAL $ 2,819,500 $ 1,866,902 Note: Projects2019-06 thru 2019-012 were completed, billed and audited in FY2017-18. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6of6 212 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF PALM DESERT 213 This page left intentionally blank. CITY Of PIIIM DESERT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-061I info@cityofpal ndesert.org May 3, 2019 Jenny Chan Management Analyst, Planning and Programming Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, California 92502-2208 Subject: Measure A Capital Improvement Program Dear Jenny, p IV E \II 1a. MAN 131019 R1V€RSIDE COUNTY rRANSPORTATK)N COMMISSM. Enclosed for Commission consideration is the City of Palm Desert's proposed 2019/2020 — 2023/2024 Five -Year Measure A Capital Improvement Program, as well as Project Status Report for Fiscal Year 2018/19, and the signed Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement. Please note that the Portola 1-10 Interchange Project has a carryover of $15,110,660 in Fiscal Year 19/20; however, the project is currently in the design phase. The City expects the construction phase to begin before the end of 2020. This will significantly reduce the City's high carryover amount. The Five -Year Program will be reviewed in the near future by our City Council. If the City Council makes any changes to the program, a revised version will be submitted to you for approval. If no changes are made, please treat this as the official submittal. If you have any questions, please contact me or Bertha A. Gonzalez, Accounting Specialist, at (760) 346-0611, extension 473, or at bgonzalez@cityofpalmdesert.orq. Sincerely, a t Tom Garcia, P.E. Director of Public Works Enclosure cc: Lauri Aylaian, City Manager Janet M. Moore, Director of Finance J. Luis Espinoza, Assistant Director of Finance i� PRIMED ON RECYCLED PAPER FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Palm Desert (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $2,398,146, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 2019 ATTEST: CITY MANAGER 216 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: PALM DESERT Prepared by: Tom Garcia, P.E., Director of Public Works Phone # : 760-346-0611 Date: May 3, 2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 21,970,019 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 2,948,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (672,658) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 24,245,361 Estimated FY 2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 2,842,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 27,087,361 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 Portola Interchange at I-10 2020-01 Estimated carryoverFY18/19 Interchange Project $ 79,800,000 $ 5,000,000 $15,110,660 Cook Street Widening - Phase II, Fred 2020-02 Waring to Frank Snatra Street Widening 9,665,500 3,655,500 Estimated carryover FY 18/19 Project $3,655,500 Citywide Pavement Management Pro g ra m 2020-03 Estimated carryoverFY18/19 Maintenance Project 7,478,855 5,500,000 $3,000,000 FY 19/20 request $2,500,000 Citywide Traffic Sgnal Hardware Upgrades Street Improvement 2020-04 Estimated carryoverFY18/19 1,087,064 1,012,064 $612,064 Project FY 19/ 20 request $400, 000 Citywide Street Striping and Lane Improvements 2020-05 Estimated carryoverFY18/19 Maintenance Project 757,293 757,293 $432,293 FY 19/20 request $325,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 8 217 2020-06 2020-07 2020-08 2020-09 2020-10 2020-11 2020-12 2020-13 2020-14 2020-15 M EASURE A LOCALSIFatIS AND ROADS PROGRAM Jefferson Street Interchange Project @ 1-10 Estimated carryover FY 18/19 $117,795 Triple Left Tumsat Washington and Fred Waring Estimated carryover FY18/19 $500,00 Citywide ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Estimated carryoverFY18/19 $100,043 FY 19/20 request $50,000 Citywide Bridge Inspection & Repair Pro g ra m Estimated carryoverFY18/19 $200,000 FY 19/20 request $100,000 Gerald Ford East of Cook Improvements Estimated carryoverFY18/19 $265,000 Washington Street Traffic Upgrade Project, Palm Royale to 42nd Estimated carryover FY 18/19 $150,000 Traffic Sgnal Modification - Hwy 111 at Parkview / Pa inters Path Estimated carryover FY18/19 $45,384 San Pablo Improvements, Hwy 111 to Magnesia Falls Estimated carryover FY 18/19 $2,655,967 Traffic Management Center FY 19/20 request $210,000 Paseo Master Plan Roadway Improvements FY 19/20 request $1,200,000 Interchange Project Street Improvement Project Maintenance Project Maintenance Project Maintenance Project Street Improvement Project Maintenance Project Street Improvement Project Street Improvement Project Street Improvement Project TOTAL 312,500 500,000 235,043 300,000 265,000 150,000 50,000 15,000,000 960,000 1,450,000 $ 118,011,255 117,795 500,000 150,043 300,000 265,000 150,000 45,384 2,655,967 210,000 1,200,000 $ 21,519,046 FY 2019-20 Page 2 of 8 218 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: PALM DESERT Prepared by: Tom Garcia, P.E., Director of Public Works Phone # : 760-346-0611 Date: May 3, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 5,568,315 2,913,000 8,481,315 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/21 Citywide Pavement Management Program Citywide Street Striping and Lane Improvements Citywide Traffic Signal Hardware Upgrades Citywide ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Citywide Bridge Inspection & Repair Program Cook Street Widening - Phase II Maintenance Project Maintenance Project Street Improvement Project Street Improvement Project Maintenance Project Widening Project $ 3,500,000 325,000 400,000 75,000 100,000 9,665,500 $ 2,500,000 325,000 400,000 50,000 100,000 2,400,000 2021-01 2021-02 2021-03 2021-04 2021-05 2021-06 TOTAL $ 14,065,500 $ 5,775,000 FY 2020-21 Page 3 of 8 219 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/ 22 Agency: PALM DESERT Prepared by: Tom Garcia, P.E., Director of Public Works Phone # : 760-346-0611 Date: May 3, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 2,706,315 2,986,000 5,692,315 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 Citywide Pavement Management Program Citywide Street Striping and Lane Improvements Citywide Traffic Signal Hardware Upgrades Citywide ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Citywide Bridge Inspection & Repair Program Cook Street Widening - Phase II Maintenance Project Maintenance Project Street Improvement Project Street Improvement Project Maintenance Project Widening Project $ 3,500,000 325,000 300,000 75,000 100,000 9,665,500 $ 2,500,000 325,000 300,000 50,000 100,000 2,000,000 2022-01 2022-02 2022-03 2022-04 2022-05 2022-06 TOTAL $ 13,965,500 $ 5,275,000 FY 2021-22 Page 4of8 220 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: PALM DESERT Prepared by: Tom Garcia, P.E., Director of Public Works Phone # : 760-346-0611 Date: May 3, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 417,315 3,061,000 3,478,315 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 Citywide Pavement Management Program Citywide Street Striping and Lane Improvements Citywide Traffic Signal Hardware Upgrades Citywide ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Citywide Bridge Inspection & Repair Program Maintenance Project Maintenance Project Street Improvement Project Street Improvement Project Maintenance Project $ 3,500,000 325,000 300,000 75,000 100,000 $ 2,500,000 325,000 300,000 50,000 100,000 2023-01 2023-02 2023-03 2023-04 2023-05 TOTAL $ 4,300,000 $ 3,275,000 FY 2022-23 Page 5 of 8 221 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: PALM DESERT Prepared by: Tom Garcia, P.E., Director of Public Works Phone # : 760-346-0611 Date: May 3, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 203,315 3,138,000 3,341,315 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/24 Citywide Pavement Management Program Citywide Street Striping and Lane Improvements Citywide Traffic Signal Hardware Upgrades Citywide ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Citywide Bridge Inspection & Repair Program Maintenance Project Maintenance Project Street Improvement Project Street Improvement Project Maintenance Project $ 3,500,000 325,000 300,000 75,000 100,000 $ 2,500,000 325,000 300,000 50,000 100,000 2024-01 2024-02 2024-03 2024-04 2024-05 TOTAL $ 4,300,000 $ 3,275,000 FY 2023-24 Page 6 of 8 222 M EASURE A LOCALSIFatIS AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: PALM DESERT Prepared by: Tom Garcia, P.E., Director of Public Works Phone # : 760-346-0611 Date: May 6, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds 6cpended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 2019-06 2019-07 Portola Interchange at Interstate 10 Cook Street Widening -Phase II, Fred Waring to Frank Snatra Citywide Pavement Management Pro g ra m Citywide Traffic Sgnal Hardware Upgrades Citywide Street Striping and Lane Improvements @if10rson Street Interchange Project Triple Left Tumsat Washington and Fred Waring Interchange Project Street Widening Project Maintenance Project Street Improvement Project Maintenance Project Interchange Project Street Improvement Project $ 71,993,000 9,665,500 4,000,000 695,170 432,293 312,500 500,000 $ 333,712 320,737 8,209 Sept 2022 2022 2019 2019 Oct 2019 TBD Indio 2021 design phase scoping phase II working on specs scoping out to bid Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 7of8 223 2019-08 2019-09 2019-10 2019-11 2019-12 2019-13 2019-14 2019-15 Citywide ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Citywide Bridge Inspection Program Gerald Ford East of Cook Improvements Washington Street Traffic Upgrade Project, Palm Royale to 42nd Citywide Interconnect System Improvement Project Citywide Controller Cabinet Assembly Upgrades Program Traffic Sgnal Modification - Hwy 111 at Parkview / Pa inters Path San Pablo Improvements, Hwy 111 to Magnesia Falls M EASURE A LOCALSIFatIS AND ROADS PROGRAM Maintenance Project Maintenance Project Maintenance Project Street Improvement Project Street Improvement Project Maintenance Project Maintenance Project Street Improvement Project 160,043 200,000 265,000 150,000 293,000 336,000 50,000 15,000,000 10,000 TBD TBD Dec 2019 2020 Jan 2020 Dec 2019 Jan 2020 May 2020 scoping reviewing Caltrans Report finalizing agreement finalizing agreement included with traffic signal hardware included with traffic signal hardware To bid in May construction awarded TOTAL $ 104,052,506 $ 672,658 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 8of8 224 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF PALM SPRINGS 225 This page left intentionally blank. City of Palm Springs Engineering Services Department 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way • Palm Springs, California 92262 Tel: (760) 322-8380 • Fax: (760) 323 8207 • Web: www.palmspringsca.gov April 30, 2019 Ms. Jenny Chan Management Analyst, Planning and Programming Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502-22083 RE: Measure "A" Local Street & Road Program City of Palm Springs Annual Five -Year Measure "A" CIP (Fiscal Year 2019/20 - 2023/24) Dear Ms. Chan: Enclosed, at RCTC's request, is the City of Palm Springs' Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Certification Statement, Project Status Report for CIP Projects in FY 2018/19, and proposed Local Measure "A" Five -Year CIP Plan for fiscal year 2019/2020 through 2023/2024. The City participates in the MSHCP and TUMF programs as required to participate in the Measure "A" Program. The following projects were completed or did not use Measure A funds and have been removed from the 5-year CIP. 1) 50333 San Rafael Widening Virginia to Indian Canyon Dr 2) 50348 -- Palm Canyon Pedestrian Enhancements 3) 50349 — Indian Canyon Pedestrian Enhancements 4) 50312 Pavement Condition Survey 5) 50402 — Vista Chino at Miraleste Traffic Signal 6) 50347 -- N. Palm Canyon Dr. at Via Escuela Traffic Signal If you have any questions, please call me at (760) 322-8380 or Joel Montalvo at (760) 323-8253 ext. 8339. Marcus L. Fuller, MPA, PE, PLS Assistant City Manager/City Engineer cc: ale 227 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Palm Springs (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $1,498,732, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: lirrtil 2-c .2019 avi H. ' ea • y City Manager ATTEST: iterAnthony Mejia, MMC City Clerk 228 M EASURE A LOCALbimttlb AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: PALM SPRINGS Prepared by JoelMontalvo Phone #: 760-322-8339 Date: 2/27/2019 FY2017/18Audited Measure A Balance: $ FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 5,876,514 2,232,000 (2,928,900) 5,179,614 2,240,000 Estimated Measure A Available forFY2019/20 Projects:$ 7,419,614 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Annual Surry Seal - City Wide Road Maintenance $ 1,000,000 $ 500,000 2020-02 Bridge Repairs -City Wide Bridge Maintenance 100,000 50,000 Road Widening & Bridge 2020-03 Indian Canyon Dr. UPRR Bridge 23,806,000 200,000 Replacement S Palm Canyon Dr. Bridge - Palm 2020-04 New Bridge 4,875,000 10,000 Canyon Wash 2020-05 Traffic Safety Projects- City Wide Traffic Improvements 250,000 250,000 2020-06 Annual Asphalt Overlay Road Maintenance 4,000,000 500,000 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement- 2020-07 Street Improvements 10,000 10,000 CVAG 2020-08 Curb & Gutter Repair Road Maintenance 50,000 50,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 8 229 2020-09 2020-10 M EASURE A LOCALSimttlb AND ROADS PROGRAM Bogert Trail Bridge Rehabilitation (Year 4/5 of Monitoring) Ramon Road Widening 2020-11 Vista Chino Bridge @WhitewaterRiver 2020-12 2020-13 2020-14 2020-15 2020-16 2020-17 E Palm Canyon Dr. Bridge @Palm Canyon Wash S Palm Canyon Dr. Bridge @Tahquitz Creek Tahquitz Creek Levee Certification Local Measure A Bond Payment (Year4 of 7) Gene Autry Trail Second Left Turn Lane Vista Chino Jefferson Street / 1-10Interchange Brid g e Widening/Rehabilitation Bridge/Roadway Widening New Bridge Bridge Rehabilitation Bridge Replacement Road Maintenance Road Maintenance Traffic Improvements Expanded Freeway Interchange 5,000,000 32,500,000 95,000,000 9,100,000 9,170,000 2,000,000 6,800,000 500,000 50,000,000 15,000 100,000 50,000 10,000 150,000 10,000 1,102,000 100,000 50,000 TOTAL $ 244,161,000 $ 3,157,000 FY 2019-20 Page 2of8 230 M EASURE A LOCALSiNttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: PALM SPRINGS Prepared by: Joel Montalvo Phone # : 760-322-8339 Date: 2/ 27/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 4,262,614 2,296,000 6,558,614 Item No. Project Name / limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 Annual Sum,/ Seal Indian Canyon Dr. UPRR Bridge Widening S Palm Canyon Dr. Bridge Palm Canyon Wash Annual Asphalt Overlay Mid Valley Parkway Reimbursement-CVAG Curb & Gutter Repair Bogert Trail Bridge Rehabilitation (Year 4/5 of Monitoring) Ramon Road Widening Vista Chino Bridge @Whitewater River E Palm Canyon Dr. Bridge @ Palm Canyon Wash S Palm Canyon Dr. Bridge @ TahquitzCreek Local Measure A Bond Payment (Year 5 of 7) Road Maintenance Road Widening & Bridge Replacement New Bridge Road Maintenance Street Improvements Road Maintenance Bridge Widening/Rehabilitation Bridge/Roadway Widening New Bridge Bridge Rehabilitation Bridge Replacement Road Maintenance $ 1,000,000 23,806,000 4,875,000 4,000,000 10,000 50,000 5,000,000 32,000,000 95,000,000 9,503,000 9,170,000 6,800,000 $ 500,000 490,000 100,000 500,000 10,000 50,000 15,000 100,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 1,102,000 2021-01 2021-02 2021-03 2021-04 2021-05 2021-06 2021-07 2021-08 2021-09 2021-10 2021-11 2021-12 TOTAL $ 191,214,000 $ 3,067,000 FY 2020-21 Page 3of8 231 M EASURE A LOCALbIIlLtib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: PALM SPRINGS Prepared by: Joel Montalvo Phone # : 760-322-8339 Date: 2/ 27/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2021/22 Measure AAllocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 3,491,614 2,353,000 5,844,614 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021 / 22 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement-CVAG Bogert Trail Bridge Rehabilitation (Year5/5 of Monitoring) Annual Asphalt Overlay Vista Chino Bridge @Whitewater River Local Measure A Bond Payment (Year 6 of 7) Street Improvements Bridge Widening/Rehabilitation Road Maintenance New Bridge Road Maintenance $ 1,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 95,000,000 6,800,000 $ 10,000 15,000 500,000 100,000 1,102,000 2022-01 2022-02 2022-03 2022-04 2022-05 TOTAL $ 111,800,000 $ 1,727,000 FY 2021-22 Page 4 of 8 232 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: PALM SPRINGS Prepared by: Joel Montalvo Phone # : 760-322-8339 Date: 2/ 27/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 4,117,614 2,412,000 6,529,614 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 Annual 9urry Seal Road Maintenance $ 800,000 $ 50,000 2023-02 Annual Asphalt Overlay Road Maintenance 4,000,000 50,000 2023-03 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement-CVAG Street Improvements 10,000 10,000 2023-04 Curb & Gutter Repair Road Maintenance 50,000 50,000 2023-05 Local Measure A Bond Payment Road Maintenance 6,800,000 1,102,000 (Year 7 of 7) TOTAL $ 11,660,000 $ 1,262,000 FY 2022-23 Page 5of8 233 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: PALM SPRINGS Prepared by: Joel Montalvo Phone # : 760-322-8339 Date: 2/ 27/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 5,267,614 2,472,000 7,739,614 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Annual 9urry Seal Road Maintenance $ 800,000 $ 50,000 2024-02 Annual Asphalt Overlay Road Maintenance 4,000,000 50,000 2024-03 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement-CVAG Street Improvements 10,000 10,000 2024-04 Curb & Gutter Repair Road Maintenance 50,000 50,000 TOTAL $ 4,860,000 $ 160,000 FY 2023-24 Page 6of8 234 M EASURE A LOCAL SIKLLIS AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJEC TSTATUS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: PALM 9:RINGS Prepared by: Joel Montalvo 760-322-8339 2/ 27/ 2019 Phone #: Date: Item No. Project Name/Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Estthru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Annual Burry Seal -City Wide Road Maintenance $ 1,600,000 $ 700,000 Sept. 2018 Annual Project 2019-02 Bridge Repairs -City Wide Bridge Maintenance 100,000 1,000 On -Going On -Going Indian Canyon Dr. UPRR Bridge Road Widening & December Design, R/W & Util 2019-03 23,806,000 20,000 Widening Bridge Replacement 2023 Phase 2019-04 S Palm Canyon Dr. Bridge -Palm New Bridge 4,875,000 1,000 December Design, R/W Phase Canyon Wash 2022 2019-05 Traffic Safety Projects -City Wide Traffic Improvements 325,000 15,000 On -Going On -Going 2019-06 Annual Asphalt Overlay -City Wide Road Maintenance 4,000,000 853,000 Sept.2018 On -Going 2019-07 Mid -Valley Parkway Street Improvements 10,500 10,500 On -Going On -Going Reimbursement-CVAG 2019-08 Curb & Gutter Repair -City Wide Road Maintenance 57,000 50,000 On -Going On -Going 2019-09 Ramon Road Widening Bridge/Roadway 32,500,000 10,000 December Design, R/W Phase Widening 2022 Brid g e 2019-10 Bogert Trail Bridge Rehabilitation Widening/Rehabilitatio 5,000,000 7,000 3/1/2016 Year4 of 5 (Year4/5 of Monitoring) n 2019-11 Traffic MgmtCenter- Citywide Traffic Sgnal 2,100,000 17,500 April 2018 Completed Interconnect Improvements Project Rates Report FY18-19 Page 7of8 235 2019-12 2019-13 2019-14 2019-15 2019-16 2019-17 2019-18 2019-19 2019-20 2019-21 2019-22 Agua Caliente Museum Roadway/Hermosa Dr. Vista Chino Bridge @Whitewater River Pavement Condition arrvey E Palm Canyon Dr. Bridge @Palm Canyon Wash S Palm Canyon Dr. Bridge @ TahquitzCreek Jefferson Street / 1-10Interchange (Palm Springspayment) Local Measure A Bond Payment Gene Autry Trail Second Left Tum Lane @Vista Chino Vista Chino at Via Miraleste Traffic Sgnal N. Palm Canyon Dr. at Via Esc uela Traffic Sgnal N. Palm Canyon Dr. Pedestrian Crosswalks M EA SURE A LOCAL SIKLLIS AND ROADS PROGRAM Roadway Improvements New Bridge Road Maintenance Bridge Rehabilitation Bridge Replacement Expanded Freeway Interchange Road Maintenance Traffic Improvements New Traffic Signal New Traffic Sgnal Pedestrian Improvements 1,300,000 95, 000, 000 100,000 9,100,000 9,170,000 50,000,000 6,800,000 450,000 550,000 630,000 400,000 3,200 20,000 77,500 2,000 3,100 16,100 1,102, 000 15,000 5,000 December 2017 December 2022 Jan-19 Dec-21 Dec-21 December 2018 Year4 of 7 Oct-19 Post Construction Design, R/W Phase Completed Environmental Phase Environmental Phase Construction Year4of7 Construction December Design/ 2019 Construction December Design/ 2019 Construction Dec-19 Construction TOTAL $ 247,873,500 $ 2,928,900 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 8of8 236 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF PERRIS 237 This page left intentionally blank. CITY OF PERRIS HABIB MOTLAGH, CITY ENGINEER April 18, 2019 Jenny Chan Management Analyst, Planning and Programming Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502 Re: Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads CIP FY 2019/20 — 2023/24 Annual Reports The City of Perris is providing the following documentation per your request of February 12, 2018: 1. City of Perris Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) FY 2019/20 — 2023/24; 2. Project Status Report for FY 2018/19 CIP Projects; and 3. Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Signed Certification. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, abib Motlagh City Engineer CC: Richard Belmudez, City Manager Ron Carr, Interim Finance Director DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING 24 SOUTH D STREET, SUITE 100, PERRIS, GA 92570 TEL.: (951) 943 6504 FAX: (951) 943 8416 239 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Perris (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $1,218,470, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: q /619 , 2019 ichard delmudez, CI MA AGER ATTEST: SECRETARY 240 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/20 Agency: PERRIS Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 4,365,851 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 1,718,000 FY2018/19 Project Status Report expenses: (1,740,000) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 4,343,851 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 2,003,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 6,346,851 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maint Program $ 1,500,000 $ 1,000,000 2020-02 Annual Citywide Pothole Repairs Pavement Maint Pro g ra m 250,000 5,000 2020-03 Goetz Rd Intersections(ElIisAve to Perris Valley Channel) Widening & Pavement Rehab 8392,131 500,000 2020-04 Nuevo Bridge Widening and Road Improvements(Murrieta Rd to Dunlap Ave) Widening & Pavement Rehab 10,535,993 239,809 2020-05 Unpaved Streets& Alleys New Pavement 200,000 125,000 2020-06 Ramona Exwy Pavement Rehab (Webster Ave to Rider St) Widening & Pavement Rehab 2,000,000 1,000,000 2020-07 Citywide Pedestrian Improvements Pedestrian Improvements 600,000 300,000 TOTAL $ 23,478,124 $ 3,169,809 **Fund Balance ishigherthan normal due to delays in FY18/19with the Goetz Rd Improvements, Nuevo Rd Bridge, and Ramona Exwy Pavement Rehab projects. Construction for these projectsare planned to move forward in FY19/20 and the Measure A fund balance will be reduced to normal levels. FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 241 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: PERRIS Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 3,177,042 2,053,000 5,230,042 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maint Pro g ra m $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 2021-02 Annual Citywide Pothole Repairs Pavement Maint Pro g ra m 100,000 100,000 2021-03 Downtown Pavement Rehab Pavement Maint Pro g ra m 1,500,000 500,000 2021-04 Ramona Exwy Pavement Rehab (Webster Ave to Rider St) Widening & Pavement Rehab 2,000,000 1,000,000 2021-05 Citywide Sdewalk Improvements Pedestrian Improvements 400,000 150,000 TOTAL $ 5,500,000 $ 3,250,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 242 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: PERRIS Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 1,980,042 2,104,000 4,084,042 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maint Pro g ra m $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 2022-02 Annual Citywide Pothole Repairs Pavement Maint Pro g ra m 100,000 100,000 2022-03 A Street Widening (4th Street to Nuevo Rd) Widening & Pavement Rehab 2,000,000 1,000,000 2022-04 RedlandsAvenue Widening (Placentia Ave to Rider St) Widening & Pavement Rehab 2,500,000 500,000 TOTAL $ 6,100,000 $ 3,100,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 243 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: PERRIS Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 984,042 2,157,000 3,141,042 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maint Pro g ram $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 2023-02 Annual Citywide Pothole Repairs Pavement Maint Pro g ra m 100,000 100,000 2023-03 Perris Blvd Widening & Rehab (4th a to 11th Si) Widening & Pavement Rehab 1,500,000 500,000 TOTAL $ 3,600,000 $ 2,600,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 244 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: PERRIS Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 541,042 2,211,000 2,752,042 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maint Pro g ram $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 2024-02 Annual Citywide Pothole Repairs Pavement Maint Pro g ra m 100,000 100,000 TOTAL $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 245 M EASURE A LOCAL S1REEfS AND ROADS PRO GRAM PRO JEC T STA 11JS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: PERRIS Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maint Program $ 1,375,000 $ 1,375,000 On -Going On -Going Program 2019-02 Goetz Rd Intersections(DlisAve to Perris Valley Channel) Widening & Pavement Rehab g392,131 - 2020 Design & R/W Underway *2019-03 Rider Street & Storm Drain Crossing Storm Drain &Pedestrian Improvements 726,000 - 2020 Pending SCEPoIe Relocation 2019-04 Annual Citywide Pothole Repairs Pavement Maint Program 225,000 225,000 On -Going On -Going Program 2019-05 Unpaved Street & Alleys New Pavement 200,000 65,000 On -Going On -Going Program 2019-06 Ramona Exwy Pavement Rehab (Webster Ave to Rider St) Pavement Maint Program 2,000,000 - 2020 Preliminary Engineering 2019-07 Annual I-215 Maintenance (Landscape) Landscape Maint 50,000 - 2018 Complete 2019-08 Nuevo Bridge Widening and Road Improvements(Murrieta Rd to Dunlap Ave) Widening & Pavement Rehab 10,535,993 - 2020 Design & R/W Underway *2019-09 Sidewalk/Bike Path Install Pedestrian Improvements 35,000 35,000 2019 Complete *2019-10 Sidewalk & Pedestrian Ramps Pedestrian Improvements 263,713 40,000 2019 Complete *2019-11 Citywide Pedestrian Improvements Pedestrian Improvements 691,126 - 2019 Plans Underway TOTAL $ 24,493,963 $ 1,740,000 *Per FY2018/19Amendment No.1 request (Dated 4/18/2019),the City's FY 18/19 CIP includes Measure Afunding forthe projectsindicated above. These projectswere not on last year's5-year plan review. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6 of 6 246 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE 247 This page left intentionally blank. CITY OF R NC MIRAGE Cf. May 6, 2019 Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County Regional Complex, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Re: FY 2020-2024 Measure "A" Local Street and Roads Capital Improvement Plan Dear Ms. Trevino: Attached are the Local Streets and Roads Program for Measure "A" Funds for FY 2020- 2024, project status report for prior year Plan (FY 2018/2019) and the FY 2019/2020 Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement. The City's maintenance of effort for FY 2019/2020 is $1,395,378, which exceeds our established maintenance of effort requirement of $674,811. The City's five-year Capital Improvement Program totals $60,885,000 and identifies Measure "A" local funds for the five-year plan totaling $7,072,000. The Measure A Fund Balance is projected to be $617,429 as a result of the 5-year Program. The City currently carries a balance of approximately $2,617,000 in the Measure "A" Local Fund account. Therefore, with current and projected future allocations, adequate funds appear to be available for the plan. Attached is the City's status report for our prior year Plan FYE June 30, 2019. Please feel free to call me at (760) 770-3224 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Jesse' Eckenroth Director of Public Works Enclosures: Measure "A" FY 2020-2024 Capital Improvement Plan Project Status Report FY 2018/2019 FY 2019/2020 MOE Certification Statement ADMINISTRATION DEVELOPMCNT SERVICES FINANCE HOUSING' PUBLIC LIBRARY PUBLIC WORKS Tel. 1.760.324.4511 Tel. 1.760.328.2266 Tel. 1.760.770.3207 Tel. 1,760,770.3210 Tel. 1.760.341.7323 Tel, 1.760.770.3224 Fax.1.760.324.8830 Fax.1.760.324.9851 Fax.1.760.324.0528 Fax.1.760.324.1617 Fax.1.760.341.5213 Fax.1.760.770.3261 69-825 I-FIGI4WAY 111 / RANCHO MIRAGE, CA 92270 www.RanchoMirageCA.gov www.RelaxRanchoMirage.corn r7< FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Rancho Mirage (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No, 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $674,811, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: ivvui to , 2019 CITY MANAGER ATTEST: SECRETARY 250 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: RANCHO MIRAGE Prepared by: William Enos Phone # : 760-770-3224 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 2,153,611 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 973,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (509,182) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 2,617,429 Estimated FY 2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 965,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 3,582,429 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays, Pavement Rehab. and striping on variouspublic streets identified by Micro Paver Preventive Maintenance $ 1,561,000 $ 1,561,000 2020-02 Frank Snatra Bridge at Whitewater Channel (PS&E) Replace Low Water Crossing 52,800,000 408,000 2020-03 Traffic Signal Coordination Grant Design and Construction Traffic Signal Coordination 2,696,000 660,000 TOTAL $ 57,057,000 $ 2,629,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 251 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: RANCHO MIRAGE Prepared by: William Enos Phone # : 760-770-3224 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 953,429 989,000 1,942,429 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/21 2021-01 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays, Pavement Rehab. and striping on variouspublic streetsidentified by Micro Paver Preventive Maintenance $ 828,000 $ 828,000 2021-02 Frank Snatra Bridge at WhitewaterChannel (PS&E) Replace Low Water Crossing 52,800,000 115,000 TOTAL $ 53,628,000 $ 943,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 252 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: RANCHO MIRAGE Prepared by: William Enos Phone # : 760-770-3224 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 999,429 1,014,000 2,013,429 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays, Pavement Rehab. and striping on variouspublic streetsidentified by Micro Paver Preventive Maintenance $ 1,000,000 $ 750,000 2022-02 Frank Snatra Bridge at WhitewaterChannel (PS&E) Replace Low Water Crossing 52,800,000 750,000 TOTAL $ 53,800,000 $ 1,500,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3 of 6 253 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: RANCHO MIRAGE Prepared by: William Enos Phone # : 760-770-3224 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 513,429 1,039,000 1,552,429 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays, Pavement Rehab. and striping on various public streets identified by Micro Paver Preventive Maintenance $ 1,000,000 $ 500,000 2023-02 Frank Sinatra Bridge at Whitewater Channel (PS&E) Replace Low Water Crossing 52,800,000 500,000 TOTAL $ 53,800,000 $ 1,000,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 254 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: RANCHO MIRAGE Prepared by: William Enos Phone # : 760-770-3224 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 552,429 1,065,000 1,617,429 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays, Pavement Rehab. and striping on various public streets identified by Micro Paver Preventive Maintenance $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 TOTAL $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 255 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PRO JECTSTA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: RANCHO MIRAGE Prepared by: William Enos Phone # : 760-770-3224 Date: 5/6/2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays, Pavement Rehab. and striping on variouspublic streets identified by Micro Paver Preventive Maintenance $ 1,400,000 $ 147,699 Sep. 2019 Ongoing -Crack Seal complete, Surry to follow. 2019-02 Frank Snatra Bridge at Whitewater Channel (PS&E) Replace Low Water Crossing 3,097,000 125,792 June 2021 Ongoing- PS&Ein final design. 2019-03 Traffic Sgnal Coordination Grant Design and Construction Traffic Sgnal Coordination 2,696,000 235,691 Dec 2019 Ongoing- PS&E complete, waiting for Caltrans review. TOTAL $ 7,193,000 $ 509,182 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6of6 256 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF RIVERSIDE 257 This page left intentionally blank. C ri t r!Arts &Z Innovation April 18, 2019 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn.: Ms. Jenny Chan, Management Analyst, Planning and Programming Subject: Measure A Maintenance of Effort, CIP and Project Status Report Enclosed are the City of Riverside's FY 2019/20 Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement, Measure A Local Funds Capital Improvement Program for FY 2019/20 through FY 2023/24 and a status report for FY 2018/19. If you have any questions, please contact Patrick Keeney at (951) 826-2406 or pkeeney@riversideca.gov. Sincerely, Gilbert Hernandez Deputy Public Works Director/City '1' eer Attachments 3900 Main Street, Riverside, CA 92522 I Phone: (951) 826-531 1 I RiversideCA.gov 259 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Riverside (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $12,449,203, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: March 19 2019 c Approved as to Form: Ruthann M. Salem Deputy City Attorney Rafael Guzman Assistant City rnager 4.sslslA4T CITY MANAGER ATTEST: Cogeen) J . Nicol City -Clerk SECRETARY 260 MEASURE A LOCALSIIlLt15 AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/20 Agency: RIVERSIDE Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone # : (951) 826-2406 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 18,318,771 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 8,073,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (4,718,000) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 21,673,771 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 7,886,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 29,559,771 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2019/20 Arlington Ave - Fairhaven to West City Limit Canyon Crest Widening -Via Vista/Country Club Central/Canyon Crest/Watkins Bike Lanes High Friction Surface & HAWK Sgnals Indiana Widening @Pierce Jurupa Extension - Rutland to Crest Jurupa Extension -Van Buren to Rutland Magnolia Ave - Buchanan St to Banbury Dr Major Street Rehabilitation Traffic Safety Improvements Street Widening Bike Lanes/Pedestrian Crossing Street & Pedestrian Sgnal Improvements Street Widening and Improvements New Street Construction New Street Construction Street Widening and Improvements Street Resurfacing $ 897 6,105 1,257 1,293 1,115 300 6,174 6,331 5,489 $ 378 1,650 215 195 420 300 1 2,665 3,089 2,400 * * * * * * * * * 2020-01 2020-02 2020-03 2020-04 2020-05 2020-06 2020-07 2020-08 2020-09 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 20 261 M EASURE A LOCALbIIlLt15 AND ROADS PROGRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2019/20 2020-10 Market Street Bridge Bridge Replacement 2,482 38 * Replacement 2020-11 MiscelllaneousRailroad Project Grade 1,375 247 * Management Se parations/Quiet Zones 2020-12 Mission Blvd Bridge Replacement Bridge Replacement 1,233 319 * 500 2020-13 Monroe Rehab - Lincoln to Street Rehabilitation 2,457 1,577 * Arlington & Resurfacing 2020-14 Paving ProjectsCOP- Debt Street Paving 3,000 3,000 Serivice** **Fora complete list of street projectsfinanced from the City of Riverside apportionment of Local Measure A funds(Certificatesof Participation), please see the attached Exhibit A. 2020-15 Quiet Zone/BNSF- Mission Quiet Zone for BNSF 4,020 37 * Inn/3rd/Spruce Railroad 757 2020-16 Quiet Zone/BNSF/UPRR- Cridge & Quiet Zone for BNSF& 6,937 2,064 * Panorama UP Railroads 2020-17 Quiet Zone/UPRR- Brockton & Quiet Zone for UP 2,288 1,536 * Palm Railroad 2020-18 RRGrade Separation - Iowa Grade Separation - 32,227 1,403 * Avenue Iowa @BNSF 2020-19 RRGrade Separation - Riverside Grade Separation - 31,184 347 * Avenue Riverside @UPRR 2020-20 RRGrade Separation -Streeter Grade Separation - 33,971 378 * Avenue Streeter @ UPRR 2020-21 Tyler Widening -Wellsto Hole Street Widening and 11,633 35 * Improvements FY 2019-20 Page 2of20 262 MEASURE A LOCALSIIlLt15 AND ROADS PRO GRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2019/20 2020-22 Van Buren Widening - Washington to Wood 2020-23 Arterial Interconnections 2020-24 Magnolia - Buchanan to First 2020-25 Traffic Sgnal Revisions 2020-26 2020-27 New Traffic Sgnals University -Chicago to Campus 2020-28 Transportation Planning 2020-29 2020-30 2020-31 Pavement Management Pro g ra m ControllerAxcmbly Replacement LED Sgnal Lenses Replacement 2020-32 Spread Spectrum Radio Replacement 2020-33 Traffic Management Center Street Widening Sgnal Coordinations Sgnal Coordination Sgnal Modifications New Traffic Sgnals Sgnal Coordination Engineering Planning Ongoing Annual Expenditure Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance Sgnal Coordination 453 41 2,804 164 455 50 99 250 83 31 23 80 47 * 1 * 40 289 * 64 * 100 205 * 250 50 * 49 * 50 125 * 125 13 * 70 11 * 20 13 * 10 30 * 50 FY 2019-20 Page 3of20 263 M EASURE A LOCALbIIlLt15 AND ROADS PROGRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2019/20 2020-34 Traffic Sgnal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal 30 5 Maintenance 25 2020-35 Traffic Planning/Investigations Traffic Engineering 444 144 300 2020-36 San Andreas/Glenwood Drainage Improvemer 675 98 Improvements 2020-37 Active Transportation Master Plan Traffic Engineering 200 200 2020-38 Interconnected Traffic Sgnal Sgnal Modifications 1,120 560 Controller Replacement 2020-39 Railroad Grade Separation - Grade Separation - 50,917 1,136 Magnolia Magnolia @UPRR TOTAL $ 219,687 $ 27,631 "*"Denotesestimated fundscarried overfrom FY2018/19. FY 2019-20 Page 4of20 264 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: RIVERSIDE Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone # : (951) 826-2406 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: 1,928,771 8,083,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 10,011,771 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2020/21 Quiet Zone/BNSF- Mission Quiet Zone for BNSF $ 4,020 $ 773 2021-01 Inn/3rd/Spruce Railroad 2021-02 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 Pavement Management Ongoing Annual 125 125 2021-03 Program Expenditure 2021-04 Traffic Planning/Investigations Traffic Engineering 300 300 Paving ProjectsCOP- Debt 3,000 3,000 2021-05 Service Street Paving 2021-06 Major Street Rehabilitation Street Resurfacing 2,400 2,400 1,233 250 Mission Blvd Bridge Replacement Bridge Replacement 2021-07 2021-08 MarKet Street bridge Ronlnnomonr Bridge Replacement 2,482 250 2021-09 Traffic Signal Revisions Signal Modifications 100 100 2021-10 Arterial Interconnections Signal Coordinations 40 40 FY 2020-21 Page 5 of 20 265 M EASURE A LOCALSIFatIS AND ROADS PROGRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2021-11 Traffic Management Center Sgnal Coordination 50 50 2021-12 New Traffic Sgnals New Traffic Signals 250 250 ControllerAxcmbly Ongoing Traffic 70 70 2021-13 Replacement Sgnal Maintenance Dread oectrum Radio Ongoing Traffic 10 10 2021-14 Replacement Sgnal Maintenance 2021-15 LED Sgnal Lenses Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance 20 20 2021-16 Traffic Sgnal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance 25 25 TOTAL $ 14,175 $ 7,713 FY 2020-21 Page 6 of 20 266 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: RIVERSIDE Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone # : (951) 826-2406 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: 2,298,771 8,285,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 10,583,771 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2021/22 Quiet Zone/BNSF- Mission Quiet Zone for BNSF $ 4,020 $ 788 2022-01 Inn / 3 rd /Spruce Railroad 2022-02 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 Pavement Management Ongoing Annual 125 125 2022-03 Program Expenditure 2022-04 Traffic Planning/Investigations Traffic Engineering 300 300 2022-05 raving rrojectsuur- uebt �n ;, o Street Paving 3,000 3,000 2022-06 Major Street Rehabilitation Street Resurfacing 2,400 2,400 2022-07 marKet Street triage Ronlnromon# Bridge Replacement 2,482 150 2022-08 Traffic Sgnal Revisions Sgnal Modifications 100 100 2022-09 Arterial Interconnections Sgnal Coordinations 40 40 2022-10 Traffic Management Center Sgnal Coordination 50 50 2022-11 New Traffic Sgnals New Traffic Sgnals 250 250 FY 2021-22 Page 7 of 20 267 M EASURE A LOCALSIFatIS AND ROADS PROGRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) ControllerAncombly Ongoing Traffic 70 70 2022-12 Replacement Signal Maintenance Spread Spectrum Radio Ongoing Traffic 10 10 2022-13 Replacement Signal Maintenance 2022-14 LED Signal Lenses Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 20 20 2022-15 Traffic Signal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 25 25 TOTAL $ 12,942 $ 7,378 FY 2021-22 Page 8 of 20 268 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: RIVERSIDE Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone # : (951) 826-2406 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: 3,205,771 8,492,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 11,697,771 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2022/23 Quiet Zone/BNSF- Mission Quiet Zone for BNSF $ 4,020 $ 804 2023-01 Inn/3rd/Spruce Railroad 2023-02 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 Pavement Management Ongoing Annual 125 125 2023-03 Program Expenditure 2023-04 Traffic Planning/Investigations Traffic Engineering 300 300 Paving Projects COP- Debt 3,000 3,000 2023-05 Se rvic e Street Paving 2023-06 Major Street Rehabilitation Street Resurfacing 2,400 2,400 2023-07 Traffic Sgnal Revisions Sgnal Modifications 100 100 2023-08 Arterial Interconnections Sgnal Coordinations 40 40 2023-09 Traffic Management Center Sgnal Coordination 50 50 2023-10 New Traffic Sgnals New Traffic Sgnals 250 250 FY 2022-23 Page 9 of 20 269 M EASURE A LOCALSIFat15 AND ROADS PROGRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Controller Assembly Ongoing Traffic 70 70 2023-11 Replacement Sgnal Maintenance Spread Spectrum Radio Ongoing Traffic 10 10 2023-12 Replacement Sgnal Maintenance 2023-13 LED Signal Lenses Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance 20 20 2023-14 Traffic Sgnal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance 25 25 TOTAL $ 10,460 $ 7,244 FY 2022-23 Page 10 of 20 270 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: RIVERSIDE Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone # : (951) 826-2406 Date: 4/ 18/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 4,453,771 Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: 8,704,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 13,157,771 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2023/24 Quiet Zone/BNSF- Mission Quiet Zone for BNSF $ 4,020 $ 870 2024-01 Inn/3rd/Spruce Railroad 2024-02 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 Pavement Management Ongoing Annual 125 125 2024-03 Program Expenditure 2024-04 Traffic Planning/Investigations Traffic Engineering 300 300 Paving Projects COP- Debt 3,000 3,000 2024-05 Service Street Paving 2024-06 Major Street Rehabilitation Street Resurfacing 2,400 2,400 2024-07 Traffic Signal Revisions Signal Modifications 100 100 2024-08 Arterial Interconnections Signal Coordinations 40 40 2024-09 Traffic Management Center Signal Coordination 50 50 2024-10 New Traffic Signals New Traffic Sgnals 250 250 FY 2023-24 Page 11 of 20 271 M EASURE A LOCALSIFat15 AND ROADS PROGRAM Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Controller Assembly Ongoing Traffic 70 70 2024-11 Replacement Sgnal Maintenance Spread Spectrum Radio Ongoing Traffic 10 10 2024-12 Replacement Sgnal Maintenance 2024-13 LED Signal Lenses Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance 20 20 2024-14 Traffic Sgnal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance 25 25 TOTAL $ 10,460 $ 7,310 FY 2023-24 Page 12 of 20 272 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: RIVERSIDE Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone # : (951) 826-2406 Date: April 6, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/ 30/ 2019) ($000's) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-01 Arlington Ave - Fairhaven to West City Limit Traffic Safety Improvements $ 897 $ 18 Oct-18 Construction complete. Project close out in process. 2019-02 Bike Conflict Zone Improvements Bicycle & Pedestrian Crossing 95 21 3/24/2017 Project complete. 2019-03 Campbell & Babb Ave Sidewalks Sdewalk Construction 499 - 6/13/2017 Project complete. 2019-04 Canyon Crest Widening -Via Vista/Country Club Street Widening 6,105 - Unknown Project on hold. 2019-05 Central Ave at UPRR Crossing Railroad Crossing Improvements 227 - 8/4/2017 Project complete. 2019-06 Central/Canyon Crest/Watkins Bike Lanes Bike Lanes/Pedestrian Crossing Improvements 1,257 - 6/30/2020 Design in progress. 2019-07 High Friction Surface & HAWK Sgnals Street & Pedestrian Sgnal Improvements 1,293 - 6/30/2020 Design in progress. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 13 of 20 273 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: RIVERSIDE Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone # : (951) 826-2406 Date: April 6, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/ 30/ 2019) ($000's) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-08 Indiana Widening @Pierce Street Widening and Improvements 1,115 - Aug-12 Pending billing from school district. 2019-09 Iowa Ave Railroad Crossing Railroad Crossing 339 - 8/4/2017 Project complete. Improvements Improvements 2019-10 Jurupa Extension - Rutland to Crest New Street Construction 300 - Unknown Pending environmental clearance and developer construction schedule. 2019-11 Jurupa Extension -Van Buren to New Street 6,174 - 2/28/2021 Construction complete. Rutland Construction Required environmental mitigation still underway. 2019-12 Magnolia Ave - Buchanan St to Street Widening and 6,331 195 Summer2020 Design in progress. Banbury Dr Improvements Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 14 of 20 274 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: Prepared by: Phone #: Date: RIV ERSI D E Patrick Keeney (951) 826-2406 April 6, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/ 30/ 2019) ($000's) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-13 2019-14 2019-15 2019-16 2019-17 2019-18 2019-19 Major Street Rehabilitation Market Street Bridge Replacement Miscelllaneous Railroad Project Management Mission Blvd Bridge Replacement Monroe Rehab - Lincoln to Arlington Paving Projects COP- Debt Serivice** Street Resurfacing Bridge Replacement Grade Separations/Quiet Bridge Replacement Street Rehabilitation & Resurfacing Street Paving 4,480 2,482 1,375 1,233 2,457 2,999 1,391 71 681 2,999 6/ 30/ 2039 6/ 30/ 2024 6/ 30/ 2039 6/ 30/ 2022 Spring 2021 6/ 30/ 2034 Ongoing annual expenditure. City share for County administered project. Ongoing project management. City share for County administered project. Project being constructed in phases. Annual debt service. **Fora complete list of street projectsfinanced from the City of Riverside apportionment of Local Measure A funds(Certificatesof Participation), please see the attached Exhibit A. Quiet Zone/BNSF- Buchanan to Jane Quiet Zone for BNSF Railroad 12,749 11/17/2016 Project complete. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 15 of 20 275 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: Prepared by: Phone #: Date: RIV ERSI D E Patrick Keeney (951) 826-2406 April 6, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/ 30/ 2019) ($000's) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-20 Quiet Zone/BNSF- Mission Inn/3rd/Spruce Quiet Zone for BNSF Railroad 4,020 3 6/30/2022 Design in progress. 2019-21 Quiet Zone/BNSF/UPRR-Cridge & Panorama Quiet Zone forBNSF& UP Railroads 6,937 2 12/31/2020 Design in progress. 2019-22 Quiet Zone - Perris Valley Line Quiet Zone for Perris Valley Line 5 - 3/2/2017 Project complete. 2019-23 Quiet Zone/UPRR- Brockton & Palm Quiet Zone for UP Railroad 2,288 15 6/30/2020 Design in progress. 2019-24 RRGrade Separation - Iowa Avenue Grade Separation - Iowa @BNSF 32,227 (958) 11/9/2015 Construction complete. Project close out in process. 2019-25 RRGrade Separation -Riverside Avenue Grade Separation - Riverside @UPRR 31,184 28 3/2/2017 Construction complete. Project close out in process. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 16 of 20 276 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: Prepared by: Phone #: Date: RIV ERS D E Patrick Keeney (951) 826-2406 April 6, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/ 30/ 2019) ($000's) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-26 RRGrade Separation -Streeter Avenue Grade Separation - Streeter@UPRR 33,971 1 1/25/2017 Construction complete. Project close out in process. 2019-27 Tyler Widening -Wellsto Hole Street Widening and Improvements 11,633 2 6/9/2017 Construction complete. Project close out in process. 2019-28 Van Buren Widening - Washington to Wood Street Widening 453 283 Unknown City share for County administered project. On hold pending County identifying additional funding for right-of-way. 2019-29 Arterial Interconnections Sgnal Coordinations 40 39 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-30 Magnolia - Buchanan to First Sgnal Coordination 2,804 28 Summer2019 Construction in p ro g re ss. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 17 of 20 277 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: RIVERSIDE Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone # : (951) 826-2406 Date: April 6, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/ 30/ 2019) ($000's) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-31 Traffic Sgnal Revisions Signal Modifications 114 50 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-32 New Traffic Sgnals New Traffic Sgnals 460 255 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-33 University -Chicago to Campus Sgnal Coordination 50 - Unknown On hold pending additional funding. 2019-34 Protect/Permit Left Tums Sgnal Modifications 140 - 6/30/2018 Project complete. 2019-35 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 1 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-36 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 125 - 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-37 ControllerAmbly Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance 85 72 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 18 of 20 278 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: Prepared by: Phone #: Date: RIV ERS D E Patrick Keeney (951) 826-2406 April 6, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/ 30/ 2019) ($000's) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-38 LED Signal Lenses Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 20 9 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-39 Spread Spectrum Radio Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance 21 8 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-40 Traffic Management Center Sgnal Coordination 76 47 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-41 Traffic Sgnal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Sgnal Maintenance 40 35 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-42 Traffic Planning/Investigations Traffic Engineering 300 156 6/30/2039 Ongoing annual expenditure. 2019-43 Minor areets Rehab Street Resurfacing 1,881 - 4/14/2017 Project complete. 2019-44 San Andreas/Glenwood Improvements Drainage Improvement 675 27 Summer 2019 Construction in progress. 2019-45 Active Transportation Master Traffic Engineering 200 - Dec-19 Design in progress. Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 19 of 20 279 M EASURE A LOCALS1REEfS AND ROADS PRO GRAM PROJECT STATUS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: RIVERSIDE Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone # : (951) 826-2406 Date: April 6, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/ 30/ 2019) ($000's) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2019-46 Interconnected Traffic Sgnal Signal Modifications 1,120 - Dec-19 Design in progress. Controller Replacement 2019-47 Railroad Grade Separation - Grade Separation - 50,917 (783) 11/27/2013 Construction complete. Magnolia Magnolia @UPRR Project close out in process. TOTAL $ 234,243 $ 4,718 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 20 of 20 280 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF SAN JACINTO 281 This page left intentionally blank. 1141 ir SAN JACINTO May 6, 2019 Theresia Trevino Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Attn: Jenny Chan, Management Analyst, Planning and Programming RE: 2020-24 Measure "A" Improvement Plan and 2018-19 Status Report Enclosed please find the City of San Jacinto's proposed 5-year capital improvement plan. Also enclosed is a status report of the currently adopted 5-year plan and the MOE certification. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Please call me at 951-487-7330 (ext 389) or Habib Motlagh at 951-654-3592 if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, it)i,eittaeOefkib' Michelle Holmes Finance Director 595 S. San Jacinto Ave. San Jacinto, CA 92583 Ph (951) 654-7337 Fax (951) 654-3728 www.sanjacintoca.gov 283 FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the City of San Jacinto (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $156,391, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: April 29, 2019 CITY A ATTEST: 284 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: SAN JACINTO Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: 5/ 1/2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 3,907,573 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 926,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (1,740,618) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 3,092,955 Estimated FY 2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 927,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 4,019,955 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Sanderson Ave. Safety Imp (HSIP- 8). C ity's C IP 17-004. Safety Imp. & Slurry Seal $ 1,265,000 $ 365,000 2020-02 Slurry Seal (citywide) - City'sCIP 18-002 Road Rehab -Slurry Se a I Pro g ra m 500,000 250,000 2020-03 ATP II - Bike Lanes (Inc. pavement widening). City'sCIP 18-005 Bicycle facilities- infrastructure project 1,170,000 624,250 2020-04 Mountain Ave. Rehab -7th to Esplanade. City's CIP 12-008 Pavement Rehab 660,000 305,000 2020-05 Cottonwood Ave. Sdewalks& minor widening. City'sCIP17-002 Road Widening & SW 720,000 320,000 2020-06 Traffic Control Devices/Studies. City's CIP 02-019 Traffic Safety 64,000 35,000 2020-07 Esplanade Ave. Widening - Sanderson to Warren, Traffic SgnaIs& SW Install Road Widening per General Plan & TUMF Network 5,405,000 705,000 2020-08 Hewitt St. Pavement Rehab, Minor Widening & SD. City'sCIP 07-011 Road Widening and Re h a b 1,040,000 490,000 2020-09 Citywide traffic signal upgrades- Ph 1 Traffic Safety/Traffic Row Improvements 260,000 70,808 2020-10 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead 74,160 74,160 TOTAL $ 11,158,160 $ 3,239,218 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 285 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: SAN JACINTO Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: May 1, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 780,737 950,000 1,730,737 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/21 2021-01 Ramona Exp Rehab -Sanderson to West City Limits. City'sCIP 18- 003 Pavement Rehab $ 2,400,000 $ 1,000,000 2020-02 Esplanade Ave. Widening - Sanderson to Warren, Traffic Signals& SW Install. City'sCIP 06- 145 Road Widening per General Plan & TUMF Network 5,164,000 75,000 2021-03 Esplanade Ave. Rehab -State to San Jacinto. City'sCIP 14-004 Pavement Rehab 569,400 269,400 2021-04 Traffic Sgnal Upgrades Ph 2. CIP 10-001B. Traffic Row/Safety 150,000 75,000 2021-05 Palm Ave at Cottonwood Ave. - Traffic Sgnal Install. CIP 10-002 Traffic Row/Safety 430,284 25,000 2021-06 State St. Rehab - Ramona Exp to So. City limits. CIP20-002 Pavement Rehab 1,300,000 65,000 2021-07 Traffic Control Devices/Studies. C ity's C IP 02-019 Traffic Safety 65,000 35,000 2021-08 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead 76,000 76,000 TOTAL $ 10,154,684 $ 1,620,400 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 286 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: SAN JACINTO Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: May 1, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 110,337 974,000 1,084,337 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Citywide Pavement Rehab/Slurry Seal Program Pavement Management Prog $ 500,000 $ 250,000 2022-02 Traffic Stud ies�Surveys/Improv. Traffic Safety Imp. 35,000 20,000 2022-03 Administrative Overhead Adm. Overhead 77,920 77,920 TOTAL $ 612,920 $ 347,920 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 287 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: SAN JACINTO Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: May 1, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 736,417 998,000 1,734,417 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 Warren Road Pavement Rehab & Minor Drainage Imp.- Ramona Exp. To Esplanade. CIP20-004 Pavement Rehab $ 3,250,000 $ 1,500,000 2023-02 Esplanade Ave. Wid. - Sanderson to Palm Ave. CIP21-003 Road Widening per Gen. Plan and IUMF Network 3,750,000 75,000 2023-03 Traffic Stud ies/Surveys/Improv. Traffic Safety Imp. 75,000 45,000 2023-04 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead 79,840 79,840 TOTAL $ 7,154,840 $ 1,699,840 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 288 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: SAN JACINTO Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone # : 951-943-6504 Date: May 1, 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 34,577 1,023,000 1,057,577 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Citywide Pavement Rehab & Slurry Seal Program Pavement Management $ 1,000,000 $ 750,000 2024-02 Esplanade Ave. Wid. -Sanderson to Palm Ave. CIP21-003 Road Widening per Gen. Plan and IUMF Network 3,750,000 140,000 2024-03 Warren Road Pavement Rehab & Minor Drainage Imp.- Ramona Exp. To Esplanade. CIP20-004 Pavement Rehab 2,500,000 75,000 2024-04 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead 81,840 81,840 TOTAL $ 7,331,840 $ 1,046,840 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 289 M EASURE A LOCALSIid:LIS AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS FORT FY 2018/ 19 Agency: SAN JACINTO Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: 951-943-6504 Date: May 1, 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Estthru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status Citywide Pavement Rehab AKA 2019-01 Downtown Imp Pavement Rehab 2,000,000 $ 1,332,028 Fall2018 Complete Sanderson Ave. Safety Imp (HSIP- Env., Design & RW complete. Consin 2019-02 8) Safety Improvements 1,200,000 67,944 Jan.2020 FY19/20 Road Rehab - Surry Scope of Work 2019-03 Surry Seal (citywide) Seal Program 1,000,000 10,000 30-Jun-20 defined. ATPII- BikeLanes(Inc.pavement widening) Bicycle facilities - infrastructure project Bid advertisement 2019-04 685,000 30-Jun-20 underway Mountain Ave. Rehab - 7th to Reprogrammed to 2019-05 Esplanade Pavement Rehab 305,000 - 30-Jun-20 FY2019/20 RequiresCoord. Ramona Exp Rehab -Sanderson W/Co of Riverside. 2019-06 to West City Limits Pavement Rehab 448,000 - FY2020/21 Moved to FY20-21 2019-07 Traffic Control Devices/Studies Traffic Safety 46,202 15,536 On -going On -going Program Esplanade Ave. Rehab -State to 2019-08 Palm Pavement Rehab 245,000 244,790 Simmer2018 Complete Reprogrammed to 2019-09 Cottonwood Ave. Sdewalks Road widening & SW 520,000 Sept. 2020 FY2019/20 2019-10 De Anza Dr. St. ImprovementE Sidewalk & Minor Wid. 52,319 - Sept. 2018 Completed Administrative 2019-11 Administrative Overhead Overhead 70,320 70,320 on -going On -going cost TOTAL $ 6,571,841 $ 1,740,618 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6of6 290 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF TEMECULA 291 This page left intentionally blank. FY 2019/20 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Temecula (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $1,431,799, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. V i he i CITY MA G R — Aaron d s ATTE SECRETARY — Randi Johl 293 This page left intentionally blank. M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: TEMECULA Prepared by: Julie Tarrant Phone # : (951) 694-6463 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 4,243,589 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 3,354,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (2,588,710) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 5,008,879 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 3,211,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 8,219,879 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 Pavement Rehab Program - Street Reconstruction 2020-01 Citywide & Rehabilitation $ 11,987,445 $ 5,701,509 Right of way maintenance and repairsto include: Citywide Street Maintenance striping/stenciling , PC C & AC repairs, Street & ROW maintenance of 2020-02 Program drainage facilities 2,008,540 2,008,540 TOTAL $ 13,995,985 $ 7,710,049 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 295 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/ 21 Agency: TEMECULA Prepared by: Julie Tarrant Phone #: (951) 694-6463 Date: 6-May-19 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 631,461 3,291,000 3,922,461 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/21 Pavement Rehab Program - Street Reconstruction 2021-01 Citywide & Rehabilitation $ 3,201,243 $ 1,283,089 Right of way maintenance and repairsto include: Citywide Street Maintenance striping/stenciling, PC C & AC repairs, Street & ROW maintenance of 2021-02 Program drainage facilities 2,008,540 2,008,540 TOTAL $ 5,209,783 $ 3,291,629 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 296 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: TEMECULA Prepared by: Julie Tarrant Phone #: (951) 694-6463 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 630,832 3,373,000 4,003,832 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 Pavement Rehab Program - Street Reconstruction 2022-01 Citywide & Rehabilitation $ 3,281,652 $ 1,325,135 Right of way maintenance and repairsto include: Citywide Street Maintenance striping/stenciling, PC C & AC repairs, Street & ROW maintenance of 2022-02 Program drainage facilities 2,008,540 2,008,540 TOTAL $ 5,290,192 $ 3,333,675 FY 2021-22 Page 3 of 6 297 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/ 23 Agency: TEMECULA Prepared by: Julie Tarrant Phone #: (951) 694-6463 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 630,832 3,457,000 4,087,832 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 Pavement Rehab Program - Street Reconstruction 2023-01 Citywide & Rehabilitation $ 3,364,034 $ 1,368,387 Right of way maintenance and repairsto include: Citywide Street Maintenance striping/stenciling, PC C & AC repairs, Street & ROW maintenance of 2023-02 Program drainage facilities 2,008,540 2,008,540 TOTAL $ 5,372,574 $ 3,376,927 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 298 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/ 24 Agency: TEMECULA Prepared by: Julie Tarrant Phone #: (951) 694-6463 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 509,830 3,543,000 4,052,830 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/24 Pavement Rehab Program - Street Reconstruction 2024-01 Citywide & Rehabilitation $ 3,447,606 $ 1,412,829 Right of way maintenance and repairsto include: Citywide Street Maintenance striping/stenciling, PC C & AC repairs, Street & ROW maintenance of 2024-02 Program drainage facilities 2,008,540 2,008,540 TOTAL $ 5,456,146 $ 3,421,369 FY 2023-24 Page 5 of 6 299 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PRO JECTSTA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: TEMECULA Prepared by: Julie Tarrant Phone # : 951-694-6463 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status Pavement Rehab Program - Annual pavement On -going annual 2019-01 Citywide Street Reconstruction & Rehabilitation $ 1,363,544 $ 1,000,000 rehabilitation program projects Right of way maintenance and repairston include: 2019-02 Citywide Street Maintenance Program striping/stenciling, PCC & AC Repairs, Street & ROW maintenance drainage facilities 1,940,894 1,588,710 Annual right of way maintenance On -going right of way maintenance TOTAL $ 3,304,438 $ 2,588,710 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page6of6 300 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS CITY OF WILDOMAR 301 This page left intentionally blank. Marsha Swanson, Mayor, Dist. 5 Dustin Nigg, Mayor Pro Tem, Dist. 2 Ben J. Benoit, Council Member, Dist. 1 Bridgette Moore, Council Member, Dist. 4 Joseph Morabito, Council Member, Dist. 3 May 2, 2019 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: Jenny Chan Subject: Measure A 5-Year CIP for FY 2019/20 — 2023/24 Dear Ms. Chan 23873 Clinton Keith Rd, Ste 201 Wildomar, CA 92595 951/677-7751 Phone 951/698-1463 Fax www.CitpfWildomar.org Enclosed is the following: 1. Five Year CIP for FY 2019/20 — 2023/24 2. Project Status Report for FY 2018/19 3. The City is not submitting a MOE Certificate because our base is zero dollars The City of Wildomar proposes an amendment to the FY 2018/19 Measure A CIP to better reflect the construction and project design activities required for this fiscal year. Please see the FY 2018/19 Project Status Report for details. The added projects as shown with an (1. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely; City Dan York, , PLS Assistant Ci Manager Director of Public Works/City Engineer 303 This page left intentionally blank. M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: WILDOMAR Prepared by: Dan York Phone # : 951-677-7751 X216 Date: 5/ 1/2019 FY 2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ (15,086) FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 675,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (544,576) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 115,338 Estimated FY 2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 680,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 795,338 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2019/ 20 2020-01 Public Works Cost Allocation Interfund Transfer $ 54,400 $ 54,400 2020-02 CIPProj. Admin. & Engineering Admin./Engineering 2,323,285 573,900 2020-03 CIPPavement Program Construction 700,000 100,000 TOTAL $ 3,077,685 $ 728,300 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 305 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM I FY 2020/21 Agency: WILDOMAR Prepared by: Dan York Phone # : 951-677-7751 X216 Date: 5/ 1/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2020/21 Projects: $ 67,038 697,000 764,038 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2020/ 21 2021-01 Public Works Cost Allocation Interfund Transfer $ 55,760 $ 55,760 2021-02 CIPProj. Admin & Engineering Admin/Engineering 1,957,080 573,900 2021-03 CIP Pavement Program Construction 700,000 100,000 TOTAL $ 2,712,840 $ 729,660 FY 2020-21 Page 2 of 6 306 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM I FY 2021/22 Agency: WILDOMAR Prepared by: Dan York Phone # : 951-677-7751 X216 Date: 5/ 1/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2021/22 Projects: $ 34,378 714,000 748,378 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2021/22 2022-01 Public Works Cost Allocation Interfund Transfer $ 57,120 $ 57,120 2022-02 CIPAdmin. & Engineering Admin. / Engineering 1,723,500 573,900 2022-03 CIP Pavement Program Construction 700,000 100,000 TOTAL $ 2,480,620 $ 731,020 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 307 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM I FY 2022/23 Agency: WILDOMAR Prepared by: Dan York Phone # : 951-677-7751 X216 Date: 5/ 1/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 17,358 732,000 749,358 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2022/23 2023-01 Public Works Cost Allocation Interfund Transfer $ 58,560 $ 58,560 2023-02 CIPAdmin. & Engineering Admin. / Engineering 763,000 573,900 2023-03 CIP Pavement Program Construction 700,000 100,000 TOTAL $ 1,521,560 $ 732,460 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 308 M EASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PRO GRAM I FY 2023/24 Agency: WILDOMAR Prepared by: Dan York Phone # : 951-677-7751 X216 Date: 5/ 1/2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2023/24 Projects: $ 16,898 750,000 766,898 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 2023/ 24 2024-01 Public Works Cost Allocation Interfund Transfer $ 60,000 $ 60,000 2024-02 CIPAdmin. & Engineering Admin. / Engineering 762,000 573,900 2024-03 CIP Pavement Program Construction 700,000 100,000 TOTAL $ 1,522,000 $ 733,900 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 309 M EASURE A LOCALSlia±is AND ROADS PROGRAM PRO JECTSTA 1US REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: WILDOMAR Prepared by: Dan York Phone # : 951-677-7751 X216 Date: 5/1/2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status 2018/19 2019-01 Public Works Cost Allocation InterFund Transfer $ 54,000 $ 54,000 ongoing annual program 2019-02 Accessibility Imp. Maintenance 19,231 19,231 ongoing annual program 2019-03 Road Safety Imp. Maintenance 32,990 32,990 ongoing annual program 2019-04 Pavement Program Maintenance 68,593 68,593 ongoing annual program 2019-05 Citywide Gen. Maint. Maintenance 186,651 186,651 ongoing annual program 2019-06* Grand Ave & CKBike Path 1 Construction 312,003 18,579 complete 2019-07* Grand Ave & CKBike Path 2 Construction 259,762 12,821 complete 2019-08* Pedestrian Countdown Heads Design 545,000 29,665 10/1/2019 In Design 2019-09* Guardrail Improvements Design 435,000 47,918 8/1/2019 In Design 2019-10* Sedco Sdewalk Imp. Construction 412,243 74,128 5/30/2019 In Construction TOTAL $ 2,325,473 $ 544,576 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page6of6 310 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 311 This page left intentionally blank. rCOUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MoahedSalama, P.E. TRANSPORTATION AND Deputy for Transportation/Capital Projects %9TlON� C��,, Richard Lantis, P.L.S. LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY Deputy for Transportation/Planning and Patricia Romo, P.E. Development Director of Transportation Transportation Department Ms. Jenny Chan Management Analyst Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 S. Lemon St., Third floor Riverside, CA 92501 RE: Measure A Local Streets and Roads Program Dear Ms. Chan: May 2, 2019 Attached is the County's five-year program of projects for the County's portion of Measure A funds for Fiscal Year 2020/2024. The County's Transportation Department receives no general funds and no certification of MOE is included. Also attached is a copy of our Fiscal Year 2018/2019 plan with comments addressing project status. We have scheduled expenditures based on revenue projections. Three reports are attached representing the Western, Coachella Valley and the Palo Verde Valley unincorporated regions of the county. These projects are incorporated in the County's proposed Fiscal Year 2019/2020 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) which is planned for Board approval. We will inform your agency of any changes that occur to the Measure A program due to future revisions of the County's TIP. If you have any questions concerning this program, please feel free to contact me at (951) 955-6740. Sincerely, Patricia Romo Director of Transportation RKN: attachments cc: Robert Brooks Yolanda Gordon Roy Null (transmittal only) 4080 Lemon Street, 8« Floor • Riverside, CA 92501 • (951) 955-6740 P.O. Box 1090 • Riverside, CA 92502-1090 • FAX (951) 955-3198 313 This page left intentionally blank. M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: RIVERSIDE COUNTY -CV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 1,194,076 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 1,866,000 FY2018/19 Project Status Report expenses: (2,020,044) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 1,040,032 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure A Allocation: 1,886,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 2,926,032 Item No. Project Name / limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2019/ 20 2020-01 SLURRY SEALOF4TH DISTRICT Slurry seal $ 2,274,000 $ 380,000 4 ROADSFY18/19 (Districtwide) 2020-02 661H AVE Grant St -- Ha yes St Reconstruct RMS paved road 473,000 330,000 4 2020-03 CALHOUN ST: 54th Ave to 52nd Ave Reconstruct AC paved road 544,000 399,000 4 2020-04 SLURRY SEALOF4TH DISTRICT Slurry seal 2,745,000 1,106,000 4 ROADSFY19/20 (Districtwide) 2020-05 AURORA RD: Lang loisRd to WIy LangloisRd .62mi Resurface AC paved road 612,000 440,000 4 2020-06 BUBBLING WELLSRD: Dillon Rd to Camino Campanero Resurface AC paved road 1,545,000 271,032 4 TOTAL $ 8,193,000 $ 2,926,032 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 315 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNIY-CV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 1,933,000 1,933,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Siapv. Dist. 2020/ 21 2021-01 SLURRY SEAL OF4THDISTRICT Slurry seal $ 3,199,000 $ 1,125,000 4 ROADSFY20/21 (Districtwide) 2021-02 COACHELLA VALLEY AREA: Resurfacing program in Coachella Valley 808,000 808,000 4 variousroads-- TOTAL $ 4,007,000 $ 1,933,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2of6 316 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNIY-CV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 1,981,000 1,981,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 9apv. Dist. 2021/22 2022-01 SLURRY SEAL OF4THDISTRICT Slurry seal $ 1,650,000 $ 1,162,000 4 ROADSFY21/22 (Districtwide) 2022-02 COACHELLA VALLEY AREA: Resurfacing program in Coachella Valley 819,000 819,000 4 variousroads-- TOTAL $ 2,469,000 $ 1,981,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 317 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNIY-CV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure A Available forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 2,031,000 2,031,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Siapv. Dist. 2022/ 23 2023-01 SLURRY SEAL OF4INDISTRICT Slurry seal $ 1,675,000 $ 1,200,000 4 ROADSFY22/23 (Districtwide) 2023-02 COACHELLA VALLEY AREA: Resurfacing program in Coachella Valley 831,000 831,000 4 variousroads-- TOTAL $ 2,506,000 $ 2,031,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 318 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNIY-CV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure A Available forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 2,082,000 2,082,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Siapv. Dist. 2023/ 24 2024-01 SLURRY SEAL OF4INDISTRICT Slurry seal $ 1,700,000 $ 1,225,000 4 ROADSFY23/24 (Districtwide) 2024-02 COACHELIA VALLEYAREA: Resurfacing program in Coachella Valley 857,000 857,000 4 variousroads-- TOTAL $ 2,557,000 $ 2,082,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 319 M EASURE A LOCALSIhittlb AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJEC T STA TUS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNIY-CV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone # : 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status Supv. Dist. 2018/ 19 2019-01 SLURRY SEAL OF41H DISTRICT Surry seal 2,274,000 1,520,000 10/31/2019 Under construction 4 ROADSFY18/19 (Districtwide) 2019-02 661H AVE Grant St -- Hayes St Reconstruct RMS paved road 473,000 19,000 9/30/2019 Under construction 4 2019-03 CALHOUN ST: 54th Ave to 52nd Ave Reconstruct AC paved road 544,000 1,000 9/30/2019 Under construction 4 2019-04 POLKST: 76th Ave to 70th Ave Resurface RMS paved road 650,000 480,044 2/28/2019 Complete 4 TOTAL $ 3,941,000 $ 2,020,044 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6 of 6 320 M EASURE A LOCAL S!Fitt IS AND ROADS PRO GRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: RIVERSIDE COUNTY-PVV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 328 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A Revenue: 199,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (199,328) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 208,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2019/20 Projects: $ 208,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2019/ 20 CHIP SEAL OF41H DISTRICT ROADS FY19/20 (Districtwide) Chip seal $ 2,235,000 $ 208,000 4 2020-01 TOTAL $ 2,235,000 $ 208,000 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 321 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNTY-PVV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2020/21 Measure AAllocation: $ Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 213,000 213,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2020/ 21 CHIP S_AL OF4IH DISIIACT ROADSFY20/21 (Districtwide) Chip seal $ 3,199,000 $ 213,000 4 2021-01 TOTAL $ 3,199,000 $ 213,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2of6 322 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNTY-PVV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2021/22 Measure AAllocation: $ Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 218,000 218,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2021/22 CHIP S_AL OF4IH DISIIACT ROADSFY21/22 (Districtwide) Chip seal $ 2,000,000 $ 218,000 4 2022-01 TOTAL $ 2,000,000 $ 218,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 323 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNTY-PVV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2022/23 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure A Available forFY2022/23 Projects: $ 223,000 223,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2022/ 23 CHIP SEAL OF4TH DISIRICT ROADSFY22/23 (Districtwide) Chip seal $ 2,000,000 $ 223,000 4 2023-01 TOTAL $ 2,000,000 $ 223,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 324 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNTY-PVV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY2023/24 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure A Available forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 229,000 229,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2023/24 CHIP SEALOF4TH DISIRICT ROADSFY23/24 (Districtwide) Chip seal $ 2,000,000 $ 229,000 4 2024-01 TOTAL $ 2,000,000 $ 229,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 325 M EASURE A LOCALSIhittlb AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJEC T STA TUS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNIY-PVV Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone # : 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status Supv. Dist. 2018/ 19 CHIPSEALOF4TH DISTRICT ROADSFY18/19 (Districtwide) Chip seal $ 1,794,000 $ 199,328 6/15/2019 Under construction 4 2019-01 TOTAL $ 1,794,000 $ 199,328 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6 of 6 326 M EASURE A LOCAL SiRetib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2019/ 20 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNIY-WESTERN Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 FY2017/18 Audited Measure A Balance: $ 124,856 FY2018/19 (Revised) Measure A (Revenue: 5,819,000 FY 2018/ 19 Project Status Report expenses: (4,753,000) Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 1,190,856 Estimated FY2019/20 Measure AAllocation: 5,920,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2019/20 Projects: $ 7,110,856 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2019/20 2020-01 SLURRY SEAL OF1ST DISTRICT Surryseal $ 3,048,000 $ 374,000 1 ROADS FY18/19 (Districtwide) 2020-02 SLURRY SEAL OF 1ST DISTRICT Surryseal 869,000 869,000 1 ROADSFY19/20 (Districtwide) 2020-03 SLURRY SEAL OF2NDDISTRICT Surryseal 1,352,000 164,000 2 ROADS FY18/19 (Districtwide) 2020-04 SLURRY SEAL OF2NDDISTRICT Surryseal 815,000 815,000 2 ROADSFY19/20 (Districtwide) 2020-05 SLURRY SEAL OF3RDDISTRICT Surryseal 1,872,000 230,000 3 ROADS FY18/19 (Districtwide) 2020-06 SLURRY SEAL OF3RDDISTRICT Surryseal 2,158,000 2,158,000 3 ROADSFY19/20 (Districtwide) 2020-07 SLURRY SEAL OF51HDISTRICT Surryseal 429,000 74,000 5 ROADS FY18/19 (Districtwide) 2020-08 SLURRY SEAL OF51HDISTRICT Surryseal 913,000 913,000 5 ROADSFY19/20 (Districtwide) 2020-09 I-10 BYPASS Hargrave St -- Construct road 107,044,000 100,000 5 Apache Trl 2020-10 Cajalco Rd: Brown St to Day St Construct turning lanes and shoulderwidening 6,298,000 50,000 1 2020-11 SerfasClub Dr: Sly Pine Crest Construct sidewalk 703,000 67,000 2 .07mi to Monterey Peninsula Dr 2020-12 Mitchell Rd: Bautista Rd to Kirby Rd Resurface AC paved road 2,264,000 100,000 3 2020-13 Integrated Mitigation Project: W9y of Briggs Rd to Sly Camino De Los Cab Const channel improvementsasenv mitigation for projects 2,379,000 800,000 3 2020-14 Gilman Springs Rd, Phase 4A: SEIyAlessandro 1.7mito SEly Widen should ersand add painted median 16,484,000 396,856 5 Bridge St 1mi TOTAL $ 146,628,000 $ 7,110,856 FY 2019-20 Page 1 of 6 327 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2020/21 Agency: RIVERSDECOUNIY-WESTERN Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2020/21 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY2020/21 Projects: $ 6,068,000 6,068,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Siapv. Dist. 2020/ 21 2021-01 SLURRY SEAL OF1STDISIRICT Slurry seal $ 2,081,000 $ 2,081,000 1 ROADSFY20/21 (Districtwide) 2021-02 SLURRY SEAL OF2ND DISTRICT Slurry seal 352,000 352,000 2 ROADS FY20/21 (Districtwide) 2021-03 SLURRY SEAL OF3RDDISTRICT Slurry seal 2,603,000 2,603,000 3 ROADSFY20/21 (Districtwide) 2021-04 SLURRY SEAL OF5IHDISTRICT Surryseal 1,032,000 1,032,000 5 ROADSFY20/21 (Districtwide) TOTAL $ 6,068,000 $ 6,068,000 FY 2020-21 Page 2of6 328 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2021/22 Agency: RIVERSDECOUNIY-WESTERN Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2021/22 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure AAvailable forFY2021/22 Projects: $ 6,220,000 6,220,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Siapv. Dist. 2021/22 2022-01 SLURRY SEAL OF 1 ST D ISTRICT Slurry seal $ 2,133,000 $ 2,133,000 1 ROADSFY21/22 (Districtwide) 2022-02 SLURRY SEAL OF2ND DISTRICT Slurry seal 361,000 361,000 2 ROADS FY21/22 (Districtwide) 2022-03 SLURRY SEAL OF3RD DISTRICT Slurry seal 2,668,000 2,668,000 3 ROADSFY21/22 (Districtwide) 2022-04 SLURRY SEAL OF 51H DISTRICT Surryseal 1,058,000 1,058,000 5 ROADSFY21/22 (Districtwide) TOTAL $ 6,220,000 $ 6,220,000 FY 2021-22 Page 3of6 329 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2022/23 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNIY-WESTERN Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2022/23 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure A Available for FY2022/23 Projects: $ 6,376,000 6,376,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds Siapv. Dist. 2022/ 23 2023-01 SLURRY SEAL OF 1 ST D ISTRICT Slurry seal $ 2,187,000 $ 2,187,000 1 ROADSFY22/23 (Districtwide) 2023-02 SLURRY SEAL OF2ND DISTRICT Slurry seal 370,000 370,000 2 ROADS FY22/23 (Districtwide) 2023-03 SLURRY SEAL OF3RD DISTRICT Slurry seal 2,735,000 2,735,000 3 ROADSFY22/23 (Districtwide) 2023-04 SLURRY SEAL OF51H DISTRICT Slurry seal 1,084,000 1,084,000 5 ROADS FY22/23 (Districtwide) TOTAL $ 6,376,000 $ 6,376,000 FY 2022-23 Page 4of6 330 M EASURE A LOCALSttttib AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2023/24 Agency: RIVERSIDECOUNIY-WESTERN Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone #: 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2023/24 Measure A Allocation: $ Estimated Measure A Available forFY2023/24 Projects: $ 6,535,000 6,535,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Project Cost Measure A Funds 9apv. Dist. 2023/ 24 2024-01 SLURRY SEAL OF1STDISTRICT Slurry seal $ 2,242,000 $ 2,242,000 1 ROADSFY23/24 (Districtwide) 2024-02 SLURRY SEAL OF2ND DISTRICT Slurry seal 379,000 379,000 2 ROADS FY23/24 (Districtwide) 2024-03 SLURRY SEAL OF3RD DISTRICT Slurry seal 2,803,000 2,803,000 3 ROADSFY23/24 (Districtwide) 2024-04 SLURRY SEAL OF51H DISTRICT Slurry seal 1,111,000 1,111,000 5 ROADS FY23/24 (Districtwide) TOTAL $ 6,535,000 $ 6,535,000 FY 2023-24 Page 5of6 331 M EASURE A LOCALSIhittlb AND ROADS PROGRAM PROJEC T STA TUS REPO RTFY 2018/ 19 Agency: RIVERSIDE COUN-Y-WESTERN Prepared by: Andrew Martin Phone # : 951-955-6841 Date: 5/ 6/ 2019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Anticipated Measure A Funds Expended (Est thru 6/30/2019) Estimated/ Actual Completion Status Supv. Dist. 2018/ 19 2019-01 SLURRY SEAL OF1STDISTRICT Surryseal $ 3,048,000 $ 2,121,000 9/30/2019 Under construction 1 ROADSFY18/19 (Districtwide) 2019-02 SLURRY SEALOF2ND DISTRICT Surry seal 1,352,000 929,000 9/30/2019 Under construction 2 ROADSFY18/19 (Districtwide) 2019-03 SLURRYS_AL OF3RD DISTRICT Surry seal 1,872,000 1,306,000 9/30/2019 Under construction 3 ROADSFY18/19 (Districtwide) 2019-04 SLURRYS_AL OF51H DISTRICT Surry seal 429,000 297,000 10/31/2019 Underconstruction 5 ROADSFY18/19 (Districtwide) 2019-05 1-10 BYPASS Hargrave St -- Construct road 107,044,000 100,000 10/31/2024 Ongoing 5 Apache Trl TOTAL $ 113,745,000 $ 4,753,000 Project Status Report FY18-19 Page 6 of 6 332 AGENDA ITEM 9F RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2020 State Transportation Improvement Program Funding Distribution and Draft Fund Estimate BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the 2020 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funding distribution among the three geographic areas in Riverside County per the adopted STIP Intracounty Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The STIP is a five-year program of projects administered by the California Transportation Commission (CTC). It is updated every two years outlining the commitment and programming of transportation funds for the State's multimodal transportation system including highways, rail, transit, local roads, and bike and pedestrian facilities. In June of every odd year, Caltrans is required to prepare a draft STIP Fund Estimate (FE) that estimates how much funding will be available for programming for the next five-year period. The CTC will release the 2020 STIP FE at its June 26, 2019 meeting. The 2020 STIP will cover fiscal years (FY's) 2020/21 through 2024/25. Each STIP cycle adds on two years with most of the programming capacity available in the last two years. STIP funds are allocated into two broad programs — the Regional Improvement Program (RIP) receives 75 percent of the total STIP funds, and the remaining 25 percent is directed to Caltrans for its Interregional Transportation Improvement Program. The 75 percent RIP funding is further subdivided by formula into county shares. County shares are available solely for projects nominated by regional agencies. The 2020 STIP FE also establishes funding levels for the State Highway Operation and Protection Program, which Caltrans prepares in consultation with the regions. STIP Intracounty Formula Distribution Per the Commission's STIP intracounty formula distribution, STIP funds are allocated to Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley based on the most recent fiscal year taxable sales by geographic area used for Measure A allocations. The geographic area percentages of taxable Agenda Item 9F 66 sales applied to the 2014 through 2020 STIPs demonstrates a growing trend in Western County compared to Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys: Geographic Area 2014 STIP 2016 STIP 2018 STIP 2020 STIP Western County 75.17% 75.76% 77.30% 78.12% Coachella Valley 24.12% 23.54% 22.11% 21.45% Palo Verde Valley 0.71% 0.70% 00.59% 00.43% Per the STIP Intracounty distribution formula, each geographic area will receive funding based on the above percentages. In addition, STIP guidelines allow up to 5 percent of RIP funding for planning, programming, and monitoring (PPM) activities. However, the Commission's policy is to set aside 2 percent for PPM activities to fund Project Study Reports, planning, and staff costs associated with STIP funding and programming. PPM funding is available for CVAG and Commission activities. Draft 2020 STIP Fund Estimate On June 25, 2019, CTC staff released the Draft 2020 STIP Fund Estimate (FE), which identified county share targets for each region in the state. Unfortunately, the FE is lower than anticipated. New programming capacity statewide is $490,426,000, and the county share target for Riverside County is approximately $10,220,000. CTC staff indicated that the programming capacity is only available in the last two years of the 2020 STIP cycle, FYs 2023/24 and 2024/25. The table below reflects the 2 percent off the top for PPM activities, and the amounts for each geographic area, per the Commission's STIP MOU Intracounty formula distribution. Draft 2020 STIP FE — Riverside County Share Target Total Riverside County Share $ 10,220,000 Less: 2 percent PPM 204,400 Total New Project Programming $ 10,015,600 Western County Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley 2020 STIP Project Selection Process Western Riverside County 78.12 percent 21.45 percent 00.43 percent $ 7,824,187 $ 2,148,346 $ 43,067 Western Riverside County projects are nominated by staff. Recommendations for current and new projects for STIP funds will be considered and based on the 2019-29 Delivery Plan, consistency with Measure A, and other high priority projects approved by the Commission. Per the funding distribution for Western County, $7,824,187 is available. An additional $50 million is also available for programming resulting from the Commission's action to advance the 1-15 Agenda Item 9F 67 Express Lanes Southern Extension project. The CTC approved the Commission's AB 3090 Replacement request, which allowed the $50 million of STIP originally programmed through the 2018 STIP cycle to be reprogrammed to another project. Staff will be recommending the reprogramming of the $50 million in STIP funds either through a STIP amendment or as part of the 2020 STIP cycle. Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley The Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) nominates its projects and notifies Commission staff for final concurrence and submittal to the CTC. Per the funding distribution for Coachella Valley, $2,148,346 is available for programming. Staff will review the programming process and timeline with CVAG staff and present CVAG's recommended projects to the Commission for inclusion in the 2020 STIP submittal. The funding available for Palo Verde Valley is $43,067. Palo Verde Valley projects are nominated by the city of Blythe (Blythe); however, given the minor amount of funding and complexity in processing these funds, the Commission and Blythe have executed MOUs in past STIP cycles trading Palo Verde Valley STIP funds with Measure A Western Riverside County Highway funds. The city of Blythe is required to include the STIP traded funds in its Measure A Local Street and Roads Capital Improvement Plan. Upon CTC's adoption of the 2020 STIP in March 2020, staff will move forward with preparing the 2020 STIP MOU with Blythe. Status of Current 2018 STIP Programming The current 2018 STIP projects for Riverside County include the following environmental, right of way, and construction phases as follows: 2018 STIP — Riverside County (Approved by CTC in March 2018) Agency Project Phase FY 2018/19 FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 FY 2021/22 FY 2022/23 Total STIP Temecula I-15/French Valley IC C $47,600,000 $47,600,000 Caltrans/ RCTC SR-60 Truck Climbing/ Descending Lanes C $31,555,000 31,555,000 RCTC/ CVAG PPM C $668,000 $1,800,000 $971,000 3,439,000 Riverside County Avenue 66 Grade Separation C $6,130,000 6,130,000 CVAG CV Link, Phase 1 C 18,655,000 18,655,000 RCTC/ Lake Elsinore I-15/Railroad Canyon IC C 2,920,000 2,920,000 *RCTC 1-15 Express Lanes Southern Extension E 50,000,000 50,000,000 Totals $38,353,000 $21,575,000 $49,400,000 $971,000 $50,000,000 $160,299,000 *AB 3090 Replacement project TBD C=Construction E=Environmental IC=Interchange PPM=Planning, Programming, and Monitoring Agenda Item 9F 68 Projects in FY 2018/19 from the above table have been allocated with the exception of the Avenue 66 Grade Separation, which will be allocated in August 2019. Projects programmed in FY 2019/20 are expected to be allocated as scheduled. Projects programmed in FY's 2020/21 and 2021/22 will be reviewed for carryover into the 2020 STIP. The CTC approved an AB 3090 replacement project for the 1-15 Express Lanes Southern Extension, as the Commission approved moving forward with the environmental document phase using federal funds. The replacement project will be selected as part of the 2020 STIP development. The CTC will adopt the Final STIP FE at its August 14-15, 2019 meeting. There is a possibility that the Final FE will differ from the Draft FE; therefore, staff will report any changes at the September Commission meeting. The 2020 STIP submittal is due to the CTC by December 15, 2019. CTC adoption of the 2020 STIP is scheduled for March 2020. There is no fiscal impact to the Commission related to the adoption of the 2020 STIP funding distribution. Agenda Item 9F 69 AGENDA ITEM 9G RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Ariel Tapia Alcon, Management Analyst Alfredo Machuca, Management Analyst Intern LoreIle Moe -Luna, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2019 Title VI Program Report Update, including Public Participation Plan and Language Assistance Plan BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the 2019 Title VI Program Report, including the Public Participation Plan and Language Assistance Plan in compliance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and amendments protects persons in the United States from being excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. The Commission's commitment to ensuring that its services are delivered and implemented in accordance with Title VI is described in the Non -Discrimination notice and procedures that were adopted by the Commission on October 10, 2012. The existing practices conform to Caltrans' requirements for implementing Title VI and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations. However, as a recipient of FTA funds, requirements for implementing Title VI are more extensive and include the adoption of a Title VI Program under the guidelines set forth in FTA Circular 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. The Commission is unique in that it is a recipient of FTA funds (through the Rail Program); however, it is not a transit operator or a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Nevertheless, since FTA funds were utilized for the development of various RCTC-owned Metrolink stations, the FTA Title VI requirements and guidelines apply. The institution -wide application of Title VI has been emphasized at recent FTA workshops since the Circular was revised in 2016 with the assertion that, "Title VI covers all of the operations of covered entities without regard to whether specific portions of the covered program or activity are federally Agenda Item 9G 70 funded...Recipients are responsible for ensuring that all of their activities are in compliance with Title VI. In other words, a recipient may engage in activities not described in the Circular, such as ridesharing program, roadway incident response program, or other programs not funded by FTA, and those programs must also be administered in a nondiscriminatory manner." (p. II-1) The Circular has general requirements and guidelines for all recipients and additional requirements for fixed route transit providers, states, and MPOs. As the regional transportation planning agency and county transportation commission, only the general requirements and guidelines, as listed below, are applicable to the Commission. 1) Title VI Notice to the Public — A notice shall be posted in public locations and website, including language that the recipient complies with Title VI and instructions on how to file a Title VI complaint to the Commission and directly to the FTA. 2) Title VI Complaint Procedures and Complaint Form — Procedures on filing a complaint shall be developed for investigating and tracking Title VI complaints. A complaint form must also include the necessary information and questions to conduct an investigation. 3) List of transit -related Title VI investigations, complaints, or lawsuits — FTA requires that files of investigations, complaints, or lawsuits that pertain to allegations of discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in transit -related activities and programs be maintained for three years and a list of cases be held for five years. 4) Public Participation Plan — An established process or plan shall promote inclusive public participation and describe the proactive strategies, procedures, and desired outcomes of a recipient's public participation activities. 5) Language Assistance Plan — Recipients are required to take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to benefits, services, information, and other important portions of its programs or activities for persons who are limited -English proficient. 6) A table depicting the membership on non -elected committees and councils, broken down by race — This pertains to transit -related, non -elected planning boards, advisory councils or committees. 7) Monitoring procedures for subrecipients — The Commission had two subrecipients during this reporting period, Metrolink and Riverside Transit Agency. Since both subrecipients are also direct recipients of FTA funds and submit a Title VI report directly, the Commission is not required to monitor their Title VI procedures. 8) Title VI equity analysis for the site and location of facilities — "Facilities" included in this provision include, but are not limited to, storage facilities, maintenance facilities, operations centers, etc. Recipients are required to complete an equity analysis, including the impacts of various siting alternatives, during the planning stage with regard to where a project is located or sited to ensure that the location is selected without regard to race, color, or national origin. 9) Documentation that the governing board has reviewed and approved the Title VI Program — A copy of meeting minutes or a resolution must be submitted with the Title VI Program Report. Agenda Item 9G 71 The Title VI Program was last updated in 2016 and is required to be updated every three years, or as necessary, when guidelines are revised or as compliance reviews require. FTA requires a review and update of the Title VI Program Report at least triennially. Upon approval of the Title VI Program, staff will submit the report to FTA via the Transit Award Management System. Concurrence and approval of the report by the FTA Regional Civil Rights Office is anticipated within 30 days. There is no financial impact to the Commission budget with the adoption of this program. Attachment: Title VI Program Report Agenda Item 9G 72 TITLE VI � PROGRAV REPORT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION Riverside, CA 92501 COMMISSION ION 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Hoer If information is needed in another language, please contact (951 ) 787-7141 for free translation services. Si se necesita este documents en Espanol, Ilame al 95�3787-7141 para servicios de traduccian gratuitss, Table of Contents Introduction and Purpose 1 Background of RCTC 2 Title VI Notice to the Public 3 Title VI Complaint Procedures and Complaint Form 4 List of Transit -Related Title VI Investigations, Complaints, or Lawsuits 5 Public Participation Plan 5 Language Assistance Plan 5 Membership of Non -Elected Committees and Councils 6 Subrecipient Compliance 7 Title VI Equity Analysis for Determining the Site or Location of Facilities 7 Approval of the Title VI Program 8 Appendices Appendix A: Title VI Policy, Procedures, and Complaint Form (English and Spanish) Appendix B: Public Participation Plan Appendix C: Language Assistance Plan Appendix D: Documentation of Governing Body Approval 74 Introduction and Purpose Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects persons in the United States from being excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC or Commission) is committed to ensuring that its services are delivered and implemented in accordance with Title VI and other non-discriminatory regulations from the state and federal levels. As a state recipient, RCTC complies with the guidelines set forth by the State of California's (State) Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Caltrans requires local agencies to adopt a non-discriminatory notice, grievance procedures, complaint form, and a Coordinator of the program. These were approved by the Commission on October 10, 2012 for implementing Title VI and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). RCTC is also a recipient under the federal Department of Transportation (DOT). Under the DOT, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements for implementing Title VI include the adoption of a Title VI Program report pursuant to FTA Circular 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. The purpose of this report is to certify RCTC's compliance with FTA Circular 4702.1B every three years. As stated in Chapter II, page 1 of the Circular, RCTC will ensure that Title VI compliance is carried out in all of its programs and services, whether federally -funded or not, "Title VI covers all of the operations of covered entities without regard to whether specific portions of the covered program or activity are federally funded... In other words, a recipient may engage in activities not described in the Circular, such as ridesharing program, roadway incident response program, or other programs not funded by FTA, and those programs must also be administered in a nondiscriminatory manner." The Circular has general requirements for all recipients and additional guidelines for Fixed Route Transit Providers, States, and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). As the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) and County Transportation Commission (CTC), the following general requirements and guidelines apply: 1) Title VI Notice to the Public 2) Title VI Complaint Procedures 3) Title VI Complaint Form 4) List of transit -related Title VI investigations, complaints, or lawsuits 5) Public Participation Plan 6) Language Assistance Plan 1 75 7) A table depicting the membership on non -elected committees broken down by race 8) Monitoring procedures for Subrecipients 9) Title VI equity analysis for the site and location of facilities 10) Documentation that the governing board has reviewed and approved the Title VI Program The following sections of this report document how the Commission is in compliance with each requirement. Background of RCTC The Commission was established in 1976 by the State to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside County. The governing body consists of all five members of the County Board of Supervisors, one elected official from each of the County's 28 cities, and one non -voting member appointed by the Governor of California. As the designated RTPA and CTC, its responsibilities include setting policies, establishing priorities, coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and local jurisdictions. The public is most familiar with RCTC for its capital projects and motorist aid services. The various regional capital projects that RCTC is involved in throughout the County include the following: ✓ State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project ✓ State Route 91 High Occupancy Vehicle Project ✓ Mid -County Parkway ✓ Realignment of State Route 79 ✓ Expansion of Metrolink from Riverside to Perris ✓ State Route 60 Truck Climbing Lanes ✓ Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Project ✓ State Route 91/71 Interchange Project ✓ Interstate 10/ State Route 60 Interchange The Commission also provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. These services include the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a program that provides call box service for motorists; the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP), a roving tow truck service that assist motorists with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods; and Rideshare programs such as Inland Empire 511 (IE511), a traveler information system. 2 76 These programs and projects are funded with various local, state, and federal sources. Local funding sources consist of Measure A, the countywide sales tax; Debt proceeds, derived from issuing bonds; and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF), derived from developer impact fees. State funding sources for projects are derived from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). RCTC also receives apportionments of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); and FTA Sections 5307, 5309, 5337 formula funds. Additionally, the Commission was also awarded an FTA Small Starts grant for the Perris Valley Line. The Commission is unique in that it is not a transit provider like many other CTCs, however, does receive FTA formula funds (under the Rail Program) for transfer and expenditure for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink). Regardless of funding source, RCTC is committed to ensuring that its projects and services are delivered and implemented in a non-discriminatory manner. Title VI Notice to the Public Recipients must notify beneficiaries of protections under Title VI by posting a notice in public locations that confirms that the recipient complies with Title VI and provides instructions on how to file a Title VI complaint to RCTC and directly to the FTA. The following notice is available on RCTC's website, RCTC owned Metrolink stations, and at the front desk of RCTC's offices at 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. RCTC operates its programs and services without regard to race, color, and national origin in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Any person who believes she or he has been aggrieved by any unlawful discriminatory practice under Title VI may file a complaint with RCTC. For more information on RCTC's Title VI program, and the procedures to file a complaint, contact (951) 787-7141; email 1standiford@rctc.org; or visit our administrative office at 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. For more information, you may also visit our website at www.rctc.ora for additional information and to download a complaint form under "About Us". 3 77 A complainant may file a complaint directly with the Federal Transit Administration by filing a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights, Attention: Title VI Program Coordinator, East Building, 5t" Floor — TCR, 1200 New Jersey Avenue., SE, Washington, DC 20590. If information is needed in another language, contact (951) 787-7141. The notice is considered a vital document and is available in Spanish, consistent with DOT limited - English proficient (LEP) guidance and RCTC's Language Assistance Plan (LAP). The Spanish translation is also posted where English versions are located. See Appendix A for a complete English and Spanish version the Commission's Title VI Policy, Procedures, and Complaint form. Title VI Complaint Procedures and Complaint Form Requirements stipulate that recipients develop procedures for investigating and tracking Title VI complaints filed against them and make their procedures for filing a complaint available to members of the public. Recipients must also develop a Title VI complaint form and make this form available. RCTC's Complaint Procedures and Complaint Form are provided in Appendix A. Similar to the Non -Discrimination policy requirements of Caltrans, the Deputy Executive Director, John Standiford, has been identified as the Civil Rights Liaison and will be the primary contact for addressing Title VI complaints. The procedures explain that any person, or group of persons, who believes that they have been subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin may file a complaint to RCTC, or directly to FTA. RCTC will render a decision within 15 days upon follow-up with the complainant. The Circular also requires that the recipient explicitly state that a complainant has the opportunity to submit a complaint directly to FTA and must provide the contact information for submitting a complaint. These documents are available on RCTC's website and at the front desk of RCTC's offices at 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. In addition to the public notice, the complaint procedures and form are considered vital documents and as such are available in Spanish, consistent with the DOT LEP Guidance and RCTC's LAP. 4 78 List of Transit -Related Title VI Investigations, Complaints, or Lawsuits FTA requires that files of investigations, complaints, or lawsuits that pertain to allegations of discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in transit -related activities and programs be maintained for three years and a list of cases be held for five years. RCTC has not received any transit -related Title VI complaints, nor has it been involved in any transit -related Title VI investigations or lawsuits. Public Participation Plan Recipients are required to promote inclusive public participation and seek out and consider the needs and input of the general public, including interested parties and those traditionally underserved by existing transportation systems, such as minority and LEP persons. The Public Participation Plan is the established process or plan that describes the proactive strategies, procedures, and desired outcomes of a recipient's public participation activities. RCTC developed its Public Participation Plan by considering the demographic analysis of the population(s) affected, the type of plan, program, and/or service under consideration, and the resources available to the Commission. The Public Participation Plan is provided as Appendix B. Language Assistance Plan Recipients are required to take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to benefits, services, information, and other important portions of its programs or activities for LEP populations. FTA Circular 4702.1B details the components of the Language Assistance Plan, including the Four Factor Analysis, which provides a careful analysis of LEP persons that the recipient may encounter to determine the specific language services that are appropriate to provide. 5 79 RCTC undertook the Four Factor Analysis and developed appropriate language assistance planning based on the results. The Commission then developed a Language Assistance Plan to assist it in effectively implementing the requirements and communicating with LEP individuals. The Language Assistance Plan is provided as Appendix C. Membership of Non -Elected Committees and Councils Recipients that have transit -related, non -elected planning boards, advisory councils or committees, or similar bodies, in which the membership is selected by the recipient, must provide a table depicting the racial breakdown of the membership of those committees, and a description of efforts made to encourage the participation of minorities on such committees or councils. RCTC has one transit -related committee that is applicable to this requirement, the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (CAC/SSTAC). Section 99238 of the State Transportation Development Act (TDA) regulations requires the Commission to have a CAC/SSTAC as part of the oversight process in administering the TDA funds. The TDA allows stipulates the membership of this body: 1) One representative of a potential transit user 60 years of age and older; 2) One representative of a potential transit user who is disabled; 3) Two representatives of the social service providers for seniors; 4) Two representatives of the social service providers for the disabled, including one representative of a social service transportation provider, if one exists; 5) One representative of a social service provider for persons of limited means; and 6) Two representatives of a Consolidated Transportation Service Agency(s) designated as such pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 15975 of the Government Code, including one representative from an operator, if one exists. The CAC/SSTAC serves the Commission by participating in the transit needs hearing and reviewing the Short Range Transit Plans developed by public transit operators as part of the Commission's annual budget development process. Most importantly, the CAC/SSTAC provides a dialogue between citizen appointee representatives and the public transit and specialized transit programs of Riverside County around matters of mutual concern and provides the Commission with invaluable community feedback. 6 80 Appointments are for an initial three-year term and some are extended to ensure continuity of service for the CAC. The selection process of CAC members was broadly noticed in media, on the RCTC website, and in various outreach settings, including asking Commissioners for input and conducting individualized outreach to social service providers. In 2019, Commission staff anticipates that the existing CAC/SSTAC bylaws will be revised to expand the committee membership to include more social service agencies and transit providers to develop a more robust network that is more representative of the various populations in the county. Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Council Race Caucasian Latino African American Asian American Native American CAC/SSTAC 66.5% 33.5% 0% 0% 0% Subrecipient Compliance If a recipient is a primary recipient, which means any FTA recipient that extends federal financial assistance to a subrecipient, then it is required to ensure that subrecipients are complying with Title VI, including the submittal of a subrecipient's Title VI documents. In the last three years, RCTC had two subrecipients: the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), better known as Metrolink, and the Riverside Transit Agency. Both agencies are also direct recipients of FTA funds and submit a Title VI report directly. Per FTA Circular 4702.1B, Chapter III, page 11: "When a subrecipient is also a direct recipient of FTA funds, that is, applies for funds directly from FTA in addition to receiving funds from a primary recipient, the subrecipient/direct recipient reports directly to FTA and the primary recipient/designated recipient is not responsible for monitoring compliance of that subrecipient." Title VI Equity Analysis for Determining the Site or Location of Facilities This requirement stipulates that recipients should complete a Title VI equity analysis during the planning stage with regard to where a project is located or sited to ensure the location is selected without regard to race, color, or national origin. The equity analysis must include: 7 81 " Outreach to persons potentially impacted by the siting of facilities. " Comparison of the equity impacts of various siting alternatives, and the analysis must occur before the selection of the preferred site. The purpose of completing a Title VI analysis during the project development stage is to determine if a project will have disparate impacts on the basis of race, color, or national origin. If such impacts exist then the project may move forward with the proposed location if there is substantial legitimate justification for locating the project there, and there are no alternative locations that would have a less adverse impact on members of a group protected under Title VI. For purposes of this requirement, the Circular states that "facilities" does not include bus shelters, as they are transit amenities and are covered under the additional requirements for fixed route transit operators, nor does it include transit stations, power substations, etc., as those are evaluated during project development and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. Facilities included in this provision include, but are not limited to, storage facilities, maintenance facilities, operations centers, etc. There have not been any projects in the last three years requiring an equity analysis. Approval of the Title VI Program All recipients are required to provide documentation such as meeting minutes, resolution, or other appropriate documentation showing that the governing body reviewed and approved the Title VI Program prior to submission to FTA. RCTC's Title VI Program was reviewed and approved by the Budget and Implementation Committee on June 24, 2019 and forwarded to the full Commission for approval on July 10, 2019. Appendix D includes a copy of the meeting agenda and staff report. 8 82 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - English TITLE VI NOTICE, COMPLAINT PROCEDURES, AND COMPLAINT FORM REVISED JUNE 2019 In accordance with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Circular 4702.1 B, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC) is required to notify beneficiaries of protection under Title VI, develop complaint procedures, and develop a complaint form. These documents are considered vital and are translated into languages other than English, as needed and consistent with the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Guidance and the Commission's Language Assistance Plan (LAP). I. POLICY AND NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The Commission does not discriminate or exclude individuals from its programs, services, or activities on the basis of race, color, or national origin. The following notice shall be posted on the Commission's website, main reception area, and relevant publication materials: RCTC operates its programs and services without regard to race, color, and national origin in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Any person who believes she or he has been aggrieved by any unlawful discriminatory practice under Title VI may file a complaint with RCTC. For more information on RCTC's Title VI program, and the procedures to file a complaint, contact (951) 787-7141; email jstandiford@rctc.org; or visit our administrative office at 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. For more information, you may also visit our website at www.rctc.org for additional information and to download a complaint form under "About Us". A complainant may file a complaint directly with the Federal Transit Administration by filing a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights, Attention: Title VI Program Coordinator, East Building, 5th Floor - TCR, 1200 New Jersey Avenue., SE, Washington, DC 20590. If information is needed in another language, contact (951) 787- 7141. Si se necesita la informacion en otro idioma, flame al (951 ) 787- 7141. 83 Rev. 06/2019 Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - English II. PROCEDURES FOR FILING, INVESTIGATING, AND TRACKING COMPLAINTS Any person, group of individuals, or entity that believes it has been subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin by the Commission may file a complaint directly or through a representative with the Commission or the DOT FTA. Submission of Complaint to RCTC To file a complaint with RCTC, the complainant may contact the main reception at (951) 787-7141 to request a copy of the complaint form and procedures, or visit the website at www.rctc.org to download the complaint form and procedures. When possible, the complainant should complete the complaint form, or in writing provide information about the alleged discrimination containing the following: • Name of Complainant; • Address of Complainant; • Phone number of Complainant; • Date of incident; • Location of incident; and • Description of incident In cases where the complainant is unable or incapable of providing a written statement, the complainant may be interviewed or the complaint form may also be provided in alternative means such as audio or Braille. The complaint should be submitted as soon as possible but no later than 180 calendar days after the alleged violation to the Deputy Executive Director by email at jstandiford@rctc.org, postal mail, or in person at the following: Riverside County Transportation Commission John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 If the information provided is insufficient to conduct an investigation or render a decision, RCTC may request additional information from the complainant. Failure of the complainant to submit additional information within the designated time frame may be considered good cause to administratively close the case on the basis of lack of investigative merit. 84 Rev. 06/2019 Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - English Within 15 calendar days after receipt of the complaint, RCTC's Deputy Executive Director, or designee, will request a meeting to discuss the alleged incident with the complainant. Within 15 calendar days of the discussion, RCTC will respond in writing, and where appropriate, in a format accessible to the complainant. The response will explain the position of RCTC and offer options for resolution of the complaint. If the complainant is n o t sa tisfie d with th e d e cision of the Deputy Executive Director, or designee, an appeal may be filed within 15 calendar days after receipt of the response, to RCTC's Executive Director. Within 15 calendar days after receipt of the appeal, the Executive Director, or designee, will request a meeting to discuss the alleged incident with the complainant. Within 15 calendar days after the meeting, the Executive Director or designee will respond in writing, and, where appropriate, in a format accessible to the complainant, with a final decision of the complaint. Submission of Complaint to FTA The complainant has the right to submit a complaint directly to the FTA, however, is encouraged to initially file with RCTC. As described in FTA Circular 4702.1 B, Chapter IX, to file with the FTA, the complaint must submitted no later than 180 days after the date of alleged discrimination at the address below, unless the time for filing is extended by FTA. Federal Transit Administration, Office of Civil Rights Title VI Program Coordinator East Building, 5th Floor - TCR 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Once a complaint has been accepted by FTA for investigation, FTA will notify RCTC that it is the subject of a Title VI complaint and ask RCTC to respond in writing to the complainant's allegations. If the complainant agrees to release the complaint to RCTC, FTA will provide RCTC with the complaint, which may have personal information redacted at the request of the complainant. If the complainant does not agree to release the complaint to RCTC, FTA may choose to close the complaint. FTA will make a prompt investigation whenever a compliance review, report, complaint, or any other information indicates a possible failure to comply with DOT's Title VI regulations. The investigation will include, where 85 Rev.06/2019 Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - English appropriate, a review of the pertinent practices and policies of RCTC, the circumstances under which the possible noncompliance with DOT's Title VI regulations occurred, and other factors relevant to a determination as to whether the recipient has failed to comply with DOT's Title VI regulations. After FTA has concluded the investigation, FTA's Office of Civil Rights will transmit to the complainant and RCTC one of the following letters based on its findings: a. A letter of finding indicating FTA did not find a violation of DOT's Title VI regulations. This letter will include an explanation of why FTA did not find a violation. If applicable, the letter may include a list of procedural violations or concerns, which will put RCTC on notice that certain practices are questionable and that without corrective steps, a future violation finding is possible. b. A letter of finding indicating RCTC is in violation of DOT's Title VI regulations. The letter will include each violation referenced to the applicable regulation, a brief description of proposed remedies, notice of the time limit on coming into compliance, the consequences of failure to achieve voluntary compliance, and an offer of assistance to RCTC in devising a remedial plan for compliance, if appropriate. FTA will administratively close Title VI complaints before a resolution is reached where (1) the complainant decides to withdraw the case; (2) the complainant is not responsive to FTA's requests for information or to sign a consent release form; (3) FTA has conducted or plans to conduct a related compliance review of the agency against which the complaint is lodged; (4) litigation has been filed raising similar allegations involved in the complaint; (5) the complaint was not filed within 180 days of the alleged discrimination; (6) the complaint does not indicate a possible violation of 49 CFR part 21; (7) the complaint is so weak, insubstantial, or lacking in detail that FTA determines it is without merit, or so replete with incoherent or unreadable statements that it, as a whole, cannot be considered to be grounded in fact; (8) the complaint has been investigated by another agency and the resolution of the complaint meets DOT regulatory standards; (9) the complaint allegations are foreclosed by previous decisions of the Federal courts, the Secretary, DOT policy determinations, or the U.S. DOT's Office of Civil Rights; (10) FTA obtains credible information that the allegations raised by the complaint have been resolved; (1 1) the complaint is a continuation of a pattern of previously filed complaints involving the same or similar allegations against the same recipient or other recipients that have been found factually or legally insubstantial by FTA; (12) the same complaint allegations have been filed with another Federal, state, or local agency, and FTA anticipates that the recipient will provide the complainant with a comparable resolution process under comparable legal standards; or 86 Rev. 06/2019 Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - English (13) the death of the complainant or injured party makes it impossible to investigate the allegations fully. Tracking of Complaints As required by FTA, all written complaints received by RCTC's Deputy Executive Director, or designee, appeals to the Executive Director, or designee, and responses from these two offices will be retained by RCTC for three years. In addition, a summary list of complaints will be tracked for five years as required. III. COMPLAINT FORM See Attachment A. If information is needed in another language, contact (951) 787- 7141. Si se necesita la informacion en otro idioma, Ilame al (951) 787-7141. 87 Rev. 06/2019 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTACHMENT A: TITLE VI DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT FORM Title VI Program - Appendix A The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is committed to ensuring that no person is excluded from participating in or denied the benefits of its services on the basis of race, color, or national origin as provided by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. Complaints must be filed within 180 days from the date of the alleged discrimination. The following information is necessary to assist RCTC in processing your complaint. If you require any assistance in completing this form, please contact the Civil Rights Officer, John Standiford, by calling (951) 787-7141. When completed, submit the original signed form or letter in person or by mail to: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 1. Contact Information: Complainant's Name: Address: City, State and Zip Code: Telephone: FOR QUESTIONS OR ASSISTANCE IN OTHER ACCESSIBLE FORMATS SUCH AS LARGE PRINT, TDD, AUDIO, OR OTHER PLEASE CALL: (951) 787-7141. USERS WITH HEARING OR SPEECH IMPAIRMENTS, USE THE CALIFORNIA RELAY SERVICE, 711, AND THEN THE NUMBER YOU NEED (home/work) (cell) What are the most convenient days and times for RCTC to contact you about this complaint? 2. Are you filing this complaint on your own behalf? Yes: ❑ No: ❑ If you answered yes, please go to question #3. If you answered no, please explain why you have filed for a third party: If you answered no, please confirm that you have obtained the permission of the aggrieved party if you are filing on behalf of a third party. Yes: ❑ No: ❑ Complaint Fign Page 1 of 3 3. Basis of discriminatory action(s): Check (❑ ) all categories below that apply to the act(s) of discrimination. a. Race b. Color c. National Origin 4. Date and place of alleged discriminatory action(s): Include the earliest date of discrimination and the most recent date of discrimination: Date: Location: Date: Location: 5. How were you discriminated against? Describe the nature of the action, decision, or conditions of the alleged discrimination. Explain as clearly as possible what happened and why you believe your protected status was a factor in the discrimination. Include how other persons were treated differently from you. (Attach additional page(s) if necessary). 6. Names of individuals responsible for the discriminatory action(s): Complaint Form Page 2 of 3 89 7. Names of individuals (witnesses, fellow employees, supervisors, or others) whom we may contact for additional information to support or clarify your complains: Name Address Telephone No. 8. Has this complaint been filed with any other Federal, State, or local investigative agency? No ❑ Yes ❑ If "yes," please provide the following information: Agency: Contact Person: Address: Telephone No.: Date Filed: 9. Please provide any additional information that you believe would assist in the investigation: You may attach any written materials or other information that you think is relevant to your complaint. Please sign and date this form: Signature of Complainant Date Si se necesita la informacion en otro idioma, !lame al (951) 787- 7141. Complaint Form Page 3 of 3 90 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - Spanish AVISO, PROCEDIMIENTO DE QUEJAS Y FORMATO DE QUEJA DE TITULO VI ACTUALIZADO JUNIO 2019 De conformidad con los requisitos del Titulo VI del Decreto de Derechos Civiles de 1964 y la Circular 4702.1 B de la Administraci6n Federal de Transito (FTA, en ingl6s), la Comisi6n de Transporte del Condado de Riverside (Comisi6n o RCTC, por sus siglas en ingl6s) esta obligada a notificar a los beneficiarios de las protecciones bajo el Titulo VI, desarrollar procedimientos de queja y desarrollar un formato de queja. Estos documentos se consideran vitales y se traducen a otros idiomas diferentes al ingles, segun se considere necesario y de forma consistence con la Orientaci6n para el Dominio Limitado del Ingl6s (LEP, en ingl6s) del Departamento de Transporte (DOT, en ingl6s) y el Plan de Asistencia de Lenguaje de la Comisi6n (LAP, en ingl6s). I. POLITICAS Y AVISO AL PUBLICO Es politica de la Comisi6n de no discrimina o excluye a personas sobre la base de raza, color, u origen nacional en la admisi6n a sus programas, servicios o actividades, en el acceso a ellas, en el tratamiento o en cualquier aspecto de las operaciones. El siguiente aviso debe colocarse en el sitio web de la Comisi6n, en la zona de recepci6n principal y en los materiales impresos relevances: La RCTC opera sus programas y servicios sin tomar en cuenta el grupo etnico ni el origen nacional de conformidad con el Titulo VI del Decreto de Derechos Civiles. Cualquier persona que considere que ha sido objeto de cualquier practica discriminatoria ilegal bajo el Titulo VI puede presentar una queja contra la RCTC. Para mayor informaci6n sobre el programa de Titulo VI de la RCTC y los procedimientos para presentar una queja, comuniquese al (951)787-7141; envie un correo electr6nico a jstandiford@rctc.ora; o visite nuestras oficinas administrativas ubicadas en 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. Tambien puede visitarnuestra pagina web en www.rctc.org para informaci6n adicional y para descargar el formulario de queja bajo el apartado "Acerca de nosotros"(About Us, en ingl6s). Tambien puede presentar una queja directamente con la Administraci6n Federal de Transporte, por medio de la Oficina de Derechos Civiles, a la atenci6n del Coordinador del Programa de Titulo VI, East Building, 5th Floor TCR, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, 91 Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - Spanish Washington, DC 20590. Si requiere informacion en otro idioma, favor de comunicarse al (951)787- 7141. II. PROCEDIMIENTOS PARA PRESENTAR, INVESTIGAR Y HACER SEGUIMIENTO DE LAS QUEJAS Cualquier persona, grupo de personas o entidad que considere haber sido sometido a discriminacion por motivos de grupo etnico u origen nacional por parte de la Comision, puede presentar una queja directamente o por medio de un representante ante la comision o la FTA del DOT. Presentacion de una queja contra la RCTC Para presentar una queja contra la RCTC, el reclamante puede ponerse en contacto con la recepcion principal al (951)787-7141 para solicitar una copia del formulario de queja y sus procedimientos, o puede visitar la pagina web www.rctc.org para descargar el formulario de queja y sus procedimientos. Siempre que sea posible, el reclamante debe completar el formulario, o proporcionar por escrito la informacion sobre la presunta discriminacion, la cual debe incluir to siguiente: • Nombre del reclamante; • Domicilio del reclamante; • Numero telefonico del reclamante; • Fecha del incidence; • Ubicacion del incidence; y • Descripcion del incidence En casos en los que el reclamante no pueda o sea incapaz de proporcionar una declaracion por escrito, se puede entrevistar al reclamante o este puede presentar su declaracion por un medio alternativo como audio o Braille. La queja debe presentarse ante el Subdirector Ejecutivo to antes posible, pero no mas de 180 dias naturales despues de la presunta infraccion, por correo electronico a jstandiford@rctc.org, por correo postal o en persona en el siguiente domicilio: Riverside County Transportation Commission John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA92502-2208 92 Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - Spanish Si la informacion proporcionada es insuficiente para realizar una investigacion o generar una decision, la RCTC puede solicitar al reclamante informacion adicional. De no presentar el reclamante la informacion adicional dentro del plazo designado, se puede considerar que hay suficiente causa administrativa para cerrar el caso debido a la falta de merito investigativo. Dentro 15 dias calendario despues de haber recibido la queja, el Director Ejecutivo de la RCTC, o su representante, solicitaran una reunion para abordar el presunto incidence con el reclamante. Dentro 15 dias calendario despues de la reunion, la RCTC responders por escrito, y en los casos en que sea apropiado, en un formato accesible al reclamante. La respuesta explicara la postura de la RCTC y ofrecera opciones para la resolucion de la queja. Si el reclamante no esta satisfecho con la decision del Subdirector Ejecutivo, o su representante, se puede presentar una apelacion ante el Director Ejecutivo de la RCTC dentro de los 15 dias calendario despues de haber recibido la respuesta. Dentro 15 dias calendario siguientes despues de haber recibido la apelacion, el Director Ejecutivo, o su representante, solicitaran una reunion para abordar el presunto incidence con el reclamante. Dentro 15 dias calendario despues de la reunion, el Director Ejecutivo responders por escrito, y en los casos en que sea apropiado, en un formato accesible al reclamante, con la decision final respecto a la queja. Presentacion de queja ante la FTA El reclamante tiene el derecho de presentar una queja directamente ante la FTA, sin embargo, se le exhorta a que la presence inicialmente ante la RCTC. Tal como se describe en la circular 4702.1 B, capitulo IX de la FTA, para presentar una queja el reclamante debe hacerlo no mas de 180 dias despues de la presunta discriminacion, en el domicilio a continuacion, a menos que la FTA amplie el plazo para presentarla. Federal Transit Administration Office of Civil Rights Title VI Program Coordinator East Building, 5th Floor - TCR 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Una vez que la FTA acepte la queja para realizar una investigacion, la FTA notificara a la RCTC que es sujeto de una queja de Titulo VI y le solicitara una respuesta por escrito respecto a la acusacion del reclamante. Si el reclamante accede a que se divulgue su queja a la RCTC, la FTA se la proporcionara a la 93 Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - Spanish RCTC, y dicha queja podria contener informaci6n personal oculta a petici6n del reclamante. Si el reclamante no esta de acuerdo en divulgar la queja a la RCTC, la FTA puede elegir cerrar dicha queja. La FTA realizara una investigaci6n expedita siempre que un analisis del cumplimiento de las reglas, un informe, queja o cualquier otra informaci6n indiquen una posible falla en el cumplimiento de los reglamentos de Titulo VI del DOT. La investigaci6n incluira, en los casos apropiados, un analisis de las practicas y politicas pertinentes de la RCTC; las circunstancias bajo las cuales ocurri6 el posible incumplimiento con los reglamentos del Titulo VI del DOT y otros factores relevances a la determinaci6n de si el destinatario no cumpli6 con los reglamentos de Titulo VI del DOT. Despu6s de que la FTA concluya la investigaci6n, la Oficina de Derechos Civiles de la FTA transmitira al reclamante y a la RCTC una de las siguientes cartas de acuerdo con sus hallazgos: a. Una Carta que indique que la FTA no encontr6 una violaci6n de los reglamentos de Titulo VI del DOT. Esta carta incluira una explicaci6n de porqu6 la FTA no encontr6 una violaci6n. En caso necesario, la carta podria incluir una lista de las violaciones a procedimientos o inquietudes, misma que pondra a la RCTC sobre aviso de que ciertas practicas son cuestionables y que de no haber pasos correctivos, es posible que en el futuro si se detecte una violaci6n. b. Una carta que indique que la RCTC ha violado los reglamentos del Titulo VI del DOT. La carta incluira cada violaci6n en referencia con los reglamentos aplicables, una breve descripci6n de remedios propuestos, un aviso sobre el plazo limite para darle cumplimiento, las consecuencias que tendria la falta de cumplimiento voluntario y una oferta de ayuda a la RCTC para la creaci6n de un plan de soluci6n para lograr el cumplimiento, en los casos apropiados. La FTA cerrara administrativamente las quejas de Titulo VI antes de que se Ilegue a una resoluci6n si (1) el reclamante decide retractar el caso; (2) el reclamante no responde cuando la FTA le solicite proporcionar informaci6n o firmar un formulario de consentimiento de divulgaci6n de informaci6n; (3) la FTA ha realizado o planea realizar un analisis de cumplimiento de la agencia contra la cual se ha presentado una queja; (4) se ha iniciado un litigio con acusaciones similares a las que incluye la queja; (5) la queja no se present6 en un lapso de 180 dias despu6s de la presunta discriminaci6n; (6) la queja no indica una posible violaci6n del articulo 49 CFR parte 21; (7) la queja es deficiente, insustancial o carece de detalle a tal grado que la FTA determina que no tiene m6rito o tiene enunciados tan incoherentes o ilegibles que no se puede considerar que esta basada en hechos; (8) la queja ha sido investigada por otra agencia y la resoluci6n de esta reune los estandares regulatorios del DOT; (9) las acusaciones de la queja han sido adjudicadas por decisiones 94 Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - Spanish previas de los tribunales federales, el Secretario, las determinaciones de las politicas del DOT o la Oficina de Derechos Civiles del DOT; (10) la FTA obtiene informacion creible de que las acusaciones en la queja han sido resueltas; (1 1) la queja es la continuacion de un patron de quejas previamente presentadas, las cuales involucran acusaciones iguales o parecidas en contra del mismo reclamante u otros reclamantes y que la FTA ha considerado factual o legalmente insustanciales; (12) se han presentado las mismas acusaciones en la queja ante otra agencia federal, estatal o local y la FTA anticipa que el destinatario proporcionara al reclamante un proceso de resolucion comparable bajo estandares legales comparables; o (13) el fallecimiento del reclamante o de la parte afectada hace que sea imposible investigar por completo las acusaciones. Seguimiento de las quejas Tal como to requiere la FTA; Codas las quejas por escrito que recibe el Subdirector Ejecutivo de la RCTC, o su representante, las apelaciones ante el Director Ejecutivo, o su representante, y las respuestas de estas dos oficinas se conservar6n en la RCTC durance tres anos. Ademas, se Ilevar6 una lista resumida de las quejas durance cinco anos, como es requerido. III. FORMULARIO DE QUEJA Ver adjunto A. Si requiere informacion en otro idioma, favor de comunicarse al (951)787- 7141. 95 Title VI Program — Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - Spanish RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ADJUNTO A: FORMULARIO DE QUEJA DE DISCRIMINACION DE TITULO VI La Comisi6n de Transporte del condado de Riverside (RCTC) se compromete a asegurar que no se excluya a ninguna persona de participar o que se le nieguen los beneficios de sus servicios debido al grupo etnico u origen nacional tan como to dicta el Decreto de Derechos Civiles de Titulo VI de 1964, en su versi6n modificada. Las quejas deben presentarse en un lapso de 180 dias despu6s de la fecha de la presunta discriminaci6n. Es necesaria la siguiente informaci6n para ayudar a la RCTC a procesar su queja. Si requiere ayuda para Ilenar este formulario, por favor comuniquese con el responsable de la Oficina de Derechos Civiles, John Standiford, Ilamando al (951) 787- 7141. Una vez que Ilene este formulario, presentelo con la firma original, o una Carta firmada, en persona o por correo a: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P.O. Box12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 SI TIENE PREGUNTAS O REQUIERE AYUDA PARA OBTENER OTROS FORMATOS ACCESIBLES TALES COMO TIPOGRAFIA GRANDE, TDD, AUDIO U OTRO, FAVOR DE LLAMAR AL: (951)787-7141. LOS USUARIOS CON IMPEDIMENTO DEL HABLA O DE AUDICION, PUEDEN USAR EL SERVICIO DE TRANSMISION DE CALIFORNIA, 711, Y DESPUES EL NUMERO QUE NECESITA. 1. Informaci6n de contacto: Nombre del reclamante: Domicilio: Ciudad, estado y c6digo postal: Tel6fono: (hogar/trabajo) (celular LCuales son los dias y el horario mas convenience para que la RCTC se comunique con usted respecto a esta queja? 2. eresenta usted esta queja por su propia cuenta? Si:❑ No: ❑ Si respondi6 que si, por favor vaya a la pregunta #3. Si respondio que no, por favor explique porqu6 presenta esta queja a nombre de un tercero: Si respondio que no, por favor confirme que cuenta con el permiso de la parte afectada, Formulario gtqueja Pagina 1 de 3 Title VI Program —Appendix A Complaint Procedures and Forms - Spanish si es que presenta usted esta queja a nombre de un tercero. Si: ❑ No: ❑ 97 3. Fundamento de la(s) accion(es) discriminatoria(s): Indique a continuacion (❑) Codas las categorfas que apliquen al acto (actos)de discriminacion. a. Raza b. Grupo etnico c. Origen nacional 4. Fecha y lugar de la(s) presunta(s) accion(es) discriminatoria(s): Incluya la primera fecha de la discriminacion y la Fecha mas reciente de la discriminacion: Fecha: Ubicacion: Fecha: Ubicacion: 5. LC6mo se discrimino en su contra? Describa el tipo de accion, decision o condiciones de la presunta discriminacion. Explique to mas claro posible que ocurrio y porque cree usted que su condicion protegida fue un factor en la discriminacion. Incluya como otras personas fueron tratadas de forma diferente a usted. (Adjunte paginas adicionales de ser necesario). 6. Nombre de las personas responsables por la(s) accion(es) discriminatoria(s): Formulario de queja Pagina 2 de 3 98 7. Nombre de las personas (testigos, empleados, supervisores u otros) a quienes podriamos contactar para obtener informacion adicional en apoyo o aclaracion de su queja: Nombre Domicilio Numero telefonico 8. i,Se ha presentado esta queja ante otra agencia investigadora federal, estatal o local? No❑ Si ❑ Si respondio que "sr, indique la siguiente informacion: Agencia: Persona de contacto: Domicilio: Num. telefonico: Fecha en que se presento: 9. Favor de proporcionar cualquier informacion adicional que considere de ayuda en la investigacion: Puede adjuntar cualquier material por escrito u otra informacion que considere relevance para su queja. Favor de firmar y anotar la fecha: Firma del reclamante Fecha Si necesita informacion en otro idioma, !lame al (951) 787- 7141. Formulario de queja Pagina 3 de 3 99 APPENDIX B TITLE VI PUBLIC PARTICI PATIO\ PLAN. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION Riverside, CA 92501 COMMISSION 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor If information is needed in another language, please Contact (951) 787-7141 for free translation services_ Si se necesita este document° err Espanol, (lame al 910687-7141 para servicias de traduccion gratuit°s, Title VI Program — Appendix B Table of Contents I. Introduction 2 Background of RCTC 2 Purpose of this Plan 2 Desired Outcomes 3 Federal and State Requirements 3 Public Participation Background 4 Riverside County Demographics 3 Minority Individuals 3 LEP Individuals 4 RCTC's Stakeholders 6 III. Public Participation Strategies and Tools 7 Public Participation Goals and Strategies 7 Project Specific Public Participation 9 Updating the Public Participation Plan 9 IV. Summary of Public Participation Activities 10 Transit -Related Public Participation 10 Capital -Related Public Participation 12 RCTC's Website 12 V. Contact information 13 VI. Attachments 14 Demographic Maps of Minority Populations in Riverside County 14 1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 101 Title VI Program — Appendix B I. Introduction Background of RCTC The Commission was established in 1976 by the State of California (State) to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside County. The governing body consists of all five members of the County Board of Supervisors, one elected official from each of the County's 28 cities, and one non -voting member appointed by the Governor of California. It is the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) and County Transportation Commission (CTC). Its responsibilities include setting policies, establishing priorities, coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and local jurisdictions. RCTC's capital projects, motorist aid services and transit -related programs and projects are funded with various local, state, and federal sources. Local funding sources consist of the Measure A, the countywide sales tax; debt proceeds derived from issuing bonds; and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) derived from developer impact fees. State funding sources for projects are derived from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). RCTC also receives apportionments of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); and FTA Small Starts and Sections 5307, 5309, 5337 formula funds. The Commission is unique in that it is not a transit provider like many other CTCs; however, it receives FTA formula funds (under the Rail Program) for transfer and expenditure for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink). Regardless of funding source, RCTC is committed to ensuring that its projects and services are delivered and implemented in a non-discriminatory manner. Purpose of this Plan This Public Participation Plan (Plan) is intended to satisfy Title VI requirements as expressed in FTA Circular 4702.1B. Recipients are required to promote inclusive public participation and seek out and consider the needs and input of the general public, including interested parties and those traditionally underserved by existing transportation systems, such as minority and Limited -English Proficient (LEP) persons. The Public Participation Plan is the established process or plan that describes the proactive strategies, procedures, and desired outcomes of a recipient's public participation activities. This Plan will provide direction for the Commission's public processes by allowing public input for the planning process and for RCTC's programs, projects, and activities to all members of Riverside County, including citizens, organizations, and public agencies. Finally, it will develop specific strategies inclusive of low-income, minority, LEP populations, and underrepresented individuals. 2 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 102 Title VI Program — Appendix B RCTC developed this Plan by considering the demographic analysis of the population(s) affected, the type of plan, program, and/or service under consideration, and the resources available to the Commission. Desired Outcomes This Plan details RCTC's public participation goals, as well as strategies that will be implemented to assist meeting these goals. From these efforts, the Commission anticipates the following outcomes: • Increased access to early, meaningful, and continual engagement in the transportation planning process for all individuals in Riverside County. • Implementation of proactive strategies to bring enhanced awareness and increased access for minority individuals, LEP individuals, low-income individuals and additional underrepresented and underserved individuals. • Participation and representation from a diverse range or perspectives. Federal and State Requirements Title VI and Federal Authority Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects persons in the United States from being excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Under the DOT, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements for implementing Title VI include the adoption of a Title VI Program report, including a Public Participation Plan, pursuant to FTA Circular 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. Public Hearing Requirements Public hearing requirements may vary by project or program. The Commission may conduct a public hearing for a variety of reasons, such as approval of the Program of Projects under the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); to discuss and present the proposed location; or significant changes to right of way and major design features, social and environmental effects of a proposed project that is funded with state and federal funds. Capital projects, for instance, will comply with Caltrans' Project Development Procedures Manual, Chapter 11 Public Hearing requirements; whereas, FTIP projects would follow the public participation requirements stipulated under the existing transportation legislation, Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act. 3 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 103 Title VI Program — Appendix B Public Participation Background RCTC's traditionally seeks public involvement for both capital projects and transit -related projects. The public is most familiar with RCTC for its capital projects. The various regional capital projects that RCTC is involved in throughout the County include the following: ✓ 91 Express Lanes ✓ Interstate 15 Express Lanes ✓ 15/91 Express Lanes Connector ✓ Interstate 15 Express Lanes Southern Extension ✓ 15/91 Express Lanes Connector ✓ State Route 91 Corridor Operations Project ✓ State Route 71/91 Interchange Project ✓ State Route 60 Truck Lanes Project ✓ Mid -County Parkway/Interstate 215 Placentia Avenue Interchange ✓ Interstate 15/Railroad Canyon Interchange Project ✓ Interstate 15 Express Lanes Southern Extension ✓ State Route 79 Realignment ✓ Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project ✓ Santa Ana River Trail Extension Projects A specialized outreach plan is designed for each project and may include community meetings, open houses, and formal public hearings. Transit -related projects that involve public participation may include: • The Coordinated Plan Process • The Citizen Advisory Committee, RCTC Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee • The Annual Transit Needs Hearing • The FTIP Program of Projects • 211 • Park and Ride Lots • Rideshare 4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 104 Title VI Program — Appendix B Riverside County Demographics Riverside County is the fourth largest county in California by area and population and is diverse in geography and demographics. According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2017 American Community Survey, Riverside County covers 7,208 square miles and has a population of 2,355,002. Many of the populations important to this Plan — minority, underrepresented, and low-income individuals — are described in the American Community Survey's estimates. The U.S. Census allows ACS Dataset Tables to be compared with the Decennial Census information regarding sex, age race, Hispanic origin, and homeowner status. By referring to the 2010 Decennial Census and 2017 American Community Survey Estimates, the Commission has generated the following information to showcase county growth. • Riverside County's population experienced a 7 percent increase between 2010 and 2017. • The adult population ages 18-64 increased by more than 5 percent, adding 113,355 individuals. Adults in these age groups represent 60 percent of the county's total population, numbering nearly 1.42 million people. • The low-income adult population increased by 18.8 percent since the 2010 ACS Estimates, adding almost 44,200 individuals and representing 9.9 percent of the current entire population. • Adults with disabilities total 130,300, which represents 9 percent of the adult population and six percent of the County's total population. • The adult population age 65 or older has increased by nearly 25 percent, adding 82,000 people. This group amounts to a total of almost 340,500 persons, representing 14.1 percent of the total county population. • Younger seniors, ages 65 to 74, is the largest senior group, representing 48 percent of all seniors. • Older seniors, ages 85 and older, is the fastest growing group, having increased 76.8 percent from 2010 to 2017. • The 2017 ACS estimates indicate that three-quarters of all seniors report some form of disability; as a group, the entire senior population age 65 years and older represent almost 11 percent of Riverside County's total population. Most frequently, this group's reported disabilities include difficulties with walking and living independently. Minority Individuals RCTC conducted demographic analysis of minority populations in the aggregate to understand where these communities are located throughout the County. FTA Title VI guidance defines a minority person as an individual of any of the following groups: American Indian and Alaskan Native, Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders. 3 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 105 Title VI Program — Appendix B Demographic maps are provided in Attachment A, based upon minority population count tabulations developed for each Riverside County census tract. These were derived by subtracting the Caucasian population from each tract to arrive at the non -white, minority population counts. A summary of findings is provided below. This analysis was done at the Census Tract and Block Group levels using 2013 American Community Survey 5-year estimates, which is still relevant and reflects the current demographics. • Figure 1: In Western Riverside County, there are pockets of minority populations throughout the region. The largest concentrations of minority populations, between 59.2 to 84.3% of the population at the Census block group level, are found along the western border of the County near Norco and Rubidoux; near Moreno Valley; east of Banning; and in the south portion of the region, near Murrieta. • Figure 2: In East Riverside County, most of the region has a minority population of 34.3% to 45.6% of the total population at the block group level. A more concentrated minority population is located on the North Shore of the Salton Sea. • Figure 3: Coachella Valley is also home to many minority persons, with the largest concentrations of minority persons located north of Cabazon, north of Cathedral City and Thousand Palms and south of Thermal. In these pockets, minority persons make up 59.2 to 84.3% of the block group population of these areas. LEP Individuals As documented in RCTC's Language Assistance Plan (LAP), Riverside County is home to many LEP populations, several of which meet the Department of Justice's Safe Harbor provision. The Safe Harbor provision stipulates that written translation of vital documents for each eligible LEP language is to be provided if the group constitute 5% or 1,000 people, whichever is less, of the total population eligible to be served or likely to be affected or encountered. Such action will be considered strong evidence of compliance with the recipient's written translation obligation. RCTC's LAP details how RCTC will provide language assistance to these populations. This information is included here to detail the diverse populations that comprise Riverside County. Table 1 below provides information from the 2017 American Community Survey 1-year Estimates, the most reliable and current Census source for accessing LEP information. There is a total of 38 LEP groups in Riverside County, numbering 324,336 individuals who speak English less than "very well" or 15.7 percent of Riverside County's total population. The largest LEP group is Spanish speakers, who number 291,220 and comprise 12.86 percent of the County's total population. LEP groups of more than 1,000 are highlighted in blue in Table 1 and include individuals who speak Arabic, Chinese, Guajarati, Korean, Khmer, other Indo-European, Ilocano-Samoan-Hawaiian or other Austronesian, Persian, Punjabi, Spanish, 4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 106 Title VI Program — Appendix B Tagalog, Thai -Lao or other Tai Kalai, and Vietnamese. Besides Spanish, none of these LEP populations comprise 5% of the County's total population. A thorough analysis of LEP populations in the County was conducted to develop RCTC's Language Assistance Plan, consistent with FTA guidance. This analysis found that Spanish-speaking LEPs are the LEP population most frequently contacting RCTC and accessing RCTC's programs and services. Table 1, Riverside County LEP Populations Table B16001: LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH FOR THE POPULATION 5 YEARS AND OVER 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates Estimate % to Total # of Population Margin of Error Total Population (ACS 2017 1 Year Estimates): 2,264,417 100.00% +/-394 Speak only English 1,343,253 59.32% +/-18,260 Spanish: Speak English less than "very well" 291,220 12.86% +/-7,431 French (incl. Cajun): Speak English less than "very well" 459 0.02% +/ 292 Haitian: Speak English less than "very well" 79 0.00% +/-132 Italian: Speak English less than "very well" 275 0.01 % +/-236 Portuguese: Speak English less than "very well" 617 0.03% +/-432 German: Speak English less than "very well" 750 0.03% +/-333 Yiddish, Pennsylvania Dutch or other West Germanic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 37 0.00% +/-46 Greek: Speak English less than "very well" 80 0.00% +/-132 Russian: Speak English less than "very well" 178 0.01% +/-204 Polish: Speak English less than "very well" 0 0.00% +/-210 Serbo-Croatian: Speak English less than "very well" 123 0.01% +/ 145 Ukrainian or other Slavic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 131 0.01 % +/-170 Armenian: Speak English less than "very well" 421 0.02% +/-357 Persian (incl. Farsi, Dari): Speak English less than "very well" 1,394 0.06% +/-1,156 Gujarati: Speak English less than "very well" 404 0.02% +/-415 Hindi: Speak English less than "very well" 0 0.00% +/-210 Urdu: Speak English less than "very well" 621 0.03% +/-583 Punjabi: Speak English less than "very well" 1,413 0.06% +/-1,132 Bengali: Speak English less than "very well" 146 0.01 % +/-231 Nepali, Marathi, or other Indic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 314 0.01% +/-251 Other Indo-European languages: Speak English less than "very well" 1,371 0.06% +/ 896 Telugu: Speak English less than "very well" 130 0.01 % +/-214 Tamil: Speak English less than "very well" 257 0.01 % +/-279 5 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 107 Title VI Program — Appendix B Table B16001: LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH FOR THE POPULATION 5 YEARS AND OVER 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates Estimate % to Total # of Population Margin of Error Malayalam, Kannada, or other Dravidian languages: Speak English less than "very well" 281 0.01 % +/-276 Chinese (incl. Mandarin, Cantonese): Speak English less than "very well" 11,602 0.51% +/ 2,726 Japanese: Speak English less than "very well" 568 0.03% +/-283 Korean: Speak English less than "very well" 4,037 0.18% +/-1,594 Hmong: Speak English less than "very well" 981 0.04% +/-821 Vietnamese: Speak English less than "very well" 8,263 0.36% +/-1,854 Khmer: Speak English less than "very well" 1,623 0.07% +/-1,190 Thai, Lao, or other Tai-Kadai languages: Speak English less than "very well" 1,883 0.08% +/ 932 Other languages of Asia: Speak English less than "very well" 50 ° 0.00 /° +/-81 Tagalog (incl. Filipino): Speak English less than "very well" 12,873 0.57% +/-2,381 Ilocano, Samoan, Hawaiian, or other Austronesian languages: Speak English less than "very well" 1,348 0.06% +/-854 Arabic: Speak English less than "very well" 4,076 0.18% +/-1,753 Hebrew: Speak English less than "very well" 553 0.02% +/-893 Amharic, Somali, or other Afro-Asiatic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 181 0.01 % +/-223 Yoruba, Twi, Igbo, or other languages of Western Africa: Speak English less than "very well" 65 0.00% +/-80 Swahili or other languages of Central, Eastern, and Southern Africa: Speak English less than "very well" 0 0.00% +/-210 Navajo: Speak English less than "very well" 0 0.00% +/-210 Other Native languages of North America: Speak English less than "very well" 0 0.00% +/-210 Other and unspecified languages: Speak English less than "very well" 373 0.02% +/-417 RCTC's Stakeholders Stakeholders are individuals, groups, organizations or agencies that may be directly or indirectly affected by a plan, recommendations of that plan, or a project. RCTC seeks to engage all stakeholders through its public participation efforts, particularly those who may be adversely affected or who may be denied benefit of a plan's recommendation(s). Stakeholders include: 6 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 108 Title VI Program — Appendix B • General public, minority individuals, low-income individuals, LEP persons, persons with disabilities, and older adults; • University and college students, including those from: California Baptist University, College of the Desert, La Sierra University, Moreno Valley College, Mt. San Jacinto College, Norco College, Palo Verde College, Riverside Community College, and University of California -Riverside; • High school students throughout Riverside County; • Non-profit organizations including Blindness Support Services, Care Connexus, Care -a -Van, CASA, Friends of Moreno Valley, Inland AIDS Project, Operation SafeHouse, among others; • Public agencies including city governments and health and human services throughout Riverside Co u nty; • Public transit operators: Corona Cruiser, City of Riverside Special Services, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency, Riverside Transit Agency, SunLine Transit Agency, Banning Pass Transit, Beaumont Pass Transit; and • Private organizations and businesses. III. Public Participation Strategies and Tools Public Participation Goals and Strategies This section details RCTC public participation goals and strategies for achieving each goal. Goal 1: Provide all interested parties and agencies reasonable opportunities for involvement in the transportation planning process. Strategies • Provide adequate public notice of public participation opportunities and activities and time for public review of regionally significant plans and documents. • Use all channels of outreach for promoting public participation opportunities including RCTC's website and blog, the Citizen Advisory Council/Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (CAC/SSTAC), Southern California Associated Governments (SCAG), transit providers, news media, and social media. • Evaluate plans, programs, and projects to determine the most appropriate and effective tools and strategies for public and agency involvement and outreach. • Provide opportunities to comment on draft planning documents to affected agencies and parties. • Make transportation planning documents available for viewing on the RCTC website and at key locations throughout the county, as appropriate. • During the transportation planning process, conduct public meetings, open houses, and public hearings, as appropriate. • Provide language interpreters (Spanish language; other languages upon request) at public meetings, open houses and public hearings. 7 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 109 Title VI Program — Appendix B Goal 2: Ensure accessibility to the transportation planning process and information for all members of the community; ensure that a wide range of perspectives will be heard so that planning outcomes reflect the needs of the region's diverse communities. Strategies • Develop information materials that are easily understood and translated for appropriate audiences and make them accessible at meetings and on RCTC's website. • Make notices and announcements attractive and eye-catching. • Plan workshops and/or public hearings at convenient venues and times across the region; ensure venues are accessible to the public. • When appropriate, provide information about regionally significant plans and projects to the local media for distribution and promotion. • Maintain the RCTC website with current transportation planning activities, including reports, plans, agendas and minutes for RCTC Commission meetings. • When appropriate, present information about specific plans and projects at public forums, such as City Council and Board of Supervisors meetings for increased public and governmental awareness. • When identifying locations for community outreach activities, prioritize locations that are accessible by public transit. • Make every effort to accommodate requests for accessibility opportunities, including physical accessibility to public meetings as well as accessibility to information in LEP languages and alternative formats. • Encourage early involvement in the transportation planning process by providing timely notification and access to information. • Use citizen and/or agency advisory groups as a means of providing input to the transportation planning process. • Identify key individuals, organizations, and community organizations that may be interested in or affected by a plan or program; include this list in any mail or email distribution. • Collaborate with Riverside County transit providers to facilitate and promote public participation opportunities. • Maintain the Riverside County Transportation Network, a list of key stakeholders updated on an annual basis. The 184 agencies and organizations on the Network include non -profits, human and social services, private transportation companies, public agencies, specialized transit providers. Goal 3: Engage and increase opportunities for participation for those traditionally underrepresented and or underserved, including low-income, minority, persons with disabilities, and Limited English Proficiency populations. Strategies 8 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 110 Title VI Program — Appendix B • Make commenting on plans convenient and accessible to the public and stakeholders; enable comments to be made at public meetings and workshops, via email or online commenting forms or by telephone. • Offer vital information, such as notices and announcements, in alternative languages as appropriate and feasible. When considering translation and interpretation needs, the RCTC Language Assistance Plan will be consulted for strategies and procedures. Translated information shall be made available on the RCTC or project -specific website, at public meetings and workshops and at key locations across the county as appropriate and feasible. • Translated notices, announcements, and other vital information should be posted on Riverside County transit operators' buses and at transfer centers, as is possible. • When appropriate, use alternative media outlets that may target minority, LEP, or underserved segments of the community. • Continue expanding the contact list with agencies, organizations and stakeholders that work with LEP communities. Project Specific Public Participation The project team, including Project Manager and public relations staff, is responsible for developing an appropriate public participation plan or public outreach plan that describes the strategies that will be used to communicate key information to agencies, organizations, elected officials, residents, business operators, commuters, emergency responders and other project stakeholders. Outreach activities will be integrated with the technical work program to provide information and incorporate ideas and feedback. The input that is received will facilitate fully informed decisions by RCTC Commissioners at key decision points. These plans will be specifically tailored to individual projects to reflect project area demographics, populations and need. Plans will be developed to comply with Title VI requirements. Title VI requirements, including strategies for engaging LEP individuals, will be documented in all bid - related materials. Updating the Public Participation Plan RCTC's public participation goals and strategies will be reviewed as necessary and results will be considered in preparation of the three-year Title VI Program adoption. Based on the effectiveness of strategies and the potential changes to Riverside County's demographics and outreach resources, strategies may be modified and new strategies may be added to enhance the public participation process. The following indicators may be used in reviewing and determining the effectiveness of these goals and strategies. • Number of newspaper ads, public notices • Number of press releases, public service announcements, and news articles 9 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 111 Title VI Program — Appendix B • Number of public meetings and workshops • Number and demographics of participants at public meetings, open houses, and public hearings • Number of visits to the RCTC website and project -specific websites • Number of followers of social media pages, and volume of reach and impressions • Number of comments received during the public comment period for projects and programs • Number of requests for translated materials • Number and content of materials translation • Revisions to plans or projects based on public and agency input; analysis of how comments influenced the planning process IV. Summary of Public Participation Activities FTA Title VI guidance requires a summary of outreach efforts made since the last Title VI Program submission. The following is a summary of transit -related and capital project -related public outreach during this submittal period. Transit -Related Public Participation Annual Public Hearing on Transit Needs is Riverside County As required by Section 99238.5 of the California Public Utilities Code, RCTC holds at least one annual public hearing to solicit input from transit dependent and transit disadvantaged persons. The public hearing is promoted through newspaper notices throughout Riverside County and placed flyers and half -page seat drop flyers on buses, printed in both English and Spanish. Written and oral comments provided at the hearing were used by RCTC and the County's transit operators in identifying transit needs in preparation of transportation plans and programs, including the Regional Transportation Plan and Short -Range Transit Plans. Comments are shared with transit and paratransit operators as they relate to operating issues and needs. Additionally, comments are also shared with other agencies that provide transportation services to transit -dependent populations, including the Coordinated Transportation Services Agencies and the County Office on Aging, and specialized transit providers such as Care -A -Van, Forest Folk, and Operation SafeHouse. Coordinated Plan 2016 Outreach During the Coordinated Plan outreach process, five workshops were held in February 2016 in the various areas of Riverside County: • Blythe for the Palo Verde Valley • Palm Desert for the Coachella Valley • Hemet for Western Riverside • Lake Elsinore for southwestern Riverside County • Beaumont for the Pass Area The workshops invited comments regarding transportation needs from transit users and potential transit users, agency staff working with the target populations, and the public. RCTC promoted the workshops 10 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 112 Title VI Program — Appendix B through flyers printed in English and Spanish. Flyers were posted in buses across many of the County's transit routes. RCTC posted the workshop flyers on the RCTC home webpage and Citizens Advisory Committee members distributed the flyers throughout the County. They were also distributed through an email notice to the Riverside County Transportation Network which includes non -profits, human and social services, private transportation companies, public agencies, and specialized transit providers. The next Coordinated Plan will be completed by the end of 2020. North Shore/Mecca Salton Sea Project Development Workshops As part of the 2016 Coordinated Plan Process, RCTC held a workshop for the residents of the North Shore/Mecca community of the Salton Sea to discuss unmet transit needs and develop responsive solutions. The North Shore/Mecca area is an isolated, rural, and agricultural region in Riverside County. Many residents are agricultural workers and need to travel long distances to work in the fields throughout the area. Other families depend on jobs in the hospitality sector on the west side of the Coachella Valley and many of their children attend the College of the Desert Campus located in Palm Desert. For some, the daily commute can be 36 miles each way. Simultaneous translation was provided at the meeting to allow RCTC staff and the predominately Spanish- speaking community members to interact. Past meetings have resulted in the implementation of a volunteer driver reimbursement program and weekday and weekend connecting service to the area. Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) / Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (SSTAC) RCTC revamped the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) by appointing 10 members in September 2014. The CAC serves as RCTC's Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (SSTAC) to assist the Commission in complying with Transportation Development Act (TDA) Section 99238. The TDA provides direction for administering both Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance funds for bus and commuter rail services. This funding promotes transportation service improvements and enhancements that support the mobility of older adults, persons with disabilities, and persons of limited means. Additionally, the role of CAC/SSTAC members is to establish an effective communication exchange among Riverside County's public transit operators, its specialized transportation providers, and representatives of its transit dependent population regarding matters of mutual concern. This group meets biannually, or, as necessary. Riverside County Transportation Network The Riverside County Transportation Network is a list of key stakeholders and includes 184 agencies and organizations. These entities are non -profits, human and social services, private transportation companies, public agencies, specialized transit providers that work with a diverse range of clients throughout Riverside County. The Network is updated on an annual basis, through a mail survey and online e-survey. Transit -Related information, notices, announcements —particularly public participation opportunities —are sent to this Network via emails and physical mail, when those addresses exist. 11 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 113 Title VI Program — Appendix B Capital -Related Public Participation RCTC has a robust public participation and outreach component for its major highway and rail capital projects. Many of these efforts focus on transparency to allow the public to engage in projects via meetings, helpline, project webpages, and various social media platforms. Although non-FTA funded, examples of project -specific public outreach plans that either were developed or are currently in use are: • 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Construction of Tolled Express Lanes • Route 60 Truck Lanes Project — Construction of Dedicated Truck Lanes • Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service — Tier 1 Engineering and Environmental Studies RCTC maintains webpages for all its capital projects. These webpages are available in the "Projects" section of the RCTC website, rctc.org. Active capital projects also produce collateral material in English and Spanish and hold community meetings with bilingual staff in attendance. To date, staff has not received requests for or encountered people who require translation or interpretation to languages other than Spanish. RCTC's Website RCTC's website is includes current information and notices for all projects and activities. Website addresses are provided on all printed materials. The Commission also maintains active Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram pages to enhance its public outreach. These social media pages provide information about public meetings, transit options, capital project updates, and other items of interest to Riverside County residents and the transportation industry. 12 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 114 Title VI Program — Appendix B V. Contact information RCTC posts Title VI general notices and complaint forms on its website at www.rctc.oreabout. The Plan may be translated in any language for free upon request. Any questions or comments regarding this Plan should be directed to: Riverside County Transportation Commission John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Phone: (951) 787-7141 Email: jstandiford@rctc.org 13 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 115 Title VI Program — Appendix B VI. Attachments Demographic Maps of Minority Populations in Riverside County Figure 1: Western Riverside County Minority Population Ontario Silveradc Modjeska Western Riverside County: Minority Population 1. Mira �� na • �` `�oryR ■ Loma Pedley F d Corona Cerrito NI :ill JJ Riverside Arranxa _ Pachappa 10. y La Sierra 44 . Pren � r r � ---}�Edrernon May 4 W oodcr � a Sc...-,,, c ? 3 y _8; 1,., P.,�� M Minority Population d.D°o - 12.0% 12.1% -23.4% 23.5% - 34. 2% 34.3°. - 45.8% 45.7% - 59. 1 °5 - 59.2% - 54. 3% San Clemente/ �* 1 San.Jua _ Hot Springs: F•—•—•—•—•—•—•—•—•_. Lake illa it go Wildomar Ce Luz Sun City urrieta El Casco Lakeview Nuevo Juniper Springs Homeland Winnhester Murry �. of pr TEfrecu la Yucaipa Cherry Valley Highland Springs Banning Beaumont Gilman Ho Springs Hemel 1 East Hemet Radec Valle Visa 14 1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 116 Dea COMM ur.Nv Sur., er.3L3f 802001 Title VI Program — Appendix B Figure 2: East Riverside County Minority Population East Riverside County: Minority Population " Minority Population o.o % - 12_0 % - 34.3°% - 45.6 % 12.1 % - 23.4% - 45.7% - 59.1 % 23.5°% - 3 _2°% - 592°% - 84.3°% 15 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN 117 Title VI Program — Appendix B Figure 3: Coachella Valley Minority Population Coachella Valley, Riverside County: Minority Population --------------------------------------------------V----------------_.-•------.- White Water Pine Wood Fern Valley Idyllwild-Pine Cove Mountain Center Aomas Mountain CahuillaAnxa 1� Data Source: 20 } 3 Aar erican Community Survey, Census Mocks, 5 year estirr aces, 802001 01SWS, 01-2015 North Pa 111.1111611111 -- Desert Hot Springs Springs Palm Springs ■ Rancho Nii�age Pinyon Pines Palm Desert Indian Wells 6ermud`a'-,_ ■ La Quints Valerie fl-O-r m--- Mi nority Population 6.a% -12.0% 12.1 % - 23.4% 23-5% - 34.2% 34-3% - 45.6% - 45-7% - 59.1% - 592% - 84.3% Salton Sea 16 118 APPENDIX TITLE VI LANGUAGE ASSISTA\CE PLAN c•q4-.A-ox" gaEa WOCOA.. oextibfre.c SVC) A dalt(N- CWK\ % *9 0 t RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION Riverside, CA 92501 COMMISSION 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor If information is needed in another language, please contact (951 ) 787-7141 for free translation services. Si se necesita este dacumento err Espanol, liarne al 9519 87-7141 para servicios de traduccibn gratuitos, Title VI Program — Appendix C Table of Contents I. Introduction 1 Background of RCTC 1 Purposes of this Plan 2 Title VI and Federal Authority 2 Language Assistance Goals 2 II. Four Factor Analysis 3 Factor One: The number or proportion of LEP persons eligible to be served or likely to be encountered 3 Factor Two: The frequency with which LEP persons come into contact with the program 6 Factor Three: The nature and importance of the program, activity, or service to people's lives 6 Factor Four: The resources available to the recipient for LEP outreach 7 Discussion of Results 7 III. Implementation Plan 8 Language Service Provision 8 Staff Training 9 IV. Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the LAP 9 V. Contact information 10 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 120 Title VI Program — Appendix C I. Introduction Background of RCTC (Commission) The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC or "Commission") was established in 1976 by the State of California (State) to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside County. The governing body consists of all five members of the County Board of Supervisors, one elected official from each of the County's 28 cities, and one non -voting member appointed by the Governor of California. It is the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) and County Transportation Commission (CTC). Its responsibilities include setting policies, establishing priorities, coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and local jurisdictions. The public is most familiar with RCTC for its involvement in delivering capital projects and motorist aid services including the following: ✓ 91 Express Lanes ✓ Interstate 15 Express Lanes ✓ 15/91 Express Lanes Connector ✓ Interstate 15 Express Lanes Southern Extension ✓ 15/91 Express Lanes Connector ✓ State Route 91 Corridor Operations Project ✓ State Route 71/91 Interchange Project ✓ State Route 60 Truck Lanes Project ✓ Mid -County Parkway/Interstate 215 Placentia Avenue Interchange ✓ Interstate 15/Railroad Canyon Interchange Project ✓ Interstate 15 Express Lanes Southern Extension ✓ State Route 79 Realignment ✓ Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project ✓ Santa Ana River Trail Extension Projects RCTC also provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. These services include the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP), a roving tow truck service that assists motorists with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods; the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a program that provides call box service for motorists; and Rideshare Programs such as Inland Empire 511 (IE511), a traveler information system, and VanClub, a program to promote vanpooling. RCTC's capital projects, motorist aid services and transit -related programs and projects are funded with various local, state, and federal sources. Local funding sources consist of Measure A, the countywide sales tax; debt proceeds, derived from issuing bonds; and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF), 1 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 121 Title VI Program — Appendix C derived from developer impact fees. State funding sources for projects are derived from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). RCTC also receives apportionments of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); and FTA Small Starts and Sections 5307, 5309, 5337 formula funds. The Commission is unique in that it is not a transit provider like many other CTCs, however, does receive FTA formula funds (under the Rail Program) for transfer and expenditure for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink). Regardless of funding source, RCTC is committed to ensuring that its projects and services are delivered and implemented in a non-discriminatory manner. Purpose of this Plan The Language Assistance Plan (LAP) is intended to satisfy FTA Title VI requirements related to limited - English Proficient (LEP) individuals. FTA Circular 4702.1E states that "recipients shall take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to benefits, services, information, and other important portions of their programs and activities for individuals who are limited -English proficient (LEP)."LEP persons refer to those for whom English is not their primary language and who have a limited ability to read, write, speak, or understand English. It includes people who reported to the U.S. Census that they speak English less than very well, not well, or not at all. The LAP details the process by which RCTC will provide access to LEP individuals and the larger community. RCTC utilized the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) LEP Guidance Handbook and performed a Four Factor Analysis to develop this LAP. Title VI and Federal Authority Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects persons in the United States from being excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Under the DOT, FTA's requirements for implementing Title VI include the adoption of a Title VI Program report pursuant to FTA Circular 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. As a recipient of FTA Funds, RCTC has developed its own Language Assistance Plan in compliance with FTA Circular 4702.1B and through consultation with the FTA's Office of Civil Rights' LEP Guidance Handbook: The FTA's Office of Civil Rights' Implementing the Department of Transportation's Policy Guidance Concerning Recipients' Responsibilities to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Persons: A Handbook for Public Transportation Providers (April 13, 2007). Language Assistance Goals 2 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 122 Title VI Program — Appendix C The following goals will guide RCTC in ensuring that projects and services are delivered and implemented in a non-discriminatory manner: 1. Ensure meaningful access to all individuals regardless of race, color, national origin, and language of origin through outreach to LEP populations, translation of vital documents into LEP languages, and provision of additional language assistance services, as required; 2. Monitor changing LEP population demographics as necessary to ensure RCTC provides appropriate language assistance services; 3. Update this Language Assistance Plan as necessary to ensure the effectiveness of strategies for providing language assistance. II. Four Factor Analysis Recipients are required to take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to benefits, services, information, and other important portions of its programs or activities for persons who are limited -English proficient (LEP). FTA Circular 4702.1E details the components of the LAP, including the Four Factor Analysis, which provides a careful analysis of LEP individuals the recipient may encounter to determine the specific language services that are appropriate to provide. The Four Factor Analysis balances the following factors: • Factor One: The number and proportion of LEP persons in the jurisdiction; • Factor Two: How often LEP persons come into contact with RCTC services; • Factor Three: How important RCTC's services are to the lives of LEP persons; • Factor Four: The resources available to RCTC for LEP outreach that reasonably can be provided. The results of the four -factor analysis are used to determine the target LEP populations and the best methods of engaging with the public. RCTC undertook the Four Factor Analysis in order to develop an appropriate and effective Language Assistance Plan Factor One: The number or proportion of LEP persons eligible to be served or likely to be encountered RCTC's service area incorporates all Riverside County, which has a total population of 2,423,266 individuals according to American Community Survey (ACS) 2017 1-year estimates. ACS Census data was used for this analysis as it provides the most current and reliable information about LEP individuals. The Department of Justice's Safe Harbor provision, which was accepted by the FTA, stipulates that written translation of vital documents for each eligible LEP language group that constitutes 5% or 1,000 persons, whichever is less, of the total population of persons eligible to be served or likely to be affected or encountered, shall be considered strong evidence of compliance with the recipient's written translation obligation. 3 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 123 Title VI Program - Appendix C Table 1 below provides information from the 2016 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates demonstrating the 38 LEP populations in Riverside County, using 5-year estimates as they provide the most reliable data in terms of LEP populations. The largest group of LEP individuals is Spanish speakers, who comprise 13 percent of the County's population and number 268,982 individuals. Although no other LEP group reaches 5 percent of the population, 14 additional LEP groups have over 1,000 persons, which include: Arabic, Chinese, Guajarati, Korean, Khmer, other Indo-European, Ilocano-Samoan-Hawaiian or other Austronesian, Persian, Punjabi, Spanish, Tagalog, Thai -Lao or other Tai Kalai, and Vietnamese. Table 1, Riverside County LEP Population Table B16001: LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH FOR THE POPULATION 5 YEARS AND OVER 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates Estimate % to Total # of Population Margin of Error Total Population (ACS 2017 1 Year Estimates): 2,264,417 100.00% +/-394 Speak only English 1,343,253 59.32% +/-18,260 Spanish: Speak English less than "very well' 291,220 12.86% +/-7,431 French (incl. Cajun): Speak English less than "very well" 459 0.02% +/ 292 Haitian: Speak English less than "very well' 79 0.00% +/-132 Italian: Speak English less than "very well' 275 0.01% +/-236 Portuguese: Speak English less than "very well' 617 0.03% +/-432 German: Speak English less than "very well' 750 0.03% +/-333 Yiddish, Pennsylvania Dutch or other West Germanic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 37 0.00% +/-46 Greek: Speak English less than "very well' 80 0.00% +/-132 Russian: Speak English less than "very well' 178 0.01% +/-204 Polish: Speak English less than "very well' 0 0.00% +/-210 Serbo-Croatian: Speak English less than "very well" 123 0.01% +/-145 Ukrainian or other Slavic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 131 0.01% +/-170 Armenian: Speak English less than "very well' 421 0.02% +/-357 Persian (incl. Farsi, Dari): Speak English less than "very well' 1,394 0.06% +/ 1,156 Gujarati: Speak English less than "very well' 404 0.02% +/-415 Hindi: Speak English less than "very well' 0 0.00% +/-210 Urdu: Speak English less than 'very well' 621 0.03% +/-583 Punjabi: Speak English less than 'very well' 1,413 0.06% +/-1,132 Bengali: Speak English less than 'very well' 146 0.01% +/-231 Nepali, Marathi, or other Indic languages: Speak English less than 'very well' 314 0.01% +/-251 Other Indo-European languages: Speak English less than 'very well' 1,371 0.06% +/ 896 Telugu: Speak English less than 'very well' 130 0.01% +/-214 Tamil: Speak English less than 'very well" 257 0.01% +/-279 4 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 124 Title VI Program - Appendix C Table B16001: LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH FOR THE POPULATION 5 YEARS AND OVER 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates Estimate % to Total # of Population Margin of Error Malayalam, Kannada, or other Dravidian languages: Speak English less than "very well" 281 0.01 % +/-276 Chinese (incl. Mandarin, Cantonese): Speak English less than "very well" 11,602 0.51% +/ 2,726 Japanese: Speak English less than "very well" 568 0.03% +/-283 Korean: Speak English less than "very well" 4,037 0.18% +/-1,594 Hmong: Speak English less than "very well" 981 0.04% +/-821 Vietnamese: Speak English less than "very well" 8,263 0.36% +/-1,854 Khmer: Speak English less than "very well" 1,623 0.07% +/-1,190 Thai, Lao, or other Tai-Kadai languages: Speak English less than "very well" 1,883 0.08% +/ 932 Other languages of Asia: Speak English less than "very well" 50 ° 0.00 /° +/-81 Tagalog (incl. Filipino): Speak English less than "very well" 12,873 0.57% +/-2,381 Ilocano, Samoan, Hawaiian, or other Austronesian languages: Speak English less than "very well" 1,348 0.06% +/-854 Arabic: Speak English less than "very well" 4,076 0.18% +/-1,753 Hebrew: Speak English less than "very well" 553 0.02% +/-893 Amharic, Somali, or other Afro-Asiatic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 181 0.01 % +/-223 Yoruba, Twi, Igbo, or other languages of Western Africa: Speak English less than "very well" 65 0.00% +/-80 Swahili or other languages of Central, Eastern, and Southern Africa: Speak English less than "very well" 0 0.00% +/-210 Navajo: Speak English less than "very well" 0 0.00% +/-210 Other Native languages of North America: Speak English less than "very well" 0 0.00% +/-210 Other and unspecified languages: Speak English less than "very well" 373 0.02% +/-417 As all individuals residing in the county may be commuters, transit riders, and pedestrians, the total population is eligible to be served by the Commission's services. The following section addresses which LEP persons the Commission is likely to encounter based on the past frequency of contact. 5 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 125 Title VI Program — Appendix C Factor Two: The frequency with which LEP persons come into contact with the program To identify and analyze the frequency with which LEP persons come into contact with these programs, a survey was distributed to staff who regularly and is more likely to interact with members of the public. The units that were surveyed include the Clerk of the Board, Public Affairs, Front Reception, Capital Projects, and Commuter Assistance. The survey asked staff members about their experiences with LEP individuals, including how frequently they interacted with LEP persons, what languages the LEP individuals spoke, how successfully they communicated, and what information LEP persons were seeking. Most respondents noted very rare to no interaction with LEP individuals in the last year, with the exception of the Front Receptionist, who encounters Spanish inquiries on a daily basis. The most common requests are for information about other County services in the building, RCTC project -specific construction information, and information about Metrolink services (not under the purview of the Commission). Staff members have been able to communicate with LEP individuals through assistance from bilingual staff members, translators, and through hand gestures and drawings. RCTC also has an on - call contract with PALS for Health, a translation/interpretation service based in southern California. In conclusion, Factor Two identified that RCTC does not frequently come into contact with LEP individuals regarding its services and programs, but of those that are received, most are likely to speak Spanish. Factor Three: The nature and importance of the program, activity, or service to people's lives RCTC is a state -mandated countywide agency tasked with the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside County, which includes 28 cities, 7,208 square miles, and 2,423,266 individuals, according to the 2017 American Community Survey. The Commission's mission is to assume a leadership role in improving mobility in the County and is responsible for setting policies, establishing priorities, and coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and other agencies. The Commission also programs and/or reviews the allocation of federal, state, and local funds for highway, transit, rail, non -motorized travel (bicycle and pedestrian), and other transportation activities. The Commission serves as the tax authority and implementation agency for Measure A, the voter -approved half -cent sales tax for transportation improvements in Riverside County. The Commission also provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. The Commission is also legally responsible for allocating Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, the major source of funds for transit in the County. Finally, the Commission has been designated as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for the County. As the CMA, the Commission coordinates with local jurisdictions in the establishment of congestion mitigation procedures for the County's roadway system. 6 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 126 Title VI Program — Appendix C RCTC works to ensure and improve the quality of life of Riverside County's residents. Transportation interacts with a variety of human needs including a safe environment with better air quality, a reduction in water runoff, reducing the levels of greenhouse gases, and supporting transportation alternatives that promote better health through walking or bicycling. By taking a more holistic approach, the importance of transportation grows larger and is valued as a vital necessity. Factor Four: The resources available to the recipient for LEP outreach RCTC has numerous resources available to ensure it provides meaningful access to LEP individuals. These include existing community partners, using its own resources, and using contracted services. These resources are detailed below: • RCTC contracts with PALS for Health to provide written translation and oral interpretation for LEP individuals. • Bilingual employees provide written translation and oral interpretation. • "I Speak" language identification cards are used at the front desk and at public meetings. • Language assistance information is provided on agendas and meeting notices. • Public notices are translated into Spanish. • RCTC may contract with public outreach firms that can provide language assistance as needed. • Riverside Transportation Network: This database ensures agencies and organizations that work with LEP individuals are provided the Commission's information and notices to distribute to their clients. • CAC/SSTAC- Many members of the CAC/SSTAC represent underrepresented minority groups and are a useful resource for outreach to LEP individuals. • Riverside County Transit Operators: RCTC may partner with transit operators to post vital information in English and Spanish on buses and at transfer locations. • The Southern California Association of Government's LEP Plan, Public Participation Plan, and existing translated resources can provide materials for LEP outreach and communication. • RCTC translates Title VI vital documents and project -specific vital information into Spanish. • RCTC's website provides outreach and is equipped with a Google translator. Discussion of Results Census data analyzed in Factor One was consistent with the experience of RCTC staff members analyzed in Factor Two to determine that Spanish-speaking LEP individuals are the largest and most frequent LEP group that accesses RCTC's services and programs. As these individuals comprise 13 percent of Riverside County's population, it will be important for the Commission to continue providing vital documents in Spanish. Additional LEP groups are very small populations (less than 1 percent of the population), not yet identified (Other Indic Languages, for example), and do not frequently access the Commission's services or programs, documents will be translated as requested or as is appropriate for a specific project. Details of language assistance services are provided in the following Implementation Plan. 7 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 127 Title VI Program — Appendix C III. Implementation Plan Language Service Provision RCTC will provide the following language assistance measures to ensure LEP individuals have full access to the Commissions services, programs, and activities: Callers and Visitors • Front desk staff have "I Speak" language identification cards available to assist LEP individuals. • Several employees are bilingual and can help callers or visitors that speak Spanish. • RCTC contracts with Language Line Solutions, a language service provider, to provide simultaneous translation as needed. Language Line can be accessed by any staff member for translation services by calling 888-808-9008. The staff member can then put an LEP individual in touch with a translator for correspondence. • RCTC contracts with PALS for Health to provide written translation and oral interpretation for LEP individuals. RCTC requests in writing the material to be translated to Spanish, requests staffing for public meetings, or arranges for telephone translation services, upon request. Translation of Vital Documents FTA Circular 4702.1B defines vital documents as, "documents that provide access to essential services." The Commission will use this definition when assessing what documents should be translated. Title VI Documents are vital documents. The Title VI notice to the public, complaint form, and procedures are available in English and Spanish, the LEP language that RCTC is most likely to encounter. Vital documents are available on RCTC's website and at the front desk. Information about the availability of free language assistance is available on posted notices and agendas in Spanish. Spanish -Language Translation: RCTC provides project notices and announcements and vital documents in Spanish and will continue to do so, as the Spanish-speaking LEP population represents a significant portion of Riverside County's population. Documents that are translated include: notices and announcements about public meetings and forums and public participation opportunities, key information distributed at project meetings, and any vital project -specific meetings. Other LEP Language Translations: The additional LEP languages represent very small communities and vital information will be translated as requested and as appropriate, with decisions made on a project -by -project basis. For example, if a project takes place in a community with a large LEP population, key information for that project will be translated into that LEP language. 8 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 128 Title VI Program — Appendix C Oral Interpretation: Oral interpretation will be provided at public meetings as requested and appropriate. Decisions will be made on a project -by -project basis. Notices of public meetings and forums include information about how to request oral interpretation. Outreach/Notice of Availability of Language Assistance RCTC's Title VI Notice to the Public publicizes its language assistance services. Additionally, other notices may include the statement, "If information is needed in another language, please contact (951) 787-7141 for free translation services." Staff Training Outreach and front desk staff are trained in assisting LEP individuals, including identifying language and using the language service provider interpretation system. Training is provided for new employees and reoccurs as necessary. LEP training includes: • A summary of RCTC's language assistance requirements DOT LEP Guidance; • A summary of the Commission's language assistance plan; including responding to LEP persons • Results of RCTC's Four Factor Analysis, including a summary of the LEP individuals in Riverside County and the frequency of contact between the LEP population and the Commission • A description of the Commission's non-discrimination policies and practices. IV. Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the LAP A thorough review of the LAP will be undertaken every three years, or as necessary as guidelines are revised or as compliance reviews warrant. At that time, the LEP population will be reassessed to ensure all significant LEP languages are included in RCTC's language assistance efforts. The following reoccurring reporting and evaluation measures will be used to update the Language Assistance Plan: 1. RCTC will regularly assess the effectiveness of how the Commission communicates with LEP individuals by working with community stakeholders, such as the CAC/SSTAC, the Riverside Transit Network, County transit operators, non-profit agencies, among others. 2. Commission staff will track its language assistance efforts, including: • Tracking front desk staff interaction with LEP persons • Internal surveys of staff who are likely to engage with the public • Number of downloaded documents in other languages • Reports and updates from the language service provider • Requests for translation and interpretation 9 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 129 Title VI Program — Appendix C V. Contact information RCTC will post the approved LAP on its website at www.rctc.org. The LAP may be translated in any language for free upon request. Any questions or comments regarding the LAP should be directed to: Riverside County Transportation Commission John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Phone: (951) 787-7141 Email: jstandiford@rctc.org 10 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN 130 AGENDA ITEM 9H RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee David Thomas, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Change Order to Amend the Interstate 15 Express Lanes Project Toll Services Agreement with Kapsch TrafficCom USA for the Interstate 15/State Route 91 Express Lanes Connector Project WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Contract Change Order (CCO) No. 6 to Agreement No. 16-31-043-00 for the Interstate 15 Express Lanes Project (15 Express Lanes) with Kapsch TrafficCom USA Inc. (Kapsch) in the amount of $2,809,286, plus a contingency amount of $290,000, for a total amount not to exceed $3,099,286; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to negotiate and execute the change order on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In April 2017 Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 132 (SB 132) which appropriated $427 million to the Riverside County Transportation Efficiency Corridor (RCTEC) for five projects. SB 132 allocated $180 million to the Interstate 15/State Route 91 Express Lanes Connector (15/91 ELC) Project. The 15/91 ELC Project will provide a tolled express lanes connector between the existing 91 Express Lanes and the future 15 Express Lanes to the north of SR-91 (Figure 1: 15/91 ELC Project Vicinity Map, Figure 2: Work Vicinity Map). Agenda Item 9H 131 -15/SR-91 Express Lanes Connector OIL Lake Matthews Project Limits Figure 1: 15/91 Express Lanes Connector Project Vicinity Map AAAAA CORONA LEGEND WORK LIMITS -- COUNTY LINE VICINITY MAP EL CERRITO Figure 2: Work Vicinity Map Agenda Item 9H 132 SB 132 also statutorily created a task force to develop recommendations to accelerate project delivery of the RCTEC projects. On June 27, 2017, Governor Brown signed budget trailer bill Assembly Bill 115 (AB 115) through which the Commission received additional project delivery authority to ensure cost-effective and timely delivery of the 15/91 ELC Project. At its October 2017 meeting, the Commission approved an overall procurement strategy for the 15/91 ELC Project to secure all the services and construction needed to deliver the project. The approved strategy consists of a series of contract amendments, as permitted by AB 115, to existing 91 Project and 15 Express Lanes contracts with engineering companies, contractors, toll vendors, legal, and financial advisors. DISCUSSION: The construction of the 15/91 ELC will provide for a seamless trip between the 91 Express Lanes and 15 Express Lanes. A customer driving eastbound in the RCTC 91 Express Lanes will have the option of travelling north to the 15 Express Lanes via the 15/91 ELC. A customer driving southbound on the 15 Express Lanes will have the option of travelling west on the 91 Express Lanes via the 15/91 ELC. These movements will require the toll system to identify when and where the vehicle entered the system and share that information between the 91 Express Lanes toll system and the 15 Express Lanes toll system in order to determine the toll for the interfacility trip. Today, the 91 Express Lanes roadside toll system is operated and maintained by Cofiroute, USA (Cofiroute). The 15 Express Lanes roadside toll system will be designed, installed, operated, and maintained by Kapsch. While developing the tolling Concept of Operations for the 15/91 ELC, it became apparent that the interfacility trip pricing was going to be challenging with two different toll systems and operators. Staff and the 15 Express Lanes Project team evaluated several options for resolving these challenges and determined that the most efficient and effective short and long-term solution is to transition the 91 Express Lanes roadside toll system from Cofiroute (the current system) to Kapsch (the new system compatible with the 15 Express Lanes). In addition, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) selected Kapsch to replace the OCTA 91 Express Lanes roadside toll system that results in both agencies upgrading to the same roadside toll system. By transitioning the RCTC 91 Express Lanes roadside toll system to Kapsch, transaction processing and revenue collection for the 91 Express Lanes, 15/91 ELC and 15 Express Lanes will be more effective and efficient. As the change to the RCTC 91 Express Lanes roadside toll system is required to integrate the 15/91 ELC into the interfacility processing, the RCTC 91 Express Lanes roadside toll system transition will be funded by the 15/91 ELC project. Based on the overall procurement strategy approved for the 15/91 ELC, staff recommends a change order to the 15 Express Lanes Toll Services agreement to design and install the replacement of the existing RCTC 91 Express Lanes roadside toll system to provide compatibility across the entire RCTC tolling environment. The scope of this change order includes the following components: Agenda Item 9H 133 a) Design and install a replacement tolling gantry for the existing south connector from the RCTC 91 Express Lanes to the south 1-15; b) Design and install a new Variable Toll Message Sign (VTMS) at the Orange County/Riverside County Line for the eastbound RCTC 91 Express Lanes; and c) Add network modifications to connect the RCTC 91 Express Lanes tolling equipment to the 15 Express Lanes tolling network. The Kapsch contract provided pre -negotiated costs for roadside toll system equipment allowing for a straightforward mechanism for determining the costs of the RCTC 91 Express Lanes roadside toll system equipment. Staff worked with Kapsch to negotiate the costs associated with non - equipment installation costs and the costs related to the operations and maintenance of the roadside toll system. The total negotiated cost for CCO No. 6 is $2,809,286, plus a contingency of $290,000, for a total amount not to exceed $3,099,286. The table below summarizes the status of 15/91 ELC related change orders and amendments to Kapsch's contract. Kapsch 15/91 ELC Related Amendments/Change Orders Status Amount Contingency Total CCO No. 3 — Deputy PM and Tolling Back Office Software Development Commission approved on March 14, 2018 $ 314,721 $ 31,500 $ 346,221 CCO No. 5 — Replace 91 Express Lanes Roadside Toll System Commission approved on July 11, 2018 4,478,461 500,000 4,978,461 CCO No. 6—Add South Gantry, County -Line VTMS, and network modifications to support the Express Lanes Roadside Toll System (subject of this report) For Commission approval on July 10, 2019 2,809,286 290,000 3,099,286 Totals $7,602,468 $ 821,500 $8,423,968 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of CCO No. 6 to amend the Toll Services agreement between the Commission and Kapsch in the amount of $2,809,286, plus a contingency amount of $290,000, for a total amount not to exceed $3,099,286. Further, authorization is requested for the Chair or Executive Director to negotiate and execute the amendment on behalf of the Commission and for the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for the project. Agenda Item 9H 134 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 Amount: $1,053,000 $2,046,286 Source of Funds: SB 132 State Funds Budget Adjustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 003039 8130100000 0000 605 31 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \lie/��� Date: 06/13/2019 Attachment: Draft Change Order No. 6 Agenda Item 9H 135 Sensitive / Proprietary Change Response / TSP Change Request RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1-15 Toll Services Provider Contract Change Order No. 6 Pursuant to: (check appropriate box) EXPRESS LANES ® Written Change Notice No. 6, dated 03 Dec 2018, submitted by RCTC to TSP pursuant to Section 20.4.1 of the Contract TSP Change Request No. , dated , submitted by TSP to RCTC pursuant to Section 20.6 of the Contract n Directive Letter No. , dated , submitted by RCTC to TSP pursuant to Section 20.3 of the Contract Reference is made to that certain Toll Services Contract (Contract No. 16-31-043-00) dated 26 January 2016, as amended, by and between Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC"), a public entity of the State of California ("ROTC'), and Kapsch TrafficCom USA, Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of Delaware ("TSP"), as amended, together with all Exhibits and prior amendments (the "Contract"). This Change Order amends the Contract. Capitalized terms used, but not defined, in this Change Order have the meanings given in, and all Section and Exhibit references shall be to the Contract. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 1 136 Sensitive / Proprietary SECTION I — Narrative, Discussion of Additions, Deletions, Modifications to tF epQESS LIMES Requirements of the Toll Services Contract A. Evaluation of Change including whether TSP considers any RCTC-Initiated Change to constitute a Change and the specific provision(s) of this Contract which permit a Change Order (Section 20.4.3(a)(i)): N/A — RCTC Initiated Change Order Overview of scope of Change (Section 20.4.3(a)(iii)). For detailed scope of Change, please complete the Change Response Price Form: All capitalized terms used in this Change Order #6 and not defined herein have the meanings given to such terms in the Toll Services Contract dated January 26, 2017 (as amended by this Change Order and the previous Change Orders), between the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and Kapsch TrafficCom USA, Inc. (TSP) (together the Contract). RCTC plans to develop a new Express Lanes connector (ELC or ELC Project) between the SR-91 Express Lanes (SR-91 EL) and the future I-15 Express Lanes being developed under the I-15 Express Lanes Project (ELP Project). The ELC will consist of one Express Lane in each direction facilitating a direct east -to -north and south -to -west connection between the recently opened SR-91 Express Lanes extension and the future Express Lanes on 1-15. The ELC will allow SR-91 EL customers and 1-15 Express Lanes customers to make a continuous trip between the two Express Lane facilities. Part 1: SR-91 Retrofit to support upgraded roadside electronic tolling system Background The construction of the ELC will create new destinations accessible from the SR-91 Express Lanes and I- 15 Express Lanes. The I-15 Express Lanes system shall be modified to allow for a new inter -facility pricing strategy. Given the access configuration and location of toll points on the SR-91 Express Lanes and the I-15 Express Lanes, customers using the ELC will be required to use the RCTC segment of the SR- 91 Express Lanes (RCTC SR-91 Express Lanes Segment) and one segment of the I-15 Express Lanes (1-15 Express Lanes Segment). Prices for ELC transactions shall be combined with the RCTC SR-91 Express Lanes Segment and the I-15 Express Lanes Segment, creating an inter -facility pricing zone. Additionally, tolls for trips beginning with segment one northbound on the I-15 Express Lanes to the SR-91 Express Lanes westbound or SR-91 Express Lanes eastbound through segment four of the I-15 Express Lanes southbound shall be combined. Pricing between the SR-91 Express Lanes and the I-15 Express Lanes will require an interface between the SR-91 Express Lanes and I-15 Express Lanes toll systems to collect and exchange entry time data. For Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services z 137 Sensitive / Proprietary EXDAES�S LAHES example, the SR-91 Express Lanes toll system would need to know the time that ELC users saw the S -91 Express Lanes price so that the appropriate toll could be charged. The ELC pricing strategy is illustrated in Figure 1. This strategy introduces a new pricing zone that encompasses the RCTC SR-91 Express Lanes Segment and the entirety of the 1-15 Express Lanes so that the price to travel to the ends of the 1-15 Express Lanes would be displayed at the SR-91 County Line and the price to travel to the SR-91 County Line would be displayed on 1-15 Express Lanes signs. The Parties intend that the scope of the Project under the Contract shall be made up of 3 Sub projects: 1) The toll services work for the SR-91 Express Lanes described in previous Change Order #5 and this Change Order #6 (SR-91 Subproject); 2) The toll services work for the 1-15 Express Lanes Project (ELP Subproject) — described in the Contract as of the Effective Date; and 3) The toll services work for the ELC Subproject to be described in a future Change Order. The subprojects shall include the following phases of D&D Work described (Phases): 1) SR-91 Subproject a. SR-91 Phase 1—Tolling System Retrofit (described in Change Order #5): Retrofit the existing RCTC SR-91 Express Lanes Segment roadside electronic tolling system (currently Neology) with TSP's roadside electronic tolling system of the same design as the roadside electronic tolling system being installed on the 1-15 for the ELP Project to provide compatibility across the entire RCTC tolling environment and add additional capabilities to the RCTC SR-91 Express Lanes Segment (i.e., 6C compatibility) that are being introduced in the ELP Project. The ETC Host will provide "core" services only by creating vehicle transactions and transmitting them to the SR-91 Operator for trip -building. b. SR-91 Phase 2 — New Tolling Infrastructure — this Change Order (Change Order #6) i. South Gantry (including SR-91 (Gantry) Turnover Package 5) 1) Install new tolling equipment on the South Gantry to be included in Turnover Package 5. This tolling point will have 1 toll lane in each direction. The tolling point will be tied into the existing SR-91 fiber communications system, and shall, upon completion communicate with the new ETC Host which will be located at the RCTC Operations Center ROC). 2) After the new tolling point is put into Revenue Service, the TSP will decommission the existing toll point at the I-15/SR-91 interchange by removing the toll equipment from the site, before the gantries are removed due to ELC Project construction. The equipment will be returned to RCTC inventory. ii. County Line VTMS (including SR-91 (VTMS) Turnover Package 6) 1) Install new VTMS price sign equipment consisting of LED displays for pricing for 3 destinations. This VTMS price sign will be tied into the Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 3 138 Sensitive / Proprietary existing SR-91 fiber communications network, and shall, uponEXDAESS LAHES completion, communicate to the ELP Project ROC. 2) A Yagi antenna will be mounted to the new VTMS sign to support determination of delay for assignment of toll pricing in the Eastbound direction on the SR-91 Express Lanes. iii. Network Revisions - Connect SR-91 Tolling Infrastructure to the 1-15 ROC 1) Including the SR-91 Tolling Points as part of the overall Trip Building/Trip Pricing process for the 1-15 and RCTC SR-91 Express Lanes Segment — this work is included in previous Change Order #3 2) After ELP Subproject has reached Revenue Service, the tolling locations on the RCTC SR-91 Express Lanes Segment will be disconnected from communicating with the SR-91 Operator, and will be reconnected with the new ETC Host located at the new ELP Project ROC as described in this Change Order (Change Order #6) 3) Includes changes to the Back Office System software to support multi - facility trip tolling. 2) ELP Subproject — including Turnover Packages 1, 2, 3 and 4 to be performed as described in the Contract as of the Effective Date. 3) ELC Subproject — including Turnover Package 7 — to be more fully described in a future Change Order. Install new tolling equipment on 3 future gantries — North Gantry, West McKinley Gantry, and East McKinley Gantry. Install additional CCTV and TTMS equipment to support the monitoring of the new tolling points. These new tolling points will be tied into the new 1-15 fiber communications system or SR-91 fiber communications system (as determined during design, and communication with the new 1-15 ROC facility. SR-91 (Phase 2) D&D Work Milestones: The key milestone dates for SR-91 (Phase 2) D&D Work under this Change Order #6 are: 1) Target to issue Notice to Proceed — SR-91 (Phase 2) (NTP-SR91(Phase 2))— August 1, 2019 (subject to meeting the conditions in this Change Order) 2) County -Line VTMS a. SR-91 (VTMS) Turnover Package 6 (County Line VTMS) — Simultaneous with ELP Package 4 Turnover. b. Installation Work —Simultaneous with ELP Package 4 installation work. c. Site Acceptance Testing — Simultaneous with ELP Package 4 Site Acceptance Testing 3) Network Revisions — Connect SR-91 Tolling Infrastructure to the 1-15 ROC a. Installation Work —Simultaneous with ELP Package 3 and ELP Package 4 installation work. b. Operations Testing (County -Line VTMS and Network Revisions) — Simultaneous with ELP Operations Testing (July 2020) c. County -Line VTMS/Network Revisions Revenue Service Commencement Deadline —July 23, 2020 (Simultaneous with ELP Revenue Service Commencement Deadline) Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 4 139 Sensitive / Proprietary 4) South Gantry a. SR-91 (Gantry) Turnover Package 5 (South Gantry) — September 1, 2019 — For acceptance of site from DB. b. Installation Work —January 2020 c. Site Acceptance Testing —January 2020 d. Operations Testing — February 2020 e. South Gantry Revenue Service Commencement Deadline — March 1, 2020 f. I-15/SR-91 Existing Site Decommissioning — NLT March 31, 2020 Conditions to NTP-SR91 (Phase 2): RCTC will not issue NTP-SR91 (Phase 2) until satisfaction of the following requirements: EXPRESS'AMES 1) TSP has delivered to RCTC the NTP-SR91 (Phase 2) Performance Bond Rider and the NTP- SR91 (Phase 2) Payment Bond Rider, as specified in Part 3, section 6 below; 2) TSP has submitted to RCTC the certificates of insurance and endorsements as required by Section 17.3.2 of the Contract to confirm the insurance coverages required, as specified in Part 3, section 5 below; 3) TSP has delivered to RCTC an executed consent of the Guarantor to the addition of SR-91 (Phase 2) to the Project in the form provided in this Change Order; and 4) TSP has provided to RCTC any other documents, things or assurances required by this Change Order as a condition of NTP-SR91 (Phase 2). RCTC has no obligation to issue NTP-SR91 (Phase 2), and unless and until NTP-SR91 (Phase 2) is issued, RCTC has no liability to TSP under the Contract or this Change Order #6 with respect to SR-91 (Phase 2). SR-91 (Phase 2) Deliverables: TSP shall deliver the following SR-91(Phase 2) Deliverables by the applicable Delivery Date: Deliverable Format for Update Delivery Baseline Schedule Update to existing Standalone SR-91 Schedules SR-91 Phase 2 NTP + 30 days Four -Week Look Ahead Schedule Standalone SR-91 Schedules Weekly Civil Site Acceptance Checklist Submit with Installation Plan update See Installation Plan Communications Network Acceptance Checklist Submit with Installation Plan update See Installation Plan Installation Plan for South Gantry update the existing Installation Plan, by addendum, with any specific requirements for South Gantry NLT 60 days prior to South Gantry Installation Installation Drawings for South Gantry Standalone Installation Drawings for the South Gantry NLT 60 days prior to South Gantry Installation (NOTE 1) Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services s 140 Sensitive / Proprietary Transportation Management Plan update the existing Transportation Management Plan, by addendum, with any specific requirements for SR-91 (Phase 2) NLT 30 days prior to SouttinV`an`try" 1. Installation Individual Test Plans for South Gantry Standalone Individual Test Plans for the South Gantry NLT 60 days prior to South Gantry Installation Individual Test Reports (including Site Commissioning, Operations Testing) for South Gantry Standalone Individual Test Reports for the South Gantry Completion of testing plus 5 Days As -Built Technical Drawings for South Gantry Updates to SR-91 Standalone Package SR-91 (Phase 2) South Gantry Revenue Service Commencement Date plus 30 Days (NOTE 2) List of Materials for South Gantry All materials required for South Gantry Installation plus spares NLT 60 days prior to South Gantry Installation Maintenance Plan Updates for South Gantry Updates to SR-91 Interim Plan NLT 30 days prior to South Gantry Installation SR-91 Transition Plan for South Gantry Updates to existing SR-91 Transition Plan NLT 60 days prior to South Gantry Installation Installation Drawings for County -Line VTMS Standalone Installation Drawings for County -Line VTMS NLT 60 days prior to County -Line VTMS Installation (NOTE 1) Individual Test Plans for County -Line VTMS Standalone Individual Test Plans for County -Line VTMS NLT 60 days prior to County -Line VTMS Installation Individual Test Reports (including Site Commissioning) for County -Line VTMS Standalone Individual Test Reports for County -Line VTMS Completion of testing plus 5 Days As -Built Technical Drawings for County -Line VTMS Updates to SR-91 As -Built Package ELP As -Built Package Delivery (NOTE 2) List of Materials for County- Line VTMS All materials required for County Line VTMS Installation plus spares NLT 60 days prior to County -Line VTMS Installation Maintenance Plan for County- Line VTMS Include in ELP Maintenance Plan ELP Maintenance Plan Delivery Installation Plan for Network Revisions Update existing Installation Plan, by addendum, with any specific requirements for SR-91 Network Revisions NLT 60 days prior to Network Revisions Installation Installation Drawings for Network Revisions Standalone Installation Drawings for SR-91 Network Revisions NLT 60 days prior to Network Revisions Installation (NOTE 1) Individual Test Plans for Network Revisions Include with Individual Test Plans for ELP Package 4 testing ELP Package 4 testing Individual Test Reports Include with Individual Test Reports for ELP Package 4 testing ELP Package 4 testing As -Built Technical Drawings Updates to SR-91 As -Built Package ELP As -Built Package Delivery List of Materials for Network Revisions Update existing List of Materials (if necessary) NLT 60 days prior to Network Revisions Installation SR-91 to ROC Transition Plan Updates to existing SR-91 Transition Plan NLT 30 days prior to Network Revisions Installation NOTE 1: PDF and AutoCAD acceptable for this milestone. NOTE 2: Final As -built drawings must be delivered in PDF and Microstation formats. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services ES 6 141 Sensitive / Proprietary EXDAESS LAHES Part 2: O&M Work A. SR-91 Pre-ELP O&M Work TSP acknowledges that: 1) This Change Order#6 extends the SR-91 Pre-ELP O&M Work period, identified in Change Order #5 to run through December 31, 2019, to now run through July 31, 2020. 2) The previous Change Order #5, and this Change Order #6 do not address all potential additional O&M scope arising from the incorporation of the RCTC SR-91 Express Lanes Segment and that RCTC may, in its discretion, elect to add such additional O&M scope pursuant to a further Change Order or amendment to the Contract at a future date. 3) The Revenue Service Commencement Date and all Milestones under the Contract remain in full force and effect and are capable of being achieved notwithstanding the changes in D&D Work as a result of Change Orders #1-6. 4) SR-91 Phase 2 will incur no additional 0&M Work costs because the new tolling location at the South Gantry is replacing an existing tolling location (1-15/91 gantry), the County -Line VTMS is not operational until ELP Revenue Service Commencement, and the Network Revisions are simply a redirection of the communications infrastructure from the ETC Host at the Anaheim Data Center (SR-91 Operator) to the ETC Host at the ROC (ELP). 5) O&M Work under the Contract (including for items subject to this Change Order) will commence at the ELP Revenue Service Commencement Deadline (per current contract). Part 3: Other Material Terms 1) MOT a. Coordination of MOT is the responsibility of TSP and shall be handled in accordance with the Technical Provisions, Sections 4.7.1— 4.7.7. 2) Spare Parts a. A list of recommended Spare Parts for the SR-91 (Phase 2) work will be provided for review and approval by RCTC per TP Section 16.5, as a condition of executing this Change Order. b. The purchase and pricing of the spares for SR-91 Phases 1 and 2 WILL be part of this Change Order #6. 3) KPIs The KPIs listed in TP 19.4 —Table 19-2 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and all provisions of the Contract applicable to the O&M Work shall apply to the County -Line VTMS and the Network Revisions from Revenue Service Commencement Date. The KPIs listed in TP 19.4 Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 142 Sensitive / Proprietary EXDAESS LIIHES — Table 19-2 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and all provisions of the Contract applicable to the O&M Work shall apply to the South Gantry when the South Gantry enters Revenue Service (see milestone schedule for planned dates). 4) Liquidated Damages The liquidated damages set forth in Section 11 and Exhibit 22 of the Contract will apply to the SR-91 (Phase 2) work following SR-91 (Phase 2) South Gantry Revenue Service Commencement (for which the KPIs identified in 3 above shall apply). 5) Insurance Requirements As a condition precedent to NTP-SR91 (Phase 2), TSP shall modify their insurance policies and certificates as follows: i. Additional Insured: Orange County Transportation Authority ii. Ensure all insurance coverage include the SR-91 (Phase 1 and 2) Work 6) Bonding Requirements a. As a condition precedent to NTP-SR91 (Phase 2), TSP shall deliver to RCTC the updated NTP-SR91 Performance Bond Rider and the NTP-SR91 Payment Bond Rider. 7) Limitation of TSP's Liability For the avoidance of doubt, the Total Capital Cost, as referenced in Section 25.1.1(a) of the Contract, shall reflect the addition of the SR-91 (Phase 2) Total Capital Cost. 8) Source Code Escrow As a condition to payment of invoices for SR-91 (Phase 2) Payment Milestones and monthly installments of the SR-91 Pre-ELP O&M Cost and SR-91 (Phase 2) TCS Acceptance, TSP shall place all the Software Source Code for Pre -Existing Software owned by TSP, licensed to or by TSP or with respect to which TSP has a right to use in connection with the SR-91 D&D Work or the SR-91 Pre-ELP O&M Work into escrow in a jointly keyed and locked fireproof cabinet supplied by TSP and located in the Co -Located Office or another location acceptable to both Parties. Access to and release of Software Source Code will be in accordance with the terms of Exhibit 6 of the Contract, notwithstanding that this has not been fully executed by all required parties. All such escrowed Software Source Code shall be promptly transferred to the Source Code Escrow upon establishment of the same in accordance with the Contract. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services s 143 Sensitive / Proprietary Part 4: SR-91 Phase 2: A. Payments based on labor, overhead, margin, ODC, and subcontract costs (Percentages indicated below are percentages of the SR-91 (Phase 2) Total System Cost) 1) Notice to Proceed — SR-91 (Phase 2) (NTP-SR91 (Phase 2)) — 10% 2) Site Acceptance Testing (County Line VTMS) Complete — 10% 3) County -Line VTMS As -Built Technical Drawings — 10% 4) Installation Drawings (Network Revisions) Approved — 10% 5) Acceptance of completion of Network Testing as part of ELP Package 4 Testing — 10% 6) Site Acceptance Testing (South Gantry) Complete — 10% 7) Operations Testing (South Gantry) Complete — 10% 8) South Gantry Revenue Service Commencement — 10% 9) South Gantry As -Built Technical Drawings — 10% 10) I-15/SR-91 Existing Toll Gantry Decommissioned —10% EXDAESS LIIHES B. Payments based on Equipment costs: TSP shall deliver Lane Equipment per List of Materials — Amount set forth in the "Materials" section in the SR-91 (Phase 2) Price Sheet. Payment will be made for delivery of equipment related to items 4a, 4b, and 4c on the Price List. Part 5: SR-91 ROW Access RCTC will provide TSP with access to the SR-91 ROW: (a) From NTP-SR91 (Phase 2) until SR-91 (Phase 2) TCS Acceptance for the purposes of performing the SR-91 (Phase 2) D&D Work; and (b) For the purposes of performing the SR-91 Pre-ELP O&M Work and SR-91 O&M Work, provided that (i) TSP shall obtain an encroachment permit providing TSP with access to the SR-91 Site prior to commencing work on the site and shall comply with the requirements of such permit, and (ii) TSP shall comply at all times with TSP's safety and security procedures and all applicable requirements of this Contract and Technical Provisions. Part 6: Additional Definitions (Exhibit 1 to the Contract), not already included in Change Order #5 Notice to Proceed-SR91(Phase 2) or NTP-SR91 (Phase 2) means the Notice issued by RCTC to TSP authorizing TSP to proceed with the SR-91 (Phase 2) D&D Work. NTP-SR91 (Phase 2) Payment Bond Rider means a bond rider in the form attached to this Change Order #6 as Attachment 3-B (with such modifications as RCTC approves by Notice, in its sole discretion). NTP-SR91 (Phase 2) Performance Bond Rider means a bond rider in the form attached to this Change Order #6 as Attachment 3-A (with such modifications as RCTC approves by Notice, in its sole discretion). Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 9 144 Sensitive / Proprietary EXDAESS LIIHES SR-91(Gantry) Package 5 means the SR-91 Tolling Zone for the South Flyover Connector. SR-91 (Gantry) Package 5 Ready for Construction Plans means the last set of DB Contractor's 100% final design documents to be submitted to RCTC and Department for approval prior to commencing construction of the SR-91 (Gantry) Package 5 elements shown in such plans. SR-91(Gantry) Package 5 Turnover means, for SR-91(Gantry) Package 5, the stage in the DB Work where DB Contractor has completed design, construction and inspection of the following elements: (a) infrastructure for the Read Point, including gantry, pads, conduit, power and communication to support AVI, LPR, beacons, and all ETC components; (b) a 3,000 foot -long paved and striped EL section that includes two ELs, shoulders, and two - feet wide buffer to perform drive tests for the applicable Turnover Area, with the toll gantry constructed approximately within the center of the 3,000-foot long section; (c) communications (temporary or otherwise) from the relevant SR-91 (Gantry) Package 5 Turnover Area to the ROC; (d) commercial power to all of the infrastructure within the relevant SR-91 (Gantry) Package 5 Turnover Area and other TCS equipment locations applicable to the Turnover Area; (e) Successful completion of a load verification and automatic transfer switch test for each emergency generator meeting the requirements as set forth by the manufacturer and in the DB Contract; and (f) Successful completion of testing of the lightning protection and grounding systems to certify compliance with requirements in the NFPA-70, National Electric Code: NFPA-780, Lightening Protection Code, and UL-96A, Installation Requirements for Master Labeled Lightning Protection Systems. SR-91 (Gantry) Package 5 Turnover Date means the date on which SR-91 (Gantry) Package 5 Turnover is achieved. SR-91 (Gantry) Package 5 Turnover Deadline means the date on or prior to September 1, 2019 and confirmed by Notice from the DB Contractor under Section 8.11. SR-91 (Phase 2) As -Built Technical Drawings means documents required to be prepared by TSP and delivered to RCTC in accordance with TP Section 15.4 with respect to the SR-91 (Phase 2) D&D Work that constitute a complete and accurate record of the applicable portion of the TCS as designed, installed, integrated, deployed and tested in accordance with this Contract. SR-91 (Phase 2) D&D Monthly Progress Report means a single monthly submission and compilation of all monthly reports required by this Contract during the SR-91 (Phase 2) D&D Phase for review at monthly progress meetings. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 10 145 Sensitive / Proprietary EXPDESS'AMES SR-91 (Phase 2) D&D Phase means the time period commencing upon NTP-SR91 (Phase 2) and ending upon SR-91 (Phase 2) TCS Acceptance. SR-91 (Phase 2) D&D Work means the D&D Work with respect to SR-91 (Phase 2). SR-91 (VTMS) Package 6 means the VTMS west of the Orange/Riverside County line. SR-91(VTMS) Package 6 Ready for Construction Plans means the last set of DB Contractor's 100% final design documents to be submitted to RCTC and Department for approval prior to commencing construction of the SR-91 (VTMS) Package 6 elements shown in such plans. SR-91 (VTMS) Package 6 Turnover means, with respect to SR-91 (VTMS) Package 6, the stage in the DB Work where DB Contractor has completed design, construction, and inspection of the following elements: (a) infrastructure for VTMS, including poles, pads, conduit, power and communication from the main fiber to the fiber patch panel in the VTMS tolling cabinet; (b) communications (temporary or otherwise) from the SR-91 (VTMS) Package 6 Turnover Area to the ROC; (c) commercial power to all of the infrastructure within the SR-91(VTMS) Package 6 Turnover Area and other TCS equipment locations applicable to the SR-91 (VTMS) Package 6 Turnover Area; (d) successful completion of a load verification and automatic transfer switch test for each emergency generator meeting the requirements as set forth by the manufacturer and in the DB Contract; (e) successful completion of testing of the lightning protection and grounding systems to certify compliance with requirements in the NFPA-70, National Electric Code: NFPA-780, Lightening Protection Code, and UL-96A, Installation Requirements for Master Labeled Lightning Protection Systems; and SR-91 (VTMS) Package 6 Turnover Date means the date on which SR-91 (VTMS) Package 6 Turnover is achieved. SR-91 (VTMS) Package 6 Turnover Deadline means the anticipated date 90 days prior to the ELP Substantial Completion Deadline and confirmed by Notice from the DB Contractor under Section 8.11.3. Part 7: Impacts on Existing Definitions and Contract Provisions The definition of "Indemnified Parties" is revised to add Orange County Transportation Authority and its officers, directors, board members, employees, consultants, representatives and agents. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 11 146 Sensitive / Proprietary EXADESS LAHES For purposes of the SR-91 (Phase 1), the Setting Date, the Effective Date and similar reference dates under the Contract will be the date of issuance of this Change Order. Reference Documents include the documents and information provided with respect to SR-91 (Phase 2), as listed on Change Order #6 — Attachment 5. Except as specifically provided otherwise in this Change Order: 1) Defined terms previously applying generally to the ELP Project (such as "Project," "D&D Work," "Toll Services," "Work," "Completion Deadlines," "Total Capital Cost," etc.): (a) will retain the same names and the definitions will be revised to include SR-91 (Phase 1, 2, 3, and 4) and ELC; but (b) corresponding ELP Project -specific defined terms will also be created so as to distinguish from SR-91 and ELC as needed. 2) Provisions in the Contract of general application to the ELP Project (such as TSP's indemnities, events of default) will also apply to SR-91 and ELC. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 12 147 Sensitive / Proprietary L 1-15 Trip Pricing Zane SR-91 Trip Pricing Zones New 91/15 Trip Pricing Zone Existing SR-91 Sign Proposed 1-15 Sign Red text indicates impacts to existing/planned signs n E S, fD m ■ atm Rwnop 1671 pu oalefe0 I 1 and aa!uouo 1 L--- �y� - r l aun lyunoJ 16 l pa oalefej I 1S 4]x!S I L Limonite Ave 1 au11 Alunop 16 1 phi 031efep I I and opm° 1 i _ SR-60 Limonite Ave I L SR-60 • New sign required upstream of CL egress pa oalefe) Magnolia Ave — — OntariDAve — Caialco Rd — SR 55 ` -Sixth St SR-60 91 County Line MagnoiiaAve 1 1 SR-60 I , 91 County Line 1 Figure 1 Pricing Strategy HES B. Analysis of (impact of the Change on the performance of other aspects of the D&D Work, O&M Work, RCTC or RCTC's toll operations (as applicable); (Section 20.4.3(a)(v)): All impacts of the Change are reflected in this Change Order #6, and there are no other impacts of the Change on the performance of other aspects of the D&D Work, O&M Work, RCTC or RCTC's toll operations. C. Proposed plan for mitigating impacts of the Change (Section 20.4.2(a)(x)): Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 13 148 Sensitive / Proprietary N/A EXPRESS LANES D. Additions / deletions / modifications to the requirements of the Contract including KPIs if an (Section 20.4.3(al(viii See Redlined Technical Provisions Attachment 2. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 14 149 Sensitive / Proprietary SECTION II — Cost Impact(s) A. Summary Compensation under this Change Order is to be paid (check the applicable boxes below): EXPRESS LANES ❑ n/a' $0.00 ("no cost") Change Order. ❑ as a lump sum adjustment to the Contract Price in the amount of dollars ($ )• ❑ as a series of milestone payments in the following amounts: 1) See Section I, Subsection B (Overview of Scope), Part 4, Item A for the D&D Milestone Payment Schedule. 2) See Section I, Subsection B (Overview of Scope), Part 4, Item B for the Equipment Payment Schedule ❑ as an adjustment to Total O&M Years 1 and 2 Cost or Total O&M Years 3, 4 and 5 Cost See Section I, Subsection B (Overview of Scope), Part 4, Item C for the Monthly Payment Schedule for O&M for the SR-91 (Phase 1) Pre-ELP O&M Work. as a Unit Price Change Order for increases or decreases in the Contract Price [not to exceed] / [in the amount of] dollars ($ )) ❑ as a Time and Materials Change Order, [not to exceed dollars ($ n as is set forth below, under Section II(B)([2] / [31)./select the proper reference] ❑ If more than one box has been checked, also check this box and summarize terms here: Documentation supporting the Change Order is attached as Annex[esl [through ]. B. Special Considerations 1. Delay and disruption damages for Excusable Delay (Section 20.10). ® n/a Compensation available for Change Orders are (only) extra Work Costs and delay Costs directly attributable to the proposed Change and exclude certain costs and expenses. 1 If $0 (i.e., a "no cost" Change Order), leave remainder of Section II blank. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 15 150 Sensitive / Proprietary • Total extra Work Costs: $ • Total delay and disruption damages: $ Discussion (if any): EXPRESS LANES 2. Deductive RCTC Changes. ® n/a If this Change Order is a deductive change Net Costz Savings attributable to the deductive change $ Amount due to RCTC attributable to the deductive Change (or which can be used by RCTC, in its sole discretion, to offset payment to TSP) $ Discussion (if any): 2 When both additions and reductions are involved in any one Change Order, the adjustment shall be determined on the basis of net increase or decrease. TSP Margin will be allowed only for the net increase in labor Cost in order to establish the amount to be added to the Contract Price. In determining a deductive change order, any deduction will include the amount of TSP Margin and Audited Overhead which would have been payable on such amounts by RCTC in accordance with Section 20. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 16 151 Sensitive / Proprietary SECTION III — Completion Deadline Impacts (Applicable to All Change Orders) The status of the CSC Commencement Deadline is as follows: EXPRESS LANES ® Unaffected by this Change Order ❑ Affected by [extending] / [accelerating] the date of the CSC Commencement Deadline by calendar days to calendar days prior to Revenue Service Commencement. The status of the Revenue Service Commencement Deadline is as follows: ® Unaffected by this Change Order ❑ Affected by [extending] / [accelerating] the date of the Revenue Service Deadline by calendar days to Days after the Package 4 Turnover Date. The status of the total Float is as follows: ® Unaffected by this Change Order ❑ Affected by this Change Order as follows: If this Change Order is issued as a result of, or relating to, an Excusable Delay or a shortening time, TSP's Critical Path time impact delay analysis is attached as Annex (Section 20.4.3(a)(vi)). ® n/a Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 17 152 Sensitive / Proprietary SECTION IV - (Reviewed and recommended agreed by TSP's [Project Manager-D&Dra rict"" or [Project Manager -O&M Workj) By: Name: Jason Stewart Title: Project Manager Date: Comments: Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 18 153 Sensitive / Proprietary SECTION V - (Reviewed and agreed by TSP) EXPRESS LANES The undersigned Authorized Representative of TSP hereby certifies, under penalty of perjury, as follows: 1. Sections I, II and III of this Change Order, including all Worksheets and Annexes, collectively represent a true, accurate and complete summary of all aspects of this Change Order. 2. The amounts of time and/or compensation set forth in this Change Order (a) are, in each case, justified as to entitlement and amount, (b) reflect all changes to compensation for and scheduling of the Project (inclusive of all Subcontractor and Supplier amounts, impacts), (c) is complete, accurate and current and (d), in each case, the amounts of time, if any, and/or compensation, if any, agreeable to, and is hereby agreed by, TSP. 3. This Change Order includes all known and anticipated impacts or amounts, direct, indirect and consequential, which have been and may be incurred, as a result of the event, occurrence or matter giving rise to this Change Order. This Change Order constitutes a full and complete settlement of all Losses, Claims, matters, issues and disputes existing as of the effective date of this Change Order, of whatever nature, kind or character relating to the event, occurrence or matter giving rise to this Change Order and the performance of any extra Work that this Change Order documents or relates, including all direct and indirect costs for services, equipment, manpower, materials, overhead, profit, financing, delay and disruption arising out of, or relating to, the issues set forth herein. TSP acknowledges that it shall not be entitled to assert any Claim for relief under the Contract for delay, disruption costs or any other adverse financial or Project Schedule impacts existing as of the effective date of this Change Order and arising out of, or relating to, the event, occurrence or matter giving rise to this Change Order or such extra Work. 4. If the foregoing Change Order includes claims of Subcontractors or Suppliers, TSP represents that authorized representatives of each Subcontractor and Supplier, if any, reviewed such claims, this Change Order and accept this Change Order as dispositive on the same, subject to separate Contract between TSP and each such Subcontractor and Supplier, as applicable. Furthermore, TSP has determined in good faith that such claims are justified as to both entitlement and amount. 5. The cost and pricing data forming the basis for the Change Order is complete, accurate and current, with specific reference to the California False Claims Act (Government Code section 12650 et. seq.) and the U.S. False Claims Act (31 USC § 3729 et seq.) 6. It is understood and agreed that this Change Order shall not alter or change, in any way, the force and effect of the Contract, including any previous amendment(s) thereto, except insofar as the same is expressly altered and amended by this Change Order. 7. This Change Order supersedes all prior commitments, negotiations, correspondence, conversations, Contracts or understanding applicable to the issues addressed herein. No deviation from the terms hereof shall be predicated upon any prior representations or Contracts, whether oral or written, other than the Contract, as amended in accordance with its terms. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 19 154 Sensitive / Proprietary 1;Z E�fRRESSMRNES 8. This Change Order is binding upon, and shall insure to the benefit of, each of the pa ies an their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, TSP, intending to be legally bound, has executed this Change Order as of the date below. Date: TSP: Kapsch TrafficCom USA, Inc. By: Name: Robert Corion Title: Senior Vice President, Delivery and Operations The undersigned Guarantor hereby (i) acknowledges and consents to this CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 5; (ii) reaffirms that certain Guaranty dated as of , 201_ (the "Guaranty"), executed by the undersigned; and (iii) agrees that the Guaranty remains in full force and effect and binding upon the undersigned as of the date hereof. Date: Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services TSP: Kapsch TrafficCom AG By: Name: Title: 20 155 Sensitive / Proprietary SECTION VI - (Reviewed and recommended by RCTC) By: Name: David Thomas Title: Toll Project Manager Date: EXPRESS LANES By: Name: Michael Blomquist Title: Toll Project Director Date: Comments: Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 21 156 Sensitive / Proprietary SECTION VII - (Agreed by RCTC's Authorized Representative) EXPRESS LANES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, RCTC, intending to be legally bound, has executed this Change Order as of the date first written above. Date: RCTC (the effective date of this Change Order) RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services By: Name: Anne Mayer Title: Executive Director zz 157 Sensitive / Proprietary SECTION VIII - (Reviewed by FHWA Project Representative) Comments: EXPRESS LANES By: FHWA Project Representative Date: Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 23 158 Sensitive / Proprietary ATTACHMENT SR-91 (PHASE 2) PRICE SHEET EXPRESS LANES # Item Description Unit Qty Unit Price Total 1 Labor— Kapsch Development of System Design, Documentation, Installation, and Testing for components of the SR-91 Subproject under this Change Order #6 Lot 1 $948,619.00 $948,619.00 2 Subcontracts Support of Installation, Gantry Analysis and Modification Design, Maintenance of Traffic for components of the SR-91 Subproject under this Change Order #6 Lot 1 $1,141,806.00 $1,141,806.00 3 ODCs Supporting Costs — Vehicles, Bonding, Lane Closure Fees for components of the SR-91 Subproject under this Change Order #6 Lot 1 $71679.00 $71679.00 Total System Cost $2,162,104.00 4a Materials and Equipment — South Gantry Materials and System Equipment for Installation of TCS Lot 1 $439,764.00 $439,764.00 4b Materials and Equipment — County -Line VTMS Materials and System Equipment for Installation of TCS Lot 1 $124,181.00 $124,181.00 Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 24 159 Sensitive / Proprietary 4c Materials and Equipment — Network Equipment Materials and System Equipment for Installation of TCS Lot 1 $83,237.00 �nr� $83,23x7. Total Materials Cost 647,182.00 Total D&D Costs $2,809,286.00 Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services AHES 25 160 Sensitive / Proprietary ATTACHMENT 2 ADDITIONAL AND REVISED TECHNICAL PROVISIONS EXDAESS LAHES CHANGE #2 — The following provision is added as new Subsection 2.6.2 (and the subsections that follow are renumbered accordingly): "2.6.2 Project Schedule Requirements The TSP shall maintain a separate Project Schedule for each of SR-91 (Phase 2) and the ELP Project. The Project Schedules shall include key milestones and interdependencies for the ELP Project and SR-91 (Phase 2)." CHANGE #9 — The following provision is added as a new second paragraph to Section 4.6.2 (Installation Drawings): "The TSP shall prepare installation drawings for the SR-91 (Phase 2) for review and approval prior to any installation work being performed for SR-91 (Phase 2)." CHANGE #10 — The following provision is added as a new paragraph at the end of Subsection 5.1 (General): "The TSP shall test SR-91 (Phase 2) per Table 3. SR 91 (Phase 1) ETC FAT N/A ETC OFIT N/A ETC Site Commission x CSC FAT N/A CSC Installation N/A CSC System Commissioning Test N/A TCS Disaster Recovery and Back -Up Test N/A TCS Operations Test x TCS Acceptance Test As part of ELP Annual Renewal As part of ELP Table 1 SR-91 (Phase 2) Testing Overview" Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 26 161 Sensitive / Proprietary ATTACHMENT 3-A FORM OF NTP-SR91 (PHASE 1) PERFORMANCE BOND RIDER To be attached to and form a part of Bond No.: EXPRESS LANES Type of Bond: Performance Bond dated effective (Month — Day — Year) [Principal] and by , as Surety, in favor of Riverside County Transportation Commission In consideration of the mutual agreements herein contained Principal and the Surety hereby consent to the following: The amount of the Payment Bond is hereby increased by the amount of $2,809,286. Nothing herein contained shall vary, alter or extend any provision or condition of this bond except as herein expressly stated. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 27 162 Sensitive / Proprietary This rider is effective (Month — Day — Year) Signed and Sealed (Month — Day — Year) EXPRESS LANES By: (Principal) (Surety) By: Attorney -in- Fact Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 2s 163 Sensitive / Proprietary ATTACHMENT 3-B FORM OF NTP-SR91 (PHASE 1) PAYMENT BOND RIDER To be attached to and form a part of Bond No.: EXPRESS LANES Type of Bond: Payment Bond dated effective (Month — Day — Year) [Principal] and by , as Surety, in favor of Riverside County Transportation Commission In consideration of the mutual agreements herein contained Principal and the Surety hereby consent to the following: The amount of the Payment Bond is hereby increased by the amount of $2,809,286. Nothing herein contained shall vary, alter or extend any provision or condition of this bond except as herein expressly stated. Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 29 164 Sensitive / Proprietary This rider is effective (Month — Day — Year) Signed and Sealed (Month — Day — Year) EXPRESS LANES By: (Principal) (Surety) By: Attorney -in- Fact Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services 30 165 Sensitive / Proprietary AAAAA k LEGEND PROJECT LIMITS ---- COUNTY LINE VICINITY MAP Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services ATTACHMENT 4 SR-91 AND ELC ROW CORONA EL CERRITO EXDAESS LAHES 31 166 Sensitive / Proprietary ATTACHMENT 5 SR-91 (PHASE 2) REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 1) SR-91 Express Lanes As -Built Drawings 2) TSP Change Order #5 Riverside County Transportation Commission 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Toll Services EXPRESS LANES 32 167 AGENDA ITEM 91 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee David Thomas, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: CEQA Revalidation and Addendum for the Modified State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project's Express Lane Connector Improvements WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 19-011, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting an Addendum to the Previously Certified Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2008071075) Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Approving the Proposed Changes to the Project". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In November 2012, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 12-028 related to the State Route 91 (SR-91) Corridor Improvement Project (Project) Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) and approved the Project. The Project was proposed to be implemented in phases to maximize the use of available funds: (1) the Initial Phase, and (2) the Ultimate Project. Construction of the Initial Phase was substantially completed in March 2017. The Interstate 15/State Route 91 Express Lanes Connector improvement (15/91 ELC) is a component of the Ultimate Project as identified in the EIR/EIS. The 15/91 ELC will provide a tolled express lanes connector between the existing RCTC 91 Express Lanes and the future 15 Express Lanes to the north of SR-91. A detailed vicinity map of the 15/91 ELC is provided as Attachment 1. The 15/91 ELC involves adding: 1) A single -lane tolled express lane connector from the eastbound RCTC 91 Express Lanes to the future northbound 15 Express Lanes that would extend in the median of 1-15 to the Hidden Valley Road interchange; and 2) A single -lane tolled express lane connector from the future southbound 15 Express Lanes that would extend from the median of 1-15 at the Hidden Valley Road interchange and would connect to the westbound RCTC 91 Express Lanes. In addition, operational improvements are proposed along eastbound SR-91 by extending the eastbound 91 Express Lane to approximately 0.5 mile east of the 1-15/SR-91 interchange and Agenda Item 91 168 widening SR-91 to accommodate extending the outside eastbound general purpose lane from the SR-91 bridge over Arlington Channel to east of Promenade Avenue. A variable toll messaging sign would also be installed on eastbound SR-91 near the Orange/Riverside county line. At its October 2017 meeting, the Commission approved an overall procurement strategy for all the services and construction needed for the 15/91 ELC. At the same meeting, the Commission also approved Agreement No. 15-31-001-02 with Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. to complete preliminary engineering and environmental documentation for the 15/91 ELC improvement. The current estimated capital cost of the 15/91 ELC is $220 million. In 2017, the Commission received $180 million in funding from Senate Bill 132 to construct the 15/91 ELC. At its January 2019 workshop, the Commission committed to fund the remaining balance with surplus toll revenue from the RCTC 91 Express Lanes. The Commission is also seeking federal funds to build the 15/91 ELC. DISCUSSION: Environmental Process Since the approval of the EIR/EIS, the preliminary engineering and environmental documentation efforts for the 15/91 ELC have identified minor technical changes or additions to the Project. The findings have been documented in an environmental re -validation form for the Project that was completed in June 2019. The environmental re -validation has identified that there are no new or substantive changes to any of the resources, as identified in the EIR/EIS. Hence, no additional avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures have been identified or are warranted, except for one noise barrier to be constructed. Public circulation of the re -validation document is not required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). However, a Record of Decision will be filed with the Federal Register to notify the public of the findings of the environmental re -validation documentation. The NEPA/CEQA re -validation form is described as Exhibit A to Resolution No. 19-011 (Attachment 2) and provided as Attachment 3 to this staff report. The Commission's Role as a Responsible Agency In the environmental process, the Project, and consequently the 15/91 ELC component of the Project, is considered a joint undertaking by Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration and is subject to state and federal environmental review requirements. Project documentation has been prepared in compliance with both CEQA and NEPA. Caltrans is the lead agency under NEPA and CEQA for the Project. The Commission is considered a responsible agency under CEQA. As a responsible agency, the Commission must comply with CEQA by considering the final environmental re -validation documentation adopted by Caltrans. In reviewing the final environmental re -validation documentation, the Commission must independently reach its conclusion on whether and how Agenda Item 91 169 to approve the Project modifications. The Commission should approve the Project in its role as a responsible agency. Staff and the Commission's consultant team led the preparation of the environmental re- validation document in close coordination with Caltrans. Although no additional measures to minimize harm to the resources within the Project area were identified or warranted for the Project modifications, future avoidance, mitigation and/or minimization measures may be imposed as part of permit requirements to further reduce environmental effects. An updated Environmental Commitment Record for the Project is attached to the resolution as part of Exhibit A under the re -validation form (Attachment 3). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 19-011, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting an Addendum to the Previously Certified Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2008071075) Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Approving the Proposed Changes to the Project." Attachments: 1) 15/91 Express Lanes Connector Vicinity Map 2) Resolution No. 19-011— SR-91 CIP CEQA Addendum and Approval of Project Changes 3) Exhibit A to Resolution No. 19-011 SR-91 — NEPA/CEQA Re -Validation Form (Posted on the Commission Website) Agenda Item 91 170 -15 R -91 EXPRESS. BEGIN CONSTRUCTION SR-91 PM 6.6 + :;r rA., END CONSTRUCTION 1-15 PM 43.4 EXPRESS LANES CONNECTOR PROJECT QUARRY Sf' STH St 171 ATTACHMENT 1 S CONNECTOR INSTALL NEW VTMS SR-91 PM R17.3 NORTH APPROXIMATELY 9 MILES WEST OF THE 15/91 JUNCTION END CONSTRUCTION SR-91 PM 8.1 LEGEND EXPRESS LANES CONNECTOR PROJECT CCO 6 / CCO 10 PROPOSED RE -STRIPING COUNTY LINE SR-91 CIP APE VTMS VARIABLE TOLL MESSAGE SIGN ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. 19-011 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2008071075) PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND APPROVING THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PROJECT WHEREAS, the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (Project) is a project to improve mobility in the State Route 91 corridor via capacity, operational, and safety improvements; and WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) was the lead agency for the Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); and WHEREAS, in coordination with Caltrans, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) prepared an environmental impact statement and environmental impact report (EIS/EIR) to analyze the Project's impacts on the environment; and WHEREAS, in August 2012, Caltrans, as lead agency, certified the EIS/EIR, adopted CEQA finding, adopted a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP), adopted a statement of overriding considerations, and approved the Project; and WHEREAS, in November 2012, the Commission, as a responsible agency under CEQA, considered the EIS/EIR and made similar findings and approvals; and WHEREAS, minor design refinements to the Project have been proposed, namely: the south -to -west connector would connect approximately 45 feet higher to the existing Interstate-15 (I-15)/State Route-91 (SR-91) Bridge No. 56-0817F; the connector bridge has been shortened from one large bridge to three shorter bridge segments; the Main Street East Bound on -ramp is proposed to be realigned approximately 8 feet farther south; the buffer width between East Bound and West Bound SR-91 would be reduced by approximately 7 feet; an additional toll lane would be added on I-15 that extends north of the Hidden Valley Parkway interchange; the existing North Bound off -ramp and existing North Bound on -ramp of the Hidden Valley Parkway interchange would be realigned to the east; and up to 60,000 cubic yards of excavated material removed as part of the Project would be placed in the southeast quadrant of the I-15/SR- 91 interchange between SR-91 and the North Bound I-15 to East Bound SR-91 connector ramp (collectively, the Revised Project); and WHEREAS, under CEQA, when taking subsequent discretionary actions in furtherance of a project for which an EIR has been certified, the lead agency is required to review any 172 changed circumstances to determine whether any of the circumstances under Public Resources Code section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 require additional environmental review; and WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA, Caltrans analyzed all potential environmental effects associated with the Revised Project and determined that none of the conditions described in State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 or Public Resources Code section 21166 have occurred; rather, consistent with State CEQA Guidelines section 15164, subdivision (a), the Commission determined that an addendum to the EIR should be prepared; and WHEREAS, in collaboration with Caltrans, the Commission prepared an addendum to the EIS/EIR (Addendum); and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2019, Caltrans, as the lead agency, approved and adopted the Addendum to the EIS/EIR and approved the Revised Project; and WHEREAS, in its limited role as responsible agency, this matter came before the Commission at a regularly scheduled public meeting, at which the Commission carefully considered all information pertaining to the Revised Project, including the staff report, the Addendum together with the EIS/EIR, and all of the information, evidence, and testimony presented at its public meeting; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. The recitals above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by reference as findings of fact. Section 2. Compliance with the Environmental Quality Act. In considering the Revised Project, the Commission has considered the EIS/EIR for the Project (State Clearinghouse Number 2008071075), which was certified by the Commission on November 14, 2012, and the addenda thereto, along with all oral and written comments received and the administrative record (the Record). The Commission hereby finds and determines that the Record contains a complete and accurate reporting of the environmental impacts of the Revised Project and the Project as a whole, the impacts of which were fully addressed and mitigated (to the extent feasible) in the EIS/EIR. The Commission hereby further finds and determines that the Addendum has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The Commission further finds and determines that the Addendum reflects the Commission's independent judgment. Section 3. Findings on Environmental Impacts. Based on the substantial evidence set forth in the Record, including but not limited to the Addendum, the Commission finds that an addendum to the EIS/EIR is the appropriate document for disclosing the minor changes and additions that are necessary to the EIS/EIR to account for the Revised Project. The Commission 173 finds that none of the conditions under State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 requiring the need for further subsequent environmental review have occurred because: a) No substantial changes are proposed that would require major revisions of the EIS/E1R due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; b) No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that would require major revisions of the EIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of the previously identified significant effects; and c) No new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIS/EIR was certified shows any of the following: (i) the modifications would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the EIS/EIR; (ii) significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the EIS/EIR; (iii) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects, but the Commission declined to adopt such measures; or (iv) mitigation measures or alternatives considerably different from those analyzed in the EIS/EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but which the Commission declined to adopt. Section 4. Approval of Addendum. The Commission hereby approves and adopts the Addendum to the EIS/EIR prepared for the Revised Project (attached as Exhibit A). Section 5. Approval of the Revised Project. The Commission hereby approves the Revised Project, subject to any and all applicable mitigation measures that were previously imposed by the Commission as part of the Project. Section 6. Notice of Determination. The Commission directs staff to file a Notice of Determination with the Riverside County Clerk's Office within five (5) working days of adoption of this Resolution. Section 7. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution and the above findings have been based are located at the Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, California 92502. APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission this day of July, 2019. Chuck Washington, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission 174 ATTEST: Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 175 Exhibit A (Addendum to EIR) 176 ATTACHMENT 3 NEPA/CEOA RE -VALIDATION FQRM IlST.:00,fRTE. PROM 0$-RRi•91; 413-RIV-15 ORA-J7-R1 #.43,1R18.91; RIV-g1 • RC.00JR73.0.e; RIV.15.35.6I11a5.121 E.A. ar Fad-Ald Protect N . Other ProJwel NU- 4apecilryl P JECT TITLE ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVAL TYPE Rre•iio14 EA F-540 PhJ 131XiDZOD3239. New EA OB•OF543 RN OB003 000138 Not Applit;oble Pievidusly &oriel Routs 5!1 Corrxior improvement Prolem t514.-61 Clpl. Now InleroLat,e 15; State Rpulc 91 Eilaress Lame Connector (145eSF141 ELG) Prceset Enuircnmerrlal knpw! Report (El FIVEnvirarlmental i'mp si. Slatament (EFSM DATE APPROVED REASON FOR Or?N SILTATION (23 CFR 771.125� DESCRIPTION OF C H AN clED CON DITIONS August 2012 Creak IenNon fgr carisuflutiew; IDFNLeet moceeeling ro deo imAiov fieerar approveJ [RCM -awe ln some, eartay. eeeC•!S, AtiLIgariorisasauvrcs recpArcrnunrs 53'.yezre JirriOnv (OS of4r) WA {fhe Vard arao 1r}r CECIA. 4.-) SWF rhQ A'aler daslr-mr so!rre prao- sa. sod &sages in Ore p.rcijea desk a ass rOfibm beicw. NEPA CONCLUSION — VALIDITY Based an ea examinat-an or 11ke Chenyed ronrlitrom Rind suppmrt+lg !Om —malice!: IIYhar-i' ONE or.rbe levee srsrermerlrs bthle1 7, regar ,i g hha velem/ d nhe Wpm!' ooetrrrrarirrderemAario i 123 CFR ry r. 729j. IF dog lffra9W is no farrger Len OncYagre wleerher �hp'rfiriOThar fithh7 rOleltr r L5 Iva rrelnled avic wrlahtier lr78 4939 errrif reanerrl.el docurrrera r+niOEJ70 or....0W) • Thq Original enWrorlrnental document or CE rernaini vetlid_ No furMer clocumentallon will be prepared. ® The original swim:mm{1 B! document or GE is In need ar updating; luriher dacumantatIon has peen prepared and E is iritiuded ism tee coniinuatian shea10.] .or ❑ is at1acried. With 1hla additional dOeuraeniakion. kho original E0 or CE remains Y131Id. Additional public caview la warranted (23 CFA nil 1yelp ❑ No L7 The original clacum*rrt i~E n4 longer walld. Addi litinal public review is warra ntad [13 CFA FT1.111(11E 1j Yet ❑ No ❑ 5lrpplerrnerltel eradraementel docurnenl ie needed, Yee Q No ❑ New enulran mental document is needed. Yee n No ❑ (ar -Yes,- specify type; _,— CONCLIRFIENCE NERA gi)LLISiOH I copivikvithi1he NEPA .. nalusion I , 1‘414.4i mature: Pr -coast ManagerrULAE Dale M ❑ EQA CONCLUSION.; (Only mandated for arcleeere Pre Stare Higfavoy Si/slam) eaSKI on an examination of 1hs nargeri carldiri ins and supPcrtilg inturrnalion-the fallowing amrlcJueHsn Imo teen reached n-garding arprapnore CEEDA uocumentatirmn: ,rCtie ,14 ONE # Me Me& saelerrr$rr$ 1)-orcnv, ind0.71401g wherhau env eptkoimar Odeoulerrtahon HZ be "oared. errcl'.ds0. 'POW kind. ffnddLOrornar OcipurnenraMan re areparea art sa r s copy car rsigned farm find $►lY Cord:r1.LEMSn Sfi8.911b,.) ❑ Original document remains valyd. No further documentation 0 egcesseryr. • Only minor rotheicol c hanggS Of addlilane to the previous document are neeeaVarY. A,a egdondum here bull or will be ® prepared and is ®included r}n the continuation 9lleeta ow ❑ will be attached. lk need nol be circuisied for public review. .rCElit Girkfeli'rtear § Offreav ❑ Changes am a u b�i�ntial, bul only minor addrtione or thanges are noeseary to mph, lha prawlous document adequeie. A Supplemental environmental dccurnen1 will be prepared, arid It will he circul Med for public re ripw. (MA A Gliurxerrrres, g15163) ❑ Changes are 8ubetsnitial, and melon revision@ lei The dui -refit dbcumcnt are necessary. A Sulnequent ernironrl eetal document will be prepared, grid Jl wilt be circulated for public re -view. (CEQA Gurdebnes, §?±1 1 faFJ ISpeoity rype of subsequenr docvmenr, e.p . Suas igw nr Fink EAR) ❑ The GE It MO. danger valid. Now CE ngedyci, Yea ❑ Hp ❑ CONCURRENCE wrTH Ce_EQA C ONCLU SI ON r cn� ry aa0ve.Ctile�i3-s, 1"- i1 siai ETvImnrnenlel Br�a h -Other rsdura: Ppeilset PAanagerlaLAE Oats Psgc ] of la Devised September 2016 NEPA/CEQA RE -VALIDATION FORM CONTINUATION SHEET(S) Address only changes or new information since approval of the original document and only those areas that are applicable. Use the list below as section headings as they apply to the project change(s). Use as much or as little space as needed to adequately address the project change(s) and the associated impacts, minimization, avoidance and/or mitigation measures, if any. Changes in project design (e.g., scope change, a new alternative, change in project alignment). An Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) was adopted in 2012 for the State Route (SR) 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP). The SR-91 CIP Alternative 2f was proposed in several phases to maximize use of available funds and consisted of an Initial Phase and an Ultimate Project. The SR-91 CIP 2012 EIR/EIS analyzed both the Initial Phase and the Ultimate Project phases. The Record of Decision (ROD) was prepared for the Initial Phase. A new ROD will be needed for this project and for future phases. Construction of the SR-91 CIP Initial Phase was completed under Expenditure Authorization (EA) 08-0F540. The Initial Phase included improvements on SR-91 from approximately the Orange/Riverside county line to the Interstate 15 (1-15) interchange and a single -lane direct connector to and from 1-15 south, extending from SR-91 to the Ontario Avenue interchange. Construction of the Initial Phase began in June 2014 and was opened to traffic in March 2017. Separate projects have been identified below and programmed to incorporate the following remaining improvements of the Ultimate Project by 2035. See Attachment 1 for the Ultimate Project Study Area. The Ultimate Project would provide the following improvements: Eastbound SR-91 • A sixth general purpose (GP) lane would be provided between SR-241 and SR-71. Between SR-241 and Coal Canyon, widening on eastbound (EB) SR-91 is proposed to accommodate the additional lane. Between Coal Canyon and Green River Road, the centerline of SR-91 is proposed to be shifted northward and widening of westbound (WB) SR-91 is proposed to accommodate the additional EB lane. • The Green River Road EB off- and on -ramps would be widened and realigned to accommodate the Ultimate Project. • Between Green River Road and SR-71, restriping EB SR-91 is proposed to accommodate the additional GP lane. • From 1-15 to Pierce Street, a fourth GP lane would be added by widening EB SR-91 between 1-15 and the Pierce Street off -ramp. The EB tolled Express Lane would be extended from I-15 to the McKinley Street interchange by restriping the inside GP lane. • The McKinley Street EB ramps would be modified to accommodate the widening of SR-91, and additional lanes would be added to the ramps. • A new collector -distributor road would be constructed, combining the Pierce Street and Magnolia Avenue EB off -ramps into one exit point from SR-91, which is also the termination point of the fourth GP lane addition. Westbound SR-91 • A sixth GP lane would be provided between SR-71 and SR-241. Between Coal Canyon and SR-241, widening on WB SR-91 is proposed to accommodate the additional lane. • Between Green River Road and Coal Canyon, widening of WB SR-91 is proposed to accommodate the additional lane. • The Green River Road WB on -ramp would be widened and realigned to accommodate the Ultimate Project. • Between the SR-71 south—west connector to Green River Road, the additional GP lane would be added by restriping. An auxiliary lane would also be added in advance of the Green River Road off - ramp by restriping. • From Pierce Street to I-15, a fourth GP lane would be added by widening WB SR-91 between the Pierce Street WB on -ramp and 1-15. The WB high -occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane would be converted to a tolled Express Lane within these limits. Page 2 of 10 Revised September 2016 NEPA/CEQA RE -VALIDATION FORM • The McKinley Street WB ramps would be modified to accommodate the widening of SR-91, and an additional lane would be added to the ramps. 1-15 • A single -lane tolled Express Lane would be constructed in the median in the northbound (NB) and southbound (SB) directions extending from the Ontario Avenue interchange to the Cajalco Road interchange. • A single -lane tolled Express Lane connector would be provided from EB SR-91 to NB 1-15 that would extend in the median of 1-15 to the Hidden Valley Road interchange. • A single -lane tolled Express Lane would be constructed in the median of 1-15 that would begin at the Hidden Valley Road interchange and would continue SB as a single -lane Express Lane connector to WB SR-91. I-15/SR-91 ELC Project Status The I-15/SR-91 ELC Project is a component of the Ultimate Project that is to be examined in this re- validation under EA 08-0F543. See Attachment 2 for the ELC Project Study Area. As previously analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS, this component involves adding: (1) a single -lane tolled Express Lane connector from the EB SR-91 Express Lanes to the NB 1-15 Express Lanes that would extend in the median of 1-15 to the Hidden Valley Road interchange; and (2) a single -lane tolled Express Lane in the median of 1-15 that would begin at the Hidden Valley Road interchange and would continue SB as a single Express Lane connector to the WB SR-91 Express Lanes. In addition, operational improvements are proposed along EB SR-91 by extending the EB Express Lane to approximately 0.5 mile east of the I-15/SR-91 interchange and widening EB SR-91 to accommodate extending the #4 GP lane from the SR-91 bridge over Arlington Channel to east of Promenade Avenue. A variable toll messaging sign (VTMS) would be installed on EB SR-91 near the Orange/Riverside county line. I-15/SR-91 ELC Project Design Changes The I-15/SR-91 ELC Project is consistent with the project features identified in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS, except for the following design changes: Separated Connectors The design of the 1-15 south-to-SR-91 west and the SR-91 east-to-1-15 north connectors was changed so each of the connectors would have an independent alignment. The design changes include the following changes: • The south -to -west connector would connect approximately 45 feet higher to the existing (constructed as part of the Initial Phase) I-15/SR-91 ELC (Bridge No. 56-0817F). The previous design was approximately 45 feet lower and connected to the existing Temescal Wash bridge. The profile of this connector is now approximately 30 feet over the existing north -to -west connector bridge. The previous design was approximately 15 feet below the existing north -to -west connector bridge. • The east -to -north connector profile generally follows the profile analyzed in the Final EIR/EIS; however, the connector bridge has been shortened from one large bridge to three shorter bridge segments by implementing 30-foot-high retaining wall structures with fill material below the roadway instead of the roadway being placed on more costly bridge structures. Barrier Separation To make room for the additional buffer required for the toll facility and to provide standard shoulder widths along EB SR-91, the Main Street EB on -ramp is proposed to be realigned approximately 8 feet farther south. Also, as a result, the buffer width between EB and WB SR-91 would be reduced by approximately 7 feet. Toll Lane Improvements An additional toll lane would be added on 1-15 that extends north of the Hidden Valley Parkway interchange. To accommodate this additional toll lane, the existing NB off -ramp and existing NB on -ramp of the Hidden Valley Parkway interchange would be realigned to the east. Page 3 of 10 Revised September 2016 NEPA/CEQA RE -VALIDATION FORM Soundwall As part of design development, one soundwall (SW2192) required minor changes from what was presented in the Final EIR/EIS. This soundwall, described below, would not affect the outcome decisions made in the Final EIR/EIS and would still be considered reasonable and feasible. Soundwall SW2192 would be approximately 90 feet long and located within private property in the northeast quadrant of the I-15/SR-91 interchange. See Attachment 3 for the location of the soundwall. Two easements would be required: a temporary construction easement (TCE) that would be 161 feet long and roughly 15 feet wide, and a footing easement that would be 110 feet long and 5 feet wide to protect the footing in perpetuity to ensure no one structurally damages the wall. Soundwall SW2192 would be a combination transparent/masonry-block wall. Changes in environmental setting (e.g., new development affecting traffic or air quality). To the extent the environmental setting has changed, it is the result of design changes that occurred during the Initial Phase that were addressed in previous re -validations of the EIR/EIS. The changes did not result in any substantial impacts to the environment. Attachment 4 provides a summary of the previous re -validations for the Initial Phase. Changes in environmental circumstances (e.g., a new law or regulation, change in the status of a listed species). The following are changes in environmental circumstances from what was previously analyzed in the Final EIR/EIS: Hazardous Materials/Waste The governing regulatory guidance for conducting initial site assessments (ISA)/hazardous materials/ hazardous waste assessments at the time the Phase I ISA was conducted for the Final EIR/EIS was the American Standards for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E 1527-05, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Process. The regulatory guidance has since been updated to the current ASTM E 1527-13. The major changes in the current version are discussed below: Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC) — The revised Standard simplifies the definition of an REC to be "a release, a likely release, or a material threat of a release of hazardous substances to the environment and property." A Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC) now refers only to "historic releases which have been remediated to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities for unrestricted use," therefore limiting an HREC to past releases that do not subject the property to any use restrictions, activity and use limitations (AULs), or other engineering or institutional controls. An HREC is no longer considered an REC. Finally, a new term was introduced: Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CRECs). This term describes "releases that have been addressed to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities, but from which residual contamination has been permitted to remain in place subject to the implementation of use restrictions, AULs, or other institutional or engineering controls on the subject property." A CREC is an REC and must be identified as such in the conclusions section of the Phase I report. Vapor Migration — The potential for vapor migration, including vapor that migrates in the subsurface, must be considered in the Phase I report. Agency File Reviews — If a relevant property appears on a federal, state, or tribal record, the new Standard requires a review of "pertinent regulatory files and/or records associated with the listing." The environmental professional can exercise discretion when mandating a review but must document the reasons why a review was not conducted if a document review is deemed unnecessary. An ISA Addendum was prepared and approved in October 2018 to update the information related to the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project site and accommodate changes with the toll lane improvements. Air Quality The governing regulatory guidance for conducting project air quality analysis in 2010 was the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reviews the most up-to-date scientific information and the existing ambient standards for each pollutant every Page 4 of 10 Revised September 2016 NEPA/CEQA RE -VALIDATION FORM 5 years and obtains advice from the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) on each review. Based on these, EPA applies consideration to revise the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) accordingly. The changes and adjustments to the NAAQS, especially those that occurred since approval of the project's 2012 Final EIR/EIS, include the following: 1. The 8-hour ozone (03) standard of 0.075 parts per million (ppm) was established in 2008. On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated attainment designations based on the 8-hour Os standard. On October 1, 2015, EPA strengthened the 8-hour Os NAAQS based on new scientific evidence regarding the effects of ground -level Os on public health and the environment. The new 8-hour Os NAAQS standard (primary and secondary) is 0.070 ppm. The area designation/classification based on the new standard passed Final rule on March 1, 2018, and attainment demonstration plans in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) will be due by late 2019. EPA revised the air quality standards for particle pollution in 2012. The new revisions became effective on January 15, 2015, and include the following: 1. The annual particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) standard, for primary and secondary, was strengthened from the 2006 level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter (pg/m3) to 12.0 pg/m3 (primary) and 15.0 pg/m3 (secondary); the 24-hour standard of 35 pg/m3was retained. 2. The 24-hour particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM,o) standard of 150 pg/m3 was retained. Since approval of the Final EIR/EIS, the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) and Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) have been updated (2016-2040 RTP/SCS and 2017 FTIP). In June 2018, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) confirmed that the previously issued Project - Level Conformity Determination for the SR-91 CIP remains valid for obtaining the ROD for the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project. Consistent with 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 93.104d, the I-15/SR-91 revised ELC Project does not prompt any of the three triggers that would require a redetermination of conformity: 1. The project design concept and scope have not changed: In February 2018, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 8 Traffic Planning determined that the I-15/SR-91 ELC improvements were consistent with the SR-91 CIP and that no revisions to the Traffic Operational Analysis Report are required. 2. No 3-year lapse in major steps to advance the project: The SR-91 CIP Initial Phase was opened to traffic in March 2017. The environmental permits are still open, and plant establishment and warranty repair work is ongoing. The project is active. 3. The I-15/SR-91 ELC Project does not necessitate performing a supplemental environmental document for air quality purposes. The description of the project in the 2012 RTP is as follows: Project ID No. RIV071250; Description: Phase 1: On SR-91/I-15: SR91 — Construct 1 mixed flow lane (SR-71 through 1-15)/1 aux lane at various locations (SR-241 through Pierce) (OC PM 14.43-18.91), CD system (2/3/4 lanes from Main Street to 1-15), 1 toll express lane (TEL) and convert HOV to TEL in each direction (OC to 1-15); 1-15 — construct TEL median direct connector NB 1-15 to WB SR-91 and EB SR-91 to SB 1-15, 1 TEL in each direction (SR-91 direct connector— Ontario Interchange) (1-15 PM 37.56-42.94). Phase 2: on SR-91/I- 15: SR91 — Add 1 mixed flow lane in each direction (SR241 — SR71)(115 — Pierce); 115 — add toll express lane (TEL) median direct connector (SB15 to WB91 & EB91 to NB15), 1 TEL each direction from Hidden Valley —SR-91 direct connector and from Ontario Interchange to Cajalco Interchange. Therefore, since the approved RTP description matches the proposed work, no further air quality analysis was required for the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project. Noise The base cost allowance for noise abatement reasonableness and feasibility was $55,000 at the time of the Final EIR/EIS. The 2019 base cost analysis is now $107,000 per benefited receptor. A Supplemental Noise Study Report (NSR) and Supplemental Noise Abatement Decision Report (NADR) were completed for the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project and approved in June 2019. These analyses used $107,000 per benefited receptor. Page 5 of 10 Revised September 2016 NEPA/CEQA RE -VALIDATION FORM Biology The California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB); Information, Planning and Conservation System (IPaC); and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) databases were accessed to obtain updated species lists to determine whether there were changes to the species listed in the Final EIR/EIS. The updated IPaC and NMFS database searches are included in Attachments 5 and 6. Since approval (May 2010) of the Natural Environment Study (NES), three additional special -status species were identified as having potential to occur within the Biological Study Area (BSA): Santa Monica dudleya (Dudleya cymosa ssp. ovatifolia), arroyo chub (Gila orcuttiO, and yellow rail (Cotumicops noveboracensis). A Supplemental NES was approved in May 2019. Changes to environmental impacts of the project (e.g., a new type of impact, or a change in the magnitude of an existing impact). There are no new or substantive changes for the following resource areas, as identified in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. 3.1 — Land Use Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed or substantial impacts to land use. These design changes do not result in changes to zoning, and land use remains consistent with the Riverside County General Plan. A temporary construction easement for parcel 115-353-015 will be required during construction of Soundwall SW2192; however, no additional avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures (AMMs) would be required. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures (AMMs) are required. 3.2 — Growth Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed or substantial impacts to growth. The I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would not foster economic or population growth. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. 3.3 — Farmlands/Timberlands Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in substantial impacts to Farmlands of Local Importance and Timberlands. While there is an area of Farmland of Local Importance located within the project study area in the southeast quadrant of the I-15/SR-91 interchange, the identified farmland is located outside the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project footprint. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. 3.4 — Community Impacts Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed or substantial impacts to the community. No minority or low-income populations that would be adversely affected by the proposed project have been identified. Therefore, this project is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12898. Additionally, the current use of the project location is an interchange. The proposed improvements do not change the existing use; therefore, the project would not affect community character and cohesion. No acquisitions are required for the project; therefore, no relocations would occur. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. 3.5 — Utilities/Emergency Services Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed substantial impacts to utilities/emergency services. Any additional utilities relocations resulting from separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, or improvements to the toll lanes would be coordinated with the utility companies and emergency service providers to reduce disruptions to service. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. Page 6 of 10 Revised September 2016 NEPA/CEQA RE -VALIDATION FORM 3.6 — Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities A memorandum was prepared and approved in May 2018, confirming the analysis in the SR-91 CIP Traffic Operations Analysis Report is still valid. Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed substantial impacts to traffic and transportation/pedestrian and bicycle facilities. These changes in design are anticipated to improve traffic and transportation within the project area. The I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with the traffic and transportation analysis in the Final EIR/EIS. Therefore, no new AMMs would be required. 3.8 — Cultural Resources No cultural resources were identified in the Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) within the revised I- 15/SR-91 ELC Project area. Therefore, the design changes for the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project, separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed substantial impacts to cultural resources and would not result in any historic properties being affected. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. 3.9 — Hydrology and Floodplains Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed substantial impacts to hydrology. The project is located within a 100-year base floodplain but would not result in a significant encroachment in the 100-year floodplain. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. 3.10 — Water Quality and Stormwater Runoff Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed substantial impacts to water quality and stormwater runoff analysis. These improvements are in compliance with all federal, state, and local water quality policies. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. 3.11 — Geology/Soils/Seismic/Topography Project design would follow all required building codes. Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed substantial impacts to geology, soils, seismic, and topography. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final-EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. 3.12 — Paleontology The project is located in a mix of high and low paleontological sensitivity areas, and AMMs to reduce impacts to paleontological resources were already identified in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed substantial impacts to paleontological resources from those previously analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. 3.14 — Air Quality Confirmation from FHWA was received in June 2018 that the previously issued Project -Level Conformity Determination for the SR-91 CIP remains valid for obtaining the ROD for the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project because the project conforms with 40 CFR 93.04d: the project design concept and scope have not changed, there has not been a 3-year lapse in major steps to advance the project, and the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project is not performing a supplemental environmental document for air quality purposes. The I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with the air quality analysis in the Final EIR/EIS. Therefore, no new AMMs are required. Page 7 of 10 Revised September 2016 NEPA/CEQA RE -VALIDATION FORM 3.16 — Energy Separation of the connectors, changes to the barrier separation, and improvements to the toll lanes would not result in any new/changed substantial impacts to energy resources. The project changes would use energy -efficient lighting; therefore, the project would not produce inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary energy consumption. Therefore, the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would be consistent with what was analyzed in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. No new AMMs are required. 3.23 — Relationship between Local Short -Term Uses of the Human Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long -Term Productivity The I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would not change the outcome of what was determined and addressed in Section 3.23 of the Final EIR/EIS. 3.24 — Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources that would be Involved in the Proposed Proiect The I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would not change the outcome of what was determined and addressed in Section 3.24 of the Final EIR/EIS. 3.25 — Cumulative Impacts The I-15/SR-91 ELC Project would not change the cumulative impacts as identified in the Final EIR/EIS. While the following resources did require additional technical studies, there are no substantive changes for these resources, as identified in the SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS. 3.7 — Visual/Aesthetics Since approval of the Final EIR/EIS, design changes, consisting of the addition of two direct connectors and the lower profile of the EB to NB connector, have been incorporated into the I-15/SR-91 ELC that have resulted in visual changes. These changes were analyzed in a Scenic Resource Evaluation and Visual Impact Assessment Addendum of State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project. The addendum was approved in December 2018. New visual simulations were prepared to display the potential changes associated with the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project and can be found in Attachment 7. The addendum also analyzed the proposed mitigation associated with the changes to the visual environment of the study area. The analysis confirmed that the new changes associated with the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project are not anticipated to result in changes to visual resources beyond what was identified in the 2010 Visual Impact Assessment and analyzed in the Final EIR/EIS. No additional impacts were identified, and no new AMMs are recommended. 3.13 — Hazardous Waste/Materials Since approval of the Final EIR/EIS, project limits expanded by adding a toll lane on 1-15 that extends north of the Hidden Valley Parkway interchange, which required updated information about potential hazardous material/waste sites that could affect the project site. Impacts from these changes were analyzed in the ISA Addendum approved in October 2018. Addendum activities conducted include identification of contaminated properties on or adjacent to the project site, review of historical records of releases adjacent to or on the project site, identification of other environmental issues that may exist on or near the project site, and other potential environmental issues that may affect Caltrans and/or other project proponent's ability to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed project. The ISA Addendum did not reveal any additional RECs in connection with the project beyond those identified and analyzed in the Final EIR/EIS for hazardous materials/waste. No additional AMMs beyond those identified in the Final EIR/EIS were recommended. 3.15 — Noise As of May 2019, RCTC has constructed all of the soundwalls committed in the Final EIR/EIS for the SR- 91 CIP. A Supplemental NSR (SNSR) and Supplemental NADR (SNADR) were prepared to account for geometric changes to the express lanes connectors since approval of the 2012 Final EIR/EIS. The connectors have different horizontal and vertical alignments than originally proposed in the 2012. As mentioned in the "Changes in Environmental Circumstances" section of this re -validation, the base cost Page 8 of 10 Revised September 2016 NEPA/CEQA RE -VALIDATION FORM allowance for noise abatement reasonableness and feasibility increased from $55,000 in 2012 to $107,000 per benefited receptor. Traffic noise impacts associate with the geometric changes to the express lane connector would occur at two single-family residences located along Cresta Road, north of SR-91 and east of 1-15. The SNSR concluded that a soundwall with heights ranging from 8 to 10 feet would be needed to provide feasible abatement of traffic noise of reducing existing noise levels to 5 decibels (dB) for the two impacted receptors. The SNADR determined that Soundwall SW2192 is reasonable from a basis of cost, and the property owner is in favor of the soundwall; therefore, a soundwall is recommended to be constructed. Biological Resources (3.17 — Natural Communities, 3.22 — Invasive Species) Since approval of the Final EIR/EIS, design changes have been incorporated into the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project's final design. The potential impacts of these changes, as well as the potential project impacts due to changes in the affected biological environment, were analyzed in a Supplemental NES that was approved in May 2019. To complete the analysis of the biological environment for the Supplemental NES, habitat assessment site visits were conducted; new species lists from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) were obtained; and a review was conducted of the Final Jurisdictional Delineation Report approved in November 2009. New species lists (see Attachments 5 and 6) were obtained to update the occurrence of flora and fauna in the project area. The IPaC planning tool was used to obtain a species list from USFWS. One species, Santa Monica Mountains dudleya (Dudleya cymosa ssp. ovatifolia), was not previously identified in the approved May 2010 NES. The CNDDB was used to obtain a CDFW species list. Two species, arroyo chub (Gila orcuttiO and yellow rail (Cotumicops noveboracensis), were not previously identified in the approved May 2010 NES. The NMFS was used to obtain NOAA species lists of endangered or threatened species and critical habitat in California. No new species were identified from this database search. No suitable habitat for the Santa Monica Mountains dudleya was observed during focused surveys conducted in 2008 or 2014 nor during the 2018 site visits. Additionally, no species were observed during the March 9, 19, or April 11, 2018, site visits. The lack of suitable habitat and absence of the Santa Monica Mountains dudleya during the site visits results in a no effect finding for the species. According to the database search results, no suitable habitat occurs within the project study area for the arroyo chub or the yellow rail, which results in a no effect finding for both species. The I-15/SR-91 ELC would result in temporary impacts to 1.56 acres of United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) non -wetland jurisdictional features and 0.01 acre of permanent impacts to USACE non -wetland jurisdictional features. No USACE wetlands would be impacted for project development. The I-15/SR-15 ELC would result in temporary impacts to 1.69 acres of CDFW and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional features and 0.02 acre of permanent impacts to CDFW and RWQCB jurisdictional features. See Attachment 8 for figures of impacts to CDFW/RWQCB waters. Project development would not impact CDFW riparian habitat. Authorization under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) Nationwide Permit and Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the CWA (and a Porter- Cologne Water Quality Control Act permit for impacts on state waters only), and a CDFW 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement would be required. According to the analysis in the Supplemental NES, the project would implement the AMMs as included in the previously approved NES and the Final EIR/EIS. The analysis shows that the project, including the design changes, would result in minimal changes to the biological environment, and the AMMs included in the previously approved NES and Final EIR/EIS would suffice to mitigate these minimal changes without the need for new mitigation measures; therefore, no new mitigation measures have been recommended. Changes to avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures since the environmental document was approved. Since approval of the Final EIR/EIS, the Initial Phase of the SR-91 CIP has been constructed. Attachment 9 contains the Environmental Commitments Record (ECR) for the Initial Phase, which includes all measures committed to in the Final EIR/EIS. This ECR also includes the additional AMMs Page 9 of 10 Revised September 2016 NEPA/CEQA RE -VALIDATION FORM required as a result of the design changes analyzed in the various re -validations completed during design and construction of the Initial Phase of the SR-91 CIP. Changes to environmental commitments since the environmental document was approved (e.g., the addition of new conditions in permits or approvals). When this applies, append a revised Environmental Commitments Record (ECR) as one of the Continuation Sheets. While there are no new visual impacts resulting from the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project related to project changes, in order for the SR-91 CIP to satisfy the ECR requirements for tree replacement, the SR-91 CIP needed to either: • Plant 1,877 trees with 1,500 shrubs for the 150 trees with no plantable areas adjacent, or • Plant 1,228 trees with 7,990 shrubs utilizing the 10:1 tree equivalent ratio for the community adjacent trees, or • A combination of trees and shrubs between the limits of the two options. The most recent count of tree replacements for SR-91 CIP is 1,169 and 4,977 (5-gallon shrubs). The planting of 87 trees within the I-15/SR-91 interchange was deferred due to conflict with the future 1-15 Express Lanes Project (ELP). These trees were transferred from the SR-91 CIP via Revalidation 30 and will be planted by the 1-15 ELP through the ELP's Revalidation 11. Assuming all community adjacent trees are replaced at a 1:1 tree ratio, the SR-91 CIP required an additional 360 trees to fulfill ECR Measure V-2. Through the SR-91 CIP, 324 trees were donated to the City of Corona to plant within their community. Additionally, 236 trees were donated to Riverside County Parks and Recreation to plant within their jurisdiction. Final count for the SR-91 CIP, including landscape plan quantities and community donations, totaled 2,227 tree equivalents, which exceed the requirements of the ECR. There remains a commitment to place 87 trees from the SR-91 CIP. These remaining tree replacements from the SR-91 CIP have been deferred via a re -validation of the SR-91 CIP to the 1-15 ELP (EA 0J0800) through a re -validation of the ELP. The 87 trees transferred from the SR-91 CIP would be in addition to any tree replacement commitments already determined for EA 0J0800. Commitment V-2 has been satisfied and has been removed from the Ultimate Project ECR. Table 1 lists the trees to be planted. Table 1. Trees to be Planted by EA 0J0800 Botanical Name Common Name Size Quantity Chilopsis Linearis Desert Willow 24" Box 15 Pinus Canariensis Canary Island Pine No. 15 3 Platanus Racemosa California Sycamore 24" Box 2 Platanus Racemosa California Sycamore No. 15 18 Quercus Wislizenii Interior Live Oak 24" Box 3 Quercus Wislizenii Interior Live Oak No. 15 2 Quercus Agrifolia Coast Live Oak No. 15 12 Parkinsonia Florida Blue Palo Verde 24" Box 19 Parkinsonia Florida Blue Palo Verde No. 15 13 Total 87 Attachment 10 contains the ECR, which will be applicable to all projects constituting the Ultimate Project, including the I-15/SR-91 ELC Project. Page 10 of 10 Revised September 2016 ATTACHMENT 1 Ultimate Project Study Area Page 1-1 SR g I CT Ubmra ,irc nst Six* lvaa — F{Airjr 3Y0441y — Highway COY er7A-g . Gau TeEl o me a rp Page 1-2 E•p1514:1rrerrCan1W:4f ATTACHMENT 2 ELC Project Study Area Page 2-1 o rxs • YL 2 sac D E LC Project SLIM .area Channel I flash Railroads i. _. City Boundary RARSO NS ESP]. rii.a s. ail 2.2a,R P&p y pima 1 yG5V70 Y 1-15 SR 51 FxpnEms. 1 nnrs C_a n nrrtnr 3RCAW-91= P.M CAW IEA: 08-tiF54+3 ELC Projent Study Area Page 2-2 ATTACHMENT 3 Soundwall Location Page 3-1 " MI* " " 15.1*4 r_ " ..... 1 1. CIWI 1. WM= mr! ma - - irr 1 . .." ....r, IPTIP . ;:.' . : " . ; 1, - .7:," =1 ,_" _. ... , ... __ _ .--- " -  . _=4.,_" 1=---_,I = = -... " .. .-" .. " - , " :-='-:----=;_. _ . . '-..- ' "  __ - ----.---:. , '---- - . -zr:-.-_-___ .--=.:;-_-_: - "'41 0:11M Detail A \" 0 tur swziw AMR *E. Ek;FNFE En. *IT- slam rem mt+a_+ooeH- ililram - -1:10.T171N 41E,411.1E1,1114T O 11911 " titela-1" 4141." 11.31;11M. �% - 4,1.1471-1r.WLY1131:CAZ maw - aw1m1.3,41. b - .1011b1L7K1 1R" 49.74'1 L7RT114:1 31:0E414L- -c-3- -"  " -- - iNiLY2LD 304.1Em11L - PRIMA ITCPERP 1:6 Lin }FIT mar PARSONS. INS MST 151/4040 ST. PAtodArt14C..E.9112.1 1.1170j 14 04;100 1-151'Sn-91 OcPRESS" LANES CONNECTak HOME RECEIVER S. ELARFIIER LIMallGri" S Page 3-2 ATTACHMENT 4 SR-91 CIP Final EIR/EIS Initial Phase Re -validations Page 4-1 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised 1. Design Change #1 N/A Horizontal Alignment • Shift the Serfas Club Drive alignment approximately 6 degrees to accommodate a right -turn pocket from northbound (NB) Serfas Club Drive to eastbound (EB) Pine Crest Drive, avoid right- of-way (ROW) impacts to Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) #102-113-001, and accommodate a driveway from APN #102-050-002 (Arco/McDonald's) to Serfas Club Drive. The change addresses City of Corona and County of Riverside concerns of proposed intersections leading to traffic circulation issues. ROW • Chevron Station at APN #102-091-020 to be protected in place instead of acquired (as originally reported in the Final Environmental Impact Report [EIR]/Environmental Impact Statement [EIS]). • Arco/McDonalds at APN #102-050-002 to be reconfigured to provide a driveway. Acquisition of this property not required. • Acquisition of a currently vacant parcel (site of a former golf course) at Serfas Club Drive/Pine Crest Drive (APN #102-050-012). • The change would address City of Corona concerns regarding the tax revenue loss from acquisition of the Chevron Station. Slope -Fill Work • Implement slope -fill work to correct differences in elevation between the roadway improvements at Serfas Club Drive and adjacent parcel APN #102-050-003.The change is required as a result of the change in horizontal alignment of Serfas Club Drive. Traffic Signal Synchronization • Frontage Road/Serfas Club Drive traffic signal synchronized with Pine Crest Drive/Serfas Club Drive signal to accommodate right -turn pocket from NB Serfas Club Drive to EB Pine Crest Drive. The change is required to address City of Corona and County of Riverside concerns of proposed intersections leading to traffic circulation issues. Design Change #2 Traffic Signal Installation • Install new traffic signal at Corona Town Center and Lincoln Avenue to facilitate right -turn movements onto NB Lincoln Avenue from Corona Town Center and for left -turn movements from southbound (SB) Lincoln Avenue onto Corona Town Center. • The change is required as ROW mitigation for impacts to parking lot access at Corona Town Center. Design Changes #3—#6 Page 4-2 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised California Highway Patrol (CHP) Turn -Around Facilities within the Existing Median • Redesign of CHP turn -around based on revised State Route (SR) 91 median geometry, at SR-91 near western limits of project. • Minor realignment of EB SR-91 near the proposed SR-91/SR-71 toll facilities to allow sufficient horizontal clearances for a CHP turn -around area. • Modification of median barriers under the SR-91 to Interstate 15 (1-15) flyover structure to allow room for a CHP turn -around. • Modification of median barriers along 1-15 between the Magnolia Boulevard and Ontario Avenue interchanges to allow room for a CHP turn -around. • CHP turn -around areas are a requirement for the enforcement component of Express Toll Lanes. Design Change #7 Horizontal Alignment • Realign Green River Road to accommodate Initial Phase instead of the Ultimate Project. • Shift Green River Road alignment south, closer to SR-91, to accommodate a retaining wall for the Initial Phase of the project. • Minimize impacts to entrance driveway of Green River Golf Course by pulling cul-de-sac south, closer to SR-91. • Eliminate separate bicycle parking lot directly adjacent to the Reach 9 Phase 11 B Project and place parking lot west of cul-de-sac bulb. • The purpose of this change is to minimize impacts to facilities related to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Orange County Public Works, and City of Corona. Design Change #8 Rail Relocation • Relocate rail switches at Porphyry Yard within Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad ROW (APN #115-050-019), beneath the SR-91/1-15 interchange, to accommodate interchange improvements. • Install fifth storage track (1,561 feet of track) due to loss of existing storage track resulting from rail switch relocation. • Relocate a small segment of BNSF maintenance access road to allow enough vehicle spacing between a proposed bridge column for the SR-91/1-15 interchange and the railroad. 2. Design Change #1: SCE Utility Relocation at Lincoln Avenue and D Street Two additional measures were added to the project, included in the Initial Site Assessment (ISA) Addendum: Hazardous Waste and Materials Utility Relocation • Relocate overhead Southern California Edison (SCE) electrical utility facilities from the north side of the property (apartment complex at northwest corner of D Street and South Lincoln Avenue) Page 4-3 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised and realign underground on the south side of the property along D Street, generally located between South Lincoln Avenue and Magdalena Circle. • The purpose of this change is to accommodate widening SR-91 and construction of a soundwall where existing poles for electrical lines are located at the northern end of the property, adjacent to EB SR-91. Design Change #2: Access Easement for Building Demolition at Lincoln Avenue and D Street • • For buildings that would be demolished as part of ROW acquisition and/or construction, Asbestos -Containing Material (ACM) and Lead -Based Paint (LBP) testing shall be performed after ROW acquisition and prior to building demolition. Herbicide, pesticide, and fungicide testing shall be performed on the soils within acquired ROW at the Green River Golf Club (5215 Green River Road, Corona, CA). Temporary Access Easement (TAE) • Provide a TAE at the eastern end of the condominium complex generally located at D Street, between South Lincoln Avenue and Magdalena Circle. • The purpose of this change is to provide access to the rear of an existing condominium complex, via a private driveway at the eastern end of the property. Access to the rear of the property is necessary to conduct the proposed demolition of one condominium unit, which is necessary to accommodate widening of SR-91 and realignment of C Street. Design Change #3: SCE Utility Relocation at Smith Avenue and Pleasant View Avenue Utility Relocation • Relocate SCE electrical utility facilities from the north side of the property (apartment complex at northwest corner of Pleasant View Avenue and Smith Avenue) and realign on the south side of the property along Pleasant View Avenue generally located between South Smith Avenue and Yorba Street. • The purpose of this change is to accommodate construction of a soundwall where existing poles for electrical lines are located at the northern end of the property, adjacent to EB SR-91. Design Changes #4—#6 AT&T, Time Warner Cable (TWC), and Southern California Gas (SCG) Utility Relocations at East Grand Boulevard and 3rd Street • Relocate AT&T utility facilities along East Grand Boulevard (beneath SR-91) from Joy Street to 3rd Street before tying into existing facilities at Joy Street and 4th Street, and East Grand Boulevard and Joy Street. • Relocate TWC utility facilities along East Grand Boulevard (beneath SR-91) from Joy Street to 3rd Street before tying into existing facilities at 3rd Street (between East Grand Boulevard and Victoria Avenue), and East Grand Boulevard (between 3rd Street and Joy Street). • Relocate SCG utility facilities along Harrison Street and Blaine Street between North Main Street and Joy Street. Proposed SCG utility facilities include approximately 1,800 linear feet of 8-inch main along Blaine Street and 250 linear feet of 2-inch main along Harrison Street. The existing SCG regulator station affected by the proposed freeway widening at East Grand Boulevard would be abandoned. The proposed redundant piping under Blaine Street and Harrison Street that ties Page 4-4 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised into existing facilities at Joy Street eliminates the need for a new regulator station at East Grand Boulevard. • These changes would meet vertical clearances along East Grand Boulevard beneath the SR-91 overhead (OH) bridge. Due to widening of the bridge, the roadway profile would need to be lowered approximately 3 feet beneath the bridge, which would affect existing AT&T underground facilities. Design Change #7 Curb and Gutter Shift at Main Street and East 4t" Street • Shift curb and gutter approximately 14 feet easterly at APN #117-114-012, northeast corner of South Main Street and East 4th Street. • This design change is necessary to accommodate the proposed median widening of the Main Street undercrossing beneath SR-91. The existing South Main Street/East 3rd Street intersection consists of two through lanes in each direction, two SB left -turn lanes to EB SR-91, and one NB left -turn lane to westbound (WB) SR-91. The proposed Main Street undercrossing consists of three through lanes and two left -turn lanes in each direction. Design Change #8 Access to Bridge Construction Temporary Construction Licenses (TCL) for Temesca/ OH and SR-91/ 1-15 Viaduct TAEs • Provide TAEs for access to bridge construction areas beneath the SR-91/I-15 interchange. • The purpose of the proposed TAEs is to provide access to bridge construction areas via Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) and BNSF Railroad ROW. Access to bridge construction areas will be permitted through a BNSF-issued TCL. However, access onto BNSF ROW permitted by the TCL requires TAEs for access points that fall outside of the original area of potential effect (APE). Design Change #9 Access to Bridge Construction TCLs for Prado OH TAEs • Provide TAEs for access to bridge construction area within BNSF ROW, beneath theSR-91 Prado OH Bridge. • The purpose of the proposed TAEs is to provide access to the bridge construction area via BNSF ROW. Access onto BNSF ROW permitted by a TCL requires TAEs (also within BNSF ROW) directly east and west of the Prado OH Bridge, which fall outside of the original APE. Design Change #10 APE Shift for Building Demolition Page 4-5 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised Temporary Construction Easement (TCE) • Provide a TCE at APN #118-160-058, which is adjacent to a proposed building demolition at APN #118-160-059 (full acquisition). • The purpose of this change is to conduct demolition activities at adjacent APN #118-160-059. A TCE is necessary at APN #118-160-058 for equipment mobilization and access to the adjacent demolition site. No additional improvements or acquisition are proposed on APN #118-160-058. Design Change #11 APE Shift for Building Demolition Building Reface • Reface existing building at APN #118-160-056, which is adjacent to a proposed building demolition at APN #118-160-057 (full acquisition). • The purpose of this change is to reface the existing building at APN #118-160-056. Currently, the existing structures on both parcels are attached. With demolition of the structure on APN #118- 160-057, the structure on APN #118-160-056 will require refacing. The proposed building reface activities lie on the APE boundary, requiring the APE to be shifted to include APN #118-160-056. Design Change #12 APE Shift for Access to SCE Utility Relocation Utility Relocation • Relocate SCE overhead electrical lines at APN #118-270-012. This parcel would be accessed via Sierra Vista Street, at the east end of the parcel. • The purpose of this change is to relocate existing overhead electrical lines to tie into an existing pad -mounted transformer. The transformer is located behind the Cardenas Market building at adjacent APN #118-270-035. Electrical service to the existing pad -mounted transformer would be re-established via an underground feed system beneath Sierra Vista Street from existing power poles on APN #118-270-012. Design Change #13 APE Shift for Access to Demolition Activities Permanent Access Easement (PAE) • Provide a PAE at APN #118-250-020, between SR-91 and Pomona Road, east of Lincoln Avenue. • The purpose of this change is to provide temporary access to Mill Creek Restaurant, which is proposed to be demolished to accommodate freeway widening. Furthermore, the purpose of this change is also to provide permanent access for maintenance of a proposed storm water Best Page 4-6 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised Management Practice (BMP) facility between APN #118-250-020 and SR-91. The proposed PAE is partly outside of the APE, requiring a shift of the APE to include APN #118- 250-020. Design Chang? #14 APE Shift for Access to SCE Utility Relocation Utility Relocation • Obtain a permanent utility easement (access is covered under Design Change #8) at APN# 115- 050-030 (RCFC&WCD ROW) to relocate existing SCE overhead electrical lines to a proposed underground electrical conduit that crosses beneath SR-91. • The purpose of this change is to obtain a permanent utility easement inside APN #115-050- 030 to relocate existing SCE overhead electrical lines that cross over SR-91 adjacent to Temescal Wash to a proposed underground electrical system that crosses beneath SR-91 along an existing RCFC&WCD maintenance road. Existing overhead lines require relocation due to proposed bridge and interchange improvements at the SR-91/I-15 interchange. Electrical overhead lines would no longer be able to cross over SR-91 because they would be in the path of the interchange's increased vertical profile. Therefore, electrical lines would need to be relocated to an underground system to cross the freeway. A utility easement is necessary within APN #115- 050-030 to install the proposed underground vault and related conduits to relocate the electrical lines. Design Change #1 APE Shift for Traffic Signal Modification at West Grand Boulevard and West 2nd Street • Reconfigure traffic signals at the intersection of West Grand Boulevard and West 2nd Street. • The purpose of this change is to accommodate the proposed widening of the SR-91 Bridge over West Grand Boulevard. Design Change #16 Access Easement for Building Cut and Reface (Site Mitigation) TAEs • Provide TAE at APN #101-170-038 and #101-170-010. • The purpose of this change is to conduct a partial demolition and cut and reface of an existing storage facility building at APN #101-170-038. Access to the proposed cut and reface activities would be provided via a TAE on APN #101-170-010, which is a vacant parcel located adjacent to APN #101-170-038. Design Change #17 Relocation of up to Four Additional Historic Streetlights within Grand Boulevard Historic District Streetlight Relocation Page 4-7 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised • Relocate up to four additional acorn -style streetlights within the Grand Boulevard Historic District. • The purpose of this change is to accommodate widening of the SR-91 bridges over East and West Grand Boulevard and to accommodate underground utility relocations along East Grand Boulevard, under Design Changes #4, #5, and #15. 3. Noise Abatement N/A Soundwall E-1 (Noise Study Area E) • Soundwall E-1 is generally located at the Edge of Shoulder (EOS) along WB SR-91, between Green River Road and Green River Golf Club. The Final EIR/EIS reported that Soundwall E-1 would be constructed during the Ultimate Project. Soundwall E-1 was not found to be reasonable or feasible for the reasons stated below and will not be built as part ofthe Initial Phase of the project: • As shown in the Supplemental Noise Study Report (NSR), construction of the project's Initial Phase will not result in noise impacts to the receivers in receiver areas representing the Green River Mobile Home Park. Figure 7-1 in the Supplemental NSR provides a summary of modeled noise impacts for each receiver located within the Green River Mobile Home Park; none of the receiver levels surpassed the Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) of 67 A -weighted decibels (dBA) levels, which is required for construction of a soundwall. • The California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol requirement to obtain at least a 50 percent vote in favor of the wall was not achieved. According to the sound barrier survey results, Soundwall E-1 received six votes. Two of the six votes were in support of the wall, and four opposed the soundwall; indicating that less than 50 percent of the adjacent property owners were in support of the soundwall. During the final design phase, further coordination was conducted with local stakeholders (discussed above), who indicated that they oppose the soundwall during the project's Initial Phase, resulting in the elimination of Soundwall E-1. 4. 1-15 and Main Street Area Design Refinements The following measure was required related to hazardous waste/materials. Results of the LBP survey conducted at the 6th Street overcrossing and the Temescal Wash Bridge along 1-15 indicated that lead -based and lead - containing paints are present at these locations; as such, the following measure would apply at these locations: • Shift the EB Main Street on -ramp to SR-91 and the EB SR-91 to I-15 connector braid west, reducing the complicated "stacked" construction over Temescal Wash and the BNSF railroad corridor. This allows the EB Main Street on -ramps to SR-91 to tie into EB SR 91 much sooner. Page 4-8 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised HW-17: Where lead is present and dust - producing activities will be performed, the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal -OSHA) regulation for lead in construction (Title 8, California Code of Regulations, Section 1532.1) identifies that the employer shall treat the employee as if they would be exposed to lead above the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) and shall implement employee productive measures until an employee exposure assessment is performed to document otherwise. Lead was identified in the yellow traffic striping paint, the grey paint on the guard rail, and black traffic paint. Contractors involved in renovation/ demolition activities should be informed of the presence of and potential health hazards associated with lead -containing paints. Care should be taken to protect workers (i.e., respiratory protection) when disturbing lead -containing paints during renovation/demolition activities. 5. Serfas Club Drive Area Design Refinements N/A • In the area between Serfas Club Drive and Maple Street, the modification involves a reconfiguration of the EB Serfas Club Drive on -ramp and the EB Maple Street off -ramp. The modification involves shifting the proposed braid of the two ramps farther to the west by approximately 1,300 feet from its previous location and closer to Serfas Club Drive. The Serfas Club Drive EB on -ramp will cross under the Maple Street EB off -ramp. • This modification also affects the frontage road design, which will be shifted closer to the SR-91 mainline, resulting in less required ROW. The parcels along the frontage road are designated as full acquisitions, which means the project refinements will result in larger remnants being available as a result of less ROW being required. • All of the improvements are within the footprint that was identified in the adopted EIR/EIS. Page 4-9 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised 6. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has determined that the project could adversely affect existing fish or wildlife resources and has included measures [necessary to protect those resources] in the Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement entered into between CDFW and the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC). Retaining Walls 203 and 205 Area Design Refinements An additional measure was added to V-2: Visual/Aesthetics Prior to the implementation of the 2:1 slopes in the area between Bridge Nos. 56-0637 Prado OH and 56-0634 West Prado OH, RCTC will ensure that the design -build contractor will minimize the impacts for the loss of visual quality by incorporating V-2 measures as approved by Caltrans and the permitting agencies. • Replace approximately 1,050 feet of Retaining Wall 203 with a 2:1 fill slope. This wall is located along the north side of SR-91 and extends from Prado Road to a point approximately 3,350 feet east of Prado Road. The fill slope will eliminate a portion of Retaining Wall 203; as such, the distance between the western portion of Retaining Wall 203 and the eastern portion of Retaining Wall 203 will be approximately 1,050 feet. The fill slope limits overlap the limits of both walls; as such, the total length of the fill slope is approximately 1,650 feet. The remaining western portion of Retaining Wall 203 will be 310 feet, and the eastern portion of Retaining Wall 203 will be 1,740 feet. The original design for Retaining Wall 203 had a height ranging from 25 feet to 35 feet. The proposed design refinement has Retaining Wall 203A ranging in height from 7.5 feet to 25 feet and Retaining Wall 203B ranging in height from 7.5 feet to 27.5 feet. • Replace Retaining Wall 205 with a 2:1 cut slope. This wall is located along the north side of SR- 91 and extends from SR-71 to a point approximately 2,700 feet east of SR-71. As such, the cut slope replacing Retaining Wall 205 will be approximately 2,700 feet in length. The remaining portion of Retaining Wall 205 will be 365 feet. • Relocation of approximately 800 feet of USACE maintenance road toward the east end of Retaining Wall 205 to allow for construction of the cut slope. • Construction of drainage ditch to convey flow in the northwest quadrant of the SR-91/SR-71 interchange. This ditch is approximately 565 feet in length. It has a 4-foot-wide flat bottom with 12-foot-wide side slopes for a total width of 28 feet. This drainage ditch is at the toe of the proposed fill slope. The runoff will outlet into the existing flood control channel. 7. Reduction of Soundwall D1-B — 900 feet west of Buchanan Avenue N/A • NB D1-B will be built on private property along the southeast edge of Villaggio Condominium Complex. The result of this revalidation will construct sound barrier NB D1-B. NB D1-B would be constructed outside of State (Caltrans) ROW next to existing property walls and first -row buildings on the SR-91 side. • Updates to the recommended ramp closure at the SR-91 Main Street interchange are necessary to conduct construction activities and implement interchange improvements. 8. TCE in Chino Hills State Park (CHSP) N/A Page 4-10 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised • It was identified in the adopted EIRIEIS that 2.14 acres of TCE would be required within CHSP. boundaries. Based on final design and construction methods for the Green River Road WB off - ramp, it has been identified that additional TCE areas would be required within CHSP property adjacent to Prado Road near one of the park entrances. • The purpose of the additional TCE areas is for access and temporary storage of materials and equipment. 9. No project changes are proposed. Mapping exhibits need to be corrected: errata sheets illustrating Noise Barrier 0-3 not being constructed were attached. N/A 10. During preparation and review of the design plans, 64 locations were identified that required analysis. The proposed 64 design refinements include striping, sign installations, testing and upgrading of communication equipment within an existing building, and utility relocations for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP). N/A 11. Two Optional Barrier Locations have been Evaluated to Replace Previously Identified Barrier N/A M1. • Refinements to previously identified Barriers NB-M1 and NB-M2 were identified. These barriers, near Serfas Club Drive, were included in the adopted EIR/EIS and to Barrier EB-M1 that subsequently replaced these barriers in Revalidation #5. Supplemental NSR Addendum #1 (March 2015) was prepared for Revalidation #5 Supplemental NSR. The proposed design refinements for the SR-91 CIP are described below. Barrier M1-A: • In the area between Serfas Club Drive and Maple Street, the modification involves reconfiguration of Noise Barrier EB-M1 from Revalidation #5. This revalidation evaluates two barrier alternatives, M1A Option 1 and Option 2, located along the EOS of the SR-91 EB off - ramp. Noise Barrier M1A Option 1 extends from Station 98+00 to Station 116+00. Noise Barrier M1A Option 2 extends from Station 193+20 and curves along the frontage road and joins with the EOS of the SR-91 off -ramp to Maple Street at Station 1 03+00 then continues to Station 116+00. Both options also include a noise barrier (S200), approximately 300 feet in length, along the property line of three residences on the west side of Ridgeview Terrace. Both noise barrier options (MIA Options 1 and 2) are feasible and would provide the appropriate level of noise abatement. 12. Relocation of Soundwall M-1 No changes to avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures, but measures Reval 12-A, Reval 12-B, and Reval 12-C were added. • Refinements to the project within the Auto Center Drive/Serfas Club Drive to Maple Street area would involve reconfiguring the EB Serfas Club Drive on -ramp and the EB Maple Street off -ramp. These refinements were approved in Revalidation #5 (December 4, 2014). Page 4-11 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised • However, Noise Barrier NB M-1 at the EOS would cause a visual obstruction to commercially zoned properties along Frontage Road, which are currently owned by RCTC (a public entity). The new NB M-1 B, would be constructed just outside the properties of the impacted receivers, providing feasible noise reduction (5-dBA minimum) for 12 residences while providing visibility to the commercial property between these residences and SR-91. 13. Ramp Closure Revision N/A • A proposed ramp closure at the SR-91/Auto Center Drive/Serfas Club Drive interchange would need to be revised from 6 months to 15 months. 14. Refinements to the Project within the Lincoln Avenue to Grand Boulevard Area No changes to avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures, but measure Reval 14A was added. • Buena Vista Mobile Manor, located south of SR-91 and east of Lincoln Avenue and which would have received feasible noise abatement from Noise Barrier NB Q-1, has been acquired for the Ultimate Project ROW. In addition, it has been indicated that continued visibility of the major car dealership Honda Cars of Corona, located north of SR-91 and just east of Lincoln Avenue, could be compromised by the originally proposed NB P-1. • As a result of these changes, the westerly portions of NBs P-1 and Q-1, which were originally proposed to begin approximately 700 feet east of Lincoln Avenue, have been analyzed in a Supplemental NSR to confirm that new lengths would still provide a comparable level of noise attenuation as that proposed in the project's EIR/EIS. • Sound Barrier P1A Option 1 is shorter in length by 150 feet; Soundwall P1A Option 2 is shorter by 230 feet. Barrier Q-1A is shorter in length by approximately 200 feet. 15. Temporary Sound Barrier Installation N/A • Due to noise exposure from construction activities near Prado Road (bridge demolition), temporary sound barrier will be installed to shield residents from construction noise. • A portion is located within CHSP and involves the installation of acoustical sound blankets/batting material panels, mounted on a steel frame; • The other portion of the temporary wall will consist of truck trailers with batting material installed in gaps and skirting along the bottom of the trailers. 16. Refinements to a Project Wall located along the northwest area of the SR-91/I-15 Interchange, N/A between Corona Avenue and Parkridge Avenue • The purpose of this revalidation is to document the change in location (from the EOS to the top of berm) and a design change (to accommodate a previous commitment [Committed Wall]), as well as the EIR/EIS commitment to build K1-A. Page 4-12 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised • Although the 2012 EIR/EIS proposed the K1-A wall location to be moved from the EOS to the top of slope, the height at this location was not evaluated. Now that the project is in design and construction, technical analysis has been conducted to determine the height at which K1-A would provide comparable noise reduction, as the 14-foot-high wall evaluated in the project's NSR, but at the top of slope as proposed in the EIR/EIS. Additionally, the previous documents confirmed the height and location of the northerly segment of wall: • The northerly 1,100-foot-long segment of K1-A will be 14 feet high; the southerly segment will be 12 feet high. 17. Noise Barrier T-1 Removal N/A • Due to design refinements made, a Supplemental NSR was conducted and included analysis near the Main Street interchange. The Supplemental NSR concluded that there is no traffic noise impact in the affected area. • NB T-1 is therefore being removed from the project. 18. Utility Work N/A • This revalidation is to document the revision to install two 5-inch-diameter power poles at Wardlow Wash, just south of SR-91, which has been found, by CDFW, to be located within their jurisdiction. The work is proposed south of the EB SR-91 at the SR-71 south to SR-91 connector. The project would entail the installation of two wooden power poles and service cabinet in uplands adjacent to Wardlow Wash. Work will occur on fill previously placed as part of the separate SR-91 Eastbound Widening Project. 19. Noise Study Report Approval Date N/A • Caltrans and RCTC were unable to locate a signed copy of the NSR at the request of a resident in the SR-91 corridor. • In the process of fulfilling this request, a discrepancy in the EIR/EIS was discovered. The approved EIR/EIS shows the approved date for the NSR as April 2010, even though the document was approved in May 2010. A memo was prepared to document approval of the NSR for the SR-91 CIP to complete the administrative record. • The purpose of this revalidation is to reaffirm approval of the project NSR and to update the date of the approval to May 2010 in the environmental document. 20. Emergency Access Feature Incorporation N/A • Due to emergency access issues that arose during construction, a temporary ramp was developed at the end of Green River Road, partially using the Old Santa Ana River Trail, to avoid and minimize any potential impacts of a WB freeway shutdown. Page 4-13 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised • The purpose of this revalidation is to incorporate this emergency access as a permanent project feature. The emergency detour ramp (located approximately at station 573+00) near Green River Road will be permanently maintained and opened to the public in the event WB SR-91, west of Green River Road, becomes partially or fully impassable. 21. Contra -Flow Plan N/A • Due to mudslides in December 2014, a median contra -flow plan is proposed between Coal Canyon and the Serfas Club/Auto Center Drive/Auto Center Drive interchange to alleviate traffic and provide access to communities. 22. Cultural Resources N/A • During the construction phase of the SR-91 CIP, west of 1-15, installation of utilities required additional analysis to accommodate activities just outside the originally approved APE. Due to design changes during construction, the APE was extended through Revalidation #10 for utility modification, roadway striping, and sign installation, in and along SR-91 and 1-15. 23. Soil Placement, Grading, and Landscaping N/A • The design refinement involves placement and grading of a soil pile located between the SB SR- 71 on -ramp to SR-91 EB, and the BNSF railroad to the south. This design refinement involves the placement of 37,000 cubic yards of fill and landscaping of the disturbed area. 24. Ramp Closure Extension N/A Extend previously approved long-term ramp closures for two on -ramps and two off -ramps to complete the work required for widening of SR-91: • EB Main Street On -ramp — from a 15-month closure to an 18-month closure; • WB Main Street Off -ramp- from a 12-month closure to a 15-month closure; • WB Maple Street Off -ramp — from a 2-month closure to a 4-month closure; and • EB Serfas Club Drive On -ramp — from a 15-month closure to a 17-month closure. 25. New Access Point Based on the results of the environmental re-evaluation, there is a potential for temporary impacts to the vegetation. Any impacts will be addressed in the project restoration plan. To minimize impacts to the surrounding area, the following will be addressed: • A new access point for equipment to reach the construction at Bridge 30 (1-15 at Temescal Wash) is necessary. The new access will be from All American Way, which is located outside the existing APE and was not included in the EIR/EIS. The contractor will be utilizing the new access to move equipment and construction materials in and out of the channel during demolition and construction of the new pier wall for Bridge 30. The access is temporary for a period of 1 month once construction is ready to begin. Page 4-14 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised • The SR-91 CIP will be starting demolition of Bridge 30. During a preconstruction site visit, it was determined that the pile driver will not be able to access the bridge through the access ramp from Harrison Yard (main access point). RCFC&WCD Approval 1) Delineating the limits of disturbance area (in the earthen area) with environmental sensitive area (ESA) fencing. 2) Potential use of crane pads to limit any potential grading. 3) Installing BMPs if grading or fill activities occur in this earthen area for access. 4) Regular housekeeping of construction litter/pollution through the access area. 5) Regular biological monitoring to ensuring compliance with the permits. The measures for vegetation and/or revegetation are not required by RCFC&WCD, who owns the property being accessed. AWJV will implement measures along the access route to avoid any disturbance of the existing native and non-native vegetation as specified by the biologist. • AWJV submitted a request to RCFC&WCD to amend the existing Encroachment Permit (EP 3516) to allow access from All American Way. The amendment was approved by RCFC&WCD in February 2016, which included compliance with Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401, CWA Section 404, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. CDFW Approval AWJV has also received e-mail approval from CDFW for the new access from All American Way. The following are the requirements from CDFW: • Develop and implement a focused training for all staff working in the area to ensure and document avoidance of fish and wildlife resources. • Work in the concrete channel is promptly cleared/cleaned-up (nodischarges). • Quantify and restore any vegetation impacts offsite (if necessary). 26. Ramp Closure Amendments N/A The SR-91 CIP requires a second amendment for the Ramp Closure Study to address the impacts of adding two temporary ramp closure locations along the SR-91 CIP for the WB Lincoln Avenue on - ramp and the EB Maple Street/6th Street off -ramp. • WB Lincoln Avenue On -ramp: 2-month closure. • EB Maple Street/6th Street Off -ramp: 6-week closure. 27. Ramp Closure Extension N/A Two long-term ramp closures necessary for construction of the SR-91 CIP required to be extended by 3 more months than identified in the original Ramp Closure Study and two amendments that followed. The duration of the following ramps will be extended: • WB Maple Street/6th Street Off -ramp — extend by 3 months for a total of 6 months. • EB Serfas Club Drive On -ramp — extend by 3 months for a total of 17 months. 28. Heightened Soundwall for Aesthetic Purposes Unknown at this time. Page 4-15 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised • The purpose of this revalidation is to document the increase in height of an existing soundwall on top of Retaining Wall 03B for aesthetic purposes and to block views of the freeway from Northmoor Drive residences. 29. Plantings at Walls Requirement Change Measures V-1 and V-4 required plantings at all soundwalls and retaining walls, however, this requirement was not met. Per clause 'C' of Measure V-1 and related text in Measure V-4, planting of trees, shrubs, and/or vines at soundwalls and retaining walls is required. Required plantings at all soundwalls and retaining walls, however, has not been possible. • The purpose of this re-evaluation is to document the language modification in Measures V-1 and V-4, of the Environmental Commitment Record (ECR), which require plantings. Every effort was made to meet the requirements of Measures V-1 and V-4 to plant trees or shrubs and vines at the base of the walls. However, landscaping at every soundwall and retaining wall was not possible. Planting of trees, shrubs, and/or vines was not possible at every soundwall and retaining wall due to four primary reasons: • Paving associated with the wall —The wall is either sitting above a retaining wall, barrier, or adjacent to paved surfaces; which do not allow for landscaping. • Lack of maintenance access — No access to the back side of most of the walls that are at grade. • Inability to get irrigation to areas where walls are located. • Other project structures interfered with the planting area. 30. Transfer of SR-91 CIP-required Trees to 1-15 Toll Express Lanes Project. Based on the results of this re-evaluation, to ensure the planting of 44 trees by the 1-15 TEL Project, the following measure was required: V-7: During construction of the 1-15 TEL Project, a revalidation shall be processed for the addition of 44 trees to be planted at the SR-91/I-15 interchange. • Per Measure V-2 of the SR-91 CIP, trees removed by the project are required to be replaced at a 1:1 ratio. This requirement, however, conflicts with the upcoming 1-15 TEL Project where the two projects overlap — at the SR-91/I-15 interchange. Forty-four (44) trees not planted by the SR-91 CIP will be planted by the 1-15 TEL Project, generally located between Temescal Wash and the BNSF railroad tracks, along 1-15. The installation of vegetation, which could possibly become habitat for nearby species and migratory birds, only to have it removed within a short time frame, could cause temporary impacts to biological resources. To avoid impacting the area twice and throw away improvements, planting of those 44 SR-91 CIP trees is being deferred to the 1-15 TEL Project. 31. Fair Share Contributions Requirement Update Table 3.1 of Measure T-3 was updated. • ECR Measure T-3 describes the fair share contributions required to mitigate SR-91 CIP impacts to the City of Corona. These improvements were to be completed differently depending on which alternative was implemented; Alternative 1, which would be completed in 2015, or Alternative 2 Page 4-16 Reval # Reason for Revalidation Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Added, Deleted, or Revised which would consist of an Initial Phase in 2015 and then the Ultimate Phase in 2035. Alternative 2 was selected as the preferred alternative and construction of the Initial Phase began in 2014. Measure T-3 states: • RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that RCTC pays the fair share contribution for the project - related impacts at area intersections. Those fair shares are shown by intersection in Table T-3.1. The recommended improvements include additional turn and through lanes. Summaries of the improved intersection delays and level of service (LOS) are provided in Tables T-3.2, T-3.3, and T-3.4 for 2015 with the Initial Phase of Alternative 2, Design Year 2035 with Alternative 1, and Design Year 2035 with Alternative 2 conditions, respectively. 32. Document the transfer of geotechnical investigations proposed for SR-91 N/A Page 4-17 ATTACHMENT 5 IPaC Database Search Page 5-1 L; rii tod S bars D artm ran11u: InleriOr FISH A.I'M N.UTt.PLIES 42P,111 1(2.k. cmirDrialithAri3 Cuyi4i liar: dne y.riar�WGF Ciliru5f.CA11040+tom P;Rl# {440.940Iry -4I.*E.: HoniTdorrf FbYlMi I�i $ rplIr Itst4a.0 0ciiii111-Pi-0Pr Cm& (IM`ai1 1941.1 E7ent Cade: GEEC P:00.20,1966 '3 Pmcci. FA;u.c 15A? � $ii ' cr hrcA r•? Rji fur m your pigw.4441pNkittt _s:�Lt•:ii, �u•s•:i =m7'sc 1'crlrcl17J°= Nrallod dpao3ECt To Whom It lay Coe =,m: '1 =c :lad c2 i em ci li r:• 5 rF d=Wit iitd. c�cl i�r_r.:l, �i2 Frcric40.d c{stF. .:114 Bali•:A] 241,141. an•: udn•El•LmIr. F?cO.OF elide =irjr ic{ift 1 •:iii Fr sFroTm2 raGet; anthem ay be ffe:rad bk your geop and profit:h The seats Isis fulfill 5-.he r+rq.;zremen-A •;21. LIE ;.! ` ai11 .PRYi c j '6(C) eic :iicr ci ct S?cklGF $ (ILLI) 1913, a3 amended 1st ii.S C 1531 V. MQ.). w anbrInA-= b4i#d 41:4 t?APIA iiiiTcyt, :li:r cr iii did clafirilniL •xi yr(mtF, chd r2liiiralid CeethA ioiii, 1::r_2 CIL.poiun r—s li a cmcc I'rcl rrs* �# contax.; SEyo::a exed more rm-rrx SnEoam ati of assistano : regsrdm.;. :he po:enh it =pacts to prnorFc8. kmd. aal2 cNi ;ptritF+=4 f#dci L14 dcJ oi.cti =:1 F I:cdorl eALF.� kaki;ar. Pleme molt nat:seder SO C'TJR 402 I e) of rya repul aii m -p1e=e _np it:h o= ad r6a :L, lac $:C-_A:y cr. Llii F FacI.Lrc _iL s'_:r_:I 'Jr rr__r1 c•? -fLtT i0 il.plyt 1<liia Tt'I Lcglicii cm! be :cui7:_dt2 rccul4ll7 x iiirci= 7 #i e -UTact _r { dF r=IL' Tcis1`i.1111oa c :omp:ehed by Vlil =ng the BO:DS Drewehsite as regular ireruah project pluming amd F •5 E?nil p I1it; #1t' IOa =..F&fled' iL rum :•1>crcri:l.c2 cos; - e = J1 :PO s a r.em caropleti ne ssmt pe+4ttS5 W!(.1 tt mein endased ILA. '1 _r I:iii :•:•cr til' dm iir:'. 17 La 7C•:r1•11: # =cdCF wartni Lk t'Lc rgxI Ar12 cl 1gte$ iptc ±ir�tl t c ci::•srd1 i 11F�ii x_i_ r_cx •r c=cl =ix hr.:oiii rrc•: ii•r rr.:L:EmF +{ii)(1) ir-d ?{A)1 t c .4:r �d =rs i t=enh �r�n.srioni (SO On. •10 mq.), Federal aerone are re wed ,o •=hic Sric dm:li•:r_ cr k !nu 17 x.' Fckp �flc Lac CaOFci rSt•:ii •:I'r-- cAtcli(cl 4=1 cii� crc2 Spr(ttS and ro d_her= ahelher projL-:hs may aorta Imear_ned and endangered ipt:its at=d'oc dcir.piLi cl q1L:di Iax!A! Page 5-2 " 0." '_i i v' .. .. .. ..... - `<I= .lri%i: ii.`. -.. Fi'ii L'.-._.��:1:-L v" Official Species List . This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information �%r'helher any species whii.lt is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of.a proposed action". This species list is provided by: Carlsbad Fish And Wildlife Office 2177 Salk Avolue - Suite 250 Carlsbad, CA 9204)8-7385 (760) 431-9 i40 Page 5-3 ..A etiological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having • similar pltysical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the . human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) • (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological • evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to deteimine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat.. Recommended.. . contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 C.FR 402.12. if a Federal agency determines, Rased on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the Pole of permit or.hcensc applicants, cant be found. in the "l.pdangere.d Species Consultation Handbook" at: http:iiwvaN,..fvvs.govi oulangcn:diesa-libraryipdfITOC-GLOS.PD Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 66g et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require • development of an eagle conservation plait (http://www.fivs.goviwindenergyl eagle.__.guidance_html).:Additionally, wind energy. projects should follow the wind c »ergy guidelines(http:/'wwwfws.govlwindenergy!) for minimizing impacts to nllgraloiy birds and bats. • Guidance; for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications • 'towers (e.g., cellular; digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) cairn be found at: hap:i/ •. www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues!hazards/towersitowers.htm; http:ii vvwsv,towerkill.com; and http:r'/www.fws.govimigralorybirds/CurreutBirdlss.uesi .wards/towers... • conmtovv.lmtinl. We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the :Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in • the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our ()nice. . Attachment(s): Official. Species list • Page 5-4 .L:•Y S• .. L'.• -. i'_ L. i%U i;: V:j'�..1�'C::V-•2Ui:,-L 2 Project Summary Consultation Code,: 08EC AR00-2019-SL1-0994 • Event Coda: 08EC R00-2019-E-02293 Project Name: 15-91 ELC_ Project Type: TRANSPORTATION ..Project. Description: Project Description California Department of Transportation District 8 (Caltrans), Riverside. • • County Transportation Commission (ROTC), and Federal Highway Administration (1' IWA) propose to construct the Interstate 15 (1-15)/State • Route 91 (SR-91) Express Lana Connector (ELC). The project is in the. City of Corona at the junction of SR-91 and 1-15 in western Riverside • . County. Improvements will consist of adding a tolled express lane connector from southbound 1-15 Express Lanes to westbound SR-91 Express Lutes and an express lane connector from eastbound SR-91 Express Lines to northbound 1-15 Express Lanes. In addition, operational improvements along eastbound SR-91 are proposed to be constructed to enhance operations from west of the 1-15 (NA 6.6) to east of South Promenade Avenue (PM 8.1). Additionally, a new VTAIS sign will be constructed in Orange County, Hear the Orange/Riverside County Line. Please see Figure 1 Project Location Map and.Eigure 2 Pro*t.Vicinity •. Map attached. The 1.15!SR-91 ELC project is one of four components of the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) Ultimate Project to follow the Initial. Project and is the second project being advanced. The. Expenditure • .• Authorization (EA) for this project is 08-0E5 43. The SR-91 C1P consisted of an initial Project and an Ultimate Project proposed in several phases over a 20-year period. Separate projects would be identified and programmed to incorporate the components of the pleasing plan for improvements on Sit-91 and 1-15 between the Initial . Project and completion of tlx.: Ultimate Project by 2035. The SR-91 C1P Initial Project was completed tinder EA is 08-0E540. The Initial Project • included implementation of improvements on SR-91 from approximately • •fhe Change/Riverside County line to the 1-15 interchange and a single - lane direct connector to and from the 1-15 south, extending from Sit-9i to the Ontario .-Avenue interchange. Construction of the Initial 1'roject.hpgain.... in Awe. 2014, :uid.wr m opened tU traffic M.March 2017, Page 5-5 " " . " 0.1.2.211'.H.r;?.. " 0..:5ECAROLQ1" " " " Z)-E-I.'&:3 " " " . RCTC, Calimns, and FHWA now propose to construct the ELC project . because funding has been secured for this component of the Ultimate " Project of the SR-91 CIP. The ELC project is included in the approved " SR-9I CIP Final FIR/EIS as one of four components of the Ultimate Project. 11tc ELC project is consistent with the project features identified in the approved SR-91 Final E1R/EIS, The 1-15/SR-91 ELC project (RIV160101) is listed in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) Amendment !!1" 17-IG, as RTPID: R1V021250B, Project 1D: RIV160101. " " " " " " " " " IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY ON SR-91/1-15: ON 1-15 - ADD. " . ... TOLL EXPRESS LANE MEDIAN DIRECT CONNECT FROM SB15.. TO WB9I & EB91 TO NBI5, 1 TOLL EXPRESS LANE EACH DIRECTION FROM HIDDEN VALLEY10 SR91 DIRECT CONNECTOR. CONSTRUCT OPERATIONAL1MPROVEMENT AND. AUX1LARY LANE ALONG SR91. CON sTRucr ADDITIONAL. . " SiGNAGE ALONG SR91 Ar PM R18.0 IN OR COUNTY, The 2017 FM Amendment 417-16 is consistent with the 2016 REP/SCS and the 2017 FTIP as previously amended. SLAG approval 1/23/18, (Alum Approi.m1 24SAS. FHWA. appmweil i rrie" ci Lena kin: Ap prim iin c loc at im of the pro j t pan be 4icre its Gcoglc lira=I iti ps vrww yokii; Iti ...1)111 mar. plakT 33..14.926904.2913k1U55 'N1111.5540323 N..11)22N4W Rivvrsiriv.. CA mein. ER .e Nib 1 Page 5-6 Si•5, ski •L'; -_i: %i..•.ui': L.v- itiU-'�Ji-LF33 Endangered Species Act Species • 'there is a total of 12 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list • Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear.on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole juriscisJion of NO:La Fiahe iekt, as 1.:S 4'S does nol have the aulhnrkly Speak on beha]Fof KO.Ar1 arid the Department of Calrmcree. Soo the "Critical habillis" sectio i hclow loT time ethical habitnls Ihnt lie whol ly or pallidly wain. your proatet area viuder t ib. offices jurisdioiion_ Plcaac oentact the dcsiglwrted FWS ofliiec ityou hive quellioris. 1, KOA A FiawriLx, nko known as. the National Nfru inr Fitt Tics Service (N MrS). is oxi office or NssioneL Oceanic and ddr oapimio Dcpert Icnt of Mammals 5lerthclss' Kangaroo Rau DepodEarrrps ya.Acrno WI'. D. camas) critisal hallivl ha, boeu doipnale+d brad, IFk%ier. Spe.;w rile 131.1pe: •kwa.Cwszcorinrr.xivrr}I95 Birds �i�;Il1L Elldrtgered $TAT1J5 Cu imEal Cali I'unia { IuattalLher Pol'ioplAr calrfurmicu crliforrricu Cltrealeried I him u Muhl eurtgl Bali n, for dud ilxein. Your Iooalinn iL own& Jle ofiuc�l luhuoi N:et lei profile kapS:c .fyrid,o recip.'sixaieFIrl s Lcask Vireo ilruo OciTh pain irs Enciangered Them fuw Il' •lsin 1'v • 67-116y� sy u r .•� i .� �y� aci�pmrilo f� t.ue NYEoipeNizew4ien;5A41x 5iwlhweslern Ilpcelzher ErripAdrrrrar lrar r in:dimur dint ill clued d WNW i'r.r ihd leerniinn we hie Hit Iohan. 5poeie� profile. cpNoixur lux a.kine peciaeV.19 l'rdang•e ed Page 5-7 DE %2na19 Beard foda WE CAR D0.2i17£-022i& Amph lbl�n� N 4iC 3TAT41S Arnnyu ( arroyo SontlrwrAtern] 'Liiail fl r mrs_t-nrs cull formicra I{ntlangerad Theit u Mail IrlGlt llllAllrl III 11b Errupla 1Wu 6�SIIri�11 n yN•ala lilt 1311i ILI hi:1241H1 SPXLe5 profile ha:it:LWI.NaV3:_tEn-IpeuiaF'1^• ri$ Fishes NAME Kola Ana Simko. { iMu'i irar ;natrrlrrsrr� PopuLedorc 3 CA. rirer twine 'rlms Y rd.ib. E Maio rim 11a .11CL'K•. 1.1111 wL'Allllll R L+y.111C 111E L7111 L'it lulmllfl nsects NAME ] C1tYiSnDI-5 FLower-loving FLy RJrapkraturlas rarrnimarms aMahlirmabs qraicel hzlMorl Im+1v1Ru iln+irstand fxr ihia xl;xiea :911.r+tlrilp hta•.'c•�x.Cwc�.or•a�.iNLx14 Quin.) C 150A r gfalrno• h= r- v rr�nlrj Thir41g4rresi Endangered Entlaagared I1x.1l IIN•CIMI II.I I.11 R 4�a�nS II�4 �II1471 lulrinl 3�rx,6. F+.�III�• : il�o Uc� o Ina. a.+I •�L�I }�r.�u� tlJc+1 Flrnirerinlg Plants i•IA %SF AIL SRL Diego Ambrosin Any roars isaatnita Endmgcred 711are ia cridwl h Masi for dm mpeaiee. Your Isawliou is oust& due cnur-al habitat 5:11;fiam pciGb 1lP•5511Vi : Swlla Anti 1Ri'ear ill'uully-xis'il}Aas7nr.er ctrrrsijuiiream rrp. serldsM-urn Va ersktd ballmal h l Gears rlrrtgrtsltd fortldl species. 'Sixties profile Etps:rsxoa.rws itov.aoo3ixaia15375 J�:rwleol��rtd Sarnia Monica Mouallnia$ Nidleyea Dina ep ervia s crw rifairr Thrernerled Va eriical habiml }m Wendel for this spaaia,. Smiel• Pr 111;po-:elecar ixs ea•,aeatipaciee :53d TirreadrLeaved li udiaea frrcd izre l t�fi lrar 'rlln� u rd u:lloal habant flx Illo .1 0 VIAII 1u1.111K111 A IMd.ick IIIC LTIlln11 1p111J1 Nrcles profile hirpa::seces rm. gok.arfelpt iae.Y.91.*: • 'ILrt aL.lwd Page 5-8 L'�.r2.2V S LL'i,': L.L`d—":i:4h1;100720•1+�- Critical habitats k) CRi _ .-. i i. )."Vi ] is" Y.C.:Uii Page 5-9 ATTACHMENT 6 N M FS Database Search Page 6-1 Species Liar —VAS WCR CA Specks L6# die} 2019 k MSInx�-. .• o+ �i I' iB Eor•.10' 61M Name corona No rtn Quad Number 33717,H s ESA Anadromous Fish $011C.oho E$U Cr} • COG Cohn ESU (E) - CC Chinook salmon ESU (1) - CVSR Chinook Salmon ESLI (T) - S ROM Cttiinoa : Salmon ESU (E)iC Steelhes d ❑ PS [T} - CCC alee lhead a PS (rj. SCCC Steelhesc Q R$ (1') - SC Steelhbead DPS (E) - X CCV S6eelhead DPS Cr) - Eulechon Cr) • sDPS Green Sturgeun Cr) - ESA Ariad rot= u s Fish Critical Habitat Page 6-2 SONCC Coho Critical Habitat - CCC Coho Critical Habitat - CC Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat - CVSR Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat - SRWR Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat - NC Steelhead Critical Habitat - CCC Steelhead Critical Habitat - SCCC Steelhead Critical Habitat - SC Steelhead Critical Habitat - CCV Steelhead Critical Habitat - Eulachon Critical Habitat - sQPS Green Sturgeon Critical Habitat - ESA Marine Invertebrates Range Slack Abalone (E) - Range White Abalone (E) - ESA Marine Invertebrates Critical Habitat B la k Alia v i7 e C ntica I Ha Ditat - ESA Sea Turtles Ease Pacific Green Sea Tur le - cimee Ridley 5e4 Turf le ( TIE) - Leatherba ck Sea Turtle (E) - North Pacific Loggerhead Sea Turtle (E) - ESA Wliales H lue 'yvhale (E }• . rilI WIEd C (E) - Humpback Whale (E) - Southern Resident Killer Whale (E) - North Pacific Right Whale (E) R Sei Whale (E) - Sperm Whale (E) - ESA Pinnipeds Page 6-3 Guadalupe Fur Seal (T) - Steller Sea Lion Critical Habitat - Essential Fish Habitat . Coho EFH - Chinook Salmon EFH - Groundfish EFH - Coastal Feleglas EFH - Highly Migratory Species EFH - MMPA Species (See list at left) ESA and MMPA CetaceanslPinnipeds See list at left and consult the NMFS Lang Beach office. 562 980-4000 MMPA Cetaceans - MMPA Pinnipeds - Qusd Name Carona South Page 6-4 Civad Number.33117-G5 ESA Anadrorrtrous Fish SCNCC Caho ESu Cr) - CCC Goho ESL); E] - CC Chinook Salmon ESU {Tj - C R C hinaok t; alnion ES U (T� S RWR Ch inook Selman ESL! (E) - NC Steelhead UPS;T r - CCC Steelhearl DP5 (T) - SCCG Steelhead DPS CTj. - SC Steelhead DPS (E).- X CCV 5teelhoad DPS M - Eu lachon Cr) - sD PS Green Sturgeon T - ESA Anad romcu s Fish C ritic a I Habitat CCC Coho Critical Habitat - CC Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat - CVSR Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat - SRWR Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat - NC Steelhead Critical Habitat - CCC Steelhead Critical Habitat - SCCC Steeihead Critical Habitat - SC Steelhead Critical Habitat - CCV Steelhead Critical Habitat - Eulachon Critical Habitat - sDPS Green Sturgeon Critical Habitat - ESA Marine Invertebrates . Range Black Abalone {E} - Range White Abalone (E) - ESA Marine Invertebrates Critical Habitat Page 6-5 puck ck Atiaio ne Critical Habitat - ESA Sea Turtles a.5t PeGlfc Green $ea Turtle (T) owe ee Turtle (-r E) - Lea ti-rerback Sea Turtle (E) - Narth Pacific Lcgperhead Sea Turtle ;E} - ESA Whales Blue Whale (E) - Fin Whale (E) - Humpback Whale (E) - Southern Resident Killer Whale (E) - North Pacific Right Whale .(E) - Sei Whale (E) - Sperm Whale (E) - ESA Pinnipeds Guadalupe Fur Seal (T) - Steller Sea Lion Critical Habitat - Essential Fish Habitat Coho EFH - Chinook Salmon EFH - Groundfish EFH - Coastal Pelagics EFH - Highiy Migratory Species EFH - MMPA Species (See list at left) ESA and MMPA Cetaceans/Pinnipeds .See list at left and consult.the.NMFS.L.o.ng B.each..oftice 562-980-4000 MMPA Cetaceans - MMPA Pinnipeds - Page 6-6 ATTACHMENT 7 Visual Simulations Page 7-1 Kafir Viewpoint 116, Revised Simulator' Bidirl9 view WWII2008 (1ipl arld reniEc1 righl). Thy simulabGn itOm 2010 Call IA been in !he!MAI I el I nage From the bf Swa16h,r)ed ASSegtmed LLCC4P rrrtr hT� 8 s• I ICJ of rd P.1 +1 �IIXIL'r�IL'L Etifling Irmo; n.p.MF amprom. N+rLlaw ma, CLam.•••I 1 ` Lila Lim i.L.m. nAN&-rm .I.'+r r..d6 gym• as {Ai al •al ape , I..la i.0 L•a.Mau i •olml 4 Mi l 111. I iTOiF1. �a Rr-IX1FM YMI u444 ovrokke iL'N h4.�Lrl l imins 51Em•f • 1 no • { "Amid ilmilvlor_ FILILInL•1 ] i , • rely Ur+ + II 1;7: r� 1}�JY� n *A 4>� IPC Li i IC Ih�la Page 7-2 Ff,P.:Ft i_ n.*n 1... .19 8. MIA :ad. it Srn aas/ltYY Wed! -119 1-1-1.9 +-4 • Key Viewpoint 117, Revised Simul et on rxisimg view tram •r16 Owl. f 5rrd reed 5rnAuch ilwitprn righl], The 5irn d es en 1rpm can he Seen i n the I prrQr I fl i mage frvrn The QrigiNi 4fi5uas'&npact As5e5wrerif ‘4m., .Laaai NLiau L.•.1.. • ala1.r,9 n •ordi dSQL n.1.4mrmEllr Pimp AR41.101 f.W .=%19 r ar'_ _ ter•x4trL itiwrv.#il Es Ca t,Wntaw ml .Ne96 mom= mikiaNF7Ji..edir+. _.hW JV 11..4 ii4.9.9mmlaimbiam hi.ilop-I i ,181.gJi16iNliml Mni-•••ah7LL 4' 1F WfI 12.,rWodmLt11. aVA�r'.7.E{1.1 LIG uu 7 7-IG .17r•PI Cw4.4m nY Nor 5icr 7 11•a-h L1111CiJ1 tii.,1 iaa Y�IY i+nJ+J1ri.11 Y MA i`FIF Past-Canstruction View Page 7-3 ATTACHMENT 8 Impacts to C D FW/RWQC B Waters Page 8-1 `y+.. F -., ' r - ill `....... APy l _ • - 1 - .. t rr L ay' .y • ..•••� ilf. \ —Fhl.. ,! - x _ r ' _ .01 xIL i ++Ijf _ 4t ' • L • 1 t M1 • ' L i _ 14 y �'- • r•, - k } ` m+ '411 - - - - ly — t '*• ' ti 4+yL'r 'i f . t z .m.f � _ r G + l� a ti + ��_ y t} • _ - ur CI cores. ewaco Jlnincleanll- • { .. Y �-.. ' k r +'elliN - Jill. N 4 . i • s _ i• 4 . _ k �ti• _ .. 1 �h CEfW dont+rB JudldrtYorw+• _ +-.ti," #� - Failure lin 1.11 Erna L. - IL _.. {� +y ` ..••�F _ f r ti fi i T if�l I I� _ - � _ . �+-- r •L a ,m �,r r.:i Gu 1431..ic■LbrILL\■ IaiL1.. — r++1}+larFM�ryry I�ii ...F...ot - F... R7 44YLrtr0 L� ILcFcos! 15uc141• lair Fsrrb RrrnaxY Icy 1491.11M11k 141411 to ly+� Ci[11.051 r RWCZB Junrdlcdonal and Hon-Junadclronail Frnurcx ' • ; 4 . - +` - +4. ra }'A LL I+rx: .15' SR DI cmto Lames rrsacln. I•.1 RY 11.iY]A 811-117: Pia I.lir 1 El!, Q8-0Ff#7 andt• Fsdica . = T--•vPrlr Ia L5yw1 aros �..un • in iu� Ftirf 1.0 our% Polat 1 rLFY1 Jr'rdl.:1Ersl£1 Hy• 14rdrni ��II larrspllminl 11.11 rF s{Ir Iv 15slrn t♦ Pr 17Mr • P.IrrOr GO:w=rklM Fn miI.3eDfli RWCKII �r. r'1 {{0.0w41rrl • FlLA a1■ 1 Lp � � iclrr S'.R xnvr :.1'7 4.*1 ,..-.4:EM l 1rb dttrW -11I4 rl rs {G1Y.l 111.1:C1 rMocv tsars zsttIra n Pri+3-0114 N114.rV=.1..�#]rIrmrCsr-R.A1111 Page 8-2 T1rl p ors P51Ir1 p 1{ 1 10 C4Fx' JrrdcAlpancl Drily • Rudcral r rfnw�rrlcd Fcaura 0.1I:{1.1] Errs Tcopvcry Lnpar_ co£DFly.'RYNC■ JLnicdrrhvncl- FluiErcl r UurcydaUH FiYU1+ M42: i.S4 +{+L k a a• - }i ++// � // �JFJ r gir 246:1Mbi. LCFS�' I FIWOC3 Junsdraanzl and Non-JunadrnanY Fc sum; PAPmoiVs n r:• {ic. ar.y.r c u4r �i a-r�vrF GL£ G+mQkr LrJYnr•PI PM1F5we4+#1:1FLY..1F —PFK.au II Eth-ay 7LIaup WEE PEEFinid'_Lvclrr Lrr1r P vncrarn Dim hopernr} Fmpcd: c�EntrtAit,f _ yrb.isa irml • FhdurJ ODA'S Jrncelrrml£4} • IhbrrtiJ 11nN pialmi - Arm r.rrr • Ran Page 8-3 7mperuy Inplicr ` DE £13111( r WM:1CD JrarYEayJtirFcl • kLliMil r L11514 1111.14 F#yUn+F2:0.21 1{r1 Or 4 �# 't % .-."1?*'...,... ,- FFYFrEs1 +c_Era is MINI. 2:1•.FiLnF • I fly K•FL -ilk F4*,•-•+1 •,rnrc b riylr-r drFrSiski • 0J52 w 'PIA, {Orr. •wr0{1..rvarFV•knlr 3n,••,:.--• 7 c pi G r nyi :+`v t. c nor 7: x r aim-11 { lnplcL r4GDFY4111w1;4"13 JLr.c411L1.1MJI • A •Jdcry LWvpncicd PFari 157 D.D7 xi■ i'Lli", -1-021251 1.15: PYI ♦f1.5.Y7,1 1111-1111: Rnl FAr1.7 E4: 1f-15FM) wpm•IoCdF11rFYYM3C& pEgii El ID fsrrps'ciy Frporl lo- MDR ' a.►nia Jrrrcdrenancl -Rudrel fUnsrpclrcd ..._ r3• " ___. PAFLSON3 rev :1.0 PcpcatdlEFl9roni Lri� 1794c3.1-11Tl lwe MMirg u:NIc 1,14cud Swcuc LErc Pr.. arrN tihFp IF+W.1.1 i9 MCI rfnwidr} P1PMI 1+11141 In C orW i RwoC■ JW1id1[4fN41- RudorN Llnvryn-__' Fo i res H4: k iki op!. .J. 4 i g7FW r R ra.70 Jurvoitnarrdl and rim lunxdldxinti Ftaty rx Amodre60al • 111.41rnal I CC AN.4.1a3cuwl llo-y • R.dt•y: L4rrm ryl0 2 llcrF Jura -R W r•El i Page 8-4 1.1E. S° 91 F.rir•sc rmrr•-in r' I-15t R51 •11.5•47A $R-01.• PW II Grp 1 N-0FSI] Impit1iedCDRY1 R O L ! wrltrip ATTACHMENT 9 Initial Phase Environmental Commitments Record Page 9-1 ECR ID LU-1 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures If a Build Alternative is selected for implementation, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) will request the County of Riverside, the County of Orange, and the cities along the alignments of State Route 91 (SR 91) and Interstate 15 (1-15) to amend their respective General Plans to reflect the selected SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) alternative and the modification of land use designations for properties that would be acquired for the project which are not currently designated for transportation uses. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure RCTC Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure The City of Corona will include 91 CIP land use changes in their regular General Plan Update. City of Corona has provided written verification. A meeting was held with the County of Riverside on 2/28/2018. County of Riverside does not have an official designation for "transportation use" and does not need to amend the General Plan for that purpose. Land use changes for remnant parcels will occur during standard entitlement process as properties have already been sold for private development. Please see meeting minutes. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) 10/23/17; 2/28/18 AT; JLS Remarks 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES X for Phase / NO PR-1 During final design/construction of the Initial Phase, RCTC will contribute $100,000 to the planning and implementation of improvements in that area that would support and expand regional trail connectivity. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design/ construction RCTC paid CDPR in January 2014 8/21/2015 SB 100% complete for Initial Phase X PR-2 During final design/construction of the Initial Phase, RCTC will coordinate with State Parks on the aesthetic features that will be included in the project specifications for the proposed retaining wall facing CHSP between SR-71 and the westbound Green River Road off -ramp, consistent with the aesthetic and features required in Measure V 2. The aesthetic treatment will include a texture to simulate a natural type appearance such as a soil or rock surface, or equivalent. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design guilder Final design/ construction RCTC submitted design concept and renderings in December 2014. CDPR concurs in February 2015. Final design still needs to be reviewed prior to construction of aesthetic and entrance features. 12/2/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X PR-3 To minimize nighttime noise impacts to Chino Hills State Park (CHSP): 1. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to limit the hours of construction in CHSP to daylight hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.), with the exception of limited periods when evening or night construction is necessary for operational reasons. Operational reasons may include the desire to conduct certain construction activities; such as closing multiple ramps or travel lanes, during night hours to minimize delays to the traveling public. Any night construction must be approved in writing by the RCTC Resident Engineer and coordinated with the District 8 and 12 biologists, the USFWS, and CDFG. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During Construction RCTC submitted the wildlife noise and lighting plan to CDFW for review and approval in August 2014. CDFW concurred in October 2014. A variance was approved by the City of Corona to allow night time work within the city limits. 11/16/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-2 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures CI-2 Where property acquisition and relocation are unavoidable, RCTC's Right -of -Way Agents will follow the provisions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Uniform Act) and the 1987 Amendments as implemented by the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Regulations for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs. Appendix D in the Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) provides a summary of the RCTC Relocation Assistance Program for implementing the Uniform Act. For properties where a partial acquisition results in the removal of some or all of the parking for the property, RCTC's Right -of -Way Agents will conduct parking studies to investigate the use of adjacent acquisitions for replacement parking, reconfiguring the remaining parking spaces and lots on the property, restriping parking spaces, enlarging parking lots, and reconfiguring driveways and/or delivery locations to reduce the project effects on the property. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure RCTC Timing/Phase Prior to construction; during construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure All permanent relocations have occurred. OPC has documentation. RCTC is at 85% completion of ROW acquisition and has followed applicable guidelines. (but Attachment 4 in the Reval says "RCTC has followed applicable guidelines") Measure Completed (Date and Initials) 9/30/2016 AT Remarks 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO X CI-3 Where possible during final design, RCTC's Right -of - Way Agents and the Project Engineer will work with owners of commercial, agricultural, and industrial uses subject to partial property acquisitions to reconfigure those uses on site consistent with applicable local codes and ordinances in such a manner as to enable them to remain in operation. If a commercial or industrial partial acquisition cannot be reconfigured to allow for continued operation, RCTC's Right -of -Way Agents will work with the property owners to either relocate that use to land designated for that given land use, preferably within the boundaries of the study area or to provide compensation for the land pursuant to the provisions of the Uniform Act. If an agricultural use cannot be reconfigured to allow for its continued operation, the property owner will be compensated pursuant to the provisions of the Uniform Act as required in Measure CI-2 and the agricultural use will be discontinued. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Prior to construction RCTC is at 85% (reval says 100%) completion of ROW acquisition and has followed applicable guidelines. 8/1 /2015 SB 100% complete for Initial Phase X CI-4 During final design and property acquisition, the RCTC Project Engineer and Right -of -Way Agents will work with billboard/property owners, the City of Corona, and the California Department of Transportation's (Department) Outdoor Advertising Unit to find locations for relocating Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design/ construction Billboard relocations have been identified and are being implemented. 8/1 /2016 SB 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-3 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures the affected billboards, within the existing sites where the billboards are currently located or other sites in the City where billboards are allowed. The Right -of -Way Agents will work with the City and the Department's Outdoor Advertising Unit to ensure that the sites for the relocated billboards comply with the requirements in the City of Corona Municipal Code and the Outdoor Advertising Act and Regulations. The Right -of -Way Agents will also work with the billboard/property owners to develop Billboard Relocation Agreements with the City of Corona. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO UES-1 During final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer will prepare utility relocation plans in consultation with the affected utility providers/owners for those utility facilities anticipated to be relocated, removed, and protected in- place. Final design will focus on avoiding utility relocations. If relocation is necessary, final design will focus on relocating utilities within the State right-of-way or within other existing public rights -of -way and/or easements. If relocation outside of existing or the additional public rights -of -way and/or easements required for the project is necessary, final design will focus on relocating those facilities in such a manner as to minimize environmental impacts as a result of project construction and ongoing maintenance and repair activities. The utility relocation plans will be included in the project specifications. Prior to and during construction, the RCTC Resident Engineer will ensure that the components of the utility relocation plans provided in the project specifications are properly implemented by the design/build contractor. Final EIR/EIS Design guilder/RCTC Prior to construction; during construction Coordination has been occurring between design and environmental regarding final relocation of utilities. Two remaining RFC plans will be completed by Nov. 2015. ReValidation 2 - Approved 9/17/13 ReValidation 10 -Approved 9/21/15 Remaining RFC plans are completed. Last utility (sewer at Yorba St and Pleasantview Ave) completed first week of Sept. 2017. 2/3/17; 9/12/17 AT; AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X UES-2 Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to coordinate all temporary ramp and lane closures and detour plans with law enforcement, fire protection, and emergency medical service providers to minimize temporary delays in emergency response times as part of the Final Transportation Management Plan (TMP) and Final Ramp Closure Study required in Measures T-1 and T-2, including the identification of alternative routes and routes across the construction areas for emergency vehicles developed in coordination with the affected agencies. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction; during construction TMP: Final TMP has been completed and signed. City of Corona approved proposed haul routes using city streets. Caltrans approved the September 2015 Ramp Closure Study October 16, 2015. Amendment #1 to the Ramp Closure Study/Reval 24 approved on 08/29/16. 11/3/2016 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-4 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Amendment #2 to the Ramp Closure Study/Reval 26 approved on 10/10/2016 Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO UES-3 Prior to and during any construction activities, the RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the following to minimize the risk of fires during construction: Coordinate with the applicable local fire department to identify and maintain defensible spaces around active construction areas.; Coordinate with the applicable local fire department to identify and maintain firefighting equipment extin (extinguishers, shovels, g g( g water tankers) in active construction areas.; Prohibit the use of mechanized equipment or equipment that could throw off sparks in areas adjacent to open space or undeveloped land, including areas adjacent to CHSP.; Post emergency services phone numbers (fire, emergency medical, police) in visible locations in all active construction areas. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder g Prior to construction; during construction Design Builder has prepared and current) implements a safety Ian Y p Yp and crisis management plan. 2/2/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; p however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X UES-4 The final design of the SR-91 CIP Build Alternatives will include closing gaps so there is the equivalent of a continuous barrier 30 to 36 inches high on the edge of the shoulder on both westbound and eastbound SR-91 from SR-71 to SR-241, as follows: 2. Ultimate Project: Close gaps to provide an equivalent continuous barrier 30 to 36 inches high on the edge of shoulder on SR-91 in both directions between Green River Road and SR-241 meeting Department standards applicable at the time. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Prior to construction 3 foot barrier is identified on pkg B plans from SR 71 to Orange County line. Installation of the 3-foot barrier completed on the westbound side of SR-91; the eastbound barrier will be installed during the Ultimate Phase. 9/11/2017 AT 100 ° /° complete for Initial Phase X T-1 Transportation Management Plan. During final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer direct a qualified traffic engineer to prepare the Final Traffic Management Plan (TMP), which will be based on the Preliminary TMP developed for the Project Report, to address specific short-term traffic impacts during construction of the project. The objectives of the Final TMP are to: Maintain traffic safety during construction Effectively maintain an acceptable level of traffic flow throughout the transportation system during construction Minimize traffic delays and facilitate reduction of overall duration of construction activities Minimize detours and impacts to pedestrians and bicyclists Foster public awareness of the project and related impacts Achieve public acceptance of construction of the project and the Final TMP measures. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder Prior to construction TMP being implemented. Public outreach plan being implemented. RCTC and design builder hold management of ramp closure study, traffic and public outreach task force meeting to deal with traffic management issues. Public outreach is documented in the monthly Construction Progress Report to RCTC. Caltrans approved the September 2015 Ramp Closure Study October 16, 2015. Amendment #1 to the Ramp Closure 8/1 /15; 11/6/15 SB; AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; howeoer, 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-5 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures RCTC will submit the Final TMP to the California Department of Transportation (Department) for review and approval during final design and prior to any construction activities. The existing Preliminary TMP and Ramp Closure Study contains the following elements intended to reduce traveler delay and enhance traveler safety. These elements will be refined during final design and incorporated in the Final TMP for implementation during project construction. Public Information/Public Awareness Campaign (PAC). The primary goal of the PAC is to educate motorists, business owners/operators, residents, elected officials, and government agencies about construction activities and associated impacts. The PAC is an important tool for reaching target audiences with important construction project information and will include, but not be limited to: Rideshare information Brochures and mailers Media releases Paid advertising Public meetings Broadcast fax and email services Telephone hotline Notification to targeted groups Commercial traffic reporters/feeds Project website Visual information Local cable television and news Internet postings Traveler Information Strategies. The effective implementation of a traveler information system during construction is crucial for enabling motorists to make informed decisions about their travel plans and options with real-time traffic information. That real-time traffic information will include information on lane closures, detours, delays, access to adjacent land uses, "businesses are open" signing, and other signing and information to assist travelers in navigating through and in construction areas. Key components of this system will include, but not be limited to: Fixed changeable message signs Portable changeable message signs Ground - mounted signs Automated work zone information systems Highway advisory radio Lane closure website Department highway information network Bicycle and pedestrian information Commute Smart website Incident Management. Effective incident management will ensure that incidents in construction areas are cleared quickly and do not lead to substantial delays for the traveling public through work zones. Incident management includes, but is not limited to: Construction Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Study/Reval 24 approved on 08/29/16. Amendment #2 to the Ramp Closure Study/Reval 26 approved on 10/10/2016. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO Page 9-6 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP) Freeway service patrol for construction Traffic surveillance stations Transportation Management Center Unit 370 Traffic management team Towing services Construction Strategies. The Final TMP will include procedures to lessen the effect of typical construction activities and will include, but not be limited to, consideration of the following: Conflicts with other projects and special events Construction staging alternatives Mainline lane closures Local road closures Ramp/connector closures Pedestrian and bicycle detours and facility closures Traffic control improvements Coordination with other projects Project phasing Traffic screens Truck traffic restrictions Demand Management. Temporarily reducing the overall traffic volumes on the project segments of State Route 91 (SR-91) and Interstate 15 (1-15) could reduce the short-term adverse effects of construction on traffic operations. The Final TMP will include, but not be limited to, the following strategies that could reduce vehicular demand in the study area during project construction: Rideshare incentives Transit services Shuttle services Variable work hours/telecommuting High -occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes/ramps Park -and -ride lots Alternate Route Strategies. The Final TMP will provide strategies for notifying motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists, especially interregional commuters, of planned construction activities. This notification will allow travelers to make informed decisions about their travel plans, including the consideration of possible alternate routes. The Final TMP will consider the development of alternate routes for motorists to address the following: Mainline lane closures Ramp/connector closures Local road closures Temporary highway or shoulder use Local street improvements Temporary detours and closures of bicycle and pedestrian facilities Traffic signal coordination RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the measures in the Final TMP are properly implemented by the design/build contractor prior to and during construction. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO T-2 Management of Ramp Closures. During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will direct a qualified environmental planner to develop the Final Ramp Closure Study to address specific short-term impacts Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design/ construction Draft Ramp Closure Study completed by Parsons Brinkerhoff in January of 2010, and is being utilized by the Design Builder as final. 11 /6/2016 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project X Page 9-7 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures associated with ramp closures longer than 10 days during construction. The objectives of the Final Ramp Closure Study will be to: Minimize inconvenience to the traveling public.; Minimize closures.; Avoid or minimize concurrently multiple closures where possible.; Coordinate closures as needed with other projects and activities. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the measures included in the Final Ramp Closure Study are properly implemented by the design/build contractor. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Per RCT-AWJ-LTR-0139, Caltrans and RCTC granted the DB permission to use the draft report only if the DB provides a memorandum stating that ramp closures in the draft study will remain unchanged. If any changes do occur, the Design Builder will provide a new Ramp Closure Study. ReValidation 13 - Approved 7/6/15 Caltrans approved the September 2015 Ramp Closure Study October 16, 2015. Amendment #1 to the Ramp Closure Study/Reval 24 approved on 08/29/16. Amendment #2 to the Ramp Closure Study/Reval 26 approved on 10/10/2016. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO T-3 Fair Share Contributions. RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that RCTC pays the fair share contribution for the project -related impacts at area intersections. Those fair shares are shown by intersection in Table T-3.1. The recommended improvements include additional turn and through lanes. Summaries of the improved intersection delays and levels of service (LOS) are provided in Tables T-3.2, T-3.3, and T-3.4 for 2015 with the Initial Phase of Alternative 2, Design Year 2035 with Alternative 1, and Design Year 2035 with Alternative 2 conditions, respectively. Final EIR/EIS RCTC During Construction For the initial phase, local street improvements are included as part of RFC plans. Co-op agreement with the City of Corona, for project improvements, has been executed. 11/16/17; 1 /31 /28 AT; JLS 100% complete for Initial Phase X T-4 During final design, the RCTC Project Engineer will ensure that the final design and project specifications for the widened areas in the undercrossings on SR-91 and I- 15 include appropriate lighting for vehicles and pedestrians. The RCTC Project Engineer will also assess the need for additional lighting in the original parts of the undercrossings in the event the longer undercrossings result in the need for additional lighting in Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder Final design/ construction Lighting measures associated with this commitment are incorporated in all final design packages. Coordination with the City of Corona further supports compliance. On 2/3/17 Nelson confirmed all their concerns regarding lighting at 2/3/17; 7/10/17 AT; AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-8 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO those areas. That additional lighting, if any, will also be shown in the project specifications. The RCTC Project Engineer will have any lighting considered at Coal Canyon reviewed and approved by the Project Biologist prior to incorporation in the project specifications to ensure the lighting does not affect the use of Coal Canyon as a wildlife crossing. During construction, the RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the lighting in undercrossings as shown in the project specifications. undercrossings have been resolved. Additional lighting was installed at both E. Grand and 91/71 undercrossings. V-1 Structure Elements. To address adverse impacts of the project structures, the Project Engineer will direct a qualified landscape architect to ensure that the final project design incorporates the mitigation and minimization elements A—D, below, and that these enhancements to structures are incorporated in the design and construction of sound walls, retaining walls, and bridge elements and will not be "follow-up" enhancements. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the design/build contractor constructs the retaining and sound walls, medians, bridges, and other structures consistent with aesthetic and design features included in the project specifications. RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that those aesthetic and design features are constructed during the construction phase when the impact occurs. A. Sound walls in low -density, developed areas or those fronting private property will be heavily textured (i.e. split- face or fractured rib) and integrally colored to minimize reflected glare and visual mass. Sound walls facing public -use areas (parks, streets, etc.) will incorporate textures and color as above plus site -specific aesthetic features (local or historical references) to minimize/mitigate impacts to community character and to restore a "sense of place." Specific color selection for sound walls will be determined by the 215/91 Corridor Master Plan. B. Retaining walls (including walls associated with bridge structures) will be heavily textured (i.e., split -face or fractured rib) to minimize glare and visual mass. Retaining walls facing public use areas (parks, streets, etc.) over 9 feet (ft) high will be heavily textured (i.e., split -face or fractured rib) and include site -specific Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder During construction Draft PALM approved in February 2015 and aesthetic concepts are being implemented in Final Design Plans. Design packages approved as follows: Package A - 3/9/2015 Package B - 3/3/2015 Package C - 2/24/2015 Package D - 3/2/2015 Package E - 2/28/2015 Package F - 12/5/2014 Package G - 12/19/2014 Design packages final approvals: Package A - 1/18/16 Package B - 5/16/17 Package C - 5/17/17 Package D - 5/17/17 Package E - 5/17/17 Package F - 5/18/17 Package G - 5/18/17 Vines were incorporated where possible - Wall M-1 a on Frontage Road and Wall W-1 at the Main Street eastbound on -ramp. Vines were not possible at all sound wall locations because : 1. Paving associated with the wall, either the wall was sitting above a 2/9/2017 AT Overall 90% Complete; however, 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-9 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures aesthetic features (local or historical references). Color (integral or applied) is not required for retaining walls. C. In addition to texture and color as described in A and B, above, sound walls and retaining walls with low - density development or recreational viewer groups will include planting of trees or trees and shrubs, and vines at the base of the walls (non -motorist side) to minimize loss of visual unity. Plantings will be local native species or ornamental species that require no irrigation after establishment. These plantings will not require permanent irrigation. D. Slope paving in all areas with bicyclist and pedestrian viewers will include texture (i.e. stamped slate). In urban areas, slope paving will direct a qualified landscape architect to incorporate site -specific aesthetic features in addition to texture. Texture and pattern will be used to minimize the visual impacts of increased hard surface, and reinforce community identify, offsetting reduced community connectivity associated with increased bridge widths. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure retaining wall, barrier, or adjacent to paving. 2. Lack of maintenance access, mostly to the back side of walls that were on grade. 3. Inability to get irrigation to the walls (along the properties along the Frontage Road). 4. Other project structures interfered with the planting area. Reval 29 approved 12/14/2017 Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO V-2 Highway Planting: RCTC's Project Engineer will direct a qualified landscape architect to ensure that replacement planting to mitigate the loss of existing landscaping is included in the final design. Replacement planting will be funded with the project's construction and will include no less than 3 years of plant establishment. All planting must be reviewed and approved by the Ca!trans District 8 Landscape Architect. RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the replacement planting is under construction within 2 years of acceptance of the highway contract that damaged or removed the existing planting. RCTC's Project Engineer will direct a qualified landscape architect to ensure the project plans show that where plantable right-of-way is reduced (as at Main Street), replacement planting will be trees, shrubs, vines, ground cover, permanent irrigation, and enhanced structural elements. Enhanced structural elements will minimize the impact of reduced planting areas. Enhanced structural elements will include enhanced pedestrian facilities (such as pavement treatments, graphics, or above -standard decorative pedestrian lighting) and may incorporate community entry features into the structures. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Draft PALM approved by RCTC in February 2015. Design plans include highway replacement planting. Additional aesthetic structural features are being added to project areas where plantable right of way is reduced (Corona gateway areas). Trees will be planted after landscaping plans are approved. Design packages final approvals: Package A - 1/18/16 Package B - 5/16/17 Package C - 5/17/17 Package D - 5/17/17 Package E - 5/17/17 Package F - 5/18/17 Package G - 5/18/17 5/22/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-10 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures RCTC's Project Engineer will direct a qualified landscape architect to ensure that the project plans show that where plantable right-of-way is eliminated (as at residential areas on both sides of State Route 91 [SR-91 ] between just east of Lincoln Boulevard to approximately 400 ft west of East Grand Boulevard), the loss will be mitigated by off -site planting. Planting of street trees or other approved planting such as vines with permanent irrigation in City right-of-way such as at the base of retaining walls at Bollero Place and the 600 to 700 block of West Second Street will minimize the loss of existing landscape. The off -site tree planting will minimize the visual presence of the widened adjacent mainline. Replacement of existing trees by new street trees will be at a 1:1 (new tree to existing tree) ratio. To minimize the visual loss of the mature existing trees, these mitigating/replacement street trees will be planted at no less than 36 in box size. RCTC's Project Engineer will direct a qualified landscape architect to ensure that where plantable right-of-way is eliminated without the prospect of site -adjacent mitigation (as at the industrial areas just east of East Grand Boulevard or the above residential areas if street planting is not accepted by the City), the loss will be mitigated by planting within the project limits. This planting will be at a 4:1 (new tree to existing tree) ratio. If vehicle recovery distances prohibit tree planting in any selected area, mitigation planting may be achieved at a ratio of 10 new shrubs to 1 existing tree. For this mitigation planting, all trees will be no less than 15-gallon size and all shrubs will be no less than 5-gallon size. RCTC's Project Engineer will direct a qualified landscape architect to ensure that the project plans show that all mitigation planting within the State right-of-way, where appropriate, will include native tree, shrub, and vine species, and include temporary irrigation for establishment. Replacement planting will include permanent irrigation. The Project Engineer will refer to the Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM) for the California Department of Transportation's (Department) policy regarding planting, and Measures V- 2 and V-3 above. RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the design/build contractor properly implements the Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO Page 9-11 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures landscaping and structural treatment components described in Measures V-1 through V-4. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO V-3 Light and Glare. To reduce glare, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the project plans specify lighting fixtures with non -glare hoods and that lighting is designed to illuminate only the right-of-way. The lighting plans will require the review and approval of the Department and applicable cities and counties before construction to assure compliance with their applicable policies regarding public street lighting. RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the City of Corona and other applicable cities and counties to ensure that sufficient lighting is provided as part of the improvements to local streets within the project limits, consistent with applicable local policies and street lighting codes. Increased glare from walls, structures and pavement will be minimized by measures identified in V-2 and V-3. RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the project lighting plan included in the project specifications is implemented by the design/build contractor during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Final design plans include placement/specifications of lighting that is compliant Caltrans and local standards/policies. Approved as of April 2015 as part of RFC packages. 12/1/2016 AT ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X V-4 Graffiti Reduction, Removal and Control. During final design, the RCTC Project Engineer will incorporate vine planting on all sound barriers in the project specifications to reduce the potential for graffiti and to soften the appearance of those walls, consistent with the Highway Design Manual, Index 902.3(5). After the construction of each sound barrier, the RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to install vine planting consistent with the project specifications and the planting requirements in Measure V-3. The Department and the City of Corona have existing ongoing maintenance programs for the control and removal of graffiti. Those programs would apply to all new and modified structures in Alternatives 1 and 2, on public and private property, as appropriate. Key components of those programs are: Department Program. Chapter D1, Litter, Debris, and Graffiti (July 2006), in the Caltrans Maintenance Manual (Volume I, January 2011) describes the Department's maintenance program for the control and removal of graffiti. Key program components applicable to the project features in Alternatives 1 and 2 are: Use of recycled paint for Final EIR/EIS Design Builder/RCTC Final design/ construction PALM approved on February 2015. Design Builder including plantings on sound walls as part of Landscape Plans. Vines were incorporated where possible - Wall M-1 a on Frontage Road and Wall W-1 at the Main Street eastbound on -ramp. Vines were not possible at all sound wall locations because : 1. Paving associated with the wall, either the wall was sitting above a retaining wall, barrier, or adjacent to paving. 2. Lack of maintenance access, mostly to the back side of walls that were on grade. 3. Inability to get irrigation to the walls (along the properties along the Frontage Road). 8/25/17; 9/15/17; 12/14/17 AT; AT; JLS 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-12 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures various structures and matching paint used to cover graffiti with the original paint color on the structure. Use of physical devices such as rat guards, sign hoods, razor wire, and glare screen patches to limit access to facilities targeted by taggers. Replacement of ground -mounted signs with signs that have protective coatings or application of protective coatings to signs. City of Corona Program. Chapter 9.30, Graffiti Abatement Procedure, in the Corona Municipal Code, describes the City's procedures related to the prohibition of graffiti in the City and the graffiti removal process. Methods for the removal of graffiti include power washing, gel removers, and painting. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure 4. Other project structures interfered with the planting area. Revalidation 29 approved 12/14/2017 Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO V-5 Construction Plan. To address adverse impacts associated with views of construction access and staging areas, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to construct the project in accordance with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Standard Construction Specifications, including appropriate measures to address visual impacts during construction. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder During construction Visual mitigation measures are being implemented, and will continue to be implemented until project completion. 12/1/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X CR-1 Replacement of Trees in the Grand Boulevard Historic District. The requirements of Measure V-3 related to highway planting would apply to the replacement of the 18 trees in the Grand Boulevard Historic District. In addition, the following will be implemented during the design/build phase regarding the removal and replacement of the 18 trees in the Grand Boulevard Historic District: The RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to replace all trees removed from the Historic District at a ratio of 1:1. The RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to install replacement trees that are compatible with the existing plantings in the Grand Boulevard Historic District and with the overall character of the Historic District, and that the replacement trees be identified in consultation with the City of Corona, the California Department of Transportation (Department) District Landscape Architect, and a Professional Qualified Staff Architectural Historian from the District. The RCTC Project Engineer will require the construction contractor to install all replacement trees no later than the completion of Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design/ construction 23 trees have been identified as contributing to the historic district that will be replaced per coordination with City of Corona and as applicable RCTC and Caltrans. June 2014 memo and location map satisfactorily documents which trees will be removed. Coordination will occur for identifying location and type of replacement trees within City of Corona ROW. Additional trees were removed due to design change and utility relocations. Two queen palms have been added (May 2017) to the Package E plan set. Three California Fan Palms were added to the Historic District to complete replacement requirements. 5/19/17; 9/12/17; 10/6/17 AT; AT; AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-13 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures construction activities in the Grand Boulevard Historic District. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure To meet the City's/Historical Society's request for larger trees, RCTC directed 20-25' of clear brown trunk to be planted on E. Grand Ave, between 2nd and 3rd Street. The three additional trees were planted 9/27/17. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO CR-2 Discovery of Cultural Materials. If cultural materials are discovered during construction, the RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to divert all earthmoving activity within and around the immediate discovery area until a qualified archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find. Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction Currently being implemented for pre- construction ground disturbance activities. 11/3/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X CR-3 Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are discovered during construction, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that further disturbances and activities shall cease in any area or nearby area suspected to overlie remains and the County Coroner shall be contacted. Pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98, if the remains are thought to be Native American, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will then notify the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). At that time, the Department's District 8 Environmental Branch Chief or the District 8 Native American Coordinator (Gary Jones, [909] 383-7505) will be contacted so they may work with the MLD on the respectful treatment and disposition of the remains. Further provisions of PRC 5097.98 are to be followed as applicable. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design guilder During construction To date, human remains have not been encountered on the project site. 11/3/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X CR-4 During final design, the RCTC Project Manager and Department Cultural 1) Resources Professionally Qualified Staff will coordinate with representatives from the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians to identify areas in the project disturbance limits considered sensitive to the Tribe. 2) During final design, the RCTC Project Engineer will identify on the project plans all areas that require monitoring by a Native American Monitor during site preparation, disturbance, and grading. 3) During all site preparation, disturbance, and grading, the RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have a Native American monitor present and conducting monitoring activities in all areas identified by Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design guilder Final design At the June 2014 Environmental Task Force it was identified that Pechanga lands were outside of the project area. No monitoring is necessary. 8/1/2015 SB 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-14 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians as sensitive, as shown in the project specifications. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO CR-5 Condition for the Grand Boulevard Historic District: Acorn -Style Streetlights. The following condition will be implemented during the project design/build phase regarding the removal, temporary storage, and relocation of up to seven existing acorn -style streetlights within the project disturbance limits in the Grand Boulevard Historic District: - The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to clearly indicate on the final plans the locations of up to seven acorn -style streetlights in the project disturbance limits that are to be removed at the beginning of construction in those areas and to identify the locations where the removed streetlights would be reinstalled. - The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to remove and, as necessary, dismantle the affected acorn -style streetlights and to place them in containers appropriate for storing those fixtures during the project construction period. - The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to store the containers holding the acorn -style streetlights in a secure location protected from public access and weather. - The RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to verify that the locations identified for the reinstallation of the affected streetlights are acceptable to the City of Corona and consistent with the City's requirements for the siting of streetlights. - The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to reinstall the acorn -style streetlights at the locations designated in the final plans when no further construction/disruption will occur at those locations, as follows: - The streetlights will be reinstalled as close to their original locations as possible, based on the project design and available space, in a manner consistent with the other acorn -style streetlights in the Grand Boulevard Historic District and with the City of Corona requirements for the siting of streetlights. - If any of the acorn -style streetlights cannot be reinstalled at or near their original locations, they will be Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design/ construction During July 2014, ten (10) acorn- style street lights were satisfactorily removed from within the planned project limits. AWJV is storing 5 poles and has transferred 5 poles to City of Corona. Documentation is on file for compliance verification with this portion of this measure. On October 29, 2015 Andrew Walters, Caltrans Principal Architectural Historian, approved the Acorn -Style Decorative Light Design Plan. As of Dec. 2016, 5 poles had been re -installed. The City will return the remaining 5 poles and direct location for RCTC/Contractor to install. Acorn -style light replicas (5) were installed at the East Grand Ave undercrossing the first week of July 2017. On 7/7/17, a site visit with Andrew Walters was performed. On 7/18/17 an e-mail addressed to Andrew Walters was sent to document the installation and location of those lights. 2/3/17; 7/31/17 AT; AT o 100 /o complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-15 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Responsible for Development and/or Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial for Phase reinstalled elsewhere within the boundaries of the Grand Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Implementation of Measure (Date and Initials) YES / NO Boulevard Historic District, focusing on locations where acorn -style lights have previously been removed as long as those locations are consistent with the historic spatial relationships of the Historic District and with the City of Corona requirements for the siting of streetlights; and - If the lights cannot be reinstalled as described above, the RCTC Project Engineer will consult with the City of Corona to identify alternative locations. - The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the construction contractor to have an architectural historian on site during the removal, dismantling, and reinstallation of the acorn -style streetlights Prior to and during construction, Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002), and any subsequent permit, as they relate to the project construction activities. This will include submission of the Permit Registration Documents, including a Notice of Intent (NOI), risk assessment, site map, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Overall 95% Plan (SWPPP), annual fee, and signed certification statement to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) at least 14 days prior to the start of Prior to SWPPP completed in November 2013 and NOI sent to RWQCB in December 2013. Design Builder Complete and will remain so until project WQ-1 construction activity. The SWPPP will meet the requirements of the Construction General Permit and will identify potential pollutant sources associated with construction activities; identify non -storm water discharges; develop a water quality monitoring and sampling plan; and identify, implement, and maintain best management practices (BMPs) to reduce or eliminate pollutants associated with the construction site. Final EIR/EIS RCTC construction; during construction implementing BMP and completing reporting as needed. NOI Approval received 11/25/13 1/2/2017 AT completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X The BMPs identified in the SWPPP will be implemented during project construction. A Notice of Termination (NOT) will be submitted to the SWRCB on the completion of construction and the stabilization of the site. RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to implement SWRCB Resolution No. 2001-046 requiring sampling and analysis during project construction. Page 9-16 ECR ID WQ-2 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with the provisions of the General Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges to Surface Waters that Pose an Insignificant (De Minimums) Threat to Water Quality, Order No. R8-2009-0003, NPDES No. CAG998001, as they relate to discharge of non -storm- water dewatering wastes for the project. This will include submitting to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) an NOI at least 60 days prior to the start of construction, notification of discharge at least 5 days prior to any planned discharges, and monitoring reports by the 30th day of each month following the monitoring period. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure RCTC/Design Builder Timing/Phase Prior to construction; during construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) 8/10/2015 SB Remarks 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES X for Phase / NO WQ 3 Prior to dewatering activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer Final EIR/EIS RCTC Prior to construction 9/30/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X will provide the design/build contractor with a copy of the discharge authorization letter issued by the RWQCB Executive Director. WQ-4 Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to follow the procedures outlined in the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Storm Water Quality Handbooks, Project Planning and Design Guide (July 2010 or subsequent issuance) for implementing Design Pollution Prevention and Treatment BMPs for the project. This will include coordination with the Santa Ana RWQCB with respect to the feasibility, maintenance, and monitoring of Treatment BMPs as set forth in the Department's Statewide Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP, May 2003 or subsequent issuance). RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to comply with other provisions identified in the NPDES Permit, Statewide Storm Water Permit, and Waste Discharge Requirements for the State of California, Department of Transportation (Order No. 99-06-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000003). RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to comply with other provisions identified in the NPDES Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, the County of Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction; during construction Permanent Stormwater BMPs are included as part of the Final Design Plans. RFC packages were completed by April 2015. 1/2/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-17 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Responsible for Development and/or Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial for Phase Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Implementation of Measure (Date and Initials) YES / NO Riverside, and the incorporated cities of Riverside County within the Santa Ana Region (Order No. R8- 2010-0033, NPDES No. CAS618033); and for the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District, and the incorporated cities of Orange County within the Santa Ana Region (Order No. R8-2009-0030), as applicable. During final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer or a Project Geotechnical Engineer or Project Geologist under contract to RCTC will prepare a design -level geotechnical report. This report will document soil - related constraints and hazards such as slope instability, settlement, liquefaction, or related secondary seismic impacts that may be present along the project segments of State Route 91 (SR-91) and Interstate 15 (1-15). This report will require review and approval by the California Department of Transportation (Department). The performance standard for this report will be the geotechnical design standards of the State of California and the Department, as they apply to the project features and structures. RCTC will submit the design -level geotechnical report to the Department for review and approval during final design. The report will include but not be limited to: Evaluation of expansive soils and Geotechnical Execution Plan prepared by DB and approved 11/12/2014. Design level 100% GEO-1 recommendations regarding construction procedures and/or design criteria to minimize the effect of these soils on the construction of the project and to minimize effects related to expansive soils on project facilities in the long term. Identification of potential liquefiable areas within the project limits and recommendations for mitigation. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design geotechnical reports have been prepared for bridges, walls, and roadway packages by the Design Builder Geotechnical Engineer. 9/30/2016 AT complete for Initial Phase X Evaluation of the corrosion potential of soils along those segments of the project alignment not previously tested (i.e., areas along 1-15 and the westbound side of SR-91). Demonstration that no retaining walls or excavations will occur in the existing landslide areas, or that landslide stabilization measures independent of the retaining wall design are included in the final project design. Demonstration that the design of all retaining walls is geotechnically suitable for project area soils, and verification that project design has considered and addressed the possibility of scour associated with the Santa Ana River. Demonstration that side slopes can be designed and graded so that surface erosion of the Page 9-18 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures engineered fill is not increased compared to existing, natural conditions. RCTC's Project Engineer will incorporate the measures recommended in the design - level geotechnical report in the final design and project specifications. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the measures recommended in the design -level geotechnical report as included in the project specifications. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO GEO-2 RCTC's Resident Engineer will maintain a quality assurance/quality control plan during construction. The plan will include observing, monitoring, and testing by the Project Geotechnical Engineer and/or the Project Geologist under contract to RCTC prior to and during construction to confirm that the geotechnical/geologic recommendations from the design -level geotechnical report and standard design and construction practices are fulfilled by the design/build contractor, or if different site conditions are encountered, appropriate changes are made to accommodate such issues. The geotechnical engineer will submit weekly reports to RCTC and the Department during all project -related grading, excavation, and construction activities. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction A Quality Management Plan has been prepared and approved by RCTC on October 17, 2013. Amendments are completed on an ongoing basis. 10/9/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X GE0-3 During final design, if blasting is required, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to prepare a blasting plan to minimize potential hazards related to blasting activities. The blasting plan will address all applicable standards in accordance with the United States Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining. The issues to be addressed in the blasting plan will include, but are not limited to, the following: hours of blasting activity, notification to adjacent property owners, noise and vibration, and dust control. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the blasting plan prior to and during any blasting during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design No blasting is required for the project. 8/1/2015 SB 100% complete for Initial Phase X PAL-1 Following preparation of suitable construction drawings and elevations and during final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer will require the Designated Principal Paleontologist under contract to RCTC to prepare a Paleontological Mitigation Plan (PMP). The PMP will provide guidance for developing and implementing Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design guilder Final design/ construction Paleontological Resource Monitoring/Mitigation Plan approved July 3, 2014. 8/1/2015 SB ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-19 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Responsible for Development and/or Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial for Phase paleontological mitigation efforts, including field work, laboratory methods, and curation. This PMP will be consistent with guidelines provided in the Department's Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Implementation of Measure (Date and Initials) YES / NO Standard Environmental Reference (SER), Environmental Handbook, Volume I, Chapter 8, Paleontology, the Counties of Riverside and Orange, and the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP), and will be specifically tailored to the resources and sedimentary formations in the disturbance limits. The part of the PMP that covers excavation will include but not be limited to: Prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Designated Principal Paleontologist or his/her representative will attend a meeting with the design/build contractor to explain the likelihood for encountering paleontological resources during construction, what resources may be discovered, and the methods that will be employed if anything is discovered. RCTC's Principal Paleontologist will conduct a preconstruction field survey in areas identified as having high paleontological sensitivity after vegetation and any Principal Paleontologist, Joe Stewart, was retained. His contact information is: pavement are removed, followed by salvage of any observed surface paleontological resources prior to the beginning of additional ground -disturbing activities. The survey will be conducted by the Principal Paleontologist or their representative who is qualified to identify vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant fossils. URS Corporation 999 Town and Country Road Orange, CA 92868 (626) 710-7817 Fossil Discovery #1 During ground disturbance, grading, and excavation, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build Area 3, USACE Lic 3 cut slope - fossil discovery and recovery. August 24 through September 6, 2014. 100% PAL-1 contractor to retain a Principal Paleontologist. The Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to Discovery comprised three 10/3/17; AT; complete for X (cont'd) Principal Paleontologist will provide a Paleontological Monitor who is qualified to recognize and professionally collect vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant fossils. The qualified Paleontological Monitor will initially be present on site on a full-time basis whenever these types of construction activities occur in sediments that have a high paleontological sensitivity rating and also on a spot- check basis in sediments that have a low sensitivity rating. Monitoring may be reduced to a part-time basis if no resources are being discovered in sediments with a high sensitivity rating. Any reduction or modification in scheduling of monitoring will be determined by the Principal Paleontologist and RCTC's Resident Engineer. construction vertebrae, three ribs, and small portion of skull of a bison. Material exposed and covered with plaster cast and removed from the cut slope. Specimens were retrieved from RCTC in April 2017 by Principal Paleontologist for preparation. The Paleontological Mitigation Report: SR-91 CIP, Section 3 discusses how the requirements contained in this measure were met. 10/17/17 AT Initial Phase Page 9-20 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The qualified Paleontological Monitor will inspect fresh cuts and/or spoils piles to recover paleontological resources. That monitor will be empowered to temporarily divert construction equipment away from the immediate area of the discovery. The monitor will be equipped to rapidly stabilize and remove fossils to avoid prolonged delays to construction schedules. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Paleontological Mitigation Report was submitted to Caltrans 10/4/17. Concurrence was received on 10/17/17 (from both Marie Petry and Bahram Karimi) Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO PAL-1 (cont'd) If large mammal fossils or large concentrations of fossils are encountered, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to make heavy equipment available to assist in the removal and collection of large materials. Localized concentrations of small (or micro-) vertebrates may be found in all native sediments. Therefore, the qualified Paleontological Monitor will occasionally spot- screen native sediments through one -eighth- to one- twentieth -inch mesh screens to determine whether microfossils are present. If microfossils are encountered, a standard sediment sample (up to 3 cubic yards or 6,000 pounds) will be collected and processed through one -twentieth -inch mesh screens to recover additional fossils. Processing of large bulk samples is best accomplished at a designated location within the project limits that will be accessible throughout the duration of construction but will also be away from any cut or fill areas or active construction areas. Processing is usually completed concurrently with construction and with the intent to have all processing completed before, or just after, project completion. A small corner of a staging or equipment parking area is an ideal location for this activity. If water is not available, the location should be accessible for a water truck to occasionally fill containers with water. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Equipment and resources were made available to assist in the removal of resources. Area 3, USACE Lic 3 cut slope - fossil discovery and recovery. August 24 through September 6, 2014. Discovery comprised three vertebrae, three ribs, and small portion of skull of a bison. Material exposed and covered with plaster cast and removed from the cut slope. The Paleontological Mitigation Report: SR-91 CIP, Section 6 discusses how the requirements contained in this measure were met. Paleontological Mitigation Report was submitted to Caltrans 10/4/17. Concurrence was received on 10/17/17 (from both Marie Petry and Bahram Karimi) 10/3/17; 10/17/17 AT; AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X PAL-1 5th sub -point RCTC's Project Engineer will require the Principal Paleontologist or their representative to prepare any recovered specimens to the point of identification and permanent preservation. This includes sorting any washed mass samples to recover small invertebrate and vertebrate fossils, the removal of surplus sediment from around larger specimens to reduce the volume of storage for the repository and storage cost, and the addition of approved chemical hardeners/stabilizers to fragile specimens. This is best accomplished at a Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction Paleontologist to prepare specimen prior to curation in museum - Western Science Center in Hemet, CA. Specimens were obtained from RCTC in April 2017 by Principal Paleontologist for preparation. Preparation was completed in September of 2017 and processing 10/4/17; 10/17/17 AT; AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-21 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures designated laboratory with access to fossil preparation tools, magnifying equipment, storage boxes and vials, and chemical hardeners. Processing of fossils through the lab is best accomplished concurrently with construction, especially if numerous fossils are being collected. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure of the deed of gift began in October of 2017. Paleontological Mitigation Report was submitted to Caltrans 10/4/17. Concurrence was received on 10/17/17 (from both Marie Petry and Bahram Karimi) Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO P 1 6t sub-pointpp Specimens will be identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible and curated into an institutional repository with retrievable storage. Repository institutions usually charge a one-time fee based on volume, so removing surplus sediment is important. The repository institution may be a local museum or university that has a curator who can retrieve the specimens on request. RCTC's Project Manager and the California Department of Transportation (Department) will require that a draft curation agreement be in place between the Principal Paleontologist and an approved curation facility prior to the initiation of paleontological monitoring and mitigation activities for the project. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with the provisions of the PMP during all ground disturbance, grading,o appropriate Hation t on with activities. This Designated include p g d Principal Paleontologist and the provision of qualified paleontological monitors consistent with the provisions of the PMP. After the completion of all ground disturbance and grading, RCTC's Project Manager will require the design/build contractor to have the design/build contractor's Designated Principal Paleontologist to prepare a Final Paleontological Mitigation Report (PMR) that summarizes the project area investigated, the field and laboratory methods used, the stratigraphic units inspected, the types of fossils recovered, and the scientific significance of the curated collection. RCTC's Project Manager will retain a copy of the report for the RCTC project files and will provide a copy of the report to the Department. Final EIR/EIS ign RCTC/Design conDstrucgtion Specimens were obtained from RCTC in April 2017 by Principal Paleontologist for preparation. Curation Agreement with the Hemet Western Science Center and Deed of Gift were signed by Caltrans (Bahram Karimi) on July 17, 2017. Preparation was completed in September of 2017 and processing of the deed of gift began in October of 2017. Paleontological Mitigation Report was submitted to Caltrans 10/4/17. Concurrence was received on 10/17/17 (from both Marie Petry and Bahram Karimi) 10/17/17 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-1 First Sub -point A Phase I ESA was conducted for the Mobil No. 18-FLM site (616 Paseo Grande Street, Corona, California), and a Phase I ESA and Phase II Site Investigation were Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance Additional investigation completed. The Mobile No. 18-FLM site memo revised on November 2014 is in 9/13/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-22 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures conducted for the Honda Cars of Corona site (231 South Lincoln Avenue, Corona, California) as part of the DSI, in accordance with ASTM Standard E 1527-05. The DSI identified Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) associated with on -site releases. Based on the results of the DSI, the following measures will be implemented for these two sites of potential environmental concern: Honda Cars of Corona Site: During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to consult with regulators, confirm that the final confirmation sampling has been completed at the site, and that contaminant investigation for the site has received regulatory site closure. In addition, prior to the completion of final design, the RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design build/build contractor to properly abandon all monitoring wells and vapor extraction wells on the site in accordance with regulatory requirements. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure compliance with measure HW-1. Honda Cars of Corona: approved July 2014. Mobil Site: approved December 2014. Recommendations provided on managing of hazardous waste soil. Attachments 3 & 6 of Final Draft 06.17.14 document coordination with agencies and closure/well- abondenment in accordance with regulatory requirements. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO HW-1 Second Sub -point Mobil No. 18-FLM Site: During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct further investigation on contaminants in soils on site after a work plan is prepared and additional information is available. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design; prior to disturbance Additional investigation completed. Mobil Site: approved December 2014. Recommendations provided on managing of hazardous waste soil. 2/3/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-2 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct site investigations for any new release sites that are within the project right-of- way. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct these site investigations in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and in accordance with ASTM Standard E 1527-05. If contaminants are determined to be present during the site investigation, RCTC's Resident Engineer may require the design/build contractor to prepare one or more of the following specialized reports: Remedial Actions Options Report, Sensitive Receptor Survey, Human Health/Ecological Risk Assessment, and/or Quarterly Monitoring Report. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance 11/1/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-3 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct an aerially deposited lead (ADL) study for soil if excavation will exceed 3 feet (ft) below ground surface (bgs) in unpaved locations Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance At the June 2014 Environmental Task Force it was identified that Pechanga lands were outside of the project area. No monitoring is necessary. 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-23 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures adjacent to the State right-of-way between Gypsum Canyon Road and Magnolia Avenue, or 5 ft bgs in unpaved locations in areas where there would be fiber- optic signage along eastbound State Route 91 (SR-91) starting east of the Weir Canyon Road undercrossing and extending east of the Gypsum Canyon Road undercrossing. During construction, if soils within the project disturbance limits along SR-91 are removed off site, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to treat the soils as State hazardous waste and to properly dispose of those soils at an appropriate State - certified landfill facility. In addition, during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to test all soils imported on site as fill. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to use only clean soils as imported fill on site. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Information to DTSC, including the excavation and transportation plan, has been forwarded. E-mail correspondence dated 2/23/2018 (91 CIP - ADL ECR) reconfirms measure compliance has been completed. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO HW-4 1. Predemolition asbestos and/or LBP surveys were conducted for 21 road structures that will be renovated or demolished during project construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Surveys were completed as part of the Final environmental documents. Additional hazards testing was conducted for Temescal Wash Bridge and East 6th Street Undercrossing. Leighton Report completed. 2/23/2017 AT ° 100 /o complete for Initial Phase X HW-4 2. Based on the results of the ACM surveys of the 21 freeway structures, the SR-91/State Route 71 (SR-71) Separation (Bridge No. 56-0587), East SR-91/North SR- 71 Connector Separation (Bridge No. 56-0635), Prado Overhead (Bridge No. 56-0637), West Grand Boulevard Undercrossing (UC) (Bridge No. 56-0445 L/R), El Cerrito Road UC (Bridge No. 56-0558 L/R), and Serfas Club Drive UC (Bridge No. 56-0368 L/R) contain ACMs. Therefore, prior to disturbance associated with renovation or demolition of these bridges, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have a licensed asbestos contractor properly remove and dispose of asbestos -containing railing brace pads from these structures. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Asbestos Abatement Plan completed. 1403 Permit (SCAQMD) obtained August 2014. ACM abatement measures implemented in the field during demolition of listed bridges. Notification to SCAQMD, prior to construction, was provided. Logs attached to AW Memorandum which was transmitted 1/31/18. Documentation was reviewed during 2/5/2018 ECR meeting and it was determined compliance with this measure is complete. 2/5/2017 JLS 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-4 3. Based on the results of the LBP surveys of the 21 freeway structures, the Main Street UC (Bridge No. 56- 0448 L/R), McKinley Street UC (Bridge No. 56-0365), Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction The Leighton Report informs the design/build contractor of the presence of LBPs in structures. 9/13/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-24 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures and Buchanan Street Overcrossing (Bridge No. 56-0368) contain LBPs. Therefore, prior to disturbance associated with renovation or demolition of these bridges, RCTC's Resident Engineer will inform the design/build contractor of the presence of LBPs in those structures. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to protect construction workers from exposure to lead dust when disturbing LBP during bridge renovation or demolition activities. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure The ERSI Lead Based Paint Removal - Exposure Assessment Plan and Submittal ERS10016 QA Response #201 detail how construction workers will be protected. LBP measures were implemented in the field during demolition of listed bridges. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO HW-4 4. In addition, a hazardous materials survey identified two areas with potential hazardous materials. Based on the results of the visual hazardous materials survey of the bridges, light fixture components and possible lead metal railing braces may pose an additional concern. These components include: - Light fixtures (some flush -mounted) on the undersides of many of the bridges. At a few of the bridges that cross over the freeway, there are light posts. The light bulbs in these fixtures may contain mercury. - The Temescal Wash Bridge overhead has some metal braces and wire tension cable at joint locations on the underside of the bridge. While no suspected ACMs were observed or sampled at these locations, the presence of metal washers and spacers, which may contain lead, was noted. - Soft metal railing brace pads that may be composed of lead metal were observed at the following bridges: Pierce Street UC (Bridge No. 56-0369 L/R) and Buchanan Street Overcrossing (Bridge No. 56-0368) Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Locations have been included in hazardous materials survey. Approved Specifications include measures to manage the removal of light fixtures, metal braces, and metal railing brace pads. 11/4/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-4 5. Therefore, during final design and prior to any disturbance of these facilities and materials, RCTC's Resident Engineer will inform the design/build contractor of the presence and location of the hazardous materials in the freeway structures described above. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design; prior to disturbance RCTC provided Design Builder information regarding the presence of hazardous waste in potential structures. This includes the Phase I and Phase Its that have been completed by the FED and procurement. 8/21/2015 SB 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-4 6. Prior to the disturbance of freeway structures, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have asbestos -containing railing brace pads removed and disposed of by a licensed asbestos abatement contractor. If abated, RCTC's Resident Engineer will Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Design Builder is currently implementing measures for management of ACM during demolition of bridges. 9/30/2016 AT ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-25 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures require the design/build contractor to remove non -friable ACMs in accordance with Category II asbestos abatement procedures as defined in Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Fed - OSHA) 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1926.1101. However, if mechanical means are utilized for abatement of ACMs, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to convert these non - friable materials into a friable state during removal activities and manage these materials under Class I asbestos abatement procedures. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO HW-4 7. Prior to disturbance of freeway structures, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly test any areas that have not been previously tested, and remove and dispose of any materials from these structures that exceed California Health and Safety Code criteria for hazardous waste at an appropriate State -certified landfill facility. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction All proposed bridges have been tested for potential hazardous wastes and measures are currently being implemented for management of these wastes. 2/23/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-4 8. During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, demolition, or renovation activities, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct predemolition asbestos, LBP, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), and/or mercury surveys of any buildings that will be renovated or demolished. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design; prior to disturbance RCTC has completed the Phase I and II for all buildings on acquired properties. 1/6/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-4 9. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly remove and dispose of any materials from these structures that exceed California Health and Safety Code criteria for hazardous waste at an appropriate State -certified landfill facility. Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction RCTC's right of way contractor is conducting management and disposal of all ACM and LBP on demolished projects. 1/6/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-5, Part 1 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct inspections for potential PCBs in utility pole -mounted transformers that will be relocated or removed as part of the project Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to construction Standard specifications include measures for PCBs. Design Builder is completing inspections of pole mounted transformers for proper handling. 11/4/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-5, Part 2 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to consider leaking transformers a PCB hazard unless tested and confirmed otherwise, and to handle them accordingly. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Standard specifications include management of PCBs found within the project site. According to PCM Project Engineer, no leaking transformers have been identified. 11/4/2016 AT ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-26 ECR ID HW-6 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to test, remove, and dispose of any yellow traffic striping and pavement marking materials in accordance with the California Department of Transportation (Department) Construction Manual, Chapter 7, Section 106. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/Phase During construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Calstripe submitted lead based striping paint removal work and safety plans. Plans were approved. Striping removal in progress during July. Testing determined grindings comprised lead above threshold. Material will be treated as hazardous waste. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) 12/1/2016 AT Remarks 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES X for Phase / NO HW-7 During final design and prior to any dewatering activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct additional coordination with the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health when groundwater dewatering will occur in the vicinity of contaminated soils or contaminated groundwater sites. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design Currently, no dewatering activities have been required. Groundwater discharge is regulated by RWQCB. No ground water discharge is currently planned. 9/9/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-8 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance activities, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to sample soil adjacent to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad tracks that will be disturbed during construction for the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons, metals, solvents, and other potential contaminants (e.g., polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons [PNAs], kerosene, ACMs, chlorinated hydrocarbons, pesticides, and herbicides). That testing will determine whether the soils require special handling and disposal during construction. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly dispose of all soils exceeding the criteria for State or federal hazardous waste at an appropriate State -certified landfill facility. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance RCTC conducted BNSF ROW soil testing for specified hazardous materials (May, 2014). AWJV submitted evaluation technical memo of BNSF ROW soil testing (July 21, 2014). RCTC -approved as noted, August 8, 2014. 1/25/17; 12/4/17 AT; AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-g Prior to the start of construction, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to prepare a site -specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) by a certified industrial hygienist. The HASP will be based on evaluation of proposed construction activities, the potential hazards identified in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Phase II testing, and any future assessments prepared for the project. The HASP will outline specific procedures for encountering expected and unexpected contaminants. It will include safe work practices, contaminant monitoring, the need for personal protective equipment, emergency response procedures, and safety training requirements to protect construction workers and third parties working on site. The HASP will Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Health and Safety Plan: Completed and approved on October 17, 2013. Implementing plan is ongoing. 12/1/2016 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-27 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures be in compliance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910 and 1926 and all other applicable federal, State, and local regulations and requirements. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the requirements in the HASP. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO HW-10 Prior to the start of construction, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to prepare a soils and groundwater Contaminant Management Plan (CMP). The CMP will include procedures for contaminant monitoring and identification as well as temporary storage, handling, treatment, and disposal of hazardous waste and materials in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and requirements. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the soils and groundwater CMP. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Section 5 Health and Safety Plan, of the Project Management Plan (PMP), details procedures for hazardous material handling (start on page 154). Hazardous waste water is discussed on page 231. 10/9/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-11 Prior to the start of construction, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to prepare a Construction Contingency Plan (CCP) in accordance with the Department's Unknown Hazards Procedures for Construction. The CCP will include provisions for emergency response in the event that unidentified underground storage tanks (USTs), hazardous materials, petroleum hydrocarbons, or hazardous or solid wastes are discovered during construction activities. The CCP will address UST decommissioning, field screening, contaminant materials testing methods, mitigation and contaminant management requirements, and health and safety requirements for construction workers. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the CCP during all construction activities. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to cease work immediately if an unexpected release of hazardous substances is found in reportable quantities. If an unexpected release of hazardous substances is found in reportable quantities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to notify the National Response Center by calling 1-800-424-8802. RCTC's Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction; during construction Project management plan includes elements of the Construction Contingency Plan. The Project Management Plan was approved September 2013. Being implemented in construction. 1/6/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-28 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to perform cleanup of unexpected releases under the appropriate federal, State, or local agency oversight. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO HW-12 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to notify Underground Service Alert (USA) at least 2 days prior to excavation by calling 811 to require that all utility owners within the project disturbance limits identify the locations of underground transmission lines and facilities. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Design Builder is contacting underground service alert prior to ground disturbance. 12/1/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-13 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to submit the fees to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) at least 10 days prior to proceeding with any demolition or renovation of a structure (refer to SCAQMD Rule 1403). RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to adhere to the requirements of SCAQMD Rule 1403 during renovation and demolition activities. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction AWJV submitted notification of demolition and fee to SCAQMD on August 27, 2014. Rule 1403 form was attached to AW Memorandum which was transmitted 1/31/18. Documentation was reviewed during 1/29/2018 ECR meeting and it was determined compliance with this measure is complete with receipt of the AW memorandum and attachment. 1/31/2018 JLS 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-14 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to test all wooden utility poles, railroad ties, and other treated wood waste material that will be removed and disposed of as part of the project are tested for wood treatments/preservatives. RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to test soils surrounding railroad ties for wood treatments/preservatives. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly dispose of all treated wood waste as required in Alternative Management Standards for Wood Treated Waste in Section 67386.6(a)(2)(B)(3) of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). Alternative Management Standards for Wood Treated Waste. In addition, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to require any personnel who come in contact with treated wood waste or contaminated soils to follow all applicable requirements under Section 67386.6(a)(2)(B)(3) of the CCR and to be trained in the proper identification, Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance SSP 14-11.09 addresses Treated Waste Wood; Removal along 115 corridor completed. TWW satisfactorily hauled to an approved landfill (El Sobrante) -September 2014. All wood was assumed to be treated and handled in accordance with the CCR. AW Memorandum, with Treated Wood Waste Disposal Manifests, was transmitted 2/6/2018. This Documentation was reviewed during the 2/12/2018 ECR meeting and it was determined compliance with this measure is complete. 2/12/2018 JLS 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-29 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures disposal, and safe handling of treated wood waste and contaminated soils. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO SC-1 Development of a Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. Prior to any site preparation, grading and/or construction activities, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to develop a Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. That plan will specifically incorporate measures for controlling particulate and other emissions during construction from the following sources: California Department of Transportation (Department) Standard Specifications Sections 10 and 18 (Dust Control) Department's Standard Specifications Section 39-3.06 (Asphalt Concrete Plant Emissions) South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403, including control measures from Tables 1, 2, and 3 in that rule The plan will also include the following measures: Control of ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per the manufacturers' specifications. Control of material on all trucks hauling excavated or graded material from the site by compliance with State Vehicle Code Section 23114, with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)(2), and (e)(4) as amended, regarding the prevention of such material spilling onto public streets and roads. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Air Quality and Emissions Mitigation Plan approved September 2014. SCAQMD was notified of Large Construction under Rule 403, and SCAQMD approved notification May 2014. 8/21/2015 SB 100° /° complete for Initial Phase X SC-2 Implementation of the Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. During all site preparation, grading, construction, clean-up, and other activities during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with the measures in the Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. RCTC's Resident Engineer will conduct site inspections at least once a month to ensure that the design/build contractor is complying with the provisions of the Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Design Builder has quality team to ensure emissions are staying within regulated levels. 9/15/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X SC-3 Prior to any construction activities, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the grading plans and project Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Grading plans and specifications and associated schedules have been completed. All durations are shown in the approved baseline schedule. 2/2/17; 8/31/17 AT AT ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X specifications show the anticipated duration of Page 9-30 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures construction in individual construction areas along the Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO project alignment. SC-4 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Project Geologist will conduct appropriate Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance ACM studies were completed for the project as part of the Environmental document and during the right of way process. 7/10/2017 AT 100 ° /° complete for Initial Phase X testing to determine whether there are asbestos- containing materials (ACMs) present in the project disturbance limits. SC-5 If RCTC's Project Geologist determines that ACMs are present in the project disturbance limits during that final preconstruction inspection, RCTC's Resident Engineer Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction ACM abatement measures will be implemented as part of demolition activities. AW Memorandum, with Disposal Manifests from Environmental Remediation Services Inc (CA License No 964573), was transmitted 1/31/2018. This Documentation was reviewed during the 2/5/2018 ECR meeting and it was determined compliance with this measure is complete. 2/25/2018 JLS 100% complete for Initial Phase X will require the design/build contractor to properly remove and dispose of those ACMs. N-1 Based on studies completed to date, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) intends to incorporate noise abatement in the form of reasonable and feasible barriers at 15 to 16 locations, depending on the selected alternative, ranging in height from 8 feet (ft) to 14 ft, depending on the alternative and the design variations. Calculations based on preliminary design data indicate that the barriers will reduce noise levels by 5 to 15 A -weighted decibels (dBA) for 333 to 419 homes and the Green River Golf Club, depending on the design variation. If during final design conditions have substantially changed, noise abatement at some of these locations may not be necessary. The final decision on noise abatement will be made on completion of the project design and the public involvement processes for the environmental document. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to construct the noise abatement measures included in the final design and project specifications. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Noise barriers deemed reasonable and feasible have been incorporated into the project design. Construction of all noise walls (K1-A being the last) was completed in Nov. 2017. Revalidation 4, approved 07/13/2014. Revalidation 5, approved 12/04/2014. Revalidation 7, approved 01/20/15 Revalidation 9, approved 10/27/14 Revalidation 11, approved 06/04/15 Revalidation 12, approved 09/09/16 Revalidation 14, approved 04/18/16 Revalidation 17, approved 09/01/16 1/25/17 7/10/17; 7/31/17; 11/20/17 AT AT AT AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X N-2 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to control noise from construction activity consistent with the California Department of Transportation's (Department's) Standard Specifications, Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction During July 2014, City of Corona reviewed and approved a variance to the noise ordinance to allow night time work. Monitored noise levels 2/3/17; 7/10/17; 7/31/17 AT AT AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project X Page 9-31 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Section 14-8.02, "Noise Control," and Standard Special Provisions (SSP) S5-310. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that noise levels from construction operations within the State right- of-way between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. not exceed 86 dBA at a distance of 50 ft. The noise level requirement will apply to the equipment on the job site or related to the job, including, but not limited to trucks, transit mixers, or transient equipment that may or may not be owned by the contractor. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to use an alternative warning method instead of a sound signal unless required by safety laws. In addition, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to equip all internal combustion engines with the manufacturer -recommended mufflers and not operate any internal combustion engine on the job site without the appropriate mufflers. As directed by RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor will implement appropriate additional noise mitigation measures, including changing the location of stationary construction equipment, turning off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work, and installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure adjacent to residences or as identified by complaint. ReValidation 15 - Temporary Sound Barrier at Chino Hills State Park for Green River residents. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO N-3 In accordance with the Municipal Codes of the Cities of Anaheim, Corona, Riverside, and Norco, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to limit construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding weekends and holidays. If construction is needed outside those hours or days, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to coordinate with the affected local jurisdiction. In addition to Measure N-3, Measure GE0-3 specifically addresses potential noise control in the event blasting is necessary during construction along State Route 91 (SR-91) east of Interstate 15 (I-15). Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction During July 2014, City of Corona reviewed and approved a variance to the noise ordinance to allow night time work. Monitor noise levels adjacent to residences or as identified by complaint. 1 /25/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X N-4 If noise barriers proposed for I-15 (with the exception of Noise Barrier [NB] K1-A), as part of a separate project, are not constructed within 5 years of the completion of the construction the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction 1-15 Tolled Express Lanes Final Env Document approved - will construct N-4 soundwalls. 11 /4/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-32 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures (CIP), the RCTC will initiate a separate project to construct those walls. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO N-5 1. Residences that would experience a severe traffic noise impact of 75 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) or higher would qualify for consideration of unusual and extraordinary abatement under Alternative 2f. NBs M-1, M-2, M-3, and D1-B are considered unusual and extraordinary noise abatement. 2. During the design/build phase, RCTC will contract with a qualified acoustical specialist to conduct interior noise analyses at residences projected to experience severe traffic noise impacts. Interior noise abatement for each of those homes will be evaluated on a case -by -case basis per FHWA guidance and noise protocol. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design Interior and exterior noise readings, conducted in August 2017, conclude no interior noise impact. Responses to comments on the interior noise analysis was submitted to Caltrans on 3/1/2018. 8/25/17; 3/1/20 AT JLS Overall 90% Complete; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X Compensatory Mitigation (1) Compensatory Mitigation: 1.) Compensatory mitigation for the effects to coastal sage scrub (CSS) vegetation within Riverside County will be achieved through project consistency with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Permanent effects to CSS vegetation in Orange County occupied by coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN) or within CAGN- designated critical habitat will be mitigated as described in the Biological Opinion received from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on November 30, 2011. Specifically, 16.03 acres (ac) of habitat (e.g., CSS) suitable for CAGN breeding, dispersal, and foraging will be restored in Chino Hills State Park (CHSP) (or another off -site area approved by the USFWS) during construction of the Initial Phases under Alternatives 1 and 2. This will increase the amount of conserved habitat available for CAGN in the area. Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction Compensatory Mitigation Plans for CAGN and LBV were approved in September of 2014. In September 2015, RCTC secured the Inland Empire RCD to implement the mitigation plan. In October 2015, RCTC has executed an agreement with CDPR to implement the mitigation plan within Chino Hill state Park. Currently IERCD is obtaining right of entry into Chino Hills State Park. 10/23/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Compensatory Mitigation 2 & g ( 3) 2.) Temporarily impacted coastal sage scrub (CSS) and other vegetation communities used by California gnatcatcher (CAGN) for dispersal and foraging will be restored with in -kind or better vegetation during and after construction as the construction in each disturbed area is completed e. p ( g., after each phase of construction). Measures TE-1 through TE-17, provided later in the Environmental Commitments Record (ECR), were developed from the Biological Opinion. 3.) The plant palette used for restored areas in the project limits and CHSP (or other areas approved by the Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design guilder During construction 2) AWJV to submit for RCTC and Caltrans review the week of 8/1/16. Expected submittal date to USFWS and CDFW is 8/15/16. Anticipated restoration will start 10/1/16. 3) The designated biologist (John Parent) approved the seed mix for hydroseed on the disturbed slopes between Green River Road and Bridge 6/7. The hydroseed is 2/5/18; 2/12/18 JLS JLS 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-33 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures USFWS) will be approved by the District Biologist at each location. The District Biologist may consult with local responsible agencies (e.g., local fire agencies) regarding the plant palettes if the District Biologist determines that such consultation would be appropriate. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure currently being used on these areas as erosion control until the restoration plan will be implemented. 3. (AT) Note Caltrans Biologist approval date in this field. After both resource agency and Caltrans review, Caltrans accepted DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on Fwd: DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on 2/12/2018, constituting closure of this measure. Closure of this measure was reconfirmed during the 2/12/2018 ECR Meeting. During this meeting, it was determined that additional comment from CDFW's Jeff Brandt (unrelated to this measure) will be addressed in the Bat Management Plan. USFWS previously concurred on 2/5 that information regarding bats is not required as part of the restoration plan. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO Compensatory Mitigation (4) 4. Compensatory mitigation for riparian communities in both counties will be required for United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Section 404 and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Section 1600 permitting. Typically, riparian habitat subject to Corps and CDFG jurisdiction is mitigated at a minimum mitigation -to -effect ratio of 2:1 for permanent effects and 1:1 for temporary effects, which is consistent with Corps and CDFG policies for no net loss of riparian/riverine habitat (e.g., wetlands) standards. Mitigation for permanent effects will be conducted in advance during the Initial Phases in the form of habitat restoration and/or enhancement in on- or off -site areas where similar riparian habitat exists. Temporary effects to riparian communities will be mitigated at a minimum mitigation ratio of 1:1 to be replaced on site in kind after the temporary impact has occurred. Final details for Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder During construction For permanent impacts, CDFW 1602 requires 3.0 acres of rehabilitation credits and the USACE 404 permit requires 1.06 acres of compensatory mitigation from a mitigation bank. Permanent impacts: RCRCD in lieu fee agreement completed in September 2014. Temporary impacts: on -going due to current construction. A restoration plan will be submitted to Caltrans and RCTC the week of 8/1/16. After both resource agency and Caltrans review, Caltrans accepted DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher 7/31 /17; 2/12/18; 2/23/18 AT JLS JLS Overall 90% Complete; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-34 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures compensatory mitigation will be coordinated and environmental clearance will be obtained (if necessary) through coordination among the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), the California Department of Transportation (Department), the resource agencies, and third -party landowners. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on Fwd: DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on 2/12/2018, constituting closure of this measure. Closure of this measure was reconfirmed during the 2/12/2018 ECR Meeting. During this meeting, it was determined that additional comment from CDFW's Jeff Brandt (unrelated to this measure) will be addressed in the Bat Management Plan. USFWS previously concurred on 2/5 that information regarding bats is not required as part of the restoration plan. This measure is also addressed in the 1602 permit amendment submitted on 2/23/2018. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO Compensatory Mitigation (5) 5. Prior to beginning construction, a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) will be developed in coordination with the Corps, CDFG, and USFWS that ensures no net loss of riparian habitat value or acreage. Final details for compensatory mitigation will be evaluated through coordination among the Department, RCTC, and the resource agencies. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Prior to construction Compensatory Mitigation Plan (HMMP) approved September 2014. August 2015 CAGN survey memo approved. 2/23/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Item 6 under Compensatory Mitigation 6. The HMMP will comply with all terms and conditions set forth in the permits and opinions issued by the resource agencies for the project and will include, at a minimum, the following provisions: Permanent impacts to riparian/riverine areas will be replaced on or off site at a minimum ratio of 3:1 with in -kind habitat. Permanent effects to native habitat will be replaced on or off site at a minimum 2:1 ratio with in -kind habitat. Temporary effects to native vegetation will be replaced at a minimum 1:1 ratio with in -kind habitat restored in place within the project area. If off -site restoration is conducted, it will be done within the same watershed as the project. The HMMP will identify a success criterion of at least 80 percent cover of native riparian vegetation or composition structure similar to existing adjacent high - Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction; after construction Compensatory Mitigation Plan (HMMP) approved September 2014. Agreement with Inland Empire RCD executed October 2015; first annual report to be submitted in March 2017. Oak trees are being planted within Chino Hills State Park under the IERCD agreement to manage the restoration effort. 2/23/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-35 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures quality riparian vegetation. Further criteria specified in the HMMP will include an establishment period for the replacement habitat, regular trash removal, and regular maintenance and monitoring activities to ensure the success of the mitigation plan. After construction, annual summary reports of biological monitoring will be provided to the Corps, CDFG, and USFWS documenting the monitoring effort. The duration of the monitoring and reporting will be established by resource agency permit conditions. Compensatory mitigation for effects to oak trees (excluding California scrub oaks) with trunk sizes above 8 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) will involve replacement at a mitigation -to -effect ratio of 3:1. Heritage oaks (oaks with a greater than 36-inch dbh) will be replaced at a mitigation -to -effect ratio of 10:1, if feasible. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO If the replacement trees cannot be planted in the immediate vicinity of where the previous trees were located, they may be planted elsewhere in the project area, subject to approval by the Department Landscape Item 6 under Architect and the affected local jurisdiction, if any. All compensatory mitigation for the entire project, both the 100% Compensatory Initial Phases and Ultimate Projects, will be provided in Final EIR/EIS RCTC During RCRCD agreement includes tree 3/13/17; AT complete for X Mitigation the Initial Phases of the SR-91 CIP Build Alternatives. construction plantings within Temescal Wash. 5/18/17 AT Initial Phase (cont'd) RCTC will provide appropriate funds, to be maintained in a non -wasting endowment, to Chino Hills State Park to provide for the long-term maintenance and management of the restored areas within the park to support gnatcatcher habitat in perpetuity. NC-1 1. During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to delineate all environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) within the project footprint and the immediately surrounding areas in the project specifications. ESAs include CSS, chaparral, and riparian/riverine vegetation; the protected zone of any oak tree (5 feet [ft]) outside the dripline or 15 ft from the trunk of the tree, whichever is greater) or oak habitat; and designated critical habitat Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design/ construction ESA fencing plan approved July 2014. ESA fencing installed in areas of active work as of August 2014. Yellow wire replaced orange snow fence in select areas. Installation and maintenance status 1/6/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete; however, 100% complete for X (with constituent elements). 2. In addition, all restoration and mitigation areas at Coal Canyon adjacent to the project footprint will be designated ESAs on the project plans. (including site photos) of ESA fencing can be found in accompanying locations. Initial Phase 3. Prior to clearing or construction, RCTC's Resident Page 9-36 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Engineer will require the design/build contractor to install highly visible barriers (such as orange construction fencing) around all designated ESAs. No grading or fill activity of any type will be permitted within the ESAs. In addition, no construction activities, materials, or equipment will be allowed within the ESAs. All construction equipment will be operated in a manner so as to prevent accidental damage to nearby preserved areas. No structure of any kind, or incidental storage of equipment or supplies, will be allowed within the ESAs. Silt fence barriers will be installed at the ESA boundaries to prevent accidental deposition of fill material in areas where vegetation is adjacent to planned grading activities. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO NC-2 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have a Designated Qualified Biologist under contract. The Designated Qualified Biologist will monitor construction in the vicinity of the ESAs for the duration of construction to flush any wildlife species present prior to construction and to ensure that all vegetation removal, best management practices (BMPs), ESAs, and all avoidance and minimization measures are properly implemented. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Qualified biologists) selected. All resumes on file. 9/9/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X NC-3 To avoid effects to nesting birds, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct any native or exotic vegetation removal or tree trimming activities outside of the nesting bird season (i.e., February 15—September 15). In the event that vegetation clearing is necessary during the nesting season, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have the Designated Qualified Biologist conduct a preconstruction survey within 300 ft of construction areas no more than 7 days prior to construction to identify the locations of nests. Should nesting birds be found, an exclusionary buffer of 300 ft will be established by the Designated Biologist around each nest site. This buffer will be clearly marked in the field by construction personnel under guidance of the design/build contractor's Designated Qualified Biologist, and construction or clearing will not be conducted within this zone until the Designated Qualified Biologist determines that the young have fledged or the nest is no longer active. In the event that construction must occur Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction; during construction Bird Biologists (Miller, URS; Thompson, URS; Parent, Aecom) were approved on 11/05/13. Surveys were conducted as necessary during August -Nesting season was completed as of August 31 due to seasonal conditions. Surveys were continued in 2015 from February to September and monitoring reports were regularly submitted to RCTC. As of May 2015, monitoring reports are submitted on a weekly basis. 1/6/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-37 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Responsible for Development and/or Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial for Phase within the 300 ft buffer, the Designated Biologist will take steps to ensure that construction activities do not disturb or disrupt nesting activities. If the Designated Biologist determines that construction activities are disturbing or disrupting nesting activities, the Designated Biologist will notify the Resident Engineer, who has the authority to halt construction to reduce the noise and/or disturbance to the nests. Responses may include, but are not limited to, turning off vehicle engines and other equipment whenever possible to reduce noise, installing a protective noise barrier between the nest and the construction activities, and/or working in other areas until the young have fledged. Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Implementation of Measure (Date and Initials) YES / NO When work is conducted during the fire season (as identified by the Orange County Fire Authority [OCFA], Riverside County Fire Department [RCFD], City of Norco Fire Department, and/or the City of Corona Fire Department) adjacent to any vegetated open space, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that appropriate firefighting equipment (e.g., extinguishers, shovels, water tankers) is available on site during all phases of project construction to help minimize the potential for human -caused wildfires. Shields, protective mats, and/or other fire - preventive methods will be used during grinding, welding, and other spark -inducing activities. Personnel trained in fire hazards, preventive actions, and responses to fires will advise contractors regarding fire Safety Plan covers all potential hazards and measures to be 100% NC-4 risk from all construction -related activities. If a responsible fire agency (OCFA, RCFD, City of Norco Fire Department, or City of Corona Fire Department) requires the RCTC to clear defensible spaces during construction, the RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor, and the design/build contractor's Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction implemented during fire season. Design Builder implementing these measures near natural habitat areas (Bridge 2). 6/2/2017 AT complete for Initial Phase X Designated Qualified Biologist will coordinate with the USFWS prior to this clearing effort. In the event there are resources in the areas identified for defensible clearing, RCTC's Resident Engineer and the Designated Qualified Biologist will coordinate with any applicable permitting agencies regarding possible effects to those resources prior to approving the defensible clearing of any areas by the contractor. During all Red Flag Warning periods as issued by the National Weather Service, the design/build contractor will Page 9-38 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures not be allowed to operate mechanized equipment or equipment that could throw off sparks or potentially start fires in any areas of natural open space in CHSP or other areas. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO NC-5 During final design, the Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify developed or nonsensitive upland habitat areas appropriate for use during construction for equipment maintenance, staging, dispensing of fuel and oil, or any other such activities and will delineate and identify those areas on the project specifications. The Designated Qualified Biologist will specifically identify developed or nonsensitive upland habitat areas to prevent any spill runoff on those sites from entering waters of the United States. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that all equipment maintenance, staging, dispensing of fuel and oil, or any other such activities occur in developed or designated nonsensitive upland habitat areas designated in the project specifications for those uses. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; during construction ESA exhibit was prepared in August 2013 and is being implemented in the field. Exhibit shows where staging and maintenance areas can be placed. 2/23/17; 5/18/17 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X NC-6 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify the locations of all existing wildlife fencing and will delineate and identify those areas on the project specifications. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to install new fencing prior to the removal of any existing wildlife fencing to protect against wildlife -vehicle incidents. The new fencing must be the same or greater height than the previous wildlife fence. The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that the fencing is maintained and functional throughout the project construction. The Department will ensure that the fencing is maintained and functional throughout the life of the project to prevent wildlife -vehicle incidents. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to and during construction Wildlife fencing as shown in project specifications have been and will continue to be installed in order to delineate and identify environmentally sensitive areas in construction areas. Design team is coordinating with Designated Qualified Biologist. ESA exhibit was prepared in August 2013 and is being implemented in the field. Wildlife corridor plan was reviewed and approved in October 2014. 1/6/2017 AT o Overall 95 /o Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X NC-7 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify the habitat adjacent to Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash that is anticipated to be disturbed by construction activities and will delineate those areas on the project Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; during construction Habitat adjacent to Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash have been identified on project specifications. Restoration for impacts to these areas is in -progress. Include 2/5/18; 2/12/18 JLS JLS o 100 /o complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-39 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures specifications. As detailed in the project specifications, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to restore habitat adjacent to Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash that was disturbed during construction as construction in the affected areas is completed. That restoration will be provided on a 1:1 ratio, using native vegetation as determined by RCTC and the Department in coordination with the resource agencies. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure discussion regarding monitoring at B Canyon, punch through pipe (2016), monitor present After both resource agency and Caltrans review, Caltrans accepted DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on Fwd: DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on 2/12/2018, constituting closure of this measure. Closure of this measure was reconfirmed during the 2/12/2018 ECR Meeting. During this meeting, it was determined that additional comment from CDFW's Jeff Brandt (unrelated to this measure) will be addressed in the Bat Management Plan. USFWS previously concurred on 2/5 that information regarding bats is not required as part of the restoration plan. During the 2/5 meeting Caltrans provided concurrence that habitat adjacent to Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash appeared to be restored. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO NC-8 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to delineate all wildlife corridors within the project footprint and the immediately surrounding areas as Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) in the project specifications. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that equipment maintenance, lighting, and staging are limited to designated areas away from wildlife corridor entrances. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to and during construction Wildlife corridors within the project footprint have been identified and delineated in project specifications. Equipment maintenance, lighting, and staging limitations are being implemented. After both resource agency and Caltrans review, Caltrans accepted DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on Fwd: DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher 9/9/16; 7/31/17; 2/5/18; 2/12/18; 2/23/18 AT AT JLS JLS JLS Overall 90% complete; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-40 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on 2/12/2018, constituting closure of this measure. Closure of this measure was reconfirmed during the 2/12/2018 ECR Meeting. During this meeting, it was determined that additional comment from CDFW's Jeff Brandt (unrelated to this measure) will be addressed in the Bat Management Plan. USFWS previously concurred on 2/5 that information regarding bats is not required as part of the restoration plan. This measure is also addressed in the 1602 permit amendment submitted on 2/23/2018. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO NC-9 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will develop design and construction management measures to direct temporary construction noise and nighttime construction lighting and permanent facility lighting away from the wildlife corridors, bridges (structures potentially occupied by bats), biologically sensitive areas, Western Riverside County MSHCP Conservation Areas, vegetated drainages, CSS in CAGN-designated critical habitat with long-term conservation value for covered species. Those design measures will be approved by Department District 8 Biology/Environmental prior to the completion of final design. If construction work must be done at night, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly implement the measures developed during final design to direct noise and direct lighting away from the wildlife corridors, bridges, and biologically sensitive areas during those nighttime construction activities. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design; prior to construction Wildlife Crossing Lighting and Noise Plan approved by RCTC and submitted to CDFW for review and approval. CDFW approved in October 2014 9/9/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X NC-10 Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to keep the wildlife corridors clear of all equipment or structures that could potentially serve as barriers to wildlife passage. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to and during construction Design Builder actively ensuring that wildlife corridors are kept clear of equipment and falsework. 9/9/16/16 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-41 ECR ID NC-11 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the existing culvert structures that will be extended or modified by the project are designed so that they are at least as compatible with wildlife usage as the existing culvert structures. Those culverts will be shown on the project specifications. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly implement these compatible culvert designs during construction. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/Phase Final design Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Wildlife Noise and Lighting Plan included description of design characteristics to document compliance. Plan approved by RCTC and submitted to CDFW for review and approval. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) 8/25/2017 AT Remarks 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES X for Phase / NO NC-12 Within Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to limit the hours of construction within 1,000 ft of the centerline of each of these crossings to daylight hours (7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.) to ensure continued use of these wildlife corridors during construction, with the exception of limited periods when evening or night work is required for safety or operations reasons. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Hours of construction near wildlife crossings have been and will continue to be consistent with commitment NC-12. URS completed both day and night project monitoring to verify compliance. 9/9/2016 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X NC-13 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the design and construction process for all structures required for bridge and/or culvert work within Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash, will not block the main underpass at these locations during construction. RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the design of the scaffolding and false work is restricted to the sides of the underpass and limits of the existing exclusionary chain -link fence to maintain the existing width of the wildlife corridor during construction activities. During construction within Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that all structures required for bridgework are installed and constructed consistent with the final design specifically to avoid blocking the main underpass during construction and to restrict all scaffolding and false work to the sides of the underpass and limits of the existing exclusionary chain -link fence to maintain the existing width of the wildlife corridor during construction activities. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; during construction Design of scaffolding and falsework restricts construction in the areas described in NC-13 to minimize impacts to the associated wildlife corridors. Construction in within Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash is being completed in compliance with NC-13. Measures to minimize impacts to wildlife corridors are currently being implemented in construction. Include discussion of Caltrans planting at Coal Canyon, John Novack/D12/Chuck Baker coordination. 9/9/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X NC-14 Minimal equipment staging area is available at the eastbound Coal Canyon off -ramp along the sides of the paved road and will be used for the staging of equipment for Coal Canyon work only. During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the available area for Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; during construction A Wildlife Crossing Noise and Lighting Plan was approved by RCTC in July 2014 and submitted to CDFW to address construction activities that are required to be 6/2/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-42 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures construction staging at the eastbound Coal Canyon off- ramp is delineated on the project specifications. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to minimize the use of this area during construction and, where possible, to avoid the area from February 15 to September 1. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that vehicles staged in this area are equipped with security lights. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure completed during night time hours. Project Biologist conducted monitoring for night work. The eastbound Coal Canyon off - ramp area was not used for staging (confirmed by Construction Engineer Salim Khalil on 6/2/17). Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO NC-15 During construction within Coal Canyon, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to keep the Coal Canyon on- and off -ramps open at all times for emergency and police personnel. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that use of the emergency access road as a turnaround or shortcut for any construction or non- emergency traffic is prohibited. That road will only be used during bridge construction and general road construction at Coal Canyon. RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to ensure that, in general, no hauling is allowed at night through underpasses and freeway off -ramps. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Emergency access via Coal Canyon is being maintained as described in NC-15. AWJV has minimally used the road during construction utilities and other features of the project. Project biologist has conducted monitoring throughout construction of the project to ensure compliance. 5/12/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X NC-16 During construction in Coal Canyon, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to close Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Currently being implemented during construction; RCTC to ensure that gates are closed after every construction day. 1/2/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X the gates at Coal Canyon at the end of each construction day. The locations of those gates will be shown on the project specifications. NC-17 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify existing and proposed conservation areas within the project footprint or in the immediately surrounding areas and will designate those areas on the project specifications. To reduce impacts where the project interfaces with existing or proposed conservation areas prior to and during construction, RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that the project complies with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines in Section 6.1.4 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP. The project Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design Pending approval of Revalidation 23 to close measure. 1/6/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-43 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures specifications will include applicable guidelines from the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO NC-18 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify existing Criteria Areas within the project footprint or in the immediately surrounding areas and will designate those areas on the project specifications. To reduce impacts where the project is located within the Criteria Area, RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that the project complies with the applicable siting and design criteria and the Construction Guidelines in Section 7.5.2 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP. The project specifications will include applicable guidelines from the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design ESA exhibit was prepared in August 2013 and is being implemented in the field. Exhibit reflects where criteria areas are located. 1/6/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X NC-19 During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with guidelines from the Western Riverside County MSHCP included in the project specifications. The SR-91 CIP is a covered project. Therefore, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the SR-91 CIP complies with all Western Riverside County MSHCP Construction Guidelines and Standard BMPs prior to and during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction MSHCP construction guidelines and BMPs have been incorporated into project design and applicable project guidelines. Implementation during construction is ongoing. 9/29/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X WET-1 Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Manager will ensure that prior to any clearing or construction, a Section 404 Nationwide Permit is obtained through the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). RCTC's Resident Engineer will retain a copy of the Corps permit at the construction site and will ensure that the conditions in that permit are properly implemented prior to and during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction 404 Permit Package approved for affected delineated areas other than Oak St Channel -Approved Sept 2014. Submit 404 application package for Oak St Channel - Approved Feb 2015. Amendments for Oak St. Channel impacts approved Feb. 19. 2015 8/21/2015 SB 100 ° /° complete for Initial Phase X WET-2 RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that prior to any clearing or construction, a Streambed Alteration Agreement with California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) is obtained. RCTC's Resident Engineer will retain a copy of the CDFG agreement at the construction site and will ensure that the conditions in that agreement are properly implemented prior to and during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction The Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) for the SR-91 CIP was secured in August of 2014. Streambed Alteration Agreement: Completed and approved on 08/15/13. Revalidation 6, approved 7/11/14 ReValidation 18, approved 11/2/15 1602 Amendment 1, approved 11/3/15 8/21/2015 SB ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-44 ECR ID WET-3 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that prior to any clearing or construction, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is obtained. RCTC's Resident Engineer will retain a copy of the Section 401 certification at the construction site and will ensure that the conditions in that certification are properly implemented prior to and during construction. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/Phase Prior to construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure 401 Permit secured in May of 2014. A copy of the certification is accessible at project construction sites. Implementation of conditions associated with the permit is in- progress. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) 8/21/2015 SB Remarks 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES X for Phase / NO PS-1 As part of the SR-91 CUP Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, trees and shrubs will be planted at appropriate locations, and the species list to be used for those plantings will include Southern California black walnut and Coulter's matilija poppy. At a minimum, 30 Southern California black walnut trees will be planted. Final EIR/EIS RCTC's Project Manager Required for Initial Phase; Timing during the design/build phase The HMMP approved in September 2014, identifies oak tree plantings and that Coulter's Matilija poppy seedlings. RFC landscape package B (approved November 2014) includes highway planting of Southern California Black walnut trees within the SR 91/71 interchange area. The Cooperative Agreement with State Parks, executed 2/10/16, for mitigation restoration within Chino Hills State Park includes the planting of 50 container Matilija Poppy (pg. 58). 6/2/2017 AT ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X AS-1 During final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify all areas of potential burrowing owl (BUOW) habitat within the project footprint or in the immediately surrounding areas and will designate those areas on the project specifications. To ensure that any BUOW that may occupy the site in the future are not affected by construction activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have preconstruction BUOW surveys conducted by a Designated Qualified Biologist within 30 days prior to any phase of construction in the areas identified as potential BUOW habitat. These preconstruction surveys are also required to comply with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and the California Fish and Game Code. If any of the preconstruction surveys determine that BUOW are present, one or more of the following mitigation Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design Burrowing Owl Surveys completed in September 2013. Based on BUOW PA&ED reports, habitat indicators were present during the survey to merit preconstruction survey. Seven jurisdictional features with potentially -suitable BUOW habitat were located within the Biological Survey Area (BSA). No BUOW, or their sign, were located within the CDFW jurisdictional features or their buffer during the protocol surveys. All seven drainages contained burrows and habitat that has the potential to support BUOW, but were all impacted by human disturbance and noise and were generally limited to 1/6/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-45 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO measures may be required: (1) avoidance of active nests/burrows and surrounding buffer area during construction activities; (2) passive relocation of individual owls; (3) active relocation of individual owls; and (4) preservation of on -site habitat with long-term conservation value for the owl. The specifics of the required measures will be coordinated among the Department District Biologist, RCTC's Project Manager, RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor, the design/build contractor's Designated Qualified Biologist, and the resource agencies. RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that any BUOW measures determined to be required based on the results of the preconstruction surveys and the required coordination are properly implemented by the design/build contractor prior to and during construction in the BUOW areas identified in the surveys. Final EIR/EIS small open areas with limited foraging area necessary to support BUOW. 100% complete for Initial Phase X AS-2 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify all areas of potential bat habitat within the project footprint or in the immediately surrounding areas and will designate those areas on the project specifications. RCTC's Project Manager will require the design/build contractor to have a Designated Qualified Bat Biologist survey all potential bat habitat in June, prior to construction, to assess the potential for the presence of maternity roosts because maternity roosts are generally formed in late spring. The Designated Qualified Bat Biologist will also perform preconstruction surveys because bat roosts can change seasonally. The surveys will include a combination of structure inspection, sampling, exit counts, and acoustic surveys. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design Bat habitat within the project area has been identified on project specifications. The Designated Qualified Bat Biologist has and continues to complete bat surveys per AS-2. Bat Survey Report approved on 12/17/13. 2/2/17; 7/31 /17 AT AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X AS-3 To avoid direct mortality to bats roosting in areas subject to effects from construction activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that any structure with potential bat habitat will have temporary bat exclusion devices installed under the supervision of the Designated Qualified Bat Biologist prior to construction. The installation of the exclusion devices will be conducted during the fall (September or October) to avoid trapping flightless young inside during Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Bat exclusionary devices have been installed in structures with potential bat habitat per requirements set forth in AS-3. 8/21 /2015 SB 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-46 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures the summer months or hibernating individuals during the winter. Such exclusion efforts must be continued to keep the structures free of bats until the completion of construction. Replacement roosting habitat may also be needed to minimize effects to excluded bats. All bat exclusion techniques will be coordinated among the California Department of Transportation (Department) District 8 Biologist, the Department District 12 Biologist, RCTC's Project Manager, RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor, the design/build contractor's Designated Qualified Bat Biologist, and the resource agencies. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO AS-4 As required in Measure NC-10, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that all construction work on bridges will take place during the day to the best extent feasible. Limited evening and/or night construction may be required for safety and/or operations reasons. The RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to include construction management measures to direct lighting and noise away from bat night roosting areas in the project specifications. The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement those measures during evening and night construction as much as possible while providing for safe facility operations and construction worker safety. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction A Wildlife Crossing Noise and Lighting Plan was approved by RCTC in July 2014 and submitted to CDFW to address construction activities that are required to be completed during night time hours. Design Builder actively ensuring that wildlife corridors are kept clear of equipment and falsework. 1/6/2017 AT Overall 95° /° Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X AS-5 RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the final design specifically addresses keeping riparian vegetation delineated on the project specifications that is adjacent to bat roosting sites (which include crevices in bridges, culverts, and overhead structures) intact during construction per measures included in the project specifications. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly implement the measures in the project specifications to keep riparian vegetation adjacent to bat roosting sites intact. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to and during construction Riparian vegetation adjacent to bat roosting habitat has been identified on ESA exhibits. 1/25/17; 11/6/17 AT AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X AS-6 To prevent project effects to bridge- and crevice -nesting birds (i.e., swifts and swallows), RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that all work on existing bridges with potential habitat that is conducted between February 15 and October 31 includes removal of all bird nests prior to construction under the guidance and observation of the Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Removal of bird nests, prior to construction in bridge areas with potential habitat, occurred to the extent possible. Exclusionary efforts, as described in AS-6 were implemented with supervision of a designated biologist. 5/12/17; 11/20/17 AT AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-47 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Designated Qualified Biologist prior to February 1 of that year, before the swallow colony returns to the nesting site. Removal of swallow nests that are under construction must be repeated as frequently as necessary to prevent nest completion or until a nest exclusion device is installed (such as netting or a similar mechanism that keeps birds from building nests). Nest removal and exclusion device installation will be monitored by the Designated Qualified Biologist. Such exclusion efforts must be continued to keep the structures free of swallows until September or completion of construction. All nest exclusion techniques will be coordinated among the Department District 8 Biologist, the Department District 12 Biologist, RCTC's Project Manager, RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor, the design/build contractor's Designated Qualified Biologist, and the resource agencies. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Crevices were filled on Bridge 3 with foam which, while primarily implemented for bats, also excluded white throated swifts from potential roost and nest habitat in this hinge structure (Oct 2014). The study excluded birds/bats from bridges to be demolished during 2015 or 2016. Installed one-way doors and wire mesh at soffit weepholes of affected project bridges (January and February 2015). Exclusion efforts continued through the 2017 nesting season which ended in October. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO AS-7 During final design, RCTC's Project Manager, the Department District 8 Biologist, the Department District 12 Biologist, and the Designated Qualified Biologist will determine whether structural features providing existing bat roosting habitat cannot be permanently retained following construction. If that is the case, RCTC's Project Manager, RCTC's Project Engineer, the Department District 8 Biologist, the Department District 12 Biologist, and the Designated Qualified Biologist will identify alternative roosting habitat to be installed during project construction. The project specifications will include suitable designs and specifications for bat exclusion and habitat replacement structures. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly implement the designs and specifications for bat exclusion and habitat replacement structures included in the project specifications. The installation and maintenance of those structures will be monitored by the Designated Qualified Biologist. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to and during construction Bat Panel Habitat installation, at Bridge 4, was completed on 01/13/14. Bat panel installation, over Temescal Wash, will be completed in July 2017. Retention of structural features providing bat roosting habitat will be determined following project completion. Installation was completed in July 2017 with bat biologist, Jill Carpenter, present. Details regarding panel installation locations and dates will be discussed in the Post -Construction Monitoring Report; which will be submitted to resource agencies. 7/10/17; 7/31/17 AT AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X AS-8 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to install and maintain silt fence barriers at all staging or construction areas at Coal Canyon and areas within Chino Hills State Park (CHSP) to prevent small animals from entering those areas. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Silt fence barriers at Coal Canyon and areas within Chino Hills State Park have been installed and will be maintained throughout project construction. 12/29/2016 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; X Page 9-48 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks however, 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO TE-1 Prior to any ground disturbing activities, an individual will be identified as the Designated Biologist. A qualified Designated Biologist must have a Bachelor's degree with an emphasis in ecology, natural resource management, or related science; 3 years of experience in field biology or current certification of a nationally recognized biological society, such as The Ecological Society of America or The Wildlife Society; previous experience with applying the terms and conditions of a Biological Opinion; and the appropriate permit and/or training if conducting focused or protocol surveys for listed species. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) will ensure the Designated Biologist position is filled throughout the construction period. Each successive Designated Biologist (if applicable) will be approved by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) (hereafter referred to as the Wildlife Agencies). The Designated Biologist will have the authority to ensure compliance with conservation measures and will be the primary agency contact for the implementation of these measures. The Designated Biologist will have the authority and responsibility to halt activities that are in violation of the conservation measures. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to disturbance Designated Qualified Biologists meet all of the criteria set forth in TE-1 and have been approved by each agency listed in commitment TE-1. 8/25/2015 SB 100° /° complete for Initial Phase X TE-2 To minimize adverse effects from dust during all site disturbance, grading, and construction activities, the design/build contractor will ensure that all active parts of the construction site are watered a minimum of twice daily or more often when needed due to dry or windy conditions to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Additionally, the design/build contractor will ensure that all stockpiled material is sufficiently watered or covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Design Builder is implementing BMPs to minimize dust during construction. Daily Quality Assurance Inspection Reports would have identified any dust control violations since dust control was a checklist item. No violations were identified during construction. 10/6/2017 AT Overall 95 °/° Complete; however, ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X TE-3 All erosion and sediment control devices during project construction and operation, including fiber rolls and bonded fiber matrix, will be made from biodegradable Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Design Builder is actively implementing BMPs per the NPDES General Construction Permit. 11/20/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete; howeoer, 100 /° X Page 9-49 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures materials such as jute, with no plastic mesh, to avoid creating a wildlife entanglement hazard. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO TE-4 During all site disturbance, grading, and construction activities, the design/build contractor will be required to control noise from construction activity consistent with Caltrans Standard Specifications, Section 14-8.02, "Noise Control, and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Standard Special Provisions S5-310. Noise levels from construction operations within the State right-of-way between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. will not exceed 86 A -weighted decibels (dBA) at a distance of 50 feet (ft) from the noise source. The noise level requirement will apply to the equipment on the job site or related to the job, including, but not limited to, trucks, transit mixers, or transient equipment that may or may not be owned by the contractor. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction As documented for Noise Measure N-2, measures to reduce noise from construction activities were implemented throughout construction duration. During July 2014, City of Corona reviewed and approved a variance to the noise ordinance to allow night time work. With regard to Threatened and Endangered Species, the designated Project Biologist monitored for noise violations that had the potential to impact wildlife. 6/5/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X TE-5 During all site disturbance, grading, and construction activities in and immediately adjacent to biologically sensitive areas, Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Conservation Areas, vegetated drainages, and coastal sage scrub (CSS) in coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN) designated critical habitat, the design/build contractor will be required to control noise from construction activity by using an alternative warning method instead of a sound signal unless required by safety laws. In addition, the contractor will equip all internal combustion engines with the manufacturer- recommended mufflers and will not operate any internal combustion engine on the job site without the appropriate mufflers. As directed by the RCTC Resident Engineer, the contractor will implement appropriate additional noise mitigation measures, including changing the location of stationary construction equipment, turning off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work, and installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Noise control measures were taken during all site disturbance, grading, and construction activities in and immediately adjacent to biologically sensitive areas except for one instance in early 2017 at the NW quadrant of the 91/71 interchange. The PCM biologist paused the activity and advised the construction team on appropriate measures. Documentation is provided in Biological Resource Monitoring Reports. Documentation prepared for Measure N-2 (Noise) details measures taken to keep the public informed about potentially noisy construction activities. 10/6/2017 AT ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X TE-6 In accordance with the Municipal Codes of the Cities of Anaheim, Corona, Riverside, and Norco, the design/build contractor will be required to limit construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding weekends and Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction During July 2014, City of Corona reviewed and approved a variance to the noise ordinance to allow night time work. A Wildlife Crossing Noise and 1/6/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; X Page 9-50 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures holidays. If construction is needed outside those hours or days, the design/build contractor will be required to coordinate with the affected local jurisdiction. If the local jurisdiction approves construction hours that are different from those imposed by this measure, then the design/build contractor will immediately request that RCTC consider a modification to this measure to allow construction during the new hours that the local jurisdiction approved. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Lighting Plan was approved by RCTC in July 2014 and submitted to CDFW to address construction activities that are required to be completed during night time hours. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks however, 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO TE-7 In the major wildlife movement corridors at, Coal Canyon, Wardlow Wash, and Fresno Canyon, and areas adjacent to least Bell's vireo and CAGN occupied areas (approximately Post Mile [PM] ORA-91-R17.16 to PM ORA-91-R18.74), construction activities will be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Should an exception to this measure be necessary, RCTC and the California Department of Transportation (Department) will consult with the Wildlife Agencies to determine effective measures to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to these species and movement corridors. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction A Wildlife Crossing Noise and Lighting Plan was approved by RCTC in July 2014 and submitted to CDFW to address construction activities that are required to be completed during night time hours. 1/6/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X TE-8 Braunton's Milk -vetch Conservation Measures. A pre - construction survey will be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the historical occurrence in Coal Canyon in Orange County. This survey will be conducted by a biologist familiar with the species and during the appropriate time of year to optimize detection. Should Braunton's milk -vetch be found during surveys, the Designated Biologist will consult with the USFWS to determine effective measures to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to this species. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Report submitted to USFWS in July 2014. 8/28/2015 SB 100% complete for Initial Phase X TE-9 Coastal California Gnatcatcher Conservation and Compensatory Measures. The Designated Biologist (or their designee) will monitor construction within the vicinity of CAGN-designated critical habitat areas prior to and during site preparation, grading, and construction activities, to flush any wildlife species present prior to construction and to ensure that vegetation removal, best management practices (BMPs), Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs), and all avoidance and minimization measures are properly implemented and followed. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Carol Thompson (designated biologist) currently monitors CSS area within the project footprint on a weekly basis. She also monitored any construction work near any CSS areas. John Parent became the designated biologist in early 2016. 11/30/2016 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-51 ECR ID TE-10 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures RCTC will offset the permanent loss of 8.42 acres (ac) of occupied CAGN habitat in Orange County, including 6.32 ac of designated critical habitat, by restoring 16.03 ac of habitat suitable for CAGN breeding, dispersal, and foraging in Chino Hills State Park (CHSP) to be conducted during the Initial Phase of the project. If restoration is unable to be conducted in CHSP, another location will be selected on approval of the Wildlife Agencies. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure RCTC Timing/Phase After construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Compensatory Mitigation Plans for CAGN and LBV was approved in September of 2014. Restoration work began in 2015 Measure Completed (Date and Initials) 5/18/2017 AT Remarks ° 100/° complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES X for Phase / NO TE-11 RCTC will offset the temporary loss of 3.01 ac of Final EIR/EIS RCTC After construction Compensatory Mitigation Plans for CAGN and LBV was approved in September of 2014. Restoration work began in 2015 5/18/2017 AT ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X occupied CAGN habitat in Orange County, including 2.09 ac of CAGN-designated critical habitat, with in -kind, or better, on -site restoration after the completion of project construction. TE-12 Prior to site preparation, grading or construction activities, a restoration plan will be developed by a qualified biologist for the permanent and temporary impacts to occupied CAGN habitat in Orange County, including designated critical habitat. The plan will be submitted to the USFWS for review and approval. This plan will include, at a minimum, a detailed description of restoration methods, slope stabilization/erosion control, criteria for restoration to be considered successful, and monitoring and reporting protocol(s). The restoration plan will be implemented for a minimum of 5 years, unless success criteria are met earlier and all artificial watering has been off for at least 2 years. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Compensatory Mitigation Plans for CAGN and LBV was approved in September of 2014. Restoration work will begin in 2015 After both resource agency and Caltrans review, Caltrans accepted DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on Fwd: DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on 2/12/2018, constituting closure of this measure. Closure of this measure was reconfirmed during the 2/12/2018 ECR Meeting. During this meeting, it was determined that additional comment from CDFW's Jeff Brandt (unrelated to this measure) will be addressed in the Bat Management Plan. USFWS previously concurred on 2/5 that information regarding bats is not required as part of the restoration plan. 2/5/18; 2/12/18 JLS JLS ° Overall 80 /° Complete; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X TE-13 During all site preparation, grading, and construction activities in Orange County, the RCTC Resident Engineer, will require the design/build contractor to use Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Shielded lighting measures are being implemented during nighttime construction in areas adjacent to 11/30/2016 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so X Page 9-52 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures shielded lighting for any nighttime construction adjacent to coastal sage scrub in CAGN-designated critical habitat. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure coastal sage scrub and CAGN designated critical habitat. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO TE-14 Riparian Birds Conservation Measures. During the bird breeding season (i.e., February 15—September 15), the Designated Biologist (or their designee) will monitor riparian and riverine areas within 500 ft of active construction areas for the duration of the construction in those areas to survey for active nests and/or nesting activity to ensure breeding activities are not disrupted and to ensure vegetation removal, BMPs, ESAs, and all avoidance and minimization measures are properly implemented. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Bird monitoring completed for 2014 season. Monitoring continuing for 2015 season. Nest Monitoring is occurring during 2015 nesting season within 500' buffer area at 91/71 interchange; include 2016 buffer variance info. 11/30/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X TE-15 Measure for Light Intrusion and Wildfires. To minimize adverse effects from light intrusion from vehicle headlights and the potential threat of increased fires from the operation of State Route 91 (SR-91), during final design, the Department and RCTC will work with the USFWS to investigate the possibility of adding features along SR-91 in the vicinity of the Coal Canyon wildlife crossing in Orange County. For example, consideration can be given to the placement of K-rail, concrete walls, and/or hardscaping barriers along the shoulder of SR-91. In investigating these features, consideration must be given to motorist safety, freeway operations, vehicle headlight mitigation and the potential fire threat. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Ultimate Phase WB 3-foot barrier included in final design between SR 71 and Orange County line. Coordination also occurred with resource agencies to explore possible improvements at the Coal Canyon Wildlife Crossing. To be completed during Ultimate Phase. 7/10/17; 7/31/17; 12/4/17 ATx3 100% complete for Initial Phase X TE-16 Santa Ana Sucker Conservation Measures. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is in the process of constructing the Santa Ana River (SAR) Reach 9 Phase 2 Green River Golf Club Embankment Protection Project within the action area. Following completion of the embankment construction, perennial stream habitat for the Santa Ana sucker will be reestablished within the construction footprint. The Department and RCTC will coordinate with the Corps during construction of the SR-91 CIP to ensure these restoration areas will not be temporarily or permanently impacted during construction of the SR-91 CIP. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Initial Phase construction does not require widening westbound stretch between SR-71 and SR-241, the area likely to affect releases from Prado Dam. The Ultimate Phase requires the addition of a general purpose lane; which would require coordination with ACOE for potential impacts to the Santa Ana River Canyon Habitat Management Area. 8/25/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-53 ECR ID TE-17 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures The Department and RCTC will coordinate with the Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/Phase During construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Initial Phase construction does not require widening westbound stretch between SR-71 and SR-241, the area likely to affect releases from Prado Dam. The Ultimate Phase requires the addition of a general purpose lane; which would require coordination with ACOE for potential impacts to the Santa Ana River Canyon Habitat Management Area. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) 8/25/2017 AT Remarks 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES X for Phase / NO Corps during construction to ensure that the SR-91 CIP will not affect releases from Prado Dam or result in a permanent reduction of acreage within the Santa Ana River Canyon Habitat Management Area. IS-1 During final design, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Project Engineer will direct a qualified landscape architect develop a weed abatement program for inclusion in the project specifications. That program will be developed in compliance with Executive Order (EO) 13112 to minimize the potential for intrusion or export of invasive plant species to and from the biological study area (BSA) during project construction. At a minimum, the following will be included in the weed abatement program and implemented prior to and during construction to address potential effects associated with invasive species: Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to construction Weed Abatement Plan approved in April of 2014 and is being implemented during construction; weed species of concern is Brassica and is currently being monitored. 8/25/2015 SB 100% complete for Initial Phase X IS-1a RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to inspect and clean construction equipment at the beginning and end of each day and prior to transporting equipment from one project location to another. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to limit soil and vegetation disturbance to those areas specifically required for the project construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction As part of the NPDES GCP, construction equipment is being inspected. prior to leaving the project site. This measure was closed during the 1/29/2018 ECR Meeting. During the meeting a review of the AW Memorandum transmitted 1/22/2018 determined completion of compliance with this measure. This Memorandum included confirmation of Equipment Inspection and Cleaning as well as a copy of the memorandum submitted for compliance with Measure IS-1 b. 1/29/2018 JLS ° 100 /° complete for Initial Phase X IS-1 b RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to obtain soil, gravel, and rock from weed -free sources. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction The project did not require the import of soil. Gravel and rock were obtained from weed -free sources. 12/4/2017 AT 95% Complete; however, 100% X Page 9-54 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures contractor to use only certified weed -free straw, mulch, and/or fiber rolls for erosion control during construction. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO IS-1c Prior to the completion of construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to revegetate affected areas adjacent to native vegetation with plant species that are native to the vicinity and approved by the California Department of Transportation (Department) District 8 and District 12 Biologists. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Restoration work for impacts to CSS in Orange County began in Oct. 2017 per contract with IERCD. After both resource agency and Caltrans review, Caltrans accepted DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on Fwd: DESN0392.6 California Gnatcatcher Habitat and Temporary Impacts Restoration Plan on 2/12/2018, constituting closure of this measure. Closure of this measure was reconfirmed during the 2/12/2018 ECR Meeting. During this meeting, it was determined that additional comment from CDFW's Jeff Brandt (unrelated to this measure) will be addressed in the Bat Management Plan. USFWS previously concurred on 2/5 that information regarding bats is not required as part of the restoration plan. 11/15/17; 2/5/18; 2/12/18 AT JLS JLS 100% complete for Initial Phase X IS-1 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Although included in the approved Landscaping Plans, Washingtonia Robusta (Mexican Fan), was removed from the Historic District in July 2017. Design packages final approvals: Package A - 1/18/16 Package B - 5/16/17 Package C - 5/17/17 Package D - 5/17/17 Package E - 5/17/17 Package F - 5/18/17 Package G - 5/18/17 6/1/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X contractor to not use any species listed in the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) California Invasive Plant Inventory with a high or moderate rating in revegetation. IS-1d After construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that erosion control and revegetation sites are monitored until achievement of the performance Final EIR/EIS Design Builder After construction 7/31/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete; however, X Page 9-55 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures standards included in the weed abatement program or for a period of 2 to 3 years after installation to detect nonnative species prior to the establishment of the native vegetation. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES for Phase / NO IS-1e RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor and the post -construction monitors to implement eradication procedures (e.g., spraying and/or hand weeding) should an infestation occur. The use of herbicides will be prohibited within and adjacent to native vegetation, except as specifically authorized and monitored by the Department District 8 and District 12 Biologists during and after project construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During Construction Perform weed abatement, during construction, as required per the Weed Abatement Plan 12/4/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X Final EIR/EIS After construction Restoration Plan includes weed abatement measures. 12/4/2017 AT Overall 95 /° Complete; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X IS-1f During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to reduce indirect impacts of exotic plant infestations and litter by regular roadside maintenance to remove litter and weeds from the right-of-way. Because the Department already conducts regular ongoing maintenance of landscaping in the State right- of -way, no additional project -specific measures for invasive species are required during project operations. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction 11/6/2017 AT Overall 95% Complete and will remain so until project completion; however, 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-15 For buildings that would be demolished as part of ROW acquisition and/or construction, Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and Lead Based Paint (LMP) testing shall be performed after ROW acquisition and prior to building demolition. Revalidation #2 for Initial Phase Design Builder During construction ACM and LBP testing completed as part of the ROW acquisition process. 1/1/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-16 Herbicide, pesticide, and fungicide testing shall be performed on the soils within acquired ROW at the Green River Golf Club (5215 Green River Road, Corona, CA). Revalidation #2 for Initial Phase Design Builder During construction Since recent grading work has already been completed at the Green River Golf Club, no additional testing is necessary. 5/31/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X HW-17 Prior to demolition, RCTC's Project engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct pre -demolition asbestos and lead based paint (LBP) surveys at the I- 15/6th Street overcrossing and the 1-15 southbound connector. Any recommendations resulting from the asbestos and LBP surveys shall be implemented. Revalidation Measures" Design Builder During construction Leighton Report completed and submitted as of August 2014. 9/13/2017 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-56 ECR ID V-6 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Prior to the implementation of the 2:1 slopes in the area between Bridge Nos. 56-0637 Prado OH and 56-0634 West Prado OH, RCTC will ensure that the design/build contractor will minimize the impacts for the loss of visual quality by incorporating V-2 measures as approved by Caltrans and the permitting agencies. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Revalidation #6 for Initial Phase Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/Phase During construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Design packages final approval: Package B - 5/16/17 Measure Completed (Date and Initials) 2/23/17; 7/10/17 AT; AT Remarks 100% complete for Initial Phase Environmental Compliance Initial YES X for Phase / NO N-6 ReVal 14a - Since a portion of the proposed sound barrier is outside the State right of way, a permanent easement will be secured for the affected properties to construct and maintain the noise abatement measure — the wall return of barrier P-1A, approximately 150' long. The property owners will enter into a contract with RCTC, on behalf of Caltrans, that specifies their agreement: • To allow RCTC personnel, representatives, and contractors to enter their property for purposes of constructing the noise abatement measure and all other related work. • To allow RCTC personnel and representatives to enter their property with appropriate prior notification for the purpose of periodic inspection or structural repair of the noise abatement measure. • To accept aesthetic maintenance responsibility of their respective portion of the noise abatement measure upon its completion and to perpetuate the noise abatement measure's initial aesthetic qualities. • Not to remove the noise abatement measure without full consent of all other affected property owners and Caltrans. Revalidation #14 for Initial Phase RCTC During construction RCTC will work with Caltrans to ensure that maintenance of item is completed after substantial completion of project and access is available for purposes of constructing noise abatement measure and all other related work. RCTC (Mark Lancaster) submitted draft Soundwall Maintenance Agreement to Caltrans Project Manager for legal review and approval on 7/18/16. Soundwall Construction and Maintenance Easement recorded 09/29/2016. 11/4/2016 AT 100% complete for Initial Phase X N 7 Reval 12-A: A noise barrier survey, of all property owners affected by the construction of M-1 B Option 2, will be conducted to constitute a 51 percent minimum vote in support of this noise barrier. Reval 12-B: A permanent easement will be secured from the affected properties to construct and maintain the noise abatement measure. The contract shall be between the property owner and Caltrans (RCTC will secure all maintenance agreements and record easements on behalf of Caltrans) and the property owner(s) must agree: - To allow Caltrans personnel, representatives, and contractors to enter their property for purposes of constructing the noise abatement measure and all other Revalidation #14 for Initial Phase RCTC During construction RCTC will work with Caltrans to ensure that maintenance of item is completed after substantial completion of project and access is available for purposes of constructing noise abatement measure and all other related work. A 2/26/2018 memorandum transmitted from RCTC to Caltrans indicated RCTC will accept responsibility for maintenance of walls until the time an agreement is reached with each property owner. 9/13/17; 2/26/18 AT; JLS 100% complete for Initial Phase X Page 9-57 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures related work. - To allow Caltrans personnel and representatives to enter their property with appropriate prior to notification for the purpose of periodic inspection or structural repair of the noise abatement measure. - To accept aesthetic maintenance responsibility of their respective portion of the noise abatement measure upon its completion and to perpetuate the noise abatement measure's initial aesthetic qualities. - Not to remove the noise abatement measure without full consent of all other affected property owners and Caltrans. - That the contract provisions will be a permanent burden on the property involved. Caltrans District right of way will determine specific wording that, at a minimum, must include the following provision: "The term of this contract shall be a burden that runs with the land, and shall inure and be binding upon the successors, assignees, or transferees of the property owner." Reval 12-C: RCTC will obtain a variance from the County of Riverside's Planning Department for portions of NB M- 1 B that exceed allowable wall height. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure The RCTC memorandum was accepted as completion of compliance for this measure during the 2/26/2018 ECR meeting. Measure Completed (Date and Initials) Remarks Environmental Compliance for Initial Phase YES / NO Page 9-58 ATTACHMENT 10 Environmental Commitments Record for the Ultimate Project Page 10-1 ECR ID LU-1 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures If a Build Alternative is selected for implementation, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) will request the County of Riverside, the County of Orange, and the cities along the alignments of State Route 91 (SR 91) and Interstate 15 (I-15) to amend their respective General Plans to reflect the selected SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) alternative and the modification of land use designations for properties that would be acquired for the project which are not currently designated for transportation uses. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure RCTC Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO PR-1 During final design/construction of the Initial Phase, RCTC will contribute $100,000 to the planning and implementation of improvements in that area that would support and expand regional trail connectivity. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design/ construction PR-2 During final design/construction of the Initial Phase, RCTC will coordinate with State Parks on the aesthetic features that will be included in the project specifications for the proposed retaining wall facing CHSP between SR-71 and the westbound Green River Road off -ramp, consistent with the aesthetic and features required in Measure V 2. The aesthetic treatment will include a texture to simulate a natural type appearance such as a soil or rock surface, or equivalent. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder Final design/ construction PR-3 To minimize nighttime noise impacts to Chino Hills State Park (CHSP): 1. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to limit the hours of construction in CHSP to daylight hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.), with the exception of limited periods when evening or night construction is necessary for operational reasons. Operational reasons may include the desire to conduct certain construction activities; such as closing multiple ramps or travel lanes, during night hours to minimize delays to the traveling public. Any night construction must be approved in writing by the RCTC Resident Engineer and coordinated with the District 8 and 12 biologists, the USFWS, and CDFG. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During Construction 2. Other Commitments by RCTC Relevant to Chino Hills State Park. RCTC has committed to an additional action in the Coal Canyon area, as follows. A stand-alone project will be developed to construct barriers on the south and north sides of SR-91 to shield headlight glare and freeway noise. The required barriers are estimated to be approximately 1,500 feet and 1,300 feet long on the south and north Final EIR/EIS RCTC Future Project Page 10-2 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures sides of SR-91 respectively. The project will follow environmental process requirements and engage subject area experts to establish the specific requirements and effectiveness of the proposed barriers to meet the project purpose as well as ensure safety and structural standards are met. In consideration of and reliance on the needs of State Parks and other open space plans that depend on Chino Hills State Park, and subject to environmental review, RCTC commits to build this barrier in tandem with the completion of the SR-91 widening in this area currently planned for completion in 2035. RCTC intends to work with the Department and other agencies to fund and implement this project. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO CI-2 Where property acquisition and relocation are unavoidable, RCTC's Right -of -Way Agents will follow the provisions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Uniform Act) and the 1987 Amendments as implemented by the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Regulations for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs. Appendix D in the Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) provides a summary of the RCTC Relocation Assistance Program for implementing the Uniform Act. For properties where a partial acquisition results in the removal of some or all of the parking for the property, RCTC's Right -of -Way Agents will conduct parking studies to investigate the use of adjacent acquisitions for replacement parking, reconfiguring the remaining parking spaces and lots on the property, restriping parking spaces, enlarging parking lots, and reconfiguring driveways and/or delivery locations to reduce the project effects on the property. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Prior to construction; during construction CI-3 Where possible during final design, RCTC's Right -of - Way Agents and the Project Engineer will work with owners of commercial, agricultural, and industrial uses subject to partial property acquisitions to reconfigure those uses on site consistent with applicable local codes and ordinances in such a manner as to enable them to remain in operation. If a commercial or industrial partial acquisition cannot be reconfigured to allow for continued operation, RCTC's Right -of -Way Agents will work with the property owners to either relocate that use to land designated for that given land use, preferably within Final EIR/EIS RCTC Prior to construction Page 10-3 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO the boundaries of the study area or to provide compensation for the land pursuant to the provisions of the Uniform Act. If an agricultural use cannot be reconfigured to allow for its continued operation, the property owner will be compensated pursuant to the provisions of the Uniform Act as required in Measure CI-2 and the agricultural use will be discontinued. CI-4 During final design and property acquisition, the RCTC Project Engineer and Right -of -Way Agents will work with billboard/property owners, the City of Corona, and the California Department of Transportation's (Department) Outdoor Advertising Unit to find locations for relocating the affected billboards, within the existing sites where the billboards are currently located or other sites in the City where billboards are allowed. The Right -of -Way Agents will work with the City and the Department's Outdoor Advertising Unit to ensure that the sites for the relocated billboards comply with the requirements in the City of Corona Municipal Code and the Outdoor Advertising Act and Regulations. The Right - of -Way Agents will also work with the billboard/property owners to develop Billboard Relocation Agreements with the City of Corona. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design/ construction UES-1 During final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer will prepare utility relocation plans in consultation with the affected utility providers/owners for those utility facilities anticipated to be relocated, removed, and protected in -place. Final design will focus on avoiding utility relocations. If relocation is necessary, final design will focus on relocating utilities within the State right-of-way or within other existing public rights -of -way and/or easements. If relocation outside of existing or the additional public rights -of -way and/or easements required for the project is necessary, final design will focus on relocating those facilities in such a manner as to minimize environmental impacts as a result of project construction and ongoing maintenance and repair activities. The utility relocation plans will be included in the project specifications. Prior to and during construction, the RCTC Resident Engineer will ensure that the components of the utility relocation plans provided in the project specifications are properly implemented by the design/build contractor. Final EIR/EIS Design guilder/RCTC Prior to construction; during construction UES-2 Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction; Page 10-4 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase during construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO coordinate all temporary ramp and lane closures and detour plans with law enforcement, fire protection, and emergency medical service providers to minimize temporary delays in emergency response times as part of the Final Transportation Management Plan (TMP) and Final Ramp Closure Study required in Measures T-1 and T-2, including the identification of alternative routes and routes across the construction areas for emergency vehicles developed in coordination with the affected agencies. UES-3 Prior to and during any construction activities, the RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the following to minimize the risk of fires during construction: Coordinate with the applicable local fire department to identify and maintain defensible spaces around active construction areas.; Coordinate with the applicable local fire department to identify and maintain firefighting equipment (extinguishers, shovels, water tankers) in active construction areas.; Prohibit the use of mechanized equipment or equipment that could throw off sparks in areas adjacent to open space or undeveloped land, including areas adjacent to CHSP.; Post emergency services phone numbers (fire, emergency medical, police) in visible locations in all active construction areas. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction; during construction UES-4 The final design of the SR-91 CIP Build Alternatives will include closing gaps so there is the equivalent of a continuous barrier 30 to 36 inches high on the edge of the shoulder on both westbound and eastbound SR-91 from SR-71 to SR-241, as follows: 2. Ultimate Project: Close gaps to provide an equivalent continuous barrier 30 to 36 inches high on the edge of shoulder on SR-91 in both directions between Green River Road and SR-241 meeting Department standards applicable at the time. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Prior to construction T-1 Transportation Management Plan. During final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer direct a qualified traffic engineer to prepare the Final Traffic Management Plan (TMP), which will be based on the Preliminary TMP developed for the Project Report, to address specific short-term traffic impacts during construction of the project. The objectives of the Final TMP are to: Maintain traffic safety during construction Effectively maintain an acceptable level of traffic flow throughout the transportation system during construction Minimize traffic delays and facilitate Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder Prior to construction Page 10-5 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initia s) Environmental Compliance for Remarks Ultimate Project YES / NO reduction of overall duration of construction activities Minimize detours and impacts to pedestrians and bicyclists Foster public awareness of the project and related impacts Achieve public acceptance of construction of the project and the Final TMP measures. RCTC will submit the Final TMP to the California Department of Transportation (Department) for review and approval during final design and prior to any construction activities. The existing Preliminary TMP and Ramp Closure Study contains the following elements intended to reduce traveler delay and enhance traveler safety. These elements will be refined during final design and incorporated in the Final TMP for implementation during project construction. Public Information/Public Awareness Campaign (PAC). The primary goal of the PAC is to educate motorists, business owners/operators, residents, elected officials, and government agencies about construction activities and associated impacts. The PAC is an important tool for reaching target audiences with important construction project information and will include, but not be limited to: Rideshare information Brochures and mailers Media releases Paid advertising Public meetings Broadcast fax and email services Telephone hotline Notification to targeted groups Commercial traffic reporters/feeds Project website Visual information Local cable television and news Internet postings Traveler Information Strategies. The effective implementation of a traveler information system during construction is crucial for enabling motorists to make informed decisions about their travel plans and options with real-time traffic information. That real- time traffic information will include information on lane closures, detours, delays, access to adjacent land uses, "businesses are open" signing, and other signing and information to assist travelers in navigating through and in construction areas. Key components of this system will include, but not be limited to: Fixed changeable message signs Portable changeable message signs Ground -mounted signs Automated work zone information systems Highway advisory radio Lane closure website Department highway information network Bicycle and pedestrian information Commute Smart website Incident Management. Effective incident management will ensure that incidents in Page 10-6 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initia s) Environmental Compliance for Remarks Ultimate Project YES / NO construction areas are cleared quickly and do not lead to substantial delays for the traveling public through work zones. Incident management includes, but is not limited to: Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP) Freeway service patrol for construction Traffic surveillance stations Transportation Management Center Unit 370 Traffic management team Towing services Construction Strategies. The Final TMP will include procedures to lessen the effect of typical construction activities and will include, but not be limited to, consideration of the following: Conflicts with other projects and special events Construction staging alternatives Mainline lane closures Local road closures Ramp/connector closures Pedestrian and bicycle detours and facility closures Traffic control improvements Coordination with other projects Project phasing Traffic screens Truck traffic restrictions Demand Management. Temporarily reducing the overall traffic volumes on the project segments of State Route 91 (SR-91) and Interstate 15 (1-15) could reduce the short-term adverse effects of construction on traffic operations. The Final TMP will include, but not be limited to, the following strategies that could reduce vehicular demand in the study area during project construction: Rideshare incentives Transit services Shuttle services Variable work hours/telecommuting High -occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes/ramps Park -and -ride lots Alternate Route Strategies. The Final TMP will provide strategies for notifying motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists, especially interregional commuters, of planned construction activities. This notification will allow travelers to make informed decisions about their travel plans, including the consideration of possible alternate routes. The Final TMP will consider the development of alternate routes for motorists to address the following: Mainline lane closures Ramp/connector closures Local road closures Temporary highway or shoulder use Local street improvements Temporary detours and closures of bicycle and pedestrian facilities Traffic signal coordination RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the measures in the Final TMP are properly implemented by the design/build contractor prior to and during construction. Page 10-7 ECR ID T-2 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Management of Ramp Closures. During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will direct a qualified environmental planner to develop the Final Ramp Closure Study to address specific short-term impacts associated with ramp closures longer than 10 days during construction. The objectives of the Final Ramp Closure Study will be to: Minimize inconvenience to the traveling public.; Minimize closures.; Avoid or minimize concurrently multiple closures where possible.; Coordinate closures as needed with other projects and activities. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the measures included in the Final Ramp Closure Study are properly implemented by the design/build contractor. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/ Phase Final design/ construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO T-3 Fair Share Contributions. RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that RCTC pays the fair share contribution for the project -related impacts at area intersections. The recommended improvements include additional turn and through lanes. Summaries of the improved intersection delays and levels of service (LOS) are provided in Tables T-3.2, T-3.3, and T-3.4 for 2015 with the Initial Phase of Alternative 2, Design Year 2035 with Alternative 1, and Design Year 2035 with Alternative 2 conditions, respectively. Final EIR/EIS RCTC During Construction T-4 During final design, the RCTC Project Engineer will ensure that the final design and project specifications for the widened areas in the undercrossings on SR- 91 and I-15 include appropriate lighting for vehicles and pedestrians. The RCTC Project Engineer will also assess the need for additional lighting in the original parts of the undercrossings in the event the longer undercrossings result in the need for additional lighting in those areas. That additional lighting, if any, will also be shown in the project specifications. The RCTC Project Engineer will have any lighting considered at Coal Canyon reviewed and approved by the Project Biologist prior to incorporation in the project specifications to ensure the lighting does not affect the use of Coal Canyon as a wildlife crossing. During construction, the RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the lighting in undercrossings as shown in the project specifications. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design guilder Final design/ construction V-1 Structure Elements. To address adverse impacts of the project structures, the Project Engineer will direct Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder During construction Page 10-8 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initia s) Environmental Compliance for Remarks Ultimate Project YES / NO a qualified landscape architect to ensure that the final project design incorporates the mitigation and minimization elements A—D, below, and that these enhancements to structures are incorporated in the design and construction of sound walls, retaining walls, and bridge elements and will not be "follow-up" enhancements. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the design/build contractor constructs the retaining and sound walls, medians, bridges, and other structures consistent with aesthetic and design features included in the project specifications. RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that those aesthetic and design features are constructed during the construction phase when the impact occurs. A. Sound walls in low -density, developed areas or those fronting private property will be heavily textured (i.e. split -face or fractured rib) and integrally colored to minimize reflected glare and visual mass. Sound walls facing public -use areas (parks, streets, etc.) will incorporate textures and color as above plus site - specific aesthetic features (local or historical references) to minimize/mitigate impacts to community character and to restore a "sense of place." Specific color selection for sound walls will be determined by the 215/91 Corridor Master Plan. B. Retaining walls (including walls associated with bridge structures) will be heavily textured (i.e., split - face or fractured rib) to minimize glare and visual mass. Retaining walls facing public use areas (parks, streets, etc.) over 9 feet (ft) high will be heavily textured (i.e., split -face or fractured rib) and include site -specific aesthetic features (local or historical references). Color (integral or applied) is not required for retaining walls. C. In addition to texture and color as described in A and B, above, sound walls and retaining walls with low -density development or recreational viewer groups will include planting of trees or trees and shrubs, and vines at the base of the walls (non - motorist side) to minimize loss of visual unity. Plantings will be local native species or ornamental species that require no irrigation after establishment. These plantings will not require permanent irrigation. D. Slope paving in all areas with bicyclist and pedestrian viewers will include texture (i.e. stamped slate). In urban areas, slope paving will direct a qualified landscape architect to incorporate site - specific aesthetic features in addition to texture. Page 10-9 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Texture and pattern will be used to minimize the visual impacts of increased hard surface, and reinforce community identify, offsetting reduced community connectivity associated with increased bridge widths. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO Light and Glare. To reduce glare, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the project plans specify lighting fixtures with non -glare hoods and that lighting is designed to illuminate only the right-of-way. The lighting plans will require the review and approval of the Department and applicable cities and counties before construction to assure compliance with their applicable policies regarding public street lighting. RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the City V-3 of Corona and other applicable cities and counties to ensure that sufficient lighting is provided as part of the improvements to local streets within the project limits, consistent with applicable local policies and street lighting codes. Increased glare from walls, structures and pavement will be minimized by measures identified in V-2 and V-3. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the project lighting plan included in the project specifications is implemented by the design/build contractor during construction. Graffiti Reduction, Removal and Control. During final design, the RCTC Project Engineer will incorporate vine planting on all sound barriers in the project specifications to reduce the potential for graffiti and to soften the appearance of those walls, consistent with the Highway Design Manual, Index 902.3(5). After the construction of each sound barrier, the RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to install vine planting consistent with the project specifications and the planting requirements in Measure V-3. Design Final design V-4 The Department and the City of Corona have existing ongoing maintenance programs for the control and removal of graffiti. Those programs would apply to all new and modified structures in Alternatives 1 and 2, on public and private property, as appropriate. Key components of those programs are: Department Final EIR/EIS guilder/RCTC /construction Program. Chapter D1, Litter, Debris, and Graffiti (July 2006), in the Caltrans Maintenance Manual (Volume I, January 2011) describes the Department's maintenance program for the control and removal of graffiti. Key program components applicable to the project features in Alternatives 1 and 2 are: Use of Page 10-10 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures recycled paint for various structures and matching paint used to cover graffiti with the original paint color on the structure. Use of physical devices such as rat guards, sign hoods, razor wire, and glare screen patches to limit access to facilities targeted by taggers. Replacement of ground -mounted signs with signs that have protective coatings or application of protective coatings to signs. City of Corona Program. Chapter 9.30, Graffiti Abatement Procedure, in the Corona Municipal Code, describes the City's procedures related to the prohibition of graffiti in the City and the graffiti removal process. Methods for the removal of graffiti include power washing, gel removers, and painting. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO Construction Plan. To address adverse impacts associated with views of construction access and staging areas, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Resident Engineer will require RCTC/Design During V-5 the design/build contractor to construct the project in accordance with California Department of Final EIR/EIS guilder construction Transportation (Ca!trans) Standard Construction Specifications, including appropriate measures to address visual impacts during construction. Replacement of Trees in the Grand Boulevard Historic District. The requirements of Measure V-3 related to highway planting would apply to the replacement of the 18 trees in the Grand Boulevard Historic District. In addition, the following will be implemented during the design/build phase regarding the removal and replacement of the 18 trees in the Grand Boulevard Historic District: The RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to replace all trees removed from the Historic District at a ratio of 1:1. The RCTC Project Engineer will require CR-1 the design/build contractor to install replacement trees that are compatible with the existing plantings in the Grand Boulevard Historic District and with the overall character of the Historic District, and that the replacement trees be identified in consultation with the City of Corona, the California Department of Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design/ construction Transportation (Department) District Landscape Architect, and a Professional Qualified Staff Architectural Historian from the District. The RCTC Project Engineer will require the construction contractor to install all replacement trees no later than the completion of construction activities in the Grand Boulevard Historic District. Page 10-11 ECR ID CR-2 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Discovery of Cultural Materials. If cultural materials are discovered during construction, the RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to divert all earthmoving activity within and around the immediate discovery area until a qualified archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure RCTC Timing/ Phase During construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO CR-3 Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are discovered during construction, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that further disturbances and activities shall cease in any area or nearby area suspected to overlie remains and the County Coroner shall be contacted. Pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98, if the remains are thought to be Native American, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will then notify the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). At that time, the Department's District 8 Environmental Branch Chief or the District 8 Native American Coordinator (Gary Jones, [909] 383-7505) will be contacted so they may work with the MLD on the respectful treatment and disposition of the remains. Further provisions of PRC 5097.98 are to be followed as applicable. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design guilder During construction CR-4 During final design, the RCTC Project Manager and Department Cultural 1) Resources Professionally Qualified Staff will coordinate with representatives from the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians to identify areas in the project disturbance limits considered sensitive to the Tribe. 2) During final design, the RCTC Project Engineer will identify on the project plans all areas that require monitoring by a Native American Monitor during site preparation, disturbance, and grading. 3) During all site preparation, disturbance, and grading, the RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have a Native American monitor present and conducting monitoring activities in all areas identified by the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians as sensitive, as shown in the project specifications. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder Final design CR-5 Condition for the Grand Boulevard Historic District: Acorn -Style Streetlights. The following condition will be implemented during the project design/build phase regarding the removal, temporary storage, and relocation of up to seven existing acorn -style streetlights within the project disturbance limits in the Grand Boulevard Historic District: - The Riverside County Transportation Commission Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design/ construction Page 10-12 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initia s) Environmental Compliance for Remarks Ultimate Project YES / NO (RCTC) Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to clearly indicate on the final plans the locations of up to seven acorn -style streetlights in the project disturbance limits that are to be removed at the beginning of construction in those areas and to identify the locations where the removed streetlights would be reinstalled. - The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to remove and, as necessary, dismantle the affected acorn -style streetlights and to place them in containers appropriate for storing those fixtures during the project construction period. - The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to store the containers holding the acorn -style streetlights in a secure location protected from public access and weather. - The RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to verify that the locations identified for the reinstallation of the affected streetlights are acceptable to the City of Corona and consistent with the City's requirements for the siting of streetlights. - The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to reinstall the acorn -style streetlights at the locations designated in the final plans when no further construction/disruption will occur at those locations, as follows: - The streetlights will be reinstalled as close to their original locations as possible, based on the project design and available space, in a manner consistent with the other acorn -style streetlights in the Grand Boulevard Historic District and with the City of Corona requirements for the siting of streetlights. - If any of the acorn -style streetlights cannot be reinstalled at or near their original locations, they will be reinstalled elsewhere within the boundaries of the Grand Boulevard Historic District, focusing on locations where acorn -style lights have previously been removed as long as those locations are consistent with the historic spatial relationships of the Historic District and with the City of Corona requirements for the siting of streetlights; and - If the lights cannot be reinstalled as described above, the RCTC Project Engineer will consult with the City of Corona to identify alternative locations. - The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the construction contractor to have an architectural historian on site during the removal, dismantling, and reinstallation of the acorn -style streetlights Page 10-13 ECR ID WQ-1 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Prior to and during construction, Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002), and any subsequent permit, as they relate to the project construction activities. This will include submission of the Permit Registration Documents, including a Notice of Intent (NOI), risk assessment, site map, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), annual fee, and signed certification statement to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) at least 14 days prior to the start of construction activity. The SWPPP will meet the requirements of the Construction General Permit and will identify potential pollutant sources associated with construction activities; identify non -storm water discharges; develop a water quality monitoring and sampling plan; and identify, implement, and maintain best management practices (BMPs) to reduce or eliminate pollutants associated with the construction site. The BMPs identified in the SWPPP will be implemented during project construction. A Notice of Termination (NOT) will be submitted to the SWRCB on the completion of construction and the stabilization of the site. RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to implement SWRCB Resolution No. 2001-046 requiring sampling and analysis during project construction. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure RCTC Timing/ Phase Prior to construction; during construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initia s) Environmental Compliance for Remarks Ultimate Project YES / NO W Q-2 Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with the provisions of the General Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges to Surface Waters that Pose an Insignificant (De Minimums) Threat to Water Quality, Order No. R8-2009-0003, NPDES No. CAG998001, as they relate to discharge of non -storm -water dewatering wastes for the project. This will include submitting to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) an NOI at least 60 days prior to the start of construction, notification of discharge at least 5 days prior to any planned discharges, and monitoring reports by the 30th day of each month following the monitoring period. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder Prior to construction; during construction Page 10-14 ECR ID WQ-3 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Prior to dewatering activities, RCTC's Resident Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure RCTC Timing/ Phase Prior to construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO Engineer will provide the design/build contractor with a copy of the discharge authorization letter issued by the RWQCB Executive Director. WQ 4 Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to follow the procedures outlined in the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Storm Water Quality Handbooks, Project Planning and Design Guide (July 2010 or subsequent issuance) for implementing Design Pollution Prevention and Treatment BMPs for the project. This will include coordination with the Santa Ana RWQCB with respect to the feasibility, maintenance, and monitoring of Treatment BMPs as set forth in the Department's Statewide Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP, May 2003 or subsequent issuance). RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to comply with other provisions identified in the NPDES Permit, Statewide Storm Water Permit, and Waste Discharge Requirements for the State of California, Department of Transportation (Order No. 99-06-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000003). RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to comply with other provisions identified in the NPDES Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, the County of Riverside, and the incorporated cities of Riverside County within the Santa Ana Region (Order No. R8-2010-0033, NPDES No. CAS618033); and for the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District, and the incorporated cities of Orange County within the Santa Ana Region (Order No. R8- 2009-0030), as applicable. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction; during construction GEO-1 During final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer or a Project Geotechnical Engineer or Project Geologist under contract to RCTC will prepare adesign-level geotechnical report. This report will document soil -related constraints and hazards such as slope instability, settlement, liquefaction, or related secondary seismic impacts that may be present along the project segments of State Route 91 (SR-91) and Interstate 15 (1-15). This Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design Page 10-15 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures report will require review and approval by the California Department of Transportation (Department). The performance standard for this report will be the geotechnical design standards of the State of California and the Department, as they apply to the project features and structures. RCTC will submit the design -level geotechnical report to the Department for review and approval during final design. The report will include but not be limited to: Evaluation of expansive soils and recommendations regarding construction procedures and/or design criteria to minimize the effect of these soils on the construction of the project and to minimize effects related to expansive soils on project facilities in the long term. Identification of potential liquefiable areas within the project limits and recommendations for mitigation. Evaluation of the corrosion potential of soils along those segments of the project alignment not previously tested (i.e., areas along 1-15 and the westbound side of SR-91). Demonstration that no retaining walls or excavations will occur in the existing landslide areas, or that landslide stabilization measures independent of the retaining wall design are included in the final project design. Demonstration that the design of all retaining walls is geotechnically suitable for project area soils, and verification that project design has considered and addressed the possibility of scour associated with the Santa Ana River. Demonstration that side slopes can be designed and graded so that surface erosion of the engineered fill is not increased compared to existing, natural conditions. RCTC's Project Engineer will incorporate the measures recommended in the design -level geotechnical report in the final design and project specifications. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the measures recommended in the design -level geotechnical report as included in the project specifications. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initia s) Environmental Compliance for Remarks Ultimate Project YES / NO G EO-2 RCTC's Resident Engineer will maintain a quality assurance/quality control plan during construction. The plan will include observing, monitoring, and testing by the Project Geotechnical Engineer and/or the Project Geologist under contract to RCTC prior to and during construction to confirm that the geotechnical/geologic recommendations from the design -level geotechnical report and standard design and construction practices are fulfilled by the Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Page 10-16 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures design/build contractor, or if different site conditions are encountered, appropriate changes are made to accommodate such issues. The geotechnical engineer will submit weekly reports to RCTC and the Department during all project -related grading, excavation, and construction activities. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO GEO-3 During final design, if blasting is required, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to prepare a blasting plan to minimize potential hazards related to blasting activities. The blasting plan will address all applicable standards in accordance with the United States Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining. The issues to be addressed in the blasting plan will include, but are not limited to, the following: hours of blasting activity, notification to adjacent property owners, noise and vibration, and dust control. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the blasting plan prior to and during any blasting during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design PAL-1 Following preparation of suitable construction drawings and elevations and during final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer will require the Designated Principal Paleontologist under contract to RCTC to prepare a Paleontological Mitigation Plan (PMP). The PMP will provide guidance for developing and implementing paleontological mitigation efforts, including field work, laboratory methods, and curation. This PMP will be consistent with guidelines provided in the Department's Standard Environmental Reference (SER), Environmental Handbook, Volume I, Chapter 8, Paleontology, the Counties of Riverside and Orange, and the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP), and will be specifically tailored to the resources and sedimentary formations in the disturbance limits. The part of the PMP that covers excavation will include but not be limited to: Prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Designated Principal Paleontologist or his/her representative will attend a meeting with the design/build contractor to explain the likelihood for encountering paleontological resources during construction, what resources may be discovered, and the methods that will be employed if anything is discovered. Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design Builder Final design/ construction PAL-1 (cont'd) RCTC's Principal Paleontologist will conduct a preconstruction field survey in areas identified as Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Page10-17 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures having high paleontological sensitivity after vegetation and any pavement are removed, followed by salvage of any observed surface paleontological resources prior to the beginning of additional ground - disturbing activities. The survey will be conducted by the Principal Paleontologist or their representative who is qualified to identify vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant fossils. During ground disturbance, grading, and excavation, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to retain a Principal Paleontologist. The Principal Paleontologist will provide a Paleontological Monitor who is qualified to recognize and professionally collect vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant fossils. The qualified Paleontological Monitor will initially be present on site on a full-time basis whenever these types of construction activities occur in sediments that have a high paleontological sensitivity rating and also on a spot-check basis in sediments that have a low sensitivity rating. Monitoring may be reduced to a part-time basis if no resources are being discovered in sediments with a high sensitivity rating. Any reduction or modification in scheduling of monitoring will be determined by the Principal Paleontologist and RCTC's Resident Engineer. The qualified Paleontological Monitor will inspect fresh cuts and/or spoils piles to recover paleontological resources. That monitor will be empowered to temporarily divert construction equipment away from the immediate area of the discovery. The monitor will be equipped to rapidly stabilize and remove fossils to avoid prolonged delays to construction schedules. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initia s) Environmental Compliance for Remarks Ultimate Project YES / NO PAL-1 (cont'd) If large mammal fossils or large concentrations of fossils are encountered, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to make heavy equipment available to assist in the removal and collection of large materials. Localized concentrations of small (or micro-) vertebrates may be found in all native sediments. Therefore, the qualified Paleontological Monitor will occasionally spot -screen native sediments through one -eighth- to one -twentieth -inch mesh screens to determine whether microfossils are present. If microfossils are encountered, a standard sediment sample (up to 3 cubic yards or 6,000 pounds) will be collected and processed through one -twentieth -inch Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Page 10-18 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO mesh screens to recover additional fossils. Processing of large bulk samples is best accomplished at a designated location within the project limits that will be accessible throughout the duration of construction but will also be away from any cut or fill areas or active construction areas. Processing is usually completed concurrently with construction and with the intent to have all processing completed before, or just after, project completion. A small corner of a staging or equipment parking area is an ideal location for this activity. If water is not available, the location should be accessible for a water truck to occasionally fill containers with water. PAL-1 5th sub -point RCTC's Project Engineer will require the Principal Paleontologist or their representative to prepare any recovered specimens to the point of identification and permanent preservation. This includes sorting any washed mass samples to recover small invertebrate and vertebrate fossils, the removal of surplus sediment from around larger specimens to reduce the volume of storage for the repository and storage cost, and the addition of approved chemical hardeners/stabilizers to fragile specimens. This is best accomplished at a designated laboratory with access to fossil preparation tools, magnifying equipment, storage boxes and vials, and chemical hardeners. Processing of fossils through the lab is best accomplished concurrently with construction, especially if numerous fossils are being collected. Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction PAL-1 6th sub -point Specimens will be identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible and curated into an institutional repository with retrievable storage. Repository institutions usually charge a one-time fee based on volume, so removing surplus sediment is important. The repository institution may be a local museum or university that has a curator who can retrieve the specimens on request. RCTC's Project Manager and the California Department of Transportation (Department) will require that a draft curation agreement be in place between the Principal Paleontologist and an approved curation facility prior to the initiation of paleontological monitoring and mitigation activities for the project. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with the provisions of the PMP during all ground disturbance, grading, and excavation activities. This will include appropriate coordination Final EIR/EIS RCTC/Design guilder During construction Page 10-19 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures with RCTC's Designated Principal Paleontologist and the provision of qualified paleontological monitors consistent with the provisions of the PMP. After the completion of all ground disturbance and grading, RCTC's Project Manager will require the design/build contractor to have the design/build contractor's Designated Principal Paleontologist to prepare a Final Paleontological Mitigation Report (PMR) that summarizes the project area investigated, the field and laboratory methods used, the stratigraphic units inspected, the types of fossils recovered, and the scientific significance of the curated collection. RCTC's Project Manager will retain a copy of the report for the RCTC project files and will provide a copy of the report to the Department. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO HW-1 First Sub -point A Phase I ESA was conducted for the Mobil No. 18- FLM site (616 Paseo Grande Street, Corona, California), and a Phase I ESA and Phase II Site Investigation were conducted for the Honda Cars of Corona site (231 South Lincoln Avenue, Corona, California) as part of the DSI, in accordance with ASTM Standard E 1527-05. The DSI identified Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) associated with on -site releases. Based on the results of the DSI, the following measures will be implemented for these two sites of potential environmental concern: Honda Cars of Corona Site: During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to consult with regulators, confirm that the final confirmation sampling has been completed at the site, and that contaminant investigation for the site has received regulatory site closure. In addition, prior to the completion of final design, the RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design build/build contractor to properly abandon all monitoring wells and vapor extraction wells on the site in accordance with regulatory requirements. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance HW-1 Second Sub -point Mobil No. 18-FLM Site: During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct further investigation on contaminants in soils on site after a work plan is prepared and additional information is available. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design; prior to disturbance HW-2 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance Page 10-20 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures require the design/build contractor to conduct site investigations for any new release sites that are within the project right-of-way. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct these site investigations in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and in accordance with ASTM Standard E 1527-05. If contaminants are determined to be present during the site investigation, RCTC's Resident Engineer may require the design/build contractor to prepare one or more of the following specialized reports: Remedial Actions Options Report, Sensitive Receptor Survey, Human Health/Ecological Risk Assessment, and/or Quarterly Monitoring Report. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO HW-3 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct an aerially deposited lead (ADL) study for soil if excavation will exceed 3 feet (ft) below ground surface (bgs) in unpaved locations adjacent to the State right-of-way between Gypsum Canyon Road and Magnolia Avenue, or 5 ft bgs in unpaved locations in areas where there would be fiber-optic signage along eastbound State Route 91 (SR-91) starting east of the Weir Canyon Road undercrossing and extending east of the Gypsum Canyon Road undercrossing. During construction, if soils within the project disturbance limits along SR-91 are removed off site, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to treat the soils as State hazardous waste and to properly dispose of those soils at an appropriate State -certified landfill facility. In addition, during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to test all soils imported on site as fill. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to use only clean soils as imported fill on site. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance HW-4 1. Predemolition asbestos and/or LBP surveys were conducted for 21 road structures that will be renovated or demolished during project construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction HW-4 2. Based on the results of the ACM surveys of the 21 freeway structures, the SR-91 /State Route 71 (SR- 71) Separation (Bridge No. 56-0587), East SR- 91/North SR-71 Connector Separation (Bridge No. 56-0635), Prado Overhead (Bridge No. 56-0637), West Grand Boulevard Undercrossing (UC) (Bridge Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Page 10-21 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures No. 56-0445 L/R), El Cerrito Road UC (Bridge No. 56-0558 L/R), and Serfas Club Drive UC (Bridge No. 56-0368 L/R) contain ACMs. Therefore, prior to disturbance associated with renovation or demolition of these bridges, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have a licensed asbestos contractor properly remove and dispose of asbestos -containing railing brace pads from these structures. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO HW-4 3. Based on the results of the LBP surveys of the 21 freeway structures, the Main Street UC (Bridge No. 56-0448 L/R), McKinley Street UC (Bridge No. 56- 0365), and Buchanan Street Overcrossing (Bridge No. 56-0368) contain LBPs. Therefore, prior to disturbance associated with renovation or demolition of these bridges, RCTC's Resident Engineer will inform the design/build contractor of the presence of LBPs in those structures. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to protect construction workers from exposure to lead dust when disturbing LBP during bridge renovation or demolition activities. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction HW-4 4. In addition, a hazardous materials survey identified two areas with potential hazardous materials. Based on the results of the visual hazardous materials survey of the bridges, light fixture components and possible lead metal railing braces may pose an additional concern. These components include: - Light fixtures (some flush -mounted) on the undersides of many of the bridges. At a few of the bridges that cross over the freeway, there are light posts. The light bulbs in these fixtures may contain mercury. - The Temescal Wash Bridge overhead has some metal braces and wire tension cable at joint locations on the underside of the bridge. While no suspected ACMs were observed or sampled at these locations, the presence of metal washers and spacers, which may contain lead, was noted. - Soft metal railing brace pads that may be composed of lead metal were observed at the following bridges: Pierce Street UC (Bridge No. 56-0369 L/R) and Buchanan Street Overcrossing (Bridge No. 56-0368) Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction HW-4 5. Therefore, during final design and prior to any disturbance of these facilities and materials, RCTC's Resident Engineer will inform the design/build contractor of the presence and location of the Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design; prior to disturbance Page 10-22 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures hazardous materials in the freeway structures described above. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO HW-4 6. Prior to the disturbance of freeway structures, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have asbestos -containing railing brace pads removed and disposed of by a licensed asbestos abatement contractor. If abated, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to remove non -friable ACMs in accordance with Category II asbestos abatement procedures as defined in Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Fed -OSHA) 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1926.1101. However, if mechanical means are utilized for abatement of ACMs, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to convert these non -friable materials into a friable state during removal activities and manage these materials under Class I asbestos abatement procedures. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction HW-4 7. Prior to disturbance of freeway structures, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly test any areas that have not been previously tested, and remove and dispose of any materials from these structures that exceed California Health and Safety Code criteria for hazardous waste at an appropriate State -certified landfill facility. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction HW-4 8. During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, demolition, or renovation activities, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct predemolition asbestos, LBP, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), and/or mercury surveys of any buildings that will be renovated or demolished. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design; prior to disturbance HW-4 9. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly remove and dispose of any materials from these structures that exceed California Health and Safety Code criteria for hazardous waste at an appropriate State -certified landfill facility. Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction HW-5, Part 1 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct inspections for potential PCBs in utility pole -mounted transformers that will be relocated or removed as part of the project Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to construction Page 10-23 ECR ID HW-5, Part 2 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to consider leaking transformers a PCB hazard unless tested and confirmed otherwise, and to handle them accordingly. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/ Phase Prior to construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO HW-6 During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to test, remove, and dispose of any yellow traffic striping and pavement marking materials in accordance with the California Department of Transportation (Department) Construction Manual, Chapter 7, Section 106. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction HW-7 During final design and prior to any dewatering activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct additional coordination with the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health when groundwater dewatering will occur in the vicinity of contaminated soils or contaminated groundwater sites. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design HW-8 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance activities, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to sample soil adjacent to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad tracks that will be disturbed during construction for the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons, metals, solvents, and other potential contaminants (e.g., polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons [PNAs], kerosene, ACMs, chlorinated hydrocarbons, pesticides, and herbicides). That testing will determine whether the soils require special handling and disposal during construction. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly dispose of all soils exceeding the criteria for State or federal hazardous waste at an appropriate State - certified landfill facility. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance HW-9 Prior to the start of construction, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to prepare a site -specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) by a certified industrial hygienist. The HASP will be based on evaluation of proposed construction activities, the potential hazards identified in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Phase II testing, and any future assessments prepared for the project. The HASP will outline specific procedures for encountering expected and unexpected contaminants. It will include safe work practices, contaminant monitoring, the need for personal protective equipment, emergency response Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Page 10-24 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures procedures, and safety training requirements to protect construction workers and third parties working on site. The HASP will be in compliance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910 and 1926 and all other applicable federal, State, and local regulations and requirements. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the requirements in the HASP. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO Prior to the start of construction, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to prepare a soils and groundwater Contaminant Management Plan (CMP). The CMP will include procedures for contaminant monitoring and HW-10 identification as well as temporary storage, handling, treatment, and disposal of hazardous waste and materials in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and requirements. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the soils and groundwater CMP. Prior to the start of construction, RCTC's Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to prepare a Construction Contingency Plan (CCP) in accordance with the Department's Unknown Hazards Procedures for Construction. The CCP will include provisions for emergency response in the event that unidentified underground storage tanks (USTs), hazardous materials, petroleum hydrocarbons, or hazardous or solid wastes are discovered during construction activities. The CCP will address UST decommissioning, field screening, contaminant materials testing methods, mitigation and contaminant management requirements, and health Prior to construction; HW-11 and safety requirements for construction workers. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement the CCP during all construction activities. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder during construction During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to cease work immediately if an unexpected release of hazardous substances is found in reportable quantities. If an unexpected release of hazardous substances is found in reportable quantities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to notify the National Response Center by calling 1-800- 424-8802. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to perform cleanup of Page 10-25 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures unexpected releases under the appropriate federal, State, or local agency oversight. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO HW-12 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to notify Underground Service Alert (USA) at least 2 days prior to excavation by calling 811 to require that all utility owners within the project disturbance limits identify the locations of underground transmission lines and facilities. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction HW-13 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to submit the fees to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) at least 10 days prior to proceeding with any demolition or renovation of a structure (refer to SCAQMD Rule 1403). RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to adhere to the requirements of SCAQMD Rule 1403 during renovation and demolition activities. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction HW-14 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to test all wooden utility poles, railroad ties, and other treated wood waste material that will be removed and disposed of as part of the project are tested for wood treatments/preservatives. RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to test soils surrounding railroad ties for wood treatments/preservatives. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly dispose of all treated wood waste as required in Alternative Management Standards for Wood Treated Waste in Section 67386.6(a)(2)(B)(3) of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). Alternative Management Standards for Wood Treated Waste. In addition, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to require any personnel who come in contact with treated wood waste or contaminated soils to follow all applicable requirements under Section 67386.6(a)(2)(B)(3) of the CCR and to be trained in the proper identification, disposal, and safe handling of treated wood waste and contaminated soils. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance SC-1 Development of a Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. Prior to any site preparation, grading and/or construction activities, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to develop a Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. That plan will Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Page 10-26 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO specifically incorporate measures for controlling particulate and other emissions during construction from the following sources: California Department of Transportation (Department) Standard Specifications Sections 10 and 18 (Dust Control) Department's Standard Specifications Section 39-3.06 (Asphalt Concrete Plant Emissions) South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403, including control measures from Tables 1, 2, and 3 in that rule The plan will also include the following measures: Control of ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per the manufacturers' specifications. Control of material on all trucks hauling excavated or graded material from the site by compliance with State Vehicle Code Section 23114, with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)(2), and (e)(4) as amended, regarding the prevention of such material spilling onto public streets and roads. SC-2 Implementation of the Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. During all site preparation, grading, construction, clean-up, and other activities during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with the measures in the Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. RCTC's Resident Engineer will conduct site inspections at least once a month to ensure that the design/build contractor is complying with the provisions of the Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder SC-3 Prior to any construction activities, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the grading plans and Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction project sp_ecifications show the anticipated duration of construction in individual construction areas along the project alignment. SC-4 During final design and prior to any ground disturbance, RCTC's Project Geologist will conduct Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to disturbance appropriate testing to determine whether there are asbestos -containing materials (ACMs) present in the project disturbance limits. SC-5 If RCTC's Project Geologist determines that ACMs are present in the project disturbance limits during that final preconstruction inspection, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction contractor to properly remove and dispose of those ACMs. Page 10-27 ECR ID N-1 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Based on studies completed to date, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) intends to incorporate noise abatement in the form of reasonable and feasible barriers at 15 to 16 locations, depending on the selected alternative, ranging in height from 8 feet (ft) to 14 ft, depending on the alternative and the design variations. Calculations based on preliminary design data indicate that the barriers will reduce noise levels by 5 to 15 A -weighted decibels (dBA) for 333 to 419 homes and the Green River Golf Club, depending on the design variation. If during final design conditions have substantially changed, noise abatement at some of these locations may not be necessary. The final decision on noise abatement will be made on completion of the project design and the public involvement processes for the environmental document. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to construct the noise abatement measures included in the final design and project specifications. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/ Phase During construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initia s) Environmental Compliance for Remarks Ultimate Project YES / NO N-2 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to control noise from construction activity consistent with the California Department of Transportation's (Department's) Standard Specifications, Section 14-8.02, "Noise Control," and Standard Special Provisions (SSP) S5- 310. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that noise levels from construction operations within the State right-of- way between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. not exceed 86 dBA at a distance of 50 ft. The noise level requirement will apply to the equipment on the job site or related to the job, including, but not limited to trucks, transit mixers, or transient equipment that may or may not be owned by the contractor. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to use an alternative warning method instead of a sound signal unless required by safety laws. In addition, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to equip all internal combustion engines with the manufacturer - recommended mufflers and not operate any internal combustion engine on the job site without the appropriate mufflers. As directed by RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor will implement appropriate additional noise mitigation measures, including changing the location of Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Page 10-28 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures stationary construction equipment, turning off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work, and installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO N-3 In accordance with the Municipal Codes of the Cities of Anaheim, Corona, Riverside, and Norco, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to limit construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding weekends and holidays. If construction is needed outside those hours or days, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to coordinate with the affected local jurisdiction. In addition to Measure N-3, Measure GE0-3 specifically addresses potential noise control in the event blasting is necessary during construction along State Route 91 (SR-91) east of Interstate 15 (1-15). Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction N-4 If noise barriers proposed for 1-15 (with the exception of Noise Barrier [NB] K1-A), as part of a separate project, are not constructed within 5 years of the completion of the construction the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP), the RCTC will initiate a separate project to construct those walls. Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction N-5 1. Residences that would experience a severe traffic noise impact of 75 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) or higher would qualify for consideration of unusual and extraordinary abatement under Alternative 2f. NBs M-1, M-2, M-3, and D1-B are considered unusual and extraordinary noise abatement. 2. During the design/build phase, RCTC will contract with a qualified acoustical specialist to conduct interior noise analyses at residences projected to experience severe traffic noise impacts. Interior noise abatement for each of those homes will be evaluated on a case -by -case basis per FHWA guidance and noise protocol. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design Compensatory Mitigation (1) Compensatory Mitigation: 1.) Compensatory mitigation for the effects to coastal sage scrub (CSS) vegetation within Riverside County will be achieved through project consistency with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Permanent effects to CSS vegetation in Orange County occupied by coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN) or within CAGN-designated critical habitat will be mitigated as Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction Page 10-29 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures described in the Biological Opinion received from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on November 30, 2011. Specifically, 16.03 acres (ac) of habitat (e.g., CSS) suitable for CAGN breeding, dispersal, and foraging will be restored in Chino Hills State Park (CHSP) (or another off -site area approved by the USFWS) during construction of the Initial Phases under Alternatives 1 and 2. This will increase the amount of conserved habitat available for CAGN in the area. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO Compensatory 2.) Temporarily impacted coastal sage scrub (CSS) and other vegetation communities used by California gnatcatcher (CAGN) for dispersal and foraging will be restored with in -kind or better vegetation during and after construction as the construction in each disturbed area is completed (e.g., after each phase of construction). Measures TE-1 through TE-17, provided later in the Environmental Commitments Record (ECR), were developed from the Biological RCTC/Design During Mitigation (2 & Opinion. Final EIR/EIS guilder construction 3) 3.) The plant palette used for restored areas in the project limits and CHSP (or other areas approved by the USFWS) will be approved by the District Biologist at each location. The District Biologist may consult with local responsible agencies (e.g., local fire agencies) regarding the plant palettes if the District Biologist determines that such consultation would be appropriate. 4. Compensatory mitigation for riparian communities in both counties will be required for United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Section 404 and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Section 1600 permitting. Typically, riparian habitat subject to Corps and CDFG jurisdiction is mitigated at a minimum mitigation -to -effect ratio of 2:1 for permanent effects and 1:1 for temporary effects, which is consistent with Corps and CDFG policies for Compensatory no net loss of riparian/riverine habitat (e.g., wetlands) RCTC/Design During Mitigation (4) standards. Mitigation for permanent effects will be conducted in advance during the Initial Phases in the form of habitat restoration and/or enhancement in on - or off -site areas where similar riparian habitat exists. Final EIR/EIS Builder construction Temporary effects to riparian communities will be mitigated at a minimum mitigation ratio of 1:1 to be replaced on site in kind after the temporary impact has occurred. Final details for compensatory mitigation will be coordinated and environmental clearance will be obtained (if necessary) through Page 10-30 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO coordination among the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), the California Department of Transportation (Department), the resource agencies, and third -party landowners. Compensatory Mitigation (5) 5. Prior to beginning construction, a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) will be developed in coordination with the Corps, CDFG, and USFWS that ensures no net loss of riparian habitat value or acreage. Final details for compensatory mitigation will be evaluated through coordination among the Department, RCTC, and the resource agencies. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Prior to construction Item 6 under Compensatory Mitigation 6. The HMMP will comply with all terms and conditions set forth in the permits and opinions issued by the resource agencies for the project and will include, at a minimum, the following provisions: Permanent impacts to riparian/riverine areas will be replaced on or off site at a minimum ratio of 3:1 with in -kind habitat. Permanent effects to native habitat will be replaced on or off site at a minimum 2:1 ratio with in -kind habitat. Temporary effects to native vegetation will be replaced at a minimum 1:1 ratio with in -kind habitat restored in place within the project area. If off -site restoration is conducted, it will be done within the same watershed as the project. The HMMP will identify a success criterion of at least 80 percent cover of native riparian vegetation or composition structure similar to existing adjacent high -quality riparian vegetation. Further criteria specified in the HMMP will include an establishment period for the replacement habitat, regular trash removal, and regular maintenance and monitoring activities to ensure the success of the mitigation plan. After construction, annual summary reports of biological monitoring will be provided to the Corps, CDFG, and USFWS documenting the monitoring effort. The duration of the monitoring and reporting will be established by resource agency permit conditions. Compensatory mitigation for effects to oak trees (excluding California scrub oaks) with trunk sizes above 8 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) will involve replacement at a mitigation -to -effect ratio of 3:1. Heritage oaks (oaks with a greater than 36-inch dbh) will be replaced at a mitigation -to -effect ratio of 10:1, if feasible. Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction; after construction Item 6 under Compensatory If the replacement trees cannot be planted in the immediate vicinity of where the previous trees were located, they may be planted elsewhere in the project Final EIR/EIS RCTC During construction Page 10-31 ECR ID Mitigation (cont'd) Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures area, subject to approval by the Department Landscape Architect and the affected local jurisdiction, if any. All compensatory mitigation for the entire project, both the Initial Phases and Ultimate Projects, will be provided in the Initial Phases of the SR-91 CIP Build Alternatives. RCTC will provide appropriate funds, to be maintained in a non -wasting endowment, to Chino Hills State Park to provide for the long-term maintenance and management of the restored areas within the park to support gnatcatcher habitat in perpetuity. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO 1. During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to delineate all environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) within the project footprint and the immediately surrounding areas in the project specifications. ESAs include CSS, chaparral, and riparian/riverine vegetation; the protected zone of any oak tree (5 feet [ft]) outside the dripline or 15 ft from the trunk of the tree, whichever is greater) or oak habitat; and designated critical habitat (with constituent elements). 2. In addition, all restoration and mitigation areas at Coal Canyon adjacent to the project footprint will be designated ESAs on the project plans. 3. Prior to clearing or construction, RCTC's Resident Final design/ NC-1 Engineer will require the design/build contractor to install highly visible barriers (such as orange construction fencing) around all designated ESAs. No grading or fill activity of any type will be permitted within the ESAs. In addition, no construction activities, materials, or equipment will be allowed within the ESAs. All construction equipment will be operated in a manner so as to prevent accidental damage to nearby preserved areas. No structure of any kind, or incidental storage of equipment or supplies, will be allowed within the ESAs. Silt fence barriers will be installed at the ESA boundaries to prevent accidental deposition of fill material in areas where vegetation is adjacent to planned grading activities. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder construction RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have a Designated Qualified Biologist under contract. The Designated During NC-2 Qualified Biologist will monitor construction in the vicinity of the ESAs for the duration of construction to flush any wildlife species present prior to construction and to ensure that all vegetation removal, best Final EIR/EIS Design Builder construction Page 10-32 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures management practices (BMPs), ESAs, and all avoidance and minimization measures are properly implemented. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO To avoid effects to nesting birds, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to conduct any native or exotic vegetation removal or tree trimming activities outside of the nesting bird season (i.e., February 15—September 15). In the event that vegetation clearing is necessary during the nesting season, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have the Designated Qualified Biologist conduct a preconstruction survey within 300 ft of construction areas no more than 7 days prior to construction to identify the locations of nests. Should nesting birds be found, an exclusionary buffer of 300 ft will be established by the Designated Biologist around each nest site. This buffer will be clearly marked in the field by construction personnel under guidance of the design/build contractor's Designated Qualified Prior to NC-3 Biologist, and construction or clearing will not be conducted within this zone until the Designated Qualified Biologist determines that the young have fledged or the nest is no longer active. In the event that construction must occur within the 300 ft buffer, the Designated Biologist will take steps to ensure that construction activities do not disturb or disrupt nesting activities. If the Designated Biologist determines that construction activities are disturbing or disrupting nesting activities, the Designated Final EIR/EIS Design Builder construction; during construction Biologist will notify the Resident Engineer, who has the authority to halt construction to reduce the noise and/or disturbance to the nests. Responses may include, but are not limited to, turning off vehicle engines and other equipment whenever possible to reduce noise, installing a protective noise barrier between the nest and the construction activities, and/or working in other areas until the young have fledged. When work is conducted during the fire season (as identified by the Orange County Fire Authority [OCFA], Riverside County Fire Department [RCFD], City of Norco Fire Department, and/or the City of During NC-4 Corona Fire Department) adjacent to any vegetated open space, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that appropriate firefighting equipment (e.g., extinguishers, shovels, water tankers) is available on site during all phases Final EIR/EIS Design Builder construction Page 10-33 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures of project construction to help minimize the potential for human -caused wildfires. Shields, protective mats, and/or other fire -preventive methods will be used during grinding, welding, and other spark -inducing activities. Personnel trained in fire hazards, preventive actions, and responses to fires will advise contractors regarding fire risk from all construction - related activities. If a responsible fire agency (OCFA, RCFD, City of Norco Fire Department, or City of Corona Fire Department) requires the RCTC to clear defensible spaces during construction, the RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor, and the design/build contractor's Designated Qualified Biologist will coordinate with the USFWS prior to this clearing effort. In the event there are resources in the areas identified for defensible clearing, RCTC's Resident Engineer and the Designated Qualified Biologist will coordinate with any applicable permitting agencies regarding possible effects to those resources prior to approving the defensible clearing of any areas by the contractor. During all Red Flag Warning periods as issued by the National Weather Service, the design/build contractor will not be allowed to operate mechanized equipment or equipment that could throw off sparks or potentially start fires in any areas of natural open space in CHSP or other areas. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date and Initia s) Environmental Compliance for Remarks Ultimate Project YES / NO NC-5 During final design, the Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify developed or nonsensitive upland habitat areas appropriate for use during construction for equipment maintenance, staging, dispensing of fuel and oil, or any other such activities and will delineate and identify those areas on the project specifications. The Designated Qualified Biologist will specifically identify developed or nonsensitive upland habitat areas to prevent any spill runoff on those sites from entering waters of the United States. During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that all equipment maintenance, staging, dispensing of fuel and oil, or any other such activities occur in developed or designated nonsensitive upland habitat areas designated in the project specifications for those uses. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; during construction NC-6 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify the locations of all existing wildlife fencing Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to and during construction Page 10-34 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures and will delineate and identify those areas on the project specifications. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to install new fencing prior to the removal of any existing wildlife fencing to protect against wildlife -vehicle incidents. The new fencing must be the same or greater height than the previous wildlife fence. The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that the fencing is maintained and functional throughout the project construction. The Department will ensure that the fencing is maintained and functional throughout the life of the project to prevent wildlife -vehicle incidents. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO NC-7 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify the habitat adjacent to Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash that is anticipated to be disturbed by construction activities and will delineate those areas on the project specifications. As detailed in the project specifications, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to restore habitat adjacent to Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash that was disturbed during construction as construction in the affected areas is completed. That restoration will be provided on a 1:1 ratio, using native vegetation as determined by RCTC and the Department in coordination with the resource agencies. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; during construction NC-8 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to delineate all wildlife corridors within the project footprint and the immediately surrounding areas as Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) in the project specifications. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that equipment maintenance, lighting, and staging are limited to designated areas away from wildlife corridor entrances. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to and during construction NC-9 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will develop design and construction management measures to direct temporary construction noise and nighttime construction lighting and permanent facility lighting away from the wildlife corridors, bridges (structures potentially occupied by bats), biologically Final EIR/EIS RCTC Final design; prior to construction Page 10-35 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO sensitive areas, Western Riverside County MSHCP Conservation Areas, vegetated drainages, CSS in CAGN-designated critical habitat with long-term conservation value for covered species. Those design measures will be approved by Department District 8 Biology/Environmental prior to the completion of final design. If construction work must be done at night, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly implement the measures developed during final design to direct noise and direct lighting away from the wildlife corridors, bridges, and biologically sensitive areas during those nighttime construction activities. NC-10 Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to keep the wildlife corridors clear of all equipment or structures that could potentially serve as barriers to wildlife passage. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to and during construction NC-11 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the existing culvert structures that will be extended or modified by the project are designed so that they are at least as compatible with wildlife usage as the existing culvert structures. Those culverts will be shown on the project specifications. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly implement these compatible culvert designs during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design NC-12 Within Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to limit the hours of construction within 1,000 ft of the centerline of each of these crossings to daylight hours (7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.) to ensure continued use of these wildlife corridors during construction, with the exception of limited periods when evening or night work is required for safety or operations reasons. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction NC-13 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the design and construction process for all structures required for bridge and/or culvert work within Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash, will not block the main underpass at these locations during construction. RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the design of the scaffolding and false work is restricted to the sides of the underpass and limits of the existing exclusionary chain -link fence to maintain Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; during construction Page 10-36 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures the existing width of the wildlife corridor during construction activities. During construction within Coal Canyon, B Canyon, Fresno Canyon/Wardlow Wash, and Bedford Wash, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that all structures required for bridgework are installed and constructed consistent with the final design specifically to avoid blocking the main underpass during construction and to restrict all scaffolding and false work to the sides of the underpass and limits of the existing exclusionary chain -link fence to maintain the existing width of the wildlife corridor during construction activities. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO NC-14 Minimal equipment staging area is available at the eastbound Coal Canyon off -ramp along the sides of the paved road and will be used for the staging of equipment for Coal Canyon work only. During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the available area for construction staging at the eastbound Coal Canyon off -ramp is delineated on the project specifications. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to minimize the use of this area during construction and, where possible, to avoid the area from February 15 to September 1. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that vehicles staged in this area are equipped with security lights. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; during construction NC-15 During construction within Coal Canyon, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to keep the Coal Canyon on- and off - ramps open at all times for emergency and police personnel. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that use of the emergency access road as a turnaround or shortcut for any construction or non -emergency traffic is prohibited. That road will only be used during bridge construction and general road construction at Coal Canyon. RCTC's Resident Engineer will also require the design/build contractor to ensure that, in general, no hauling is allowed at night through underpasses and freeway off -ramps. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction NC-16 During construction in Coal Canyon, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to close the gates at Coal Canyon at the Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction end of each construction day. The locations of those gates will be shown on the project specifications. Page 10-37 ECR ID NC-17 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify existing and proposed conservation areas within the project footprint or in the immediately surrounding areas and will designate those areas on the project specifications. To reduce impacts where the project interfaces with existing or proposed conservation areas prior to and during construction, RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that the project complies with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines in Section 6.1.4 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP. The project specifications will include applicable guidelines from the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure RCTC Timing/ Phase Final design Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO NC-18 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify existing Criteria Areas within the project footprint or in the immediately surrounding areas and will designate those areas on the project specifications. To reduce impacts where the project is located within the Criteria Area, RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that the project complies with the applicable siting and design criteria and the Construction Guidelines in Section 7.5.2 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP. The project specifications will include applicable guidelines from the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design NC-19 During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to comply with guidelines from the Western Riverside County MSHCP included in the project specifications. The SR-91 CIP is a covered project. Therefore, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that the SR-91 CIP complies with all Western Riverside County MSHCP Construction Guidelines and Standard BMPs prior to and during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction WET-1 Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Manager will ensure that prior to any clearing or construction, a Section 404 Nationwide Permit is obtained through the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). RCTC's Resident Engineer will retain a copy of the Corps permit at the construction site and will ensure that the conditions in that permit are properly implemented prior to and during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Page 10-38 ECR ID WET-2 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that prior to any clearing or construction, a Streambed Alteration Agreement with California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) is obtained. RCTC's Resident Engineer will retain a copy of the CDFG agreement at the construction site and will ensure that the conditions in that agreement are properly implemented prior to and during construction. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/ Phase Prior to construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO WET-3 RCTC's Project Manager will ensure that prior to any clearing or construction, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is obtained. RCTC's Resident Engineer will retain a copy of the Section 401 certification at the construction site and will ensure that the conditions in that certification are properly implemented prior to and during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction PS-1 As part of the SR-91 CUP Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, trees and shrubs will be planted at appropriate locations, and the species list to be used for those plantings will include Southern California black walnut and Coulter's matilija poppy. At a minimum, 30 Southern California black walnut trees will be planted. Final EIR/EIS RCTC's Project Manager Required for Initial Phase; Timing during the design/build phase AS-1 During final design, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify all areas of potential burrowing owl (BUOW) habitat within the project footprint or in the immediately surrounding areas and will designate those areas on the project specifications. To ensure that any BUOW that may occupy the site in the future are not affected by construction activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to have preconstruction BUOW surveys conducted by a Designated Qualified Biologist within 30 days prior to any phase of construction in the areas identified as potential BUOW habitat. These preconstruction surveys are also required to comply with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and the California Fish and Game Code. If any of the preconstruction surveys determine that BUOW are present, one or more of the following mitigation measures may be required: (1) avoidance of active nests/burrows and surrounding buffer area during construction activities; Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design Page 10-39 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures (2) passive relocation of individual owls; (3) active relocation of individual owls; and Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO (4) preservation of on -site habitat with long-term conservation value for the owl. The specifics of the required measures will be coordinated among the Department District Biologist, RCTC's Project Manager, RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor, the design/build contractor's Designated Qualified Biologist, and the resource agencies. RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that any BUOW measures determined to be required based on the results of the preconstruction surveys and the required coordination are properly implemented by the design/build contractor prior to and during construction in the BUOW areas identified in the surveys. Final EIR/EIS AS-2 During final design, RCTC's Project Engineer will coordinate with the Designated Qualified Biologist to identify all areas of potential bat habitat within the project footprint or in the immediately surrounding areas and will designate those areas on the project specifications. RCTC's Project Manager will require the design/build contractor to have a Designated Qualified Bat Biologist survey all potential bat habitat in June, prior to construction, to assess the potential for the presence of maternity roosts because maternity roosts are generally formed in late spring. The Designated Qualified Bat Biologist will also perform preconstruction surveys because bat roosts can change seasonally. The surveys will include a combination of structure inspection, sampling, exit counts, and acoustic surveys. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design AS-3 To avoid direct mortality to bats roosting in areas subject to effects from construction activities, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that any structure with potential bat habitat will have temporary bat exclusion devices installed under the supervision of the Designated Qualified Bat Biologist prior to construction. The installation of the exclusion devices will be conducted during the fall (September or October) to avoid trapping flightless young inside during the summer months or hibernating individuals during the winter. Such exclusion efforts must be continued to keep the structures free of bats until the completion of construction. Replacement roosting habitat may also Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Page 10-40 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures be needed to minimize effects to excluded bats. All bat exclusion techniques will be coordinated among the California Department of Transportation (Department) District 8 Biologist, the Department District 12 Biologist, RCTC's Project Manager, RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor, the design/build contractor's Designated Qualified Bat Biologist, and the resource agencies. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO AS-4 As required in Measure NC-10, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that all construction work on bridges will take place during the day to the best extent feasible. Limited evening and/or night construction may be required for safety and/or operations reasons. The RCTC Project Engineer will require the design/build contractor to include construction management measures to direct lighting and noise away from bat night roosting areas in the project specifications. The RCTC Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to implement those measures during evening and night construction as much as possible while providing for safe facility operations and construction worker safety. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction AS-5 RCTC's Project Engineer will ensure that the final design specifically addresses keeping riparian vegetation delineated on the project specifications that is adjacent to bat roosting sites (which include crevices in bridges, culverts, and overhead structures) intact during construction per measures included in the project specifications. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly implement the measures in the project specifications to keep riparian vegetation adjacent to bat roosting sites intact. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to and during construction AS-6 To prevent project effects to bridge- and crevice - nesting birds (i.e., swifts and swallows), RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to ensure that all work on existing bridges with potential habitat that is conducted between February 15 and October 31 includes removal of all bird nests prior to construction under the guidance and observation of the Designated Qualified Biologist prior to February 1 of that year, before the swallow colony returns to the nesting site. Removal of swallow nests that are under construction must be repeated as frequently as necessary to prevent nest completion or until a nest exclusion device is installed Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Page 10-41 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO (such as netting or a similar mechanism that keeps birds from building nests). Nest removal and exclusion device installation will be monitored by the Designated Qualified Biologist. Such exclusion efforts must be continued to keep the structures free of swallows until September or completion of construction. All nest exclusion techniques will be coordinated among the Department District 8 Biologist, the Department District 12 Biologist, RCTC's Project Manager, RCTC's Resident Engineer, the design/build contractor, the design/build contractor's Designated Qualified Biologist, and the resource agencies. AS-7 During final design, RCTC's Project Manager, the Department District 8 Biologist, the Department District 12 Biologist, and the Designated Qualified Biologist will determine whether structural features providing existing bat roosting habitat cannot be permanently retained following construction. If that is the case, RCTC's Project Manager, RCTC's Project Engineer, the Department District 8 Biologist, the Department District 12 Biologist, and the Designated Qualified Biologist will identify alternative roosting habitat to be installed during project construction. The project specifications will include suitable designs and specifications for bat exclusion and habitat replacement structures. Prior to and during construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to properly implement the designs and specifications for bat exclusion and habitat replacement structures included in the project specifications. The installation and maintenance of those structures will be monitored by the Designated Qualified Biologist. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to and during construction AS-8 RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to install and maintain silt fence barriers at all staging or construction areas at Coal Canyon and areas within Chino Hills State Park (CHSP) to prevent small animals from entering those areas. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction TE-1 Prior to any ground disturbing activities, an individual will be identified as the Designated Biologist. A qualified Designated Biologist must have a Bachelor's degree with an emphasis in ecology, natural resource management, or related science; 3 years of experience in field biology or current certification of a nationally recognized biological society, such as The Ecological Society of America Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to disturbance Page 10-42 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures or The Wildlife Society; previous experience with applying the terms and conditions of a Biological Opinion; and the appropriate permit and/or training if conducting focused or protocol surveys for listed species. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) will ensure the Designated Biologist position is filled throughout the construction period. Each successive Designated Biologist (if applicable) will be approved by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) (hereafter referred to as the Wildlife Agencies). The Designated Biologist will have the authority to ensure compliance with conservation measures and will be the primary agency contact for the implementation of these measures. The Designated Biologist will have the authority and responsibility to halt activities that are in violation of the conservation measures. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO TE-2 To minimize adverse effects from dust during all site disturbance, grading, and construction activities, the design/build contractor will ensure that all active parts of the construction site are watered a minimum of twice daily or more often when needed due to dry or windy conditions to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Additionally, the design/build contractor will ensure that all stockpiled material is sufficiently watered or covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction TE-3 All erosion and sediment control devices during project construction and operation, including fiber rolls and bonded fiber matrix, will be made from biodegradable materials such as jute, with no plastic mesh, to avoid creating a wildlife entanglement hazard. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction TE-4 During all site disturbance, grading, and construction activities, the design/build contractor will be required to control noise from construction activity consistent with Caltrans Standard Specifications, Section 14- 8.02, "Noise Control," and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Standard Special Provisions S5-310. Noise levels from construction operations within the State right-of-way between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. will not exceed 86 A -weighted decibels (dBA) at a distance of 50 feet (ft) from the noise source. The noise level requirement will apply to the equipment on the job site or related Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Page 10-43 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures to the job, including, but not limited to, trucks, transit mixers, or transient equipment that may or may not be owned by the contractor. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO TE-5 During all site disturbance, grading, and construction activities in and immediately adjacent to biologically sensitive areas, Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Conservation Areas, vegetated drainages, and coastal sage scrub (CSS) in coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN) designated critical habitat, the design/build contractor will be required to control noise from construction activity by using an alternative warning method instead of a sound signal unless required by safety laws. In addition, the contractor will equip all internal combustion engines with the manufacturer -recommended mufflers and will not operate any internal combustion engine on the job site without the appropriate mufflers. As directed by the RCTC Resident Engineer, the contractor will implement appropriate additional noise mitigation measures, including changing the location of stationary construction equipment, turning off idling equipment, rescheduling construction activity, notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work, and installing acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction TE-6 In accordance with the Municipal Codes of the Cities of Anaheim, Corona, Riverside, and Norco, the design/build contractor will be required to limit construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding weekends and holidays. If construction is needed outside those hours or days, the design/build contractor will be required to coordinate with the affected local jurisdiction. If the local jurisdiction approves construction hours that are different from those imposed by this measure, then the design/build contractor will immediately request that RCTC consider a modification to this measure to allow construction during the new hours that the local jurisdiction approved. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction TE-7 In the major wildlife movement corridors at, Coal Canyon, Wardlow Wash, and Fresno Canyon, and areas adjacent to least Bell's vireo and CAGN occupied areas (approximately Post Mile [PM] ORA- 91-R17.16 to PM ORA-91-R18.74), construction activities will be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Should Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Page 10-44 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures an exception to this measure be necessary, RCTC and the California Department of Transportation (Department) will consult with the Wildlife Agencies to determine effective measures to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to these species and movement corridors. Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO TE-8 Braunton's Milk -vetch Conservation Measures. A pre - construction survey will be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the historical occurrence in Coal Canyon in Orange County. This survey will be conducted by a biologist familiar with the species and during the appropriate time of year to optimize detection. Should Braunton's milk -vetch be found during surveys, the Designated Biologist will consult with the USFWS to determine effective measures to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to this species. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction TE-9 Coastal California Gnatcatcher Conservation and Compensatory Measures. The Designated Biologist (or their designee) will monitor construction within the vicinity of CAGN-designated critical habitat areas prior to and during site preparation, grading, and construction activities, to flush any wildlife species present prior to construction and to ensure that vegetation removal, best management practices (BMPs), Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs), and all avoidance and minimization measures are properly implemented and followed. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction TE-10 RCTC will offset the permanent loss of 8.42 acres (ac) of occupied CAGN habitat in Orange County, including 6.32 ac of designated critical habitat, by restoring 16.03 ac of habitat suitable for CAGN breeding, dispersal, and foraging in Chino Hills State Park (CHSP) to be conducted during the Initial Phase of the project. If restoration is unable to be conducted in CHSP, another location will be selected on approval of the Wildlife Agencies. Final EIR/EIS RCTC After construction TE-11 RCTC will offset the temporary loss of 3.01 ac of Final EIR/EIS RCTC After construction occupied CAGN habitat in Orange County, including 2.09 ac of CAGN-designated critical habitat, with in- kind, or better, on -site restoration after the completion of project construction. TE-12 Prior to site preparation, grading or construction activities, a restoration plan will be developed by a qualified biologist for the permanent and temporary impacts to occupied CAGN habitat in Orange County, including designated critical habitat. The plan will be Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Prior to construction Page 10-45 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO submitted to the USFWS for review and approval. This plan will include, at a minimum, a detailed description of restoration methods, slope stabilization/erosion control, criteria for restoration to be considered successful, and monitoring and reporting protocol(s). The restoration plan will be implemented for a minimum of 5 years, unless success criteria are met earlier and all artificial watering has been off for at least 2 years. TE-13 During all site preparation, grading, and construction activities in Orange County, the RCTC Resident Engineer, will require the design/build contractor to use shielded lighting for any nighttime construction adjacent to coastal sage scrub in CAGN-designated critical habitat. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction TE-14 Riparian Birds Conservation Measures. During the bird breeding season (i.e., February 15—September 15), the Designated Biologist (or their designee) will monitor riparian and riverine areas within 500 ft of active construction areas for the duration of the construction in those areas to survey for active nests and/or nesting activity to ensure breeding activities are not disrupted and to ensure vegetation removal, BMPs, ESAs, and all avoidance and minimization measures are properly implemented. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction TE-15 Measure for Light Intrusion and Wildfires. To minimize adverse effects from light intrusion from vehicle headlights and the potential threat of increased fires from the operation of State Route 91 (SR-91), during final design, the Department and RCTC will work with the USFWS to investigate the possibility of adding features along SR-91 in the vicinity of the Coal Canyon wildlife crossing in Orange County. For example, consideration can be given to the placement of K-rail, concrete walls, and/or hardscaping barriers along the shoulder of SR-91. In investigating these features, consideration must be given to motorist safety, freeway operations, vehicle headlight mitigation and the potential fire threat. Final EIR/EIS RCTC Ultimate Phase TE-16 Santa Ana Sucker Conservation Measures. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is in the process of constructing the Santa Ana River (SAR) Reach 9 Phase 2 Green River Golf Club Embankment Protection Project within the action area. Following completion of the embankment construction, perennial stream habitat for the Santa Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Page 10-46 ECR ID Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Timing/ Phase Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO Ana sucker will be reestablished within the construction footprint. The Department and RCTC will coordinate with the Corps during construction of the SR-91 CIP to ensure these restoration areas will not be temporarily or permanently impacted during construction of the SR-91 CIP. TE-17 The Department and RCTC will coordinate with the Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Corps during construction to ensure that the SR-91 CIP will not affect releases from Prado Dam or result in a permanent reduction of acreage within the Santa Ana River Canyon Habitat Management Area. IS-1 During final design, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Project Engineer will direct a qualified landscape architect develop a weed abatement program for inclusion in the project specifications. That program will be developed in compliance with Executive Order (EO) 13112 to minimize the potential for intrusion or export of invasive plant species to and from the biological study area (BSA) during project construction. At a minimum, the following will be included in the weed abatement program and implemented prior to and during construction to address potential effects associated with invasive species: Final EIR/EIS Design Builder Final design; prior to construction IS-1a RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to inspect and clean construction equipment at the beginning and end of each day and prior to transporting equipment from one project location to another. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to limit soil and vegetation disturbance to those areas specifically required for the project construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction IS-1 b RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to obtain soil, gravel, and rock from weed -free sources. RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to use only certified weed -free straw, mulch, and/or fiber rolls for erosion control during construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction IS-1c Prior to the completion of construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to revegetate affected areas adjacent to native vegetation with plant species that are native to the vicinity and approved by the California Department of Transportation (Department) District 8 and District 12 Biologists. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction Page 10-47 ECR ID IS-1 Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Environmental Analysis Source (Technical Study, Environmental Document, and/or Technical Discipline) Final EIR/EIS Responsible for Development and/or Implementation of Measure Design Builder Timing/ Phase During construction Action(s) Taken to Implement Measure Measure Completed (Date Initia and s) Remarks Environmental Compliance Ultimate Project YES for / NO RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to not use any species listed in the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) California Invasive Plant Inventory with a high or moderate rating in revegetation. IS-1d After construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will ensure that erosion control and revegetation sites are monitored until achievement of the performance standards included in the weed abatement program or for a period of 2 to 3 years after installation to detect nonnative species prior to the establishment of the native vegetation. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder After construction IS-1 e RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor and the post -construction monitors to implement eradication procedures (e.g., spraying and/or hand weeding) should an infestation occur. The use of herbicides will be prohibited within and adjacent to native vegetation, except as specifically authorized and monitored by the Department District 8 and District 12 Biologists during and after project construction. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During Construction Final EIR/EIS After construction IS-1f During construction, RCTC's Resident Engineer will require the design/build contractor to reduce indirect impacts of exotic plant infestations and litter by regular roadside maintenance to remove litter and weeds from the right-of-way. Because the Department already conducts regular ongoing maintenance of landscaping in the State right-of-way, no additional project -specific measures for invasive species are required during project operations. Final EIR/EIS Design Builder During construction HW-15 For buildings that would be demolished as part of ROW acquisition and/or construction, Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and Lead Based Paint (LMP) testing shall be performed after ROW acquisition and prior to building demolition. Revalidation #2 for Initial Phase Design Builder During construction HW-16 Herbicide, pesticide, and fungicide testing shall be performed on the soils within acquired ROW at the Green River Golf Club (5215 Green River Road, Corona, CA). Revalidation #2 for Initial Phase Design Builder During construction Page 10-48 AGENDA ITEM 9J RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee David Thomas, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Request for Proposal to Design and Construct the Interstate 15/State Route 91 Express Lanes Connector Project Through a Design -Build Contract WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize staff, subject to concurrence by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to issue Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 19-31-074-00 and future addenda to design and construct the Interstate 15/State Route 91 Express Lanes Connector (15/91 ELC) project through a design -build (DB) contract; 2) Approve the selection criteria for the selection of the apparent best value (ABV) proposer; 3) Authorize the Executive Director to select the top -ranked ABV proposer for DB services, based on the criteria identified in the RFP and addenda, and to conduct subsequent limited negotiations; 4) Authorize the Executive Director to pay, to the unsuccessful shortlisted DB proposers (or potentially all DB proposers in the case that the procurement is cancelled after the proposal due date) that submit a timely and responsive proposal, a stipend of $225,000, plus a contingency amount of $25,000 per proposer, for a total amount not to exceed $1 million; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve stipend contingency up to the total amount not to exceed as deemed necessary. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 15/91 ELC will provide a tolled express lanes connector between the existing RCTC 91 Express Lanes and the future 15 Express Lanes to the north of SR-91. A detailed vicinity map of the 15/91 ELC is provided as Attachment 1. The 15/91 ELC involves adding: 1) A single -lane tolled express lane connector from the eastbound RCTC 91 Express Lanes to the future northbound 15 Express Lanes that would extend in the median of 1-15 to the Hidden Valley Road interchange; and Agenda Item 9J 177 2) A single -lane tolled express lane connector from the future southbound 15 Express Lanes that would extend from the median of 1-15 at the Hidden Valley Road interchange and would connect to the westbound RCTC 91 Express Lanes. In addition, operational improvements are proposed along eastbound SR-91 by extending the eastbound RCTC 91 Express Lane to approximately 0.5 mile east of the 15/91 interchange and widening SR-91 to accommodate extending the outside eastbound general purpose lane from the SR-91 bridge over Arlington Channel to east of Promenade Avenue. A variable toll messaging sign would also be installed on eastbound SR-91 near the Orange/Riverside county line. In April 2017 Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 132 (SB 132) which appropriated $427 million to the Riverside County Transportation Efficiency Corridor (RCTEC) for five projects. SB 132 allocated $180 million to the 15/91 ELC project. The current estimated capital cost of the project is $220 million. At its January 2019 workshop, the Commission committed to fund the remaining balance with surplus toll revenue from the RCTC 91 Express Lanes. The Commission is also seeking federal funds to build the 15/91 ELC project. SB 132 statutorily created a task force to develop recommendations to accelerate project delivery of the RCTEC projects. On June 27, 2017, Governor Brown signed budget trailer bill Assembly Bill 115 (AB 115) through which the Commission received additional project delivery authority to ensure cost-effective and timely delivery of the 15/91 ELC. At its October 2017 meeting, the Commission approved an overall procurement strategy for the 15/91 ELC to secure all the services and construction needed to deliver the project. The approved strategy consists of a series of contract amendments, as permitted by AB 115, to existing SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (91 Project) and 1-15 Express Lanes Project (ELP) contracts with engineering companies, contractors, toll vendors, legal, and financial advisors. As part of the overall procurement strategy, the Commission approved initiating negotiations with the 1-15 ELP DB Contractor to amend the 1-15 ELP DB contract to design and construct the 15/91 ELC project. The overall procurement strategy also included an alternative procurement strategy (plan B) to be implemented should staff feel it warranted due to the unsuccessful outcome of negotiations with the 1-15 ELP DB contractor. In April 2018, staff initiated negotiations with the 1-15 ELP DB contractor to amend the 1-15 ELP contract to include the 15/91 ELC work. To ensure that a fair and reasonable cost, schedule, and risk transfer is negotiated, staff and the Commission's consultant team performed an independent construction estimate to allow for a separate comparison of costs and to support direct negotiations with the 1-15 ELP DB contractor. In November 2018, staff and the 1-15 ELP DB contractor were unable to reach an agreement on a negotiated price for the 15/91 ELC project. To advance the 15/91 ELC work while the new procurement is underway, the I-15 ELP DB contract was amended to include specific final engineering design and construction work to accommodate the 15/91 ELC project. Between April 2018 and October 2018, the Commission approved one contract amendment and three contract change orders to the 1-15 ELP contract to design and construct certain work to accommodate the 15/91 ELC project. The combined amendments and Agenda Item 9J 178 change orders amounted to $24,634,604 and a contingency amount of $1,689,300 for a total amount of $26,323,904. DISCUSSION: Industry Outreach and Procurement Strategy On February 4, 2019, staff issued a letter to the industry announcing the upcoming release of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the 15/91 ELC project. The Commission conducted numerous meetings with interested companies to garner their input about the 15/91 ELC project prior to the release of the RFQ. On March 4, 2019, the Commission released the DB RFQ No. 19-31-001-00 and received seven (7) Statements of Qualifications (SOQs). Shortly after the SOQs were received, the Pass/Fail and Responsiveness Subcommittee, comprised of the Commission's consultant team, reviewed the SOQs for responsiveness using pass/fail criteria related to minimum qualifications, financial stability and safety record. SOQs were then evaluated and scored by a DB evaluation and selection review committee comprised of Commission staff and public agency personnel. The selection review committee evaluated each SOQ in accordance with the evaluation criteria listed in the RFQ, which included the proposed DB team structure and experience and approach to project scope. Technical Advisory Subcommittees, comprised of staff and the Commission's consultant team, also reviewed the SOQs for financial and legal responsiveness and made recommendations to the selection review committee. Based on the evaluations and recommendations, the selection review committee shortlisted the following four DB firms: 1. Guy F. Atkinson Construction, LLC., dba Guy F. Atkinson 2. Flatiron West, Inc. 3. MCM Construction, Inc. 4. Myers -Rados, a Joint Venture The draft DB RFP No. 19-31-074-00 was developed in coordination with Caltrans and FHWA, and an industry review draft was issued to the shortlisted DB firms on May 9, 2019 to garner industry feedback. Staff hereby requests authorization to release the final approved RFP and subsequent addenda to the DB shortlisted firms. Apparent Best Value Determination Proposals will be due to the Commission in November 2019. Once the proposals have been received, they will be evaluated using an ABV determination on both price and technical proposal. The ABV is based on a 100-point scale. The price score will represent up to 80 points of the total score, and the technical score will represent up to 20 points of the total score. The determination of ABV shall be based on the highest total proposal score (TPS) computed based on the following formula: Agenda Item 9J 179 Total Proposal Score (maximum 100 pts.) = Price Score (maximum 80 pts.) + Technical Proposal Score (maximum 20 pts.) The price score will be calculated based on the following formula: Price Score = (PPLow/PP) * 80, where; PPLow = Lowest Proposal Price (PP) submitted by any proposer as determined by its fixed price. PP = Each proposer's Price as determined by its fixed price. The technical score will be calculated based on the following formula: Technical Score = (TP/TP High) * 20, where; TP = Proposer's Technical Proposal evaluation score. TP High = Highest Technical Proposal evaluation score achieved by any proposer. The technical score calculation will be based on the following primary categories: • Technical Approach • Project Delivery Approach • Quality Management Approach Additional details of the evaluation are outlined in the RFP's Instructions to Proposers that will be issued to the shortlisted firms. Once the DB ABV proposer has been selected, staff will conduct limited negotiations that may include minor revisions to the contract terms, technical provisions, and/or scope and return to the Commission with a recommendation to award the Contract in Spring 2020. Milestone Activity Procurement Schedule Issued letter to the industry February 4, 2019 Completed Issued Request For Qualifications March 4, 2019 Completed Issued Draft RFP (to shortlisted proposers) May 9, 2019 Completed One -on -One meetings May 29 & 30 2019 Completed Issue Final RFP (to shortlisted proposers) July 2019 Final RFP addendum October 2019 Proposal due date November 2019 Selection, negotiation, and staff recommendation January 2020 Committee and Commission approval of contract award February/March 2020 Contract Award and Notice to Proceed Spring 2020 Agenda Item 9J 180 Stipend A stipend is an amount paid to proposers who submit a timely and responsive, but unsuccessful proposal on DB procurements. Use of stipends is considered an industry best practice commonly used by agencies nationally to reduce costs to industry for participation in DB procurements and provide proposers partial compensation for development of technical concepts and innovations. Stipends generally cover 20-40 percent of proposer's cost to prepare a responsive proposal/bid and allow an agency to have the right to incorporate a proposer's technical concepts and innovations into the project or elsewhere. Stipends have been found to also increase competition by allowing firms to participate due to lower proposal costs and enhance price competition by keeping proposers in the game. The Commission has twice previously approved the use of DB procurement stipends for the 91 Project and the 1-15 ELP. Under 23 CFR 636.112 and 636.113, FHWA provides for federal -aid participation in stipends with certain stipulations. There is no fixed formula for stipends. Industry surveys reveal that stipends are typically found to be in the range of 0.06 percent to 0.2 percent of the contract value. Since the 15/91 ELC project is a complex project with several challenges including structural design issues, maintenance of traffic issues for general purpose and operational express lanes along SR-91 and 1-15, and significant coordination with railroad companies and flood control facilities, staff recommends a stipend on the higher end of the industry range. The following table summarizes stipend awards on recent, similar projects and includes the current 15/91 ELC project staff recommendation. Project Location DB Contract Stipend % Notes 15/91 ELC CA $130 million (estimated) $225,000 0.17% Complex engineering; main - tenance of traffic and multiple connector bridges. Limited concept plans required 1-15 ELP CA $266 million $275,000 0.10% Concept plans not required SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project CA $795 million $650,000 0.08% Concept plans required 1-10 Contract 1 CA $673 million $500,000 0.07% Concept plans required 1-405 Sepulveda Pass CA $1.1 billion $1 million 0.09% CA High Speed Rail, CP-2 CA $1.5 billion $2 million 0.13% Complex engineering, but concept plans not required Gerald Desmond Bridge CA $750 million $1 million 0.13% Concept plans required Grand Parkway Toll Road TX $850 million $1 million 0.12% Concept plans required Agenda Item 9J 181 Grand Parkway Toll Road TX $1.3 billion $747,000 0.06% USA Parkway NV $80 million $100,000 0.13% Concept plans required for 18 miles of roadway 1-15 South NV $245 million $300,000 0.12% Concept plans required; complex maintenance of traffic and interchange project with bridges Legacy Parkway UT $300 million $500,000 0.17% Staff recommends a stipend of $225,000 to each responsive but unsuccessful proposer, which is approximately 0.17 percent of the estimated DB contract value for the 15/91 ELC project. One- on-one meetings with proposers to be conducted after issuance of the final RFP may reveal the need to increase the stipend value. Therefore, an additional stipend contingency amount of $25,000 per each proposer is requested. In the unlikely case that the Commission cancels the procurement after the proposal due date, all proposers that had submitted a responsive proposal would receive the stipend. Payment of the stipend to the unsuccessful proposers will be made if the proposal is determined by the Commission to be responsive, achieves a passing score under the criteria identified in the RFP, and all other conditions of the stipend agreement included in the RFP are met. Proposers will not receive a stipend if the Commission withdraws the RFP prior to the due date. Proposers will also not receive a stipend if they file a protest of, or otherwise challenge, the procurement process, award or cancellation of the procurement process and such protest or challenge is dismissed or unsuccessful as determined by the Commission. Payment of the stipend to each unsuccessful proposer will be made only after the DB contract has been awarded to the successful proposer. The successful proposer will not receive a stipend provided the procurement is not cancelled after the proposal due date. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends authorization to issue RFP No. 19-31-074-00 and future addenda, subject to concurrence by Caltrans and FHWA, to design and construct the 15/91 ELC project through a DB contract. Staff also requests approval of the selection criteria of the ABV proposer and authorization for the Executive Director to select the top -ranked ABV proposer for DB services, based on the criteria identified in the RFP and any addenda, and to conduct subsequent limited negotiations. Staff recommends the Commission authorize the Executive Director to pay, to the unsuccessful shortlisted DB proposers (or potentially all DB proposers in the case that the procurement is canceled after the proposal due date) that submit a timely and responsive proposal, a stipend of $225,000 plus a contingency amount of $25,000 per proposer, for a total amount not to exceed $1 million. Additionally, staff recommends that the Commission authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve stipend contingency up to the total amount not to exceed as deemed necessary. Agenda Item 9J 182 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2019/20 Amount: $1 million Source of Funds: SB 132 State Funds Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 003039 81603 00000 0000 605 3181601 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \litazif.av, Date: 06/13/2019 Attachment: 15/91 Express Lanes Connector Vicinity Map Agenda Item 9J 183 -15 R -91 EXPRESS. LAN S CONNECTOR _ EXPRESS LANES CONNECTOR PROJECT CCO 6 / CCO 10 _ PROPOSED RE -STRIPING COUNTY LINE SR-91 CIP APE VTMS VARIABLE TOLL MESSAGE SIGN 184 AGENDA ITEM 9K RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Stephanie Blanco, Capital Projects Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with WSP USA Inc. for the Completion of the Project Initiation Document Phase for the Riverside County Next Generation Express Lanes WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 19-31-058-00 to WSP USA Inc. (WSP) to provide planning and preliminary engineering services to complete the Project Initiation Document for the Next Generation Express Lanes Project (NGELP), in the amount of $1,296,110, plus a contingency amount of $99,611, for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,395,721; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to approve an increase not to exceed $20,000 of the total amount based on the final Caltrans Independent Office of Audits and Investigations (IOAI) and Commission's pre -award audit results; 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as may be required for the Project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 2019, the Commission completed the Next Generation Toll Feasibility Study which analyzed and identified freeway corridors best suited for express lane implementation. At its January 2019 workshop, the Commission authorized staff to complete the first step of project development, a Project Initiation Document (PID), for the following freeway corridors: 91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes; 60 Jurupa-Riverside Express Lanes; and 60/215 Riverside -Moreno Valley Express Lanes. See Figure 1. Agenda Item 9K 185 91 Dpwnte,. Riversme Express Lanes 60 Jurupa-Riverside Express Lanes 60,215 Riverside-Mo.Val, Express Lanes • Lae f:te.1'" ue �.,,�aa ir,eress or egress o�iy ino Hi } Eastvale oronita • mbnga Corona .,me Gardens Cerrito Temescal Va' Fontana El Sobrante Bloomington Bernardino CoIto nd Terrace Highgrove Loma Linda Mead Valley Perris Lake Mathews 'ood Hope Figure 1: Project Location Map P. c d Redland As required by the California Government Code, all projects that are on the State Highway System or are state -funded, must have a PID approved by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to be programmed for funding. The purpose of the PID process is to: • Define the purpose and need for the project; • Identify feasible alternatives for the next phase; • Collect and analyze existing information; • Identify stakeholders for development of the project; • Scope proposed studies and activities for project development; • Estimate the project cost and schedule; and • Approve the PID to program the projects and proceed to the next phase of project development The NGELP would analyze and develop a network level PID for the following three corridors in Riverside County: 1. 91 Downtown Riverside: SR-91 from 1-15 to SR-91/I-215/SR-60 interchange 2. 60 Jurupa-Riverside: SR-60 from 1-15 to SR-91/I-215/SR-60 interchange 3. 60/215 Riverside -Moreno Valley: I-215/SR-60 from SR-91/I-215/SR-60 interchange to SR-60/Theodore Avenue interchange and to I-215/Van Buren interchange Agenda Item 9K 186 Services for the PID document will be funded with State Transportation Improvement Program - Planning, Programming, and Monitoring (STIP-PPM) and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) planning funds. The NGELP's PID phase is anticipated to begin in July 2019 with planning studies. It is anticipated the PID project will have a duration of approximately 1 year with completion in the summer of 2020. Procurement Process: Pursuant to Government Code 4525 et seq, the selection of an architect, engineer, and related services shall be on the basis of demonstrated competence and on professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required. Therefore, staff used the qualification method of selection for the procurement of these services. Evaluation criteria included elements such as qualifications of firm, qualifications of personnel, project understanding and approach, and the ability to respond to the requirements set forth under the terms of a request for qualifications (RFQ). RFQ No. 19-31-058-00 for the completion of the PID for the NGELP was released on February 21, 2019. A public notice was advertised in the Press Enterprise, and the RFQ was posted on the Commission's website. Through PlanetBids, 104 firms downloaded the RFQ 13 of these firms are located in Riverside County. A pre -proposal conference was held on March 6, and attended by 19 firms. Staff responded to all questions submitted by potential proposers prior to the March 14 clarification deadline date. Four firms — Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Riverside); Parson Transportation Group Inc. (Ontario); WSP (San Bernardino); and HNTB Corporation (Ontario) — submitted responsive and responsible statements of qualifications (SOQ) prior to the 2:00 p.m. submittal deadline on April 10. Based on the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFQ, the firms were evaluated and scored by an evaluation committee comprised of Commission, Bechtel, and Caltrans staff. Based on the evaluation committee's assessment of the written SOQs and pursuant to the terms of the RFQ, the evaluation committee shortlisted and invited all four firms to the interview phase of the evaluation and selection process. Interviews were conducted on May 9, 2019. After final scoring of the interviews, the evaluation committee combined the shortlisted firms' SOQ and interview scores to develop the final ranking. Accordingly, the evaluation committee recommends contract award to WSP to provide preliminary engineering and environmental analysis services for the NGELP, as it earned the highest total evaluation score. Subsequently, staff negotiated the scope (including the appropriate level of effort, labor categories/mix, etc.), cost, and schedule proposal received from WSP for the project services and established a fair and reasonable price. As part of the procurement process for state -funded architectural and engineering services, WSP and its subconsultants' proposed indirect cost rates are subject to audit by Caltrans' IOAI, which has been completed. The proposed cost is $1,395,721 and may change slightly as a result of the Commission's independent pre -award audit Agenda Item 9K 187 of the cost proposal. The purpose of the pre -award audit is to ensure cost elements such as direct labor, other direct costs, and fixed fee associated with the work are allowable, reasonable, and allocable. The proposed cost is expected to be finalized prior to Commission approval in July; however, if not finalized, staff recommends that the Commission authorize the Chair or Executive Director to approve an increase of the total contract amount not to exceed $20,000 as a result of the indirect cost rate audits. Recommendation At the June Committee meeting, several Commissioners expressed concerns about the single - lane express lane alternative being evaluated for the 91 Downtown Riverside corridor. As a result, staff has added a dual -lane alternative to be evaluated for the 91 Downtown Riverside corridor and added $300,000 to Agreement No. 19-31-058-00 to cover costs associated with the additional evaluation. Staff recommends award of Agreement No. 19-31-058-00 to WSP to perform engineering and environmental analysis for the NGELP, based on the final scope and cost, in the amount of $1,296,110, plus contingency amount of $99,611, for a total amount not to exceed $1,395,721. The Commission's model professional services agreement will be entered into with WSP, subject to any changes approved by the Executive Director and pursuant to legal counsel review. Further, staff recommends authorization for the Chair or Executive Director to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission and for the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for the project. Financial Information Yes FY 2019/20 $ 1,250,000 In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2020/21 Amount: $ 145,721 Source of Funds: LTF planning and STIP-PPM Budget Adjustment: No N/A 003047 81101 00000 0000 262 3181101 - $ 465,241 GL/Project Accounting No.: 003048 81101 00000 0000 262 3181101 - $ 465,240 003049 81101 00000 0000 262 3181101 - $ 465,240 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \lit,jt 7 Date: 07/3/2019 Attachment: Draft Agreement No. 19-31-058-00 Agenda Item 9K 188 Agreement No. 19-31-058-00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH STATE FUNDING/ASSISTANCE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT WITH WSP USA, INC. FOR PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING SERVICES TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT FOR THE NEXT GENERATION EXPRESS LANES PROJECT Parties and Date. This Agreement is made and entered into this day of , 2019, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("the Commission") and WSP USA, INC. ("Consultant"), a [_INSERT TYPE OF LEGAL ENTITY_]. The Commission and Consultant are sometimes referred to herein individually as "Party", and collectively as the "Parties". Recitals. A. On November 8, 1988 the Voters of Riverside County approved Measure A authorizing the collection of a one-half percent (1/2 %) retail transactions and use tax (the "tax") to fund transportation programs and improvements within the County of Riverside, and adopting the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan (the "Plan"). B. Pursuant to Public Utility Code Sections 240000 et seq., the Commission is authorized to allocate the proceeds of the Tax in furtherance of the Plan. C. On November 5, 2002, the voters of Riverside County approved an extension of the Measure A tax for an additional thirty (30) years for the continued funding of transportation and improvements within the County of Riverside. D. A source of funding for payment for professional services provided under this Agreement is state funds administered by the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") pursuant to the following project/program: STIP/LTF. E. Consultant desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional services required by the Commission on the terms and conditions 189 set forth in this Agreement. Consultant represents that it is experienced in providing planning and preliminary engineering services to public clients, is licensed in the State of California (if necessary), and is familiar with the plans of the Commission. F. The Commission desires to engage Consultant to render such services for the Next Generation Express Lanes Project ("Project"), as set forth in this Agreement. Terms. 1. General Scope of Services. Consultant shall furnish all technical and professional services, including labor, material, equipment, transportation, supervision and expertise, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately supply the professional planning and preliminary engineering services necessary for the Project ("Services"). The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations. 2 Commencement of Services. The Consultant shall commence work upon receipt of a written "Notice to Proceed" or "Limited Notice to Proceed" from Commission. 3. Pre -Award Audit. As a result of the state funding for this Project, and to the extent Caltrans procedures apply in connection therewith, issuance of a "Notice to Proceed" may be contingent upon completion and approval of a pre -award audit. Any questions raised during the pre -award audit shall be resolved before the Commission will consider approval of this Agreement. The state aid provided under this Agreement is contingent on meeting all state requirements and could be withdrawn, thereby entitling the Commission to terminate this Agreement, if the procedures are not completed. The Consultant's files shall be maintained in a manner to facilitates State process reviews. 4. Caltrans Audit Procedures. Consultant and subconsultant contracts, including cost proposals and ICR, are subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, a contract audit, an incurred cost audit, an Independent Cost Review (ICR) Audit, or a CPA ICR audit work paper review. If selected for audit or review, this Agreement, 190 Consultant's cost proposal and ICR and related work papers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR audit work paper review it is Consultant's responsibility to ensure state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA's work papers including making copies as necessary. This Agreement, Consultant's cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by Consultant and approved by the Commission's contract manager to conform to the audit or review recommendations. Consultant agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into this Agreement by this reference if directed by Commission at its sole discretion. Refusal by Consultant to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the state or local governments have access to CPA work papers, will be considered a breach of the Agreement terms and cause for termination of this Agreement and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs. Additional audit provisions applicable to this Agreement are set forth in Sections 23 and 24 of this Agreement. 5. Term. 5.1 This Agreement shall go into effect on the date first set forth above, contingent upon approval by Commission, and Consultant shall commence work after notification to proceed by Commission's Contract Administrator. This Agreement shall end on December 31, 2020, unless extended by contract amendment. 5.2 Consultant is advised that any recommendation for Agreement award is not binding on Commission until this Agreement is fully executed and approved by the Commission. 5.3 This Agreement shall remain in effect until the date set forth above, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. Consultant shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement, and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines. All applicable indemnification provisions of this Agreement shall remain in effect following the termination of this Agreement. 6. Commission's Contract Administrator. The Commission hereby designates the Commission's Executive Director, or his or her designee, to act as its Contract Administrator for the performance of this Agreement ("Commission's Contract Administrator"). Commission's Contract Administrator shall have the authority to act on behalf of the Commission for all purposes under this Agreement. Commission's Contract Administrator shall also review and give approval, as needed, to the details of Consultant's work as it progresses. Consultant shall not accept direction or orders from any person other than the Commission's Contract Administrator or his or her designee. 7. Consultant's Representative. Consultant hereby designates Victor Martinez to act as its Representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Consultant's Representative"). Consultant's Representative shall have full authority to act on behalf of Consultant for all purposes under this Agreement. The Consultant's 191 Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his or her professional skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall work closely and cooperate fully with Commission's Contract Administrator and any other agencies which may have jurisdiction over, or an interest in, the Services. Consultant's Representative shall be available to the Commission staff at all reasonable times. Any substitution in Consultant's Representative shall be approved in writing by Commission's Contract Administrator. 8. Substitution of Key Personnel. Consultant has represented to the Commission that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Consultant may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence upon written approval by the Commission. In the event that the Commission and Consultant cannot agree as to the substitution of the key personnel, the Commission shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause, pursuant to the provisions herein. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as follows: Vikrant Sanghai, Project Manager; Don Hubbard, Planning Lead; Srikanth Koneru, Engineering Lead; James Santos, Environmental Lead; Brandon Reyes, Engineering Lead. 9. Standard of Care; Licenses. Consultant represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform all Services, duties and obligations required by this Agreement to fully and adequately complete the Project. Consultant shall perform the Services and duties in conformance to and consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Consultant warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Consultant further represents and warrants to the Commission that its employees and subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services, and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Consultant shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from the Commission, any services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Consultant's failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein, and shall be fully responsible to the Commission for all damages and other liabilities provided for in the indemnification provisions of this Agreement arising from the Consultant's errors and omissions. Any employee of Consultant or its sub- consultants who is determined by the Commission to be uncooperative, incompetent, a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project, a threat to the safety of persons or property, or any employee who fails or refuses to perform the Services in a manner acceptable to the Commission, shall be promptly removed from the Project by the Consultant and shall not be re-employed to perform any of the Services or to work on the Project. 10. Independent Contractor. The Services shall be performed by Consultant or under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, methods and details of 192 performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. Commission retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and not as an employee, agent or representative of the Commission. Consultant retains the right to perform similar or different services for others during the term of this Agreement. Any additional personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services and as required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such personnel, including but not limited to, social security taxes, income tax withholdings, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance. 11. Schedule of Services. Consultant shall perform the Services expeditiously, within the term of this Agreement, and in accordance with the Schedule of Services set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant represents that it has the professional and technical personnel to perform the Services in conformance with such conditions. In order to facilitate Consultant's conformance with the Schedule, the Commission shall respond to Consultant's submittals in a timely manner. Upon request of Commission's Contract Administrator, Consultant shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services. 11.1 Modification of the Schedule. Consultant shall regularly report to the Commission, through correspondence or progress reports, its progress in providing required Services within the scheduled time periods. Commission shall be promptly informed of all anticipated delays. In the event that Consultant determines that a schedule modification is necessary, Consultant shall promptly submit a revised Schedule of Services for approval by Commission's Contract Administrator. 11.2 Trend Meetings. Consultant shall conduct trend meetings with the Commission's Contract Administrator and other interested parties, as requested by the Commission, on a bi weekly basis or as may be mutually scheduled by the Parties at a standard day and time. These trend meetings will encompass focused and informal discussions concerning scope, schedule, and current progress of Services, relevant cost issues, and future Project objectives. Consultant shall be responsible for the preparation and distribution of meeting agendas to be received by the Commission and other attendees no later than three (3) working days prior to the meeting. 11.3 Progress Reports. As part of its monthly invoice, Consultant shall submit a progress report, in a form determined by the Commission, which will indicate the progress achieved during the previous month in relation to the Schedule of Services. Submission of such progress report by Consultant shall be a condition precedent to receipt of payment from the Commission for each monthly invoice submitted. 193 12. Delay in Performance. 12.1 Excusable Delays. Should Consultant be delayed or prevented from the timely performance of any act or Services required by the terms of the Agreement by reason of acts of God or of the public enemy, acts or omissions of the Commission or other governmental agencies in either their sovereign or contractual capacities, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, freight embargoes or unusually severe weather, performance of such act shall be excused for the period of such delay. 12.2 Written Notice. If Consultant believes it is entitled to an extension of time due to conditions set forth in subsection 12.1, Consultant shall provide written notice to the Commission within seven (7) working days from the time Consultant knows, or reasonably should have known, that performance of the Services will be delayed due to such conditions. Failure of Consultant to provide such timely notice shall constitute a waiver by Consultant of any right to an excusable delay in time of performance. 12.3 Mutual Agreement. Performance of any Services under this Agreement may be delayed upon mutual agreement of the Parties. Upon such agreement, Consultant's Schedule of Services shall be extended as necessary by the Commission. Consultant shall take all reasonable steps to minimize delay in completion, and additional costs, resulting from any such extension. 13. Preliminary Review of Work. All reports, working papers, and similar work products prepared for submission in the course of providing Services under this Agreement shall be submitted to the Commission's Contract Administrator in draft form, and the Commission may require revisions of such drafts prior to formal submission and approval. In the event plans and designs are to be developed as part of the Project, final detailed plans and designs shall be contingent upon obtaining environmental clearance as may be required in connection with state funding. In the event that Commission's Contract Administrator, in his or her sole discretion, determines the formally submitted work product to be not in accordance with the standard of care established under this Agreement, Commission's Contract Administrator may require Consultant to revise and resubmit the work at no cost to the Commission. 14. Appearance at Hearings. If and when required by the Commission, Consultant shall render assistance at public hearings or other meetings related to the Project or necessary to the performance of the Services. However, Consultant shall not be required to, and will not, render any decision, interpretation or recommendation regarding questions of a legal nature or which may be construed as constituting a legal opinion. 15. Opportunity to Cure; Inspection of Work. Commission may provide Consultant an opportunity to cure, at Consultant's expense, all errors and omissions which may be disclosed during Project implementation. Should Consultant fail to make such correction in a timely manner, such correction may be made by the Commission, and the cost thereof charged to Consultant. Consultant shall allow the Commission's 194 Contract Administrator and Ca!trans to inspect or review Consultant's work in progress at any reasonable time. 16. Claims Filed by Contractor. 16.1 If claims are filed by the Commission's contractor for the Project ("Contractor") relating to work performed by Consultant's personnel, and additional information or assistance from the Consultant's personnel is required by the Commission in order to evaluate or defend against such claims; Consultant agrees to make reasonable efforts to make its personnel available for consultation with the Commission's construction contract administration and legal staff and for testimony, if necessary, at depositions and at trial or arbitration proceedings. 16.2 Consultant's personnel that the Commission considers essential to assist in defending against Contractor claims will be made available on reasonable notice from the Commission. Consultation or testimony will be reimbursed at the same rates, including travel costs that are being paid for the Consultant's personnel services under this Agreement. 16.3 Services of the Consultant's personnel and other support staff in connection with Contractor claims will be performed pursuant to a written contract amendment, if necessary, extending the termination date of this Agreement in order to finally resolve the claims. 16.4 Nothing contained in this Section shall be construed to in any way limit Consultant's indemnification obligations contained in Section 29. In the case of any conflict between this Section and Section 29, Section 29 shall govern. This Section is not intended to obligate the Commission to reimburse Consultant for time spent by its personnel related to Contractor claims for which Consultant is required to indemnify and defend the Commission pursuant to Section 29 of this Agreement. 17. Final Acceptance. Upon determination by the Commission that Consultant has satisfactorily completed the Services required under this Agreement and within the term herein, the Commission shall give Consultant a written Notice of Final Acceptance. Upon receipt of such notice, Consultant shall incur no further costs hereunder, unless otherwise specified in the Notice of Final Acceptance. Consultant may request issuance of a Notice of Final Acceptance when, in its opinion, it has satisfactorily completed all Services required under the terms of this Agreement. 18. Laws and Regulations. Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. For example, and not by way of limitation, Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all implementing regulations, design standards, specifications, previous commitments that must be incorporated in the design of the Project, and administrative controls including 195 those of the United States Department of Transportation. Compliance with Federal procedures may include completion of the applicable environmental documents and approved by the United States Department of Transportation. For example, and not by way of limitation, a signed Categorical Exclusion, Finding of No Significant Impact, or published Record of Decision may be required to be approved and/or completed by the United States Department of Transportation. Consultant shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If the Consultant performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations and without giving written notice to the Commission, Consultant shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations. 19. Fees and Payment. 19.1 The method of payment for this Agreement will be based on actual cost plus a fixed fee. Commission shall reimburse Consultant for actual costs (including labor costs, employee benefits, travel, equipment rental costs, overhead and other direct costs) incurred by Consultant in performance of the Services. Consultant shall not be reimbursed for actual costs that exceed the estimated wage rates, employee benefits, travel, equipment rental, overhead, and other estimated costs set forth in the approved Consultant cost proposal attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by reference ("Cost Proposal") unless additional reimbursement is provided for by a written amendment. In no event shall Consultant be reimbursed for overhead costs at a rate that exceeds Commission's approved overhead rate set forth in the Cost Proposal. The overhead rates included in the attached Exhibit "C" shall be fixed for the term of the Master Agreement, and shall not be subject to adjustment. In the event that Commission determines that a change to the Services from that specified in the Cost Proposal and this Agreement is required, the contract time or actual costs reimbursable by Commission shall be adjusted by contract amendment to accommodate the changed work. The maximum total cost as specified in Section 19.8 shall not be exceeded, unless authorized by a written amendment. 19.2 In addition to the allowable incurred costs, Commission shall pay Consultant a fixed fee of $85,957.75. The fixed fee is nonadjustable for the term of this Agreement, except in the event of a significant change in the Scope of Services, and such adjustment is made by written amendment. 19.3 Reimbursement for transportation and subsistence costs shall not exceed the rates specified in the approved Cost Proposal. In addition, payments to Consultant for travel and subsistence expenses claimed for reimbursement or applied as local match credit shall not exceed rates authorized to be paid exempt non -represented State employees under current State Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) rules, unless otherwise authorized by Commission. If the rates invoiced are in excess of those authorized DPA rates, and Commission has not otherwise approved said rates, 196 then Consultant is responsible for the cost difference and any overpayments shall be reimbursed to the Commission on demand. 19.4 When milestone cost estimates are included in the approved Cost Proposal, Consultant shall obtain prior written approval for a revised milestone cost estimate from the Contract Administrator before exceeding such cost estimate. 19.5 Progress payments shall be made monthly in arrears based on Services provided and allowable incurred costs. A pro rata portion of Consultant's fixed fee shall be included in the monthly progress payments. If Consultant fails to submit the required deliverable items according to the schedule set forth in the Scope of Services, Commission shall have the right to delay payment or terminate this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Section 21 Termination. 19.6 No payment shall be made prior to approval of any Services, nor for any Services performed prior to approval of this Agreement. 19.7 Consultant shall be reimbursed, as promptly as fiscal procedures will permit upon receipt by Commission's Contract Administrator of itemized invoices in triplicate. Invoices shall be submitted no later than 45 calendar days after the performance of work for which Consultant is billing. Invoices shall detail the work performed on each milestone and each project as applicable. Invoices shall follow the format stipulated for the approved Cost Proposal and shall reference this Agreement number and project title. Final invoice must contain the final cost and all credits due Commission including any equipment purchased under the Equipment Purchase provisions of this Agreement. The final invoice should be submitted within 60 calendar days after completion of Consultant's work. Invoices shall be mailed to Commission's Contract Administrator at the following address: Riverside County Transportation Commission Attention: Accounts Payable P.O. 12008 Riverside, CA 92502 19.8 The total amount payable by Commission including the fixed fee shall not exceed $996,110. 19.9 Salary increases shall be reimbursable if the new salary is within the salary range identified in the approved Cost Proposal and is approved by Commission's Contract Administrator. For personnel subject to prevailing wage rates as described in the California Labor Code, all salary increases, which are the direct result of changes in the prevailing wage rates are reimbursable. 19.10 Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by the Commission's Contract Administrator. 197 19.11 All subcontracts in excess of $25,000 shall contain the above provisions. 20. Disputes. 20.1 Any dispute, other than audit, concerning a question of fact arising under this Agreement that is not disposed of by mutual agreement of the Parties shall be decided by a committee consisting of RCTC's Contract Administrator and the Director of Capital Projects, who may consider written or verbal information submitted by Consultant. 20.2 Not later than 30 days after completion of all Services under this Agreement, Consultant may request review by the Commission's Executive Director of unresolved claims or disputes, other than audit. The request for review will be submitted in writing. 20.3 Neither the pendency of a dispute, nor its consideration by the committee will excuse Consultant from full and timely performance in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 21. Termination. 21.1 Commission reserves the right to terminate this Agreement for any or no reason upon thirty (30) calendar days written notice to Consultant with the reasons for termination stated in the notice. 21.2 Commission may terminate this Agreement with Consultant should Consultant fail to perform the covenants herein contained at the time and in the manner herein provided. In the event of such termination, Commission may proceed with the work in any manner deemed proper by Commission. If Commission terminates this Agreement with Consultant, Commission shall pay Consultant the sum due to Consultant under this Agreement for Services completed and accepted prior to termination, unless the cost of completion to Commission exceeds the funds remaining in this Agreement. In such case, the overage shall be deducted from any sum due Consultant under this Agreement and the balance, if any, shall be paid to Consultant upon demand. 21.3 In addition to the above, payment upon termination shall include a prorated amount of profit, if applicable, but no amount shall be paid for anticipated profit on unperformed Services. Consultant shall provide documentation deemed adequate by Commission's Contract Administrator to show the Services actually completed by Consultant prior to the effective date of termination. This Agreement shall terminate on the effective date of the Notice of Termination. 21.4 Discontinuance of Services. Upon receipt of the written Notice of Termination, Consultant shall discontinue all affected Services as directed in the Notice or as otherwise provided herein, and deliver to the Commission all Documents and 198 Data, as defined in this Agreement, as may have been prepared or accumulated by Consultant in performance of the Services, whether completed or in progress. 21.5 Effect of Termination for Cause. In addition to the above, Consultant shall be liable to the Commission for any reasonable additional costs incurred by the Commission to revise work for which the Commission has compensated Consultant under this Agreement, but which the Commission has determined in its sole discretion needs to be revised, in part or whole, to complete the Project because it did not meet the standard of care established herein. Termination of this Agreement for cause may be considered by the Commission in determining whether to enter into future agreements with Consultant. 21.6 Cumulative Remedies. The rights and remedies of the Parties provided in this Section are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement. 21.7 Waivers. Consultant, in executing this Agreement, shall be deemed to have waived any and all claims for damages which may otherwise arise from the Commission's termination of this Agreement, for convenience or cause, as provided in this Section. 21.8 Consultant may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. 22. Cost Principles and Administrative Requirements. 22.1 Consultant agrees that the Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., shall be used to determine the cost allowability of individual items. 22.2 Consultant also agrees to comply with federal procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. 22.3 Any costs for which payment has been made to Consultant that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under 2 CFR, Part 200 and 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31.000 et seq., are subject to repayment by Consultant to Commission. 22.4 All subcontracts in excess of $25,000 shall contain the above provisions. 23. Retention of Records/Audit. For the purpose of determining compliance with Public Contract Code 10115, et seq. and Title 21, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 21, Section 2500 et seq., when applicable and other matters connected with the performance of this Agreement pursuant to Government Code 8546.7; Consultant, subconsultants, and Commission shall maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the 199 performance of this Agreement, including but not limited to, the costs of administering this Agreement. All parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during this Agreement period and for three years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. The state, State Auditor or Commission shall have access to any books, records, and documents of Consultant and it's certified public accountants (CPA) work papers that are pertinent to this Agreement and indirect cost rates (ICR) for audit, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and copies thereof shall be furnished if requested. Subcontracts in excess of $25,000 shall contain this provision. 23.1 Accounting System. Consultant and its subcontractors shall establish and maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate expenditures by line item for the Services. The accounting system of Consultant and its subcontractors shall conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion, and provide support for reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices. 24. Audit Review Procedures. 24.1 Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this Agreement that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by Commission's Chief Financial Officer. 24.2 Not later than 30 days after issuance of the final audit report, Consultant may request a review by Commission's Chief Financial Officer of unresolved audit issues. The request for review shall be submitted in writing. 24.3 Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by Commission shall excuse Consultant from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 25. Subcontracting. 25.1 Nothing contained in this Agreement or otherwise, shall create any contractual relation between Commission and any subconsultant(s), and no subcontract shall relieve Consultant of its responsibilities and obligations hereunder. Consultant agrees to be as fully responsible to Commission for the acts and omissions of its subconsultant(s) and of persons either directly or indirectly employed by any of them as it is for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by Consultant. Consultant's obligation to pay its subconsultant(s) is an independent obligation from Commission's obligation to make payments to the Consultant. 25.2 Consultant shall perform the Services with resources available within its own organization and no portion of the Services shall be subcontracted without written authorization by Commission's Contract Administrator, except that, which is expressly identified in the approved Cost Proposal. 200 25.3 Consultant shall pay its subconsultants within ten (10) calendar days from receipt of each payment made to Consultant by Commission. 25.4 Any subcontract in excess of $25,000 entered into as a result of this Agreement shall contain all the provisions stipulated in this Agreement to be applicable to subconsultants. 25.5 Any substitution of subconsultant(s) must be approved in writing by Commission's Contract Administrator prior to the start of work by the subconsultant(s). 25.6 Exhibit "C" may also set forth the rates at which each subconsultant shall bill the Consultant for Services and that are subject to reimbursement by the Commission to Consultant. Additional Direct Costs, as defined in Exhibit "C" shall be the same for both the Consultant and all subconsultants, unless otherwise identified in Exhibit "C". The subconsultant rate schedules and cost proposals contained herein are for accounting purposes only. 26. Equipment Purchase 26.1 Prior authorization, in writing, by Commission's Contract Administrator shall be required before Consultant enters into any unbudgeted purchase order, or subcontract for supplies, equipment, or Consultant services. Consultant shall provide an evaluation of the necessity or desirability of incurring such costs. 26.2 For purchase of any item, service or consulting work not covered in Consultant's Cost Proposal and exceeding $5,000 prior authorization by Commission's Contract Administrator is required. Three competitive quotations must be submitted with the request for such purchase, or the absence of bidding must be adequately justified. 26.3 Any equipment purchased as a result of this Agreement is subject to the following: Consultant shall maintain an inventory of all nonexpendable property. Nonexpendable property is defined as having a useful life of at least two years and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more. If the purchased equipment needs replacement and is sold or traded in, Commission shall receive a proper refund or credit at the conclusion of this Agreement, or if this Agreement is terminated, Consultant may either keep the equipment and credit Commission in an amount equal to its fair market value, or sell such equipment at the best price obtainable at a public or private sale, in accordance with established Commission procedures; and credit Commission in an amount equal to the sales price. If Consultant elects to keep the equipment, fair market value shall be determined at Consultant's expense, on the basis of a competent independent appraisal of such equipment. Appraisals shall be obtained from an appraiser mutually agreeable to Commission and Consultant. If Consultant determines to sell the equipment, the terms 201 and conditions of such sale must be approved in advance by Commission. 2 CFR, Part 200 requires a credit to Federal funds when participating equipment with a fair market value greater than $5,000 is credited to the project. 26.4 All subcontracts in excess $25,000 shall contain the above provisions. 27. Labor Code Requirements. 27.1 Prevailing Wages. (a) Consultant shall comply with the State of California's General Prevailing Wage Rate requirements in accordance with California Labor Code, Section 1770, and all Federal, State, and local laws and ordinances applicable to the Services. (b) Any subcontract entered into as a result of this Agreement, if for more than $25,000 for public works construction or more than $15,000 for the alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance of public works, shall contain all of the provisions of this Section. (c) When prevailing wages apply to the Services described in the Scope of Services, transportation and subsistence costs shall be reimbursed at the minimum rates set by the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) as outlined in the applicable Prevailing Wage Determination. See http://www.dir.ca.gov. (d) Copies of the prevailing rate of per diem wages in effect at commencement of this Agreement are on file at the Commission's offices. Consultant shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Consultant's principal place of business and at the project site. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the Commission, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claims, liabilities, costs, penalties or interest arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. 27.2 DIR Registration. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, then pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, the Consultant and all applicable subconsultants must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations. If applicable, Consultant shall maintain registration for the duration of the Project and require the same of any subconsultants. This Project may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations. It shall be Consultant's sole responsibility to comply with all applicable registration and labor compliance requirements. 27.3 Eight -Hour Law. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Labor Code, eight hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work, and the time of service of any worker employed on the work shall be limited and restricted to eight hours during any one 202 calendar day, and forty hours in any one calendar week, except when payment for overtime is made at not less than one and one-half the basic rate for all hours worked in excess of eight hours per day ("Eight -Hour Law"), unless Consultant or the Services are not subject to the Eight -Hour Law. Consultant shall forfeit to Commission as a penalty, $50.00 for each worker employed in the execution of this Agreement by him, or by any sub -consultant under him, for each calendar day during which such workman is required or permitted to work more than eight hours in any calendar day and forty hours in any one calendar week without such compensation for overtime violation of the provisions of the California Labor Code, unless Consultant or the Services are not subject to the Eight - Hour Law. 27.4 Employment of Apprentices. This Agreement shall not prevent the employment of properly indentured apprentices in accordance with the California Labor Code, and no employer or labor union shall refuse to accept otherwise qualified employees as indentured apprentices on the work performed hereunder solely on the ground of race, creed, national origin, ancestry, color or sex. Every qualified apprentice shall be paid the standard wage paid to apprentices under the regulations of the craft or trade in which he or she is employed and shall be employed only in the craft or trade to which he or she is registered. If California Labor Code Section 1777.5 applies to the Services, Consultant and any subcontractor hereunder who employs workers in any apprenticeable craft or trade shall apply to the joint apprenticeship council administering applicable standards for a certificate approving Consultant or any sub -consultant for the employment and training of apprentices. Upon issuance of this certificate, Consultant and any sub -consultant shall employ the number of apprentices provided for therein, as well as contribute to the fund to administer the apprenticeship program in each craft or trade in the area of the work hereunder. The parties expressly understand that the responsibility for compliance with provisions of this Section and with Sections 1777.5, 1777.6 and 1777.7 of the California Labor Code in regard to all apprenticeable occupations lies with Consultant 28. Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality. 28.1 Documents & Data. This Agreement creates an exclusive and perpetual license for Commission to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sub -license any and all copyrights and designs embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement ("Documents & Data"). Consultant shall require all subcontractors to agree in writing that Commission is granted an exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subcontractor prepares under this Agreement. 203 Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than Consultant or provided to Consultant by the Commission. Commission shall not be limited in any way in its use of the Documents & Data at any time, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at Commission's sole risk. 28.2 Intellectual Property. In addition, Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest (including copyright, patent, trade secret and other proprietary rights) in all plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data, computer programs or software and source code, enhancements, documents, and any and all works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium or expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or other data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer media ("Intellectual Property") prepared or developed by or on behalf of Consultant under this Agreement as well as any other such Intellectual Property prepared or developed by or on behalf of Consultant under this Agreement. The Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest in Intellectual Property developed or modified under this Agreement whether or not paid for wholly or in part by Commission, whether or not developed in conjunction with Consultant, and whether or not developed by Consultant. Consultant will execute separate written assignments of any and all rights to the above referenced Intellectual Property upon request of Commission. Consultant shall also be responsible to obtain in writing separate written assignments from any subcontractors or agents of Consultant of any and all right to the above referenced Intellectual Property. Should Consultant, either during or following termination of this Agreement, desire to use any of the above -referenced Intellectual Property, it shall first obtain the written approval of the Commission. All materials and documents which were developed or prepared by the Consultant for general use prior to the execution of this Agreement and which are not the copyright of any other party or publicly available and any other computer applications, shall continue to be the property of the Consultant. However, unless otherwise identified and stated prior to execution of this Agreement, Consultant represents and warrants that it has the right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Intellectual Property as provided herein. Commission further is granted by Consultant a non-exclusive and perpetual license to copy, use, modify or sub -license any and all Intellectual Property otherwise owned by Consultant which is the basis or foundation for any derivative, collective, insurrectional, or supplemental work created under this Agreement. 204 28.3 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents and Data either created by or provided to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Consultant. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of Commission, be used by Consultant for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to Consultant which is otherwise known to Consultant or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Consultant shall not use Commission's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of Commission. 28.4 Infringement Indemnification. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, for any alleged infringement of any patent, copyright, trade secret, trade name, trademark, or any other proprietary right of any person or entity in consequence of the use on the Project by Commission of the Documents & Data, including any method, process, product, or concept specified or depicted. 29. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall defend (with counsel of Commission's choosing), indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, volunteers, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to alleged negligent acts, omissions, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, agents, consultants, and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of consequential damages, expert witness fees, and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Consultant shall defend, at Consultant's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents, or volunteers. Consultant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents, or volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Consultant shall reimburse Commission and its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents, and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Commission, its directors, officials officers, employees, consultants, agents, or volunteers. 205 If Consultant's obligation to defend, indemnify, and/or hold harmless arises out of Consultant's performance as a "design professional" (as that term is defined under Civil Code section 2782.8), then, and only to the extent required by Civil Code section 2782.8, which is fully incorporated herein, Consultant's indemnification obligation shall be limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant, and, upon Consultant obtaining a final adjudication by a court of competent jurisdiction, Consultant's liability for such claim, including the cost to defend, shall not exceed the Consultant's proportionate percentage of fault. Consultant's obligations as set forth in this Section shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 30. Insurance. 30.1 Time for Compliance. Consultant shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the Commission that it has secured all insurance required under this Section, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the Commission. In addition, Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this Section. 30.2 Minimum Requirements. Consultant shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Agreement by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Consultant shall also require all of its subcontractors to procure and maintain the same insurance for the duration of the Agreement. Such insurance shall meet at least the following minimum levels of coverage: (a) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001 or exact equivalent); (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage (form CA 0001, code 1 (any auto) or exact equivalent); and (3) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. (b) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. Limits may be achieved by any combination of primary and excess or umbrella liability insurance; (2) Automobile Liability: $2,000,000 per accident 206 for bodily injury and property damage. Limits may be achieved by any combination of primary and excess or umbrella liability insurance; and (3) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Employer's Practices Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 30.3 Professional Liability. Consultant shall procure and maintain, and require its sub -consultants to procure and maintain, for a period of five (5) years following completion of the Project, errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to their profession. For Consultant, such insurance shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per claim. This insurance shall be endorsed to include contractual liability applicable to this Agreement and shall be written on a policy form coverage specifically designed to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant. "Covered Professional Services" as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this Agreement. The policy must "pay on behalf of the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend. Subconsultants of Consultant shall obtain such insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per claim. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Commission may consider written requests to lower or dispense with the errors and omissions liability insurance requirement contained in this Section for certain subconsultants of Consultant, on a case -by -case basis, depending on the nature and scope of the Services to be provided by the subconsultant. Approval of such request shall be in writing, signed by the Commission's Contract Administrator. 30.4 Aircraft Liability Insurance. Prior to conducting any Services requiring use of aircraft, Consultant shall procure and maintain, or cause to be procured and maintained, aircraft liability insurance or equivalent form, with a single limit as shall be required by the Commission. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non -owned aircraft and passengers, and shall name, or be endorsed to name, the Commission, Caltrans and their directors, officials, officers, employees and agents as additional insureds with respect to the Services or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant. 30.5 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant shall provide endorsements on forms approved by the Commission to add the following provisions to the insurance policies: (a) General Liability. (i) Commercial General Liability Insurance must include coverage for (1) bodily Injury and property damage; (2) personal Injury/advertising Injury; (3) premises/operations liability; (4) products/completed operations liability; (5) aggregate limits that apply per Project; (6) explosion, collapse and underground (UCX) exclusion deleted; (7) contractual liability with respect to this Agreement; (8) broad form property damage; and (9) independent consultants coverage. 207 (ii) The policy shall contain no endorsements or provisions limiting coverage for (1) contractual liability; (2) cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another; or (3) contain any other exclusion contrary to this Agreement. (iii) The policy shall give the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, and agents insured status using ISO endorsement forms 20 10 10 01 and 20 37 10 01, or endorsements providing the exact same coverage. (iv) The additional insured coverage under the policy shall be "primary and non-contributory" and will not seek contribution from the Commission's or Caltrans' insurance or self-insurance and shall be at least as broad as CG 20 01 04 13, or endorsements providing the exact same coverage. (b) Automobile Liability. The automobile liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, Caltrans and their directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant or for which the Consultant is responsible; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, Caltrans and their directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant's scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, Caltrans and their directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (c) Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. (0 Consultant certifies that he/she is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and he/she will comply with such provisions before commencing work under this Agreement. (ii) The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents for losses paid under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by the Consultant. (d) All Coverages. (i) forth hereunder. Defense costs shall be payable in addition to the limits set (ii) Requirements of specific coverage or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits, or other requirement, or a 208 waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits set forth herein shall be available to the Commission, Caltrans and their directors, officials, officers, employees and agents as additional insureds under said policies. Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured; whichever is greater. (iii) The limits of insurance required in this Agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of the Commission (if agreed to in a written contract or agreement) before the Commission's own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured. The umbrella/excess policy shall be provided on a "following form" basis with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying policy(ies). (iv) Consultant shall provide the Commission at least thirty (30) days prior written notice of cancellation of any policy required by this Agreement, except that the Consultant shall provide at least ten (10) days prior written notice of cancellation of any such policy due to non-payment of premium. If any of the required coverage is cancelled or expires during the term of this Agreement, the Consultant shall deliver renewal certificate(s) including the General Liability Additional Insured Endorsement to the Commission at least ten (10) days prior to the effective date of cancellation or expiration. (v) The retroactive date (if any) of each policy is to be no later than the effective date of this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain such coverage continuously for a period of at least three years after the completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall purchase a one (1) year extended reporting period A) if the retroactive date is advanced past the effective date of this Agreement; B) if the policy is cancelled or not renewed; or C) if the policy is replaced by another claims- made policy with a retroactive date subsequent to the effective date of thisAgreement. (vi) The foregoing requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by Consultant, and any approval of said insurance by the Commission, is not intended to and shall not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to, the provisions concerning indemnification. (vii) If at any time during the life of the Agreement, any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, Commission has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by Commission will be promptly 209 reimbursed by Consultant or Commission will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, Commission may cancel this Agreement. The Commission may require the Consultant to provide complete copies of all insurance policies in effect for the duration of the Project. (viii) Neither the Commission nor any of its directors, officials, officers, employees or agents shall be personally responsible for any liability arising under or by virtue of this Agreement. 30.6 Deductibles and Self -Insurance Retentions. Any deductibles or self- insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Commission. If the Commission does not approve the deductibles or self -insured retentions as presented, Consultant shall guarantee that, at the option of the Commission, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self -insured retentions as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents; or, (2) the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses. 30.7 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating no less than A:VIII, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the Commission. 30.8 Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish Commission with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to the Commission. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All certificates and endorsements must be received and approved by the Commission before work commences. The Commission reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 30.9 Subconsultant Insurance Requirements. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractors or subconsultants to commence work on any subcontract until they have provided evidence satisfactory to the Commission that they have secured all insurance required under this Section. Policies of commercial general liability insurance provided by such subcontractors or subconsultants shall be endorsed to name the Commission as an additional insured using ISO form CG 20 38 04 13 or an endorsement providing the exact same coverage. If requested by Consultant, the Commission may approve different scopes or minimum limits of insurance for particular subcontractors or subconsultants. 30.10 Other Insurance. At its option, the Commission may require such additional coverage(s), limits and/or the reduction of deductibles or retentions it considers reasonable and prudent based upon risk factors that may directly or indirectly impact the Project. In retaining this option Commission does not warrant Consultant's 210 insurance program to be adequate. Consultant shall have the right to purchase insurance in addition to the insurance required in this Section. 31. Safety. Consultant shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Consultant shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed. Safety precautions as applicable shall include, but shall not be limited to: (A) adequate life protection and life saving equipment and procedures; (B) instructions in accident prevention for all employees and subcontractors, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, equipment and other safety devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries; and (C) adequate facilities for the proper inspection and maintenance of all safety measures. As between Consultant and the construction contractors only, the construction contractors shall remain solely responsible for construction safety notwithstanding any safety obligations of Consultant at the jobsite. The foregoing sentence shall not impact nor in any way modify or alter Consultant's indemnity and defense obligations to the Commission, as set forth in Section 29 of this Agreement, not any of Consultant's duties or obligations set forth under this Agreement, including the attached exhibits. Pursuant to the authority contained in Section 591 of the Vehicle Code, the Commission has determined that the Project will contain areas that are open to public traffic. Consultant shall comply with all of the requirements set forth in Divisions 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of the Vehicle Code. Consultant shall take all reasonably necessary precautions for safe operation of its vehicles and the protection of the traveling public from injury and damage from such vehicles. 32 Additional Work. Any work or activities that are in addition to, or otherwise outside of, the Services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall only be performed pursuant to a separate agreement between the parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Commission's Executive Director may make a change to the Agreement, other than a Cardinal Change. For purposes of this Agreement, a Cardinal Change is a change which is "outside the scope" of the Agreement; in other words, work which should not be regarded as having been fairly and reasonably within the contemplation of the parties when the Agreement was entered into. An example of a change which is not a Cardinal Change would be where, in a contract to construct a building there are many changes in the materials used, but the size and layout of the building remains the same. Cardinal Changes are not within the authority of this provision to order, and shall be processed by the Commission as "sole source" procurements according to applicable law, including the requirements of FTA Circular 4220.1 D, paragraph 9(f). (a) In addition to the changes authorized above, a modification which is signed by Consultant and the Commission's Executive Director, other than a Cardinal 211 Change, may be made in order to: (1) make a negotiated equitable adjustment to the Agreement price, delivery schedule and other terms resulting from the issuance of a Change Order, (2) reflect definitive letter contracts, and (3) reflect other agreements of the parties modifying the terms of this Agreement ("Bilateral Contract Modification"). (b) Consultant shall not perform, nor be compensated for any change, without written authorization from the Commission's Executive Director as set forth herein. In the event such a change authorization is not issued and signed by the Commission's Executive Director, Consultant shall not provide such change. 33. Prohibited Interests. 33.1 Solicitation. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, the Commission shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. 33.2 Consultant Conflict of Interest (Construction Management/ Administration). (a) Consultant shall disclose any financial, business, or other relationship with Commission that may have an impact upon the outcome of this Agreement, or any ensuing Commission construction project. Consultant shall also list current clients who may have a financial interest in the outcome of this Agreement, or any ensuing Commission construction project, which will follow. (b) Consultant hereby certifies that it does not now have, nor shall it acquire any financial or business interest that would conflict with the performance of Services under this Agreement. (c) Any subcontract in excess of $25,000 entered into as a result of this Agreement, shall contain all of the provisions of this Article. (d) Consultant hereby certifies that neither Consultant, nor any firm affiliated with Consultant will bid on any construction contract, or on any contract to provide construction inspection for any construction project resulting from this Agreement. An affiliated firm is one, which is subject to the control of the same persons through joint - ownership, or otherwise. (e) Except for subconsultants whose services are limited to providing surveying or materials testing information, no subconsultant who has provided design services in connection with this Agreement shall be eligible to bid on any construction 212 contract, or on any contract to provide construction inspection for any construction project resulting from this Agreement. 33.3 Commission Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of the Commission, during the term of his or her service with the Commission, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom. 33.4 Conflict of Employment. Employment by the Consultant of personnel currently on the payroll of the Commission shall not be permitted in the performance of this Agreement, even though such employment may occur outside of the employee's regular working hours or on weekends, holidays or vacation time. Further, the employment by the Consultant of personnel who have been on the Commission payroll within one year prior to the date of execution of this Agreement, where this employment is caused by and or dependent upon the Consultant securing this or related Agreements with the Commission, is prohibited. 33.5 Covenant Against Contingent Fees. As may be required in connection with funding provided hereunder, the Consultant warrants that he/she has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement, and that he/she has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or formation of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, the Commission shall have the right to terminate this Agreement without liability pursuant to the terms herein, or at its discretion to deduct from the Agreement price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. 33.6 Rebates, Kickbacks or Other Unlawful Consideration. Consultant warrants that this Agreement was not obtained or secured through rebates kickbacks or other unlawful consideration, either promised or paid to any Commission employee. For breach or violation of this warranty, Commission shall have the right in its discretion; to terminate this Agreement without liability; to pay only for the value of the work actually performed; or to deduct from the contract price; or otherwise recover the full amount of such rebate, kickback or other unlawful consideration. 33.7 Employment Adverse to the Commission. Consultant shall notify the Commission, and shall obtain the Commission's written consent, prior to accepting work to assist with or participate in a third -party lawsuit or other legal or administrative proceeding against the Commission during the term of this Agreement. 34. Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities 213 related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. 35. Right to Employ Other Consultants. Commission reserves the right to employ other consultants in connection with the Project. 35. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed with the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 37. Disputes; Attorneys' Fees. 37.1 Prior to commencing any action hereunder, the Parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve any dispute arising between them. The pendency of a dispute shall not excuse Consultant from full and timely performance of the Services. 37.2. If the Parties are unable to resolve a dispute after attempting in good faith to do so, the Parties may seek any other available remedy to resolve the dispute. If either Party commences an action against the other Party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing Party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing Party reasonable attorneys' fees and, all other costs of such actions. 38. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 39. Headings. Article and Section Headings, paragraph captions or marginal headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall have no effect in the construction or interpretation of any provision herein. 39.1 Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose: CONSULTANT: COMMISSION: WSP USA, INC. 826 E. Hospitality Lane, Suite 350 San Bernardino, CA 92408 Attn: Victor Martinez Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: Executive Director Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty- eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, and addressed to the Party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. 214 40. Conflicting Provisions. In the event that provisions of any attached exhibits conflict in any way with the provisions set forth in this Agreement, the language, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall control the actions and obligations of the Parties and the interpretation of the Parties' understanding concerning the performance of the Services. 41. Amendment or Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by both Parties. 42. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior negotiations, agreements or understandings. 43. Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect. 44. Provisions Applicable When State Department of Transportation Funds Are Involved. When funding for the Services provided by this Agreement are provided, in whole or in part, from the Caltrans, Consultant shall also fully and adequately comply with the provisions included in Exhibit "D" (Caltrans requirements) attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 45. Survival. All rights and obligations hereunder that by their nature are to continue after any expiration or termination of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the indemnification and confidentiality obligations, shall survive any such expiration or termination. 46. No Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties. 47. Labor Certification. By its signature hereunder, Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Services. 48. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original. 49. Subpoenas or Court Orders. Should Consultant receive a subpoena or court order related to this Agreement, the Services or the Project, Consultant shall immediately provide written notice of the subpoena or court order to the Commission. Consultant shall not respond to any such subpoena or court order until notice to the Commission is provided as required herein, and shall cooperate with the Commission in responding to the subpoena or court order. 215 50. Assignment or Transfer. Consultant shall not assign, hypothecate, or transfer, either directly or by operation of law, this Agreement or any interest herein, without the prior written consent of the Commission. Any attempt to do so shall be null and void, and any assignees, hypothecates or transferees shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer. 51. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, and shall not be assigned by Consultant without the prior written consent of Commission. 52 Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein. 53. No Waiver. Failure of Commission to insist on any one occasion upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any rights or powers hereunder at any one time or more times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of such other right or power at any other time or times. [Signatures on following page] 216 SIGNATURE PAGE TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH STATE FUNDING/ASSISTANCE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Chair Approved as to Form: By: Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel WSP USA, INC. By: Signature Name Title ATTEST: By: Its: * A corporation requires the signatures of two corporate officers. One signature shall be that of the chairman of board, the president or any vice president and the second signature (on the attest line) shall be that of the secretary, any assistant secretary, the chief financial officer or any assistant treasurer of such corporation. If the above persons are not the intended signators, evidence of signature authority shall be provided to RCTC. 217 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES [attached behind this page] 218 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF WORK 1. Background The Scope of Work includes: 1. Development through approval of a PID completed to Caltrans/FHWA standards for the proposed project allowing for the projects to be programmed and to proceed with the Project Approval/Environmental Document phase. The type of PID document to be completed for this Project is a Project Study - Report/Project Development Study (PSR/PDS) and will be referenced throughout this scope of work. 2. Develop a single PSR/PDS document for the express lanes network with all express lanes corridors named in the project description to be delivered within the next 20 years. Final alternatives for the project have not been developed, however, for the purpose of this scope of work only, CONSULTANT assumes that three (3) viable alternatives for the express lanes corridors will be developed as a network for the scope identified below. Additionally, other alternatives may be included for initial alternatives screening process as described in task 3.3 — Develop Alternatives. However, the scope of work described herein, is based on the three (3) viable alternatives described below to be included in the final PSR-PDS. Alternative 1: No Build Alternative 2: • 60 Jurupa-Riverside: SR-60 from 1-15 to SR-91/I-215/SR-60 interchange; construct 1 express lane in each direction by converting existing HOV lane to 1 express lane. • 215/60 Riverside -Moreno Valley: I-215/SR 60 from SR-91/I-215/SR-60 interchange to SR 60/215 East Junction; construct 1 express lane in each direction by converting HOV lane to express lane; SR60/215 East Junction to SR-60/Theodore Road Interchange construct 1 express lane by converting existing HOV to 1 express lane; SR60/1215 East Junction to 1215/Van Buren Blvd interchange; construct 1 express lane by adding a new express lane in the median. • 91 Downtown Riverside: SR-91 from 1-15 to SR-91/I-215/SR-60 interchange; construct 2 express lanes in each direction by converting existing HOV lane to 1 express lane and adding a new express lane. Page 1 of 8 219 Alternative 3: • 60 Jurupa-Riverside: SR-60 from 1-15 to SR-91/I-215/SR-60 interchange; construct 2 express lanes in each direction by converting existing HOV lane to 1 express lane and adding a new express lane. • 215/60 Riverside -Moreno Valley: I-215/SR 60 from SR-91/I-215/SR-60 interchange to SR 60/215 East Junction; construct 2 express lanes in each direction by converting HOV lane to express lane and adding a new express lane in the median; SR60/215 East Junction to SR-60/Theodore Road Interchange construct 1 express lane by converting existing HOV to 1 express lane; SR60/1215 East Junction to 1215/Van Buren Blvd interchange; construct 1 express lane by adding a new express lane in the median. • 91 Downtown Riverside: SR-91 from 1-15 to SR-91/I-215/SR-60 interchange; construct 1 express lane in each direction by converting existing HOV lane to 1 express lane. 2. Data Collection The project will involve the review, assimilation and validation of existing data from previous Next Generation Toll Feasibility Study and the generation of new data. Existing data in pdf format consists of engineering layouts, cost estimates, and RCTC workshop materials which are included in Exhibit C. Native files of the engineering layouts, cost estimates, and traffic data from the feasibility study will be provided to the CONSULTANT. RCTC expects that the CONSULTANT will make the best use of existing data to minimize waste and duplication of work efforts. CONSULTANT shall provide a recommendation to RCTC regarding the use of existing data and if additional data collection beyond the scope of this work is required. 3. Work Activities The overall action plan will be to obtain Caltrans approval of the PID. CONSULTANT is expected to prepare all reports, studies and plans to meet all requirements of Caltrans. RCTC staff will provide overall project coordination and handle administrative and policy matters. Project management will be conducted for the duration of the PID effort. Work activities are described in the following sections. Scope for public outreach activities, such a conducting scoping meeting and public outreach events is excluded from this scope of work, except as noted in task 3.9. 3.1. Data Collection and Define Transportation Deficiency Data collection, field investigations, and interviews in support of the PSR-PDS shall be conducted. The data is to include but is not limited to regional and Caltrans Page 2 of 8 220 program objectives, traffic data, planned or in progress adjacent projects, planned or existing utilities, transportation concept report (TCR) or route concept report (RCR), district system management plan (DSMP), regional transportation plan (RTP), congestion management program (CMP), 2015 Ten -Year State Highway Operation and Protection Program Plan (SHOPP Plan), State Implementation Plan (SIP), and local plans. The data collected shall be analyzed to identify transportation deficiencies. RCTC's concurrence is required for the transportation deficiencies that will be addressed in the build alternatives. 3.2. Develop Project Purpose and Need The project purpose -and -need statement shall be developed based on transportation deficiencies developed through the evaluation of existing and future traffic conditions, current/future planning documents, and future population growth. The purpose and need should focus on supporting the implementation of express lanes and development of these corridors individually to help support an overall express lane network. As part of this activity, will be development of documentation to support a single PSR- PDS to deliver the PID phase of the three express lane corridors. 3.3. Develop Alternatives Two (2) build alternatives and one (1) no build alternative described in Section 1 are to be developed for inclusion in the PSR-PDS. The alternatives will address the established purpose -and -need and the transportation deficiencies developed in consultation with the PDT. This task includes alternatives screening and development of documentation to justify only two (2) viable build alternatives for the PID phase. This scope of work assumes other alternatives to be included for preliminary alternatives screening. A technical memorandum or white paper will be completed for the preliminary alternatives screening. To the extent feasible, CONSULTANT shall use available data and refine the geometry design, as needed, by using the Next Generation Toll Feasibility Study for incorporation into the PID. Although the corridors are part of a network, delivery of the corridors may occur separately during the 20-year planning duration. CONSULTANT will propose the sequence and years of delivery for each corridor to be considered and approved by RCTC. CONSULTANT shall prepare conceptual typical cross sections and schematic line drawings on 11" x 17" sheets (at 1" = 1000' scale) to represent the proposed improvements for the study alternatives. Preparation of plan sheets with topographic background, including obtaining new topographic mapping, is excluded from the scope of this work. 3.4. Initial Engineering Analysis Initial engineering analysis shall be performed to establish a reasonable study area Page 3 of 8 221 for alternatives. The engineering analysis is to include but not be limited to structures, storm water, materials, landscaping, permits, local and regional input, right-of-way, preliminary pavement life cycle cost analysis memo, compliance with design standards (and listing of potential design exceptions), traffic operations, toll operations, and alternative transportation modes already in place (such as: mass transit, rail, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities). The analyses will consider that all projects will be completed within 20 years. This scope of work assumes assessment of right of way costs for up to 100 properties. 3.5. Traffic Engineering Performance Assessment The Traffic Engineering Performance Assessment for the PSR-PDS will be limited to the assessment of readily available information and data, and macro -level analysis and evaluation. As necessary, traffic forecast data should be provided to show the existing and future traffic conditions without the projects. This effort will produce the potential scope and magnitude of traffic engineering work (traffic forecasting, modeling analysis, and evaluation) to be performed during the PANED phase. Also, include proposed scope for managed lanes traffic and safety analysis necessary to do during PANED to meet Caltrans Traffic Operations Directive 11-02. The assessment will also include the approach to meet SB 743 for VMT analyses requirements. The completion of transportation planning scoping information sheet will be part of this activity. 3.6. Initial Environmental Analysis A preliminary environmental analysis report (PEAR) shall be developed and include discussion on but not limited to environmental resources, potential project issues or impacts, studies that are needed to complete an environmental evaluation, recommended environmental determination/ document and a tentative schedule for its completion, initial site assessment (ISA) checklist for hazardous waste, and identification of required or anticipated permits or approvals. The analyses will consider that all projects will be completed within 20 years. A single PEAR document will be developed for all three Express Lanes projects, and a separate PEAR checklist shall be prepared for each project. Due to the high-level approach proposed for the PID, a general discussion will be provided in the PEAR and/or a brief statement for each affected resource. Record searches will be conducted for biological and cultural resources for each Express Lane Project (total of three segments) and results of the record searches will be briefly discussed in the PEAR. 3.7. Develop Cost Estimates A project cost estimate is to be developed for each alternative. Build alternative cost estimates from prior project studies are to be verified and utilized as a baseline for use for the PSR-PDS cost estimates for each build alternative. The cost estimates are to include support cost that will be provided by RCTC. Cost estimates will be escalated to year of expenditure. Page 4 of 8 222 3.8. Risk Register A risk assessment of the project conducting a PSR-PDS in lieu of a PSR is to be performed utilizing feedback from the PDT. The resulting risk register will be developed to identify, classify, and quantify the risk impacts to the scope, cost and schedule of the project. 3.9. Scoping for Public Outreach Within the PSR-PDS, discuss the type of stakeholder involvement that has been completed to date, if applicable. Identify the stakeholders and organizations that would be involved during the PA/ED effort and potential concerns/objectives from each group. Identify the context -sensitive -solutions approach for public that will be used to obtain stakeholder involvement in the identification and evaluation of alternatives during the PA/ED phase for each corridor. 3.10. Develop PSR-PDS A PSR-PDS report is to be developed for the express lanes network using Caltrans guidelines. The PSR-PDS reports are to be distributed to the PDT and others identified for review and comment. The PSR-PDS review comments are to be consolidated into a comment log for each corridor that documents resolution. Final submittal of the corridor PSR-PDS reports are to be submitted to RCTC and Caltrans with the objective to obtain approval. This task assumes 3 review cycles with Caltrans. 3.11. Project Management Project management and administration shall include the coordination and supervision of project staff to facilitate the performance of the work in accordance with the scope of work and RCTC requirements. The project management effort is to include but not be limited to the coordination/preparation/documentation of project meetings, development/ maintenance of the project schedule, preparation of project management plan, preparation of monthly invoicing, maintenance of project records, development/and administration of quality control plan, and coordination of submittals and final deliverables. The Project Development Team (PDT) shall include the Caltrans project manager, representatives from relevant Caltrans functional units, RCTC, and members of the CONSULTANT. Representatives from local and regional agencies can be added on an as needed basis. 3.12. Optional Task: Miscellaneous Planning Level Studies This activity includes additional alternatives screening, engineering, traffic, planning, and other technical work tasks and studies that may be necessary and in addition to Page 5 of 8 223 the scope of the PSR-PDS scope to further evaluate next generation express lanes project alternatives. RCTC will provide a specific scope, authorize additional budget, and issue a separate notice to proceed (NTP) if this task is warranted. 4. Deliverables The majority of the CONSULTANT work in this phase will include data gathering and analyses necessary for completion of the PID phase. The scope of work assumes that for all documents/deliverables required for PSR-PDS approval, and as described in this scope of work, two (2) reviews will be conducted by Caltrans. CONSULTANT assumes that three (3) viable alternatives for the express lanes corridors will be developed as a network for the deliverables described below. Specific documents that will be required as draft and final during PID phase include the following: • One (1) Kick-off Meeting with RCTC within one week of notice to proceed • One (1) Pre-PID Meeting with Project Development Team within 2 weeks of receiving notice to proceed. • Twelve (12) Project Development Team Meetings • Up to four (4) Focus Meetings to aid in gathering information or developing analyses for the PSR/PDS • Baseline PSR/PDS Project Schedule and Monthly Updates • Monthly Invoicing and Project Reporting • Records Management establish and maintain a web accessible records management system. Provide project files electronically at the close-out of the project. • Development and administration of an approved Quality Management Plan • Form Project Development Team • Provide data collected for the preparation of the PSR-PDS to RCTC • Define transportation deficiencies • Obtain RCTC consensus on transportation deficiencies that will be addressed in build alternatives • Develop purpose -and -need statement. • Prepare an alternatives screening technical memorandum or white paper to document the alternatives considered but eliminated from the PSR-PDS evaluation. • Develop one (1) no build alternative and two (2) build alternatives for the corridors as a network • Perform engineering analysis • Develop one (1) Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report. • Develop cost estimates for each build alternative • Develop preliminary PA&ED delivery schedule • Develop one (1) risk register Page 6 of 8 224 " Develop a single draft PSR-PDS report along with all the required attachments and scoping documents/checklists as required by Caltrans PDPM Appendix S, for the three (3) corridors " Distribute up to twenty (20) copies of draft PSR-PDS reports for comment " Document comments and resolution for PSR-PDS reports in a comment log " Obtain Caltrans approval of PSR-PDS report " Distribute up to twenty (20) copies of final PSR-PDS " Up to 20 copies of draft and final miscellaneous planning level studies Assumptions " It is assumed that a full pavement Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) will not be developed as part of this scope and will be completed in subsequent phases. 5. Project Delivery Milestones RCTC has established the following tentative milestones for the project: " Notice to Proceed " Kick-off Meeting " Initial PDT Meeting " Data Collection " Engineering and Environmental Studies " Produce Draft and Final PSR-PDS " Obtain Caltrans approval of Final PSR-PDS " Miscellaneous Planning Level Studies Optional Task: Miscellaneous Planning Level Studies described in Section 3.12 will be issued under a separate NTP and will be at the discretion of the RCTC project manager. The timeline of the deliverables associated with this task will be determined at NTP and will be within the overall contract duration. Page 7 of 8 225 Page 8 of 8 226 EXHIBIT "B" SCHEDULE OF SERVICES [attached behind this page] 227 COUNTY Network PSR-PDS plifRIVERSIDE Next Generation Express Lanes �' TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Jun '191Ju1'19lAuo'191Sep'191Oct'19 ' Jan '201Feb'20IMar'201Apr'201May'201Jun'201Ju1'20lAuo'201S 1 Notice to Proceed 0 days Tue 7/16/19 Tue 7/16/19 7/16 711= 7116 7/;16 7/16 7/16 7/22 117/29 �� 8/6 ' �' 9/ ' �� 7 0 10/24 7/16 7/15 2 PSR-PDS Document 263 days Tue 7/16/19 Thu 7/16/20 3 Project Management and Coordination Meetings 262 days Tue 7/16/19 Wed 7/15/20 4 Prepare QMP 5 days Tue 7/16/19 Mon 7/22/19 5 Obtain & Review Existing Reports & Plans 10 days Tue 7/16/19 IMon 7/29/19 6 Define Purpose and Need 54 days Tue 7/16/19 Fri 9/27/19 7 Develop/Refine Preliminary Geometry 25 days Tue 7/30/19 _ Mon 9/2/19 8 Collect Existing Traffic Data 15 days Tue 7/16/19 Mon 8/5/19 9 Traffic Methodology Memo 35 days Tue 8/6/19 IMon 9/23/19 13 Prepare Traffic Forecasts 23 days Tue 9/24/19 Thu 10/24/19 14 Conceptual Geometric Design for Alternatives 20 days Tue 9/3/19 Mon 9/30/19 15 Traffic Engineering Performance Assessment (TEPA) 90 days Fri 10/25/19 Thu 2/27/20 ' 1 1 11/21 # 2/27 Refine Conceptual Geometric Design 15 days Tue 10/1/19 Mon 10/21/1 22 23 Conduct Preliminary Constructability Review 8 days Tue 10/22/19 Thu 10/31/19 24 Prepare Preliminary Cost Estimates 15 days Fri 11/1/19 Thu 11/21/19 25 Prepare Conceptual Cost Estimate - ROW Component 15 days Fri 11/1/19 Thu 11/21/19 9/9 11/21 Prepare Transportation Planning Scoping Information Sheet 30 days Tue 7/30/ • •• 9/9/19 26 10 10/1 10/ 10/2 10/2 10/2 „10/28 11/11 ! - 1 1/18 1/18 /11 27 Prepare Short -Form SW DR 20 days T 9 18/19 28 Prepare Preliminary Materilals Report Prepare Preliminary LCCA 20 days 15 days /1/19 M. 8/19 10/29/19 M. 8/19 29 30 Prepare Risk Register 15 da - ue 10/22/19 M 11/19 31 Prepare Survey Questionnaire 5 da ue 10/22/19 r 32 Prepare Design Scoping Checklist 15 days 10/22/ 9/3 9/3 10/15 0 10/14 " 11/26 11/25 .1 1/21 2/4 20 .2/3 2/28 17 ' 4/10 .4/9 5/$ .5/7 6/5 ■6/4 .6/25 6/26 7/16 33 Prepare Preliminary ISA 20 days / , on 9/30/19 Prepare Environmental Mapping & Records Search 30 days Mon 10/14/19 34 35 Prepare Preliminary Environmental Report (PEAR) Tue 10 1 on 11/25/19 36 Prepare Draft PSR-PDS 40 days - 11/26/1' 20/20 37 QC/QA Draft PSR-PDS 10 days /21/20 /20 38 RCTC Review and Upd- PSR-PDS 10 days ,/20 Mon 2/17/20 39 Caltrans Review of Draft P 30 days /20 Thu 4/9/20 40 Prepare Draft Final PSR-PDS 20 days /20 Thu 5/7/20 41 Caltrans 2nd Review Final PSR-• 20 days 20 Thu 6/4/20 42 Update Final PSR-PDS 15 days ./20 Thu 6/25/20 43 Caltrans Approval of PSR-PDS days ./26/20 Thu 7/16/20 Page 1 Wed 5/1 5/1 9 228 EXHIBIT "C" COMPENSATION PROVISIONS [attached behind this page] 229 EXHIBIT "C" COMPENSATION SUMMARY SHEET FIRM PROJECT TASK/ROLE COST Prime Consultant WSP USA Inc. Project Management/Engineering/PSR- PDS Preparation/Tolling $ 951,153.92 Subconsultants Epic Land Solutions Right of Way $ 27,389.93 ESA, Inc. Environmental $ 130,759.68 Michael Baker International, Inc. Engineering $137,585.92 SUBTOTAL $ 1,246,889.45 OTHER DIRECT COSTS $ 49,220.30 TOTAL COST PROPOSAL $1,296,109.75 230 EXHIBIT "D" CALTRANS REQUIREMENTS 1. STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE. A. Consultant's signature affixed herein shall constitute a certification under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that CONSULTANT has, unless exempt, complied with, the nondiscrimination program requirements of Government Code Section 12990 and Title 2, California Administrative Code, Section 8103. B. During the performance of this Agreement, Consultant and its subconsultants shall not unlawfully discriminate, harass, or allow harassment against any employee or applicant for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin, physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition (e.g., cancer), age (over 40), marital status, and denial of family care leave. Consultant and subconsultants shall insure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment. Consultant and subconsultants shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code §12990 (a-f) et seq.) and the applicable regulations promulgated there under (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 7285 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing Government Code Section 12990 (a-f), set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, are incorporated into this Agreement by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. Consultant and its subconsultants shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other Agreement. 2. RELEASE OF RETAINAGE No retainage will be withheld by the Agency from progress payments due the prime consultant. Retainage by the prime consultant or subconsultants is prohibited, and no retainage will be held by the prime consultant from progress due subconsultants. Any violation of this provision shall subject the violating prime consultant or subconsultants to the penalties, sanctions, and other remedies specified in Section 7108.5 of the California Business and Professions Code. This requirement shall not be construed to limit or impair any contractual, administrative, or judicial remedies, otherwise available to the prime consultant or subconsultant in the event of a dispute involving late payment or nonpayment by the prime consultant or deficient subconsultant performance, or noncompliance by a subconsultant. 3. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD CERTIFICATION In accordance with Public Contract Code Section 10296, and by signing this Agreement, Consultant certifies under penalty of perjury that no more than one final 231 unappealable finding of contempt of court by a federal court has been issued against Consultant within the immediately preceding two-year period, because of Consultant's failure to comply with an order of a federal court that orders Consultant to comply with an order of the National Labor Relations Board. F-34 EXH I I$$-2 H - 2 AGENDA ITEM 9L RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Bryce Johnston, Capital Projects Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Award of Construction Agreement with Riverside Construction for the Mid County Parkway Mitigation Site WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 19-31-086-00 to Riverside Construction, as the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, for the construction of the Mid County Parkway (MCP) Mitigation Project (Project) in the amount of $1,782,653, plus a contingency amount of $267,398, for a total amount not to exceed $2,050,051; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work pursuant to the agreement terms up to the total not to exceed amount. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The MCP project has been under development by the Commission since 2002. The purpose of the MCP project is to provide a transportation facility that would effectively and efficiently accommodate regional west -east movement of people, goods, and services between and through the cities of Perris and San Jacinto. The Commission is the project proponent and the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has adopted guidelines for implementing the mitigation required by CEQA and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is the lead agency under NEPA, with Caltrans acting as its agent and providing oversight for the NEPA process. In April 2015, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 15-006 to certify the final environmental impact report (FEIR), adopt findings pursuant to CEQA, adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program, adopt a statement of overriding considerations, and approve the MCP project. The Commission, FHWA, and Caltrans approved the FEIR/final environmental impact Agenda Item 9L 232 statement and the final environmental document (ED) under NEPA/CEQA on April 15, 2015. The Project Approval/ED phase of the MCP project was completed with a record of decision approved by FHWA on August 17, 2015. The mitigation for the impacts of the MCP project on biological resources includes acquisition of habitat to satisfy requirements of the Western Riverside County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). In addition, mitigation for impacts of the project on waters of the United States is required in the form of wetland resources. In December 2015, the Commission purchased 154.3 acres of land (referred to as the MCP Mitigation Site), 130 acres of which satisfied 93 percent of the MSHCP habitat requirements for the entire MCP project. At the same time, a search for the required wetland resources for impacts to waters of the U.S. was undertaken which revealed that suitable land is unavailable or would require infeasible restoration efforts. Therefore, to meet this obligation, it is proposed to create 10.26 acres of wetlands resources by grading a portion of the MCP Mitigation Site acquired by the Commission to enhance and expand the 10-year floodplain of the San Jacinto River and planting with the required types of vegetation to meet the required mitigation acres (Figure 1). ** LAKEVIEW • HOTSP RINGS ♦♦ Q• Q♦♦ GO:44• BERM REMOVAL 4eg74 WETLAND GRADING owe,' *** L11''1144t Project Limits Agenda Item 9L 233 Figure 1: Project Location Map Procurement Process On May 16, 2019, the Commission advertised Invitation for Bids (IFB) No. 19-31-086-00 for construction of the Project. A public notice was advertised in the Press Enterprise, and the complete IFB, including all contract documents, was posted on the Commission's PlanetBids website, which is accessible through the Commission's website. Emails were sent to vendors registered in the Commission's PlanetBids database that fit the IFB qualifications. A pre -bid conference was held at the Commission's office on May 23, and on June 6, 4 bids were received and publicly opened. A summary of the public bid opening amounts is shown in Table A and Attachment 1. TABLE A Mid County Parkway Mitigation Project Bid Summary Firm (In order from low bid to high bid) Bid Amount Engineer's Estimate $3,294,088 1 Riverside Construction $1,782,653 2 Granite Construction $1,789,871 3 Ames Construction $1,830,965 4 SoCal Grading $1,868,832.88 The basis for award of a public works contract is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder as defined by the Commission's procurement policy and state law. The difference between the low and high bids received was $86,180. The four bids received are very close to each other in value; this is an indication that the bids received are an accurate reflection of the cost of the Project and are a result of a relatively simple project with minimal uncertainty and risk associated with the work. The difference between the low bid and the engineer's estimate is $1,511,435 with the Engineer's estimate being higher than all the bids received. Staff, along with the design engineer and the construction management team, analyzed the 4 bids received to determine why the bids were significantly lower than the engineer's estimate (Attachments 2 and 3). The reason is due to the fact that the Engineer's estimate is based on the latest Caltrans construction cost data. However, the construction of the Project will not involve Caltrans oversight; therefore, no issues or concerns arise due to the lower than anticipated cost. After analyzing the bids received, staff concluded that the Riverside Construction bid, in the amount of $1,782,653, is the lowest responsive and responsible bid received for the Project. Typically, the contingency added to a construction contract is about 10 percent; however, due to the small size of this contract staff is recommending a contingency amount of 15 percent of the total Project amount, or $267,398. Staff worked to minimize risks by clearly defining scope and Agenda Item 9L 234 ensuring the plan set is complete and thoroughly reviewed for constructability; however, if complications arise and the contingency is not adequate, such contractual budget issues may delay the Project and prevent work from being completed in a timely manner. Furthermore, smaller construction contracts such as this one often require a contingency greater than 10 percent because of changes common to many projects, such as grading excavations or overhead charges. Staff recommends award of Agreement No. 19-31-086-00 for the construction of the Project to Riverside Construction in the amount of $1,782,653, plus a contingency amount of $267,398 to fund potential change orders and supplemental work, for a total amount not to exceed of $2,050,051. Further, authorization is requested for the Chair or Executive Director to execute the draft agreement (Attachment 4), pursuant to legal counsel review, on behalf of the Commission and for the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for the Project. Financial Information Yes FY 2019/20 $ 1,650,051 In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2020/21 Amount: $ 400,000 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee -Community Environmental Source of Funds: Transportation Acceptability Process Budget Adjustment: No and 2009 Measure A Western County N/A New Corridors funds GL/Project Accounting No.: 002320 8130100000 0000 261 31 81101 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \1414-E4441 Date: 06/17/2019 Attachments: 1) RCTC Bid Opening Results Summary 2) Engineer's Estimate, Bidder's Pricing & Analysis 3) RCTC Construction Contract Bid Analysis Report 4) Draft Agreement No. 19-31-086-00 Agenda Item 9L 235 Attachment 1 RCTC BID OPENING RESULTS SUMMARY Mid County Parkway Mitigation Site RCTC Agreement 19-31-086-00 SWEENEY BID RESULTS - 6 JUN 19 SS 1913182 Rank Firm 1 Riverside Construction Co. 2 Granite Construction Co. 3 AMES Construction 4 Southern California Grading Average Spread Amount 1,782,653.00 1,789,870.50 1,830,965.00 1,868,832.88 1,818,080.35 86,179.88 Diff from Low 7,217.50 48,312.00 86,179.88 % Diff from Avg -1.9 0.4% -1.6% 2.7% 0.7% 4.8% 2.8% 35,427.35 2.0% 4.7% Bid Amount Bid Comparison - MCP Mitigation Site $2,000,000 $1,850,000 $1,782� 653 $1,700,000 $1,550,000 $1,400,000 $1,789,871 $1,830,965 S Riverside Granite Construction Co. Construction Co. $ $1,868,833 vg. = $1,818, AMES Construction Bid Amount Difference from Low Southern California Grading Average $2oo,000 3 O J E O u_ a1 V c 2 L $0 � 8 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 236 ATTACHMENT 2 Printed: 6/17/2019, 10:33 AM r ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE, BIDDERS' PRICING & ANALYSIS MCP Mitigation Site Engineer's Cost Estimate May 2019 SS1913182 Bid Opening Date: 06 June 2019 ITEM FPQ REM CODE NUM Bridge ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT OF BID MEASUR QTY E (A) ENGINEER'S ESTIMATED AMOUNT PRICE (C=A x B) (B) 080050 (F) Progress Schedule (Critical Path Method) LS 2,000.00 $ 2 100100 (F) Develop Water Supply LS 3 120090 (F) Construction Area Signs 4 5 Yellow items are $100k+ less than the ENGR EST LOW BIDDER Riverside Construction Co. VAR PRICE AMOUNT ENGR EST 2,000 5,000.00 $ 5,000 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000 50,000.00 $ 50,000 LS 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000 5,000.00 $ 5,000 130100 (F) Job Site Management LS 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000 40,000.00 $ 40,000 130300 F Prepare Storm Water Pollution Prevengon ()Plan LS 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000 3,500.00 $ 3,500 6 7 130330 (F) Storm Water Annual Report LS 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000 750.00 $ 750 160101 (F) Clearing and Grubbing LS 1 $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000 90,000.00 $ 90,000 9 150606 Remove Fence (Type BW) LF 1,806 $ 4.00 $ 7,224 4.00 $ 7,224 190101 (F) Earthwork (Farmer's Berm Removal) CY 9,526 $ 18.00 $ 171,468 7.50 $ 10 190101 (F) Earthwork (Stockpile Removal) CY 48,964 $ 18.00 $ 881,352 5.50 11 210350 Fiber Rolls LF 5,009 $ 4.00 $ 20,036 3.00 $ 150% 400% 67% 300% SECOND BIDDER Granite Construction Co. THIRD BIDDER AMES Construction FOURTH BIDDER Southern California Grading VAR PRICE AMOUNT ENGR EST VAR PRICE AMOUNT ENGR EST VAR PRICE AMOUNT ENGR EST 6,500.00 $ 6,500 1,200.00 $ 1,200 -40% 54,724.00 $ 54,724 60,000.00 $ 60,000 22,000.00 $ 22,000 10,000.00 $ 10,000 3,600.00 $ 3,600 -64 % 30,000.00 $ 30,000 -65% 2,000.00 $ 2,000 -80% 2,000.00 $ 2,000 -75% 2,500.00 $ 2,500 -17% 500.00 $ 500 80% , 54,000.00 $ 54,000 8% 120,000.00 $ 120,000 2.00 $ 3,612 -50% 7.00 $ 12,642 5.20 $ 49,535 -71 % 5.30 $ 50,488 -71 % 5.70 $ 54,298 -68% -69% 4.70 $ 230,131 -74% 3.50 $ 171,374 -81% 3.30 $ 161,581 -82% 6.30 $ 31,557 58% 3.00 $ 15,027 -25% 2.60 $ 13,023 -35% -67% 5.85 $ 361,027 -68% 8.50 $ 524,569 -53% 12.62 $ 778,831 -30% 19.00 $ 16,378 I. 90.0% 3.00 $ 2,586 -70.0% 20.00 $ 17,240 100.0% 3,000.00 $ 3,000 0% 2,500.00 $ 2,500 -17% 4,800.00 $ 4,800 60% 4.50 $ 50,679 -70% 3.80 $ 42,796 -75% 8.30 $ 93,475 -45% 1,250.00 $ 7,500 -38% 1,100.00 $ 6,600 -45% 1,600.00 $ 9,600 -20% 11.80 $ 50,008 136% 4.00 $ 16,952 -20% 3.70 $ 15,681 -26% 6.20 $ 59,198 24% 4.50 $ 42,966 -10% 3.80 $ 36,282 -24% 8.50 $ 55,922 -43% 4.75 $ 31,250 -68% 6.60 $ 43,421 -56% 17,000.40 $ 17,000 240% 10,000.00 $ 10,000 100% 4,000.00 $ 4,000 -20% 300.00 $ 1,500 -88% 225.00 $ 1,125 -91% 1,200.00 $ 6,000 -52% 250.00 $ 15,000 25% 90.00 $ 5,400 -55% 176.00 $ 10,560 -12% $ - 0% $ - 0% $ - 0% 346% ▪ 15,000.00 $ 480,000 436% 13,000.00 $ 416,000 364% 1,650.00 $ 52,800 -41% -15% 500.00 $ 16,000 0% 425.00 $ 13,600 -15% 2,700.00 $ 86,400 440 % 2,000.00 $ 64,000 11% 1,730.00 $ 55,360 -4% 1,100.00 $ 35,200 -39% 700.00 $ 7,000 -77% 585.00 $ 5,850 -81% 5,500.00 $ 55,000 83% -30% 73,500.00 $ 73,500 -48% 100,000.00 $ 100,000 -30% 100,000.00 $ 100,000 -30% $ - 0% $ - 0% $ - 0% $ - 0% $ - 0% $ - 0% $ - 0% $ - 0% $ - 0% 55,000.00 $ 55,000 -81% 0% 71,445 -58% $ 269,302 12 (F) Wetlands grading (new basin) CY 61,714 $ 18.00 $ 1,110,852 6.00 13 (F)New berm CY 862 $ 10.00 $ 8,620 20.00 $ 15,027 -25% $ 370,284 17,240 100.0% 14 (F) EMWD turn -around (scarification and LS 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000 5,000.00 $ 5,000 67% compaction) 15 800360A Fence (3-strand wire) LF 11,262 $ 15.00 $ 168,930 4.00 $ 45,048 -73 % 16 Access gates (RCA & EMWD) EA 6 $ 2,000.00 $ 12,000 1,000.00 $ 6,000 -50% 17 141000 Temporary fence (Type ESA) LF 4,238 $ 5.00 $ 21,190 5.00 $ 21,190 18 130680 Temporary Silt Fence LF 9,548 $ 5.00 $ 47,740 5.00 $ 47,740 19 Temporary Reinforced Silt Fence (Type 2) LF 6,579 $ 15.00 $ 98,685 7.00 $ 46,053 -53% 20 130710 Temporary construction entrance EA 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000 5,500.00 $ 5,500 10% 21 731502 Minor Concrete(Miscellaneous CY 5 $ 2,500.00 $ 12,500 500.00 $ 2,500 -80% Construction) 22 EMWD Delineator Bollards EA 60 $ 200.00 $ 12,000 85.00 $ 5,100 -58% 0% Not incl. 23 Seed AC 32 $ 2,800.00 $ 89,600 12,500.00 $ 400,000 24 Mycorrhizae AC 32 $ 500.00 $ 16,000 425.00 $ 13,600 Permits $$ 1 $ - $ - $ 0% 0% 25 Hydroseeding AC 32 $ 1,800.00 $ 57,600 1,700.00 $ 54,400 -6% 26 Hand Distribution of Seed AC 10 $ 3,000.00 $ 30,000 575.00 $ 5,750 -81% 27 204099 Plant Establishment Work LS 1 $ 142,000.00 $ 142,000 100,000.00 $ 100,000 Not Construction Management (12% of ▪ 0 $ $ $ incl. Construction Cost) Not incl. Construction Survey Work (4%of Construction Cost) Not incl. Contingency MOBILIZATION 0 0 $ - $ LS 1 $ Jim Daughtry: only 1st of 2 mob lines included 156861 I 230% 67% 900% 0% 0% 0% 290,291 $ 290,291 80,000.00 $ 80,000 -72% 3,294,088 [Bidder] $ 1,782,653 -46% 225% 447% 633 % 52,000.00 $ 52,000 -82 % [Bidder] $ 1,789,871 -46% 3,000.00 $ 3,000 50% 500% 33,000.00 $ 33,000 233% 5,000.00 $ 5,000 200% 100,000.00 $ 100,000 -80% 12,000.00 $ 12,000 20% -83% 1,500.00 $ 1,500 -50% 140% 75,000.00 $ 75,000 50% 75% 3.40 $ 6,140 -15% 80,180.35 $ 80,180 -72% [Bidder] $ 1,830,965 -44% [Bidder] $ 1,868,833 -43% Contractor's Bid Schedule Value Delta check: Contractors Bid Sched total vs. calculated total $ 1,782,653 ,789,871 0.50 $ 1,830,965 $ 1,868,833 Variance to Engr Estimate Variance to Engr Estimate $ (1,511,435) -45.9 (1,504,217) -45.7 $ (1,463,123) -44.4% $ (1,425,255) -43.3 % Variance to Low Bid $ % Variance to Low Bid 0.0 $ 7,218 0.4 $ 48,312 2.7 $ 86,179.88 4.8 check TOTAL BID ITEMS Items within the -75% to +50% range as compared to the Engineer's Estimate Items outside of the -75% to +50% range as compared to the Engineer's Estimate Items less than -75% of the Engineer's Estimate Items greater than +50% of the Engineer's Estimate T 0 28 18 10 2 8 0 0 0 LOW BIDDER Riverside Construction Co. % VAR PRICE AMOUNT TO ENGR EST VARIANCE TO ENGINEER's ESTIMATE SECOND BIDDER Granite Construction Co. % VAR PRICE AMOUNT TO ENGR EST THIRD BIDDER AMES Construction % VAR PRICE AMOUNT TO ENGR EST FOURTH BIDDER Southern California Grading % VAR PRICE AMOUNT TO ENGR EST 3,000.00 $ 3,000 150% 4,500.00 $ 4,500 90% (800.00) $ (800) -12% 1,000.00 $ 1,000 83% 40,000.00 $ 40,000 400% 44,724.00 $ 44,724 89% 50,000.00 $ 50,000 91% 23,000.00 $ 23,000 38% 2,000.00 $ 2,000 67% 19,000.00 $ 19,000 380% 7,000.00 $ 7,000 32% 2,000.00 $ 2,000 20% 30,000.00 $ 30,000 _ (6,400.00) $ (6,400) -16% 20,000.00 $ 20,000 556% 90,000.00 $ 90,000 300% (6,500.00) $ (6,500) -65% (8,000.00) $ (8,000) -229% (8,000.00) $ (8,000) -400% 2,000.00 $ 2,000 100% (2,250.00) $ (2,250) -75% (500.00) $ (500) -67% (2,500.00) $ (2,500) -100% (1,500.00) $ (1,500) -300% 40,000.00 $ 40,000 80% 4,000.00 $ 4,000 4 % 70,000.00 $ 70,000 130 % 25,000.00 $ 25,000 21 % - $ - 0% (2.00) $ (3,612) 0% 3.00 $ 5,418 0% (0.60) $ (1,084) 0% (10.50) $ (100,023) -58% (12.80) $ (121,933) 0% (12.70) $ (120,980) 0% (12.30) $ (117,170) 0% (12.50) $ (612,050) -69% (13.30) $ (651,221) 0% (14.50) $ (709,978) 0% (14.70) $ (719,771) 0% (1.00) $ (5,009) -25% 2.30 $ 11,521 0% (1.00) $ (5,009) 0% (1.40) $ (7,013) 0% (12.00) $ (740,568) -67% (12.15) $ (749,825) 0% (9.50) $ (586,283) 0% (5.38) $ (332,021) 0% 10.00 $ 8,620 100.0% 9.00 $ 7,758 0% (7.00) $ (6,034) 0% 10.00 $ 8,620 0% 2,000.00 $ 2,000 67% - $ - 0% (500.00) $ (500) -17% 1,800.00 $ 1,800 72% (11.00) $ (123,882) -73% (10.50) $ (118,251) 0% (11.20) $ (126,134) 0% (6.70) $ (75,455) 0% (1,000.00) $ (6,000) -50% (750.00) $ (4,500) -13% (900.00) $ (5,400) -12% (400.00) $ (2,400) -6% - $ - 0% 6.80 $ 28,818 0% (1.00) $ (4,238) 0% (1.30) $ (5,509) 0% - $ - 0% 1.20 $ 11,458 0% (0.50) $ (4,774) 0% (1.20) $ (11,458) 0% (8.00) $ (52,632) -53% (6.50) $ (42,764) 0% (10.25) $ (67,435) 0% (8.40) $ (55,264) 0% 500.00 $ 500 10% 12,000.40 $ 12,000 218% 5,000.00 $ 5,000 29% (1,000.00) $ (1,000) -10% (2,000.00) $ (10,000) -80% (2,200.00) $ (11,000) -88% (2,275.00) $ (11,375) -152% (1,300.00) $ (6,500) -116% (115.00) $ (6,900) -58% 50.00 $ 3,000 1% (110.00) $ (6,600) -1% (24.00) $ (1,440) O% - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! 9,700.00 $ 310,400 346% 12,200.00 $ 390,400 3% 10,200.00 $ 326,400 2% (1,150.00) $ (36,800) 0% (75.00) $ (2,400) -15% - $ - 0% (75.00) $ (2,400) 0% 2,200.00 $ 70,400 16% (100.00) $ (3,200) -6% 200.00 $ 6,400 0% (70.00) $ (2,240) 0% (700.00) $ (22,400) -1% (2,425.00) $ (24,250) -81% (2,300.00) $ (23,000) -40% (2,415.00) $ (24,150) -35% 2,500.00 $ 25,000 43% (42,000.00) $ (42,000) -30% (68,500.00) $ (68,500) -69% (42,000.00) $ (42,000) -57% (42,000.00) $ (42,000) -42% - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! - $ - #DIV/0! (210,291.19) $ (210,291) -72% (238,291.19) $ (238,291) -298% (210,110.84) $ (210,111) -404% (235,291.19) $ (235,291) -293% [Bidder] $ (1,511,435) [Bidder] [Bidder] $ (1,504,218) [Bidder] [Bidder] $ (1,463,123) [Bidder] [Bidder] $ (1,425,255) [Bidder] r Items, though out \\rctc-fp2-sv\becfiles-new\Project Controls \Cost Estimates (ICE), Cost Analysis & Negotiations Construction Bids \MCP Mitigation Site \Bid Schedule - MCP Mitigation Site 2019-06-07 - rB - Final, Bid Sched 237 Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT 2 Printed: 6/17/2019, 10:33 AM ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE, BIDDERS' PRICING & ANALYSIS MCP Mitigation Site Engineer's Cost Estimate May 2019 SS1913182 Bid Opening Date: 06 June 2019 AVERAGES AVERAGES ITEM FPQ REM CODE NUM Bridge ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT OF BID MEASUR QTY E (A) ENGINEER'S ESTIMATED AMOUNT PRICE (C=A x B) (B) % of % VAR PRICE AMOUNT Avg. ENGR Total EST 080050 (F) Progress Schedule (Critical Path Method) LS 1 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000 2 100100 (F) Develop Water Supply LS 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000 3 120090 (F) Construction Area Signs LS 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000 4 130100 (F) Job Site Management LS 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000 Plan 130300 F Prepare Storm Water Pollution Prevention LS ( ) 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000 6 130330 (F) Storm Water Annual Report LS 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000 7 160101 (F) Clearing and Grabbing LS 1 $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000 150606 Remove Fence (Type BW) LF 1,806 $ 4.00 $ 7,224 190101 (F) Earthwork (Farmer's Berm Removal) CY 9,526 $ 18.00 $ 171,468 10 190101 (F) Earthwork (Stockpile Removal) CY 48,964 $ 18.00 $ 881,352 11 210350 Fiber Rolls LF 5,009 $ 4.00 $ 20,036 12 (F) Wetlands grading (new basin) CY 61,714 $ 18.00 $ 1,110,852 13 (F) New berm CY 862 $ 10.00 $ 8,620 14 EMWD tum-around (scarification and (F) compaction) LS 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000 15 800360A Fence (3-strand wire) LF 11,262 $ 15.00 $ 168,930 16 Access gates (RCA & EMWD) EA 6 $ 2,000.00 $ 12,000 17 141000 Temporary fence (Type ESA) LF 4,238 $ 5.00 $ 21,190 18 130680 Temporary Silt Fence LF 9,548 $ 5.00 $ 47,740 19 Temporary Reinforced Silt Fence (Type 2) LF 6,579 $ 15.00 $ 98,685 20 130710 Temporary construction entrance EA 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000 21 731502 Minor Concrete (Miscellaneous CY 5 $ 2,500.00 $ 12,500 construction) 22 EMWD Delineator Bollards EA 60 $ 200.00 $ 12,000 Not incl. Permits $$ 1 $ $ 23 Seed AC 32 $ 2,800.00 $ 89,600 24 Mycorrhizae AC 32 $ 500.00 $ 16,000 25 Hydroseeding AC 32 $ 1,800.00 $ 57,600 26 Hand Distribution of Seed AC 10 $ 3,000.00 $ 30,000 27 204099 Plant Establishment Work LS 1 $ 142,000.00 $ 142,000 Not incl. Construction Management (12% of Construction Cost) Not incl. Construction Survey Work (4% of Construction Cost) Not incl. Contingency 1199g9D MOBILIZATION 0 0 0 $ - $ $ - $ $ LS 1 $ Jim Daughlry: only 1st of 2 mob lines included 156861 I 290,291 $ 290,291 3,294,088 Contractor's Bid Schedule Value Delta check: Contractors Bid Sched total vs. calculated total I I Variance to Engr Estimate %Variance to Engr Estimate Variance to Low Bid % Variance to Low Bid check 3,925.00 $ 3,925 0.2% 96% 49,431.00 $ 49,431 2.7% 394% 10,500.00 $ 10,500 0.6% 250% 43,400.00 $ 43,400 2.4% 334% 4,875.00 $ 4,875 0.3% -51% 1,312.50 $ 1,313 0.1% -56% 84,750.00 $ 84,750 4.7% 70% 4.10 $ 7,405 0.4% 3% 5.93 $ 56,442 3.1% -67% 4.25 $ 208,097 11.4 % -76 % 3.73 $ 18,659 1.0% -7% 8.24 $ 508,678 28.0% -54% 15.50 $ 13,361 0.7% 55% 3,825.00 $ 3,825 0.2% 28% 5.15 $ 57,999 3.2% -66% 1,237.50 $ 7,425 0.4% -38% 6.13 $ 25,958 1.4% 23% 4.88 $ 46,547 2.6% -3% 6.71 $ 44,162 2.4% -55% 9,125.10 $ 9,125 0.5% 83% 556.25 $ 2,781 0.2% -78% 150.25 $ 9,015 0.5% -25% 0.0% 10,537.50 $ 337,200 18.5% 276% 1,012.50 $ 32,400 1.8% 103% 1,632.50 $ 52,240 2.9% -9% 1,840.00 $ 18,400 1.0% -39% 93,375.00 $ 93,375 5.1 % -34% $ - 0.0% - $ - 0.0% - $ - 0.0% 66,795.09 $ 66,795 3.7% -77% $ 1,818,080 100% -45% VARIANCE TO AVERAGES (excl. lowest & highest bidders only if outliers LOW BIDDER Riverside Construction Co. SECOND BIDDER Granite Construction Co. THIRD BIDDER AMES Construction FOURTH BIDDER Southern California Grading PRICE AMOUNT %VAR TO AVG. PRICE AMOUNT %VAR TO AVG. PRICE AMOUNT %VAR TO AVG. PRICE AMOUNT %VAR TO AVG. 1,075.00 $ 1,075 27% 2,575.00 $ 2,575 66% (2,725.00) $ (2,725) -69% 569.00 $ 569 1 % 5,293.00 $ 5,293 11 % 10,569.00 $ 10,569 21 (5,500.00) $ (5,500) -52% 11,500.00 $ 11,500 110% (500.00) $ (500) -5% (3,400.00) $ (3,400) -8% (39,800.00) $ (39,800) -92% (13,400.00) $ (13,400) -31% (1,375.00) $ (1,375) -28% (2,875.00) $ (2,875) -59% (2,875.00) $ (2,875) -59% (562.50) $ (563) -43% 1,187.50 $ 1,188 90% (812.50) $ (813) -62% 5,250.00 $ 5,250 6% (30,750.00) $ (30,750) -36% 35,250.00 $ 35,250 42% (0.10) $ (181) -2% (2.10) $ (3,793) -51% 2.90 $ 5,237 71% 1.58 $ 15,003 27% (0.73) $ (6,906) -12% (0.63) $ (5,954) -11 % 1.25 $ 61,205 29% 0.45 $ 22,034 11% (0.75) $ (36,723) -18% (0.73) $ (3,632) -19% 2.58 $ 12,898 69% (0.73) $ (3,632) -19% (2.24) $ (138,394) -27% (2.39) $ (147,651) -29% 0.26 $ 15,891 3% 4.50 $ 3,879 29% 3.50 $ 3,017 23% (12.50) $ (10,775) -81% 1,175.00 $ 1,175 31% (825.00) $ (825) -22% (1,325.00) $ (1,325) -35% (1.15) $ (12,951) -22% (0.65) $ (7,320) -13% (1.35) $ (15,204) -26% (237.50) $ (1,425) -19% 12.50 $ 75 1 % (137.50) $ (825) -11 % (1.13) $ (4,768) -18% 5.68 $ 24,051 1,3% (2.13) $ (9,006) -35% 0.13 $ 1,194 3% 1.33 $ 12,651 27% (0.38) $ (3,581) -8% 0.29 $ 1,891 4% 1.79 $ 11,760 27% (1.96) $ (12,911) -29% (3,625.10) $ (3,625) -40% 7,875.30 $ 7,875 86% 874.90 $ 875 10% (56.25) $ (281) -10% (256.25) $ (1,281) -46% (331.25) $ (1,656) -60% (65.25) $ (3,915) -43% 99.75 $ 5,985 66% (60.25) $ (3,615) -40% - $ _P - $ $ (925.00) $ (925) -24% (16,431.00) $ (16,431) -33% (5,500.00) $ (5,500) -52% 56,600.00 $ 56,600 130% 7,125.00 $ 7,125 146% 187.50 $ 188 14 % (9,750.00) $ (9,750) -12% (0.70) $ (1,264) -17% (0.23) $ (2,143) -4 (0.95) $ (46,516) -22% (1.13) $ (5,635) -30% 4.38 $ 270,153 53% 4.50 $ 3,879 29% 975.00 $ 975 25 % 3.15 $ 35,475 61 % 362.50 $ 2,175 29% (2.43) $ (10,277) -40% (1.08) $ (10,264) -22% (0.11) $ (740) -2% (5,125.10) $ (5,125) -56% 643.75 $ 3,219 116% 25.75 $ 1,545 17% 1,962.50 $ 62,800 19% 4,462.50 $ 142,800 42% 2,462.50 $ 78,800 23% (8,887.50) $ (284,400) -84% (587.50) $ (18,800) -58% (512.50) $ (16,400) -51% (587.50) $ (18,800) -58% 1,687.50 $ 54,000 167% 67.50 $ 2,160 4% 367.50 $ 11,760 23% 97.50 $ 3,120 6% (532.50) $ (17,040) -33% (1,265.00) $ (12,650) -69% (1,140.00) $ (11,400) -62% (1,255.00) $ (12,550) -68% 3,660.00 $ 36,600 199% 6,625.00 $ 6,625 7% (19,875.00) $ (19,875) -21% 6,625.00 $ 6,625 7% 6,625.00 $ 6,625 7% $ _ $ $ 11111 $ _ $ $ - $ - $ $ $ $ $ 13,204.91 $ 13,205 20% (14,795.09) $ (14,795) -22% 13,385.26 $ 13,385 20% (11,795.09) $ (11,795) -18% [Bidder] $ (35,427) -1.9% [Bidder] $ (28,210) -1.6% [Bidder] $ 12,885 0.7% [Bidder] $ 50,753 2.8% side of the Engineer's Estimate range, are reasonably within the Average of the bids 10 0 0 TOTAL BID ITEMS TOTAL BID ITEMS 28 28 28 28 Items within the -75% to +50 % range as compared to the Engineer's Estimate Items within the -75% to +50% range as compared to the Average of the bids 28 23 27 25 Items outside of the -75% to +50 % range as compared to the Engineer's Estimate Items outside of the -75% to +50 % range as compared to the Average of the bids 0 5 1 3 Items less than -75% of the Engineer's Estimate Items less than -75% of the Average of the bids 0 0 0 0 Items greater than +50 % of the Engineer's Estimate Items greater than +50 % of the Average of the bids 0 5 1 3 \\rctc-fp2-sv\becfiles-new\Project Controls\Cost Estimates (ICE), Cost Analysis & Negotiations Construction Bids\MCP Mitigation Site \Bid Schedule - MCP Mitigation Site 2019-06-07 - r8 - Final, Bid Sched 238 Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENT 3 RCTC Construction Contract Bid Analysis Report Mid County Parkway Mitigation Site Adding a 154.3 acre site to enhance and expand the 10-year floodplain east of the San Jacinto River and expand the MCP right-of-way by 1.52 acres to account for necessary utility relocation RCTC Agreement 19-31-086-00 A total of four sealed bids for construction of this project were received and opened in a public forum on June 6, 2019 at RCTC's offices. The results of the bids are tabulated here. SWEENEY BID RESULTS - 6JUN 2019 SS 1913182 Rank Firm Amount Diff from Low % Diff from Avg 1 Riverside Construction Company $1,782,653.00 -1.9% 2 Granite Construction Company $1,789,871.00 $ 7,218.00 0.4% -1.6% 3 Ames Construction Company $1,830,965.00 $ 48,312.00 2.7% 0.7% 4 Southern California Grading $1,868,832.88 $ 86,179.88 4.8% 2.8% Average $1,818,080.35 $ 35,427.35 2.0% Spread $ 86,179.88 4.7% Adjustments It was not necessary to adjust the bid amounts since there were no arithmetic errors. Likewise, it was not necessary to adjust the Engineer's Estimate quantities, and all quantities in the bids exactly matched those in the Engineer's Estimate. Construction Management, Construction Survey Work and Contingency as provided in the Engineer's Estimate were not included in the bids, nor was the second Mobilization. Initial Observations All four bids were relatively close, with a spread between the low and high bids of only $86,180. The low bid was only 1.9% less than the average of the four bids, and the high bid was only 4.8% higher than the low bid, and only 2.8% higher than the average. Analysis Methodology This analysis is in accordance with Section 15.6, Contract Award, of the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual and utilizes the recommended bid analysis procedures in the FHWA document "Guidelines on Preparing Engineer's Estimate, Bid Reviews and Evaluation", herein after referred to as FHWA Guideline. Our review of each bid includes the following: 1. Assessing competition of bids received. 2. A checklist used to review bid documents for responsiveness. 3. A tabulation of bid items for each bidder that were compared to the Engineer's Estimate. 4. A review of Bid Items for unbalanced bids. 5. Contractors license review. The contracting licenses for bidders and proposed subcontractors were researched on the Contractor's State License Board web site. 1'Page 239 Attachment 3 RCTC Construction Contract Bid Analysis Report Mid County Parkway Mitigation Site Adding a 154.3 acre site to enhance and expand the 10-year floodplain east of the San Jacinto River and expand the MCP right-of-way by 1.52 acres to account for necessary utility relocation RCTC Agreement 19-31-086-00 Competition Assessment With the aforementioned low percentage differences between the bids and with the number of bids received, competition is considered excellent for this project. Bidder Responsiveness The apparent low bidder, Riverside Construction C o . acknowledged all addenda, signed the bid letter, and provided all other forms required to be submitted as part of the bid package, including signatures by a notary public. Riverside Construction Co. listed Pacific Restoration Group as their subcontractor performing seeding and plant establishment scope, which totals to $571,733, or 32°/0 of the total bid amount, and listed Fence Corp as their subcontractor performing the fencing scope, which totals to $50,385, or 2.7% of the total bid amount. Bid Item Tabulation and Unbalanced Bid Check In summary, all bidders were below the Engineer's Estimate. The lowest bidder was 43.2% below the Engineer's Estimate, the second bidder was 42.9% below, the third was 41.6 below, and the fourth and lowest bidders was 40.4% below. Compared to the low bid, all others were within 4.8% of the low bidder. The second lowest bidder was only 0.4% above, the third lowest bidder was 2.7% above, and the fourth was 4.85% above the lowest bid. A detailed bid tabulation of all four bidders is attached as reference to following: 1. A check of individual bid item total price compared to submitted bid sheets. 2. A check of the total bid price submitted on the bid sheets. 3. The percent difference between bid unit prices and the Engineer's estimated unit prices. 4. The difference between the Engineer's Estimate and the bidder's Total Bid Price in both dollars and percentages. Bids were analyzed for possible imbalance. Since all four bids were substantially below the Engineer's Estimate, yet significantly close to one another in total value, the Bid items were analyzed and considered as potentially materially unbalanced against the average of the four bids rather than against the Engineer's Estimate. Bid items were analyzed as potentially materially unbalanced if they varied outside of a range of either less than -75% or greater than 50% of the average for each Bid item. Riverside Construction Co. as the lowest bidder had zero of the 28 items that fell outside of this range. The second lowest bidder had five items that fell outside of the range, the third lowest bidder had only one item, and the fourth bidder had three items that fell outside of the range. 21Page 240 Attachment 3 RCTC Construction Contract Bid Analysis Report Mid County Parkway Mitigation Site Adding a 154.3 acre site to enhance and expand the 10-year floodplain east of the San Jacinto River and expand the MCP right-of-way by 1.52 acres to account for necessary utility relocation RCTC Agreement 19-31-086-00 Review of Large Value Items The following three Bid items total to 58% of the lowest bidder's total Bid amount. • Item 10 — Earthwork (Stockpile Removal), 48,964 cubic yards at $5.50/CY and $269,302, which is 15% of the lowest bidder's total Bid amount. • Item 12 — Wetlands grading (new basin), 61,714 cubic years at $6.00/CY and $370,284, which is 21 % of the lowest bidder's total Bid amount. • Item 23 — Seed, 32 acres at $12,500/acre and $400,000, which is 22.4% of the lowest bidder's total Bid amount. All other Bid items were less than 7% of the lowest bidders total Bid amount. Item 10 — Earthwork: The lowest bidder's price of $5.50/CY is $1.25/CY higher than the average price, which indicates that the lowest bidder's price should be adequate. Item 12 — Wetlands grading: The lowest bidder's price of $6.00/CY is $2.24/CY lower than the average price, but only $0.15 higher than the second lowest bidder. Item 23 — Seed: The lowest bidder's price of $12,500/acre is $1,962.50/acre higher than the average price, which indicates that the lowest bidder's price should be adequate. Bids v. Engineers Estimate The average of bids ($1,818,080) was 45% below the Engineers Estimate ($3,294,088). A possible explanation for this large discrepancy is the designer's use of Caltrans cost data. As the contract special provisions were adapted from a Caltrans template the designer was directed by RCTC to use Caltrans cost data for reference. In hind sight, this decision was not appropriate for a small grading project. Conclusion The bids appear to be in order and we recommend award to the low bidder. 31Page 241 ATTACHMENT 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE MID COUNTY PARKWAY MITIGATION SITE RCTC Agreement No. 19-31-086-00 May 16, 2019 BETWEEN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 1733 6.0601 K\29695231.1 Contract-1 242 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE MID COUNTY PARKWAY MITIGATION SITE AGREEMENT NO. 19-31-086-00 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Contract is made and entered into this day of , 2019 by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission (hereinafter called the "Commission") and Riverside Construction Company (hereinafter called the "Contractor"). This Contract is for that Work described in the Contract Documents entitled CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE MID COUNTY PARKWAY MITIGATION SITE 2. RECITALS. 2.1 The Commission is a County Transportation Commission organized under the provisions of Sections 130000, et seq. of the Public Utilities Code of the State of California, with power to contract for services necessary to achieving its purpose; 2.2 Contractor, in response to a Notice Inviting Bids issued by Commission on May 16, 2019, has submitted a bid proposal for CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE MID COUNTY PARKWAY MITIGATION SITE 2.3 Commission has duly opened and considered the Contractor's bid proposal and duly awarded the bid to Contractor in accordance with the Notice Inviting Bids and other Bid Documents. 2.4 Contractor has obtained, and delivers concurrently herewith, Performance and Payment Bonds and evidences of insurance coverage as required by the Contract Documents. 3. TERMS. 3.1 Incorporation of Documents. This Contract includes and hereby incorporates in full by reference this Contract and the following Contract Documents provided with the above referenced Notice Inviting Bids, including all exhibits, drawings, specifications and documents therein, and attachments thereto, all of which, including all addendum thereto, are by this reference incorporated herein and made a part of this Contract: a. NOTICE INVITING BIDS b. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS c. CONTRACT BID FORMS d. FORM OF CONTRACT e. PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND FORMS f. ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY DEPOSITS Contract-2 1733 6.0601 K\29695231.1 243 g• CONTRACT APPENDIX PART "A" - Regulatory Requirements and Permits PART "B" — Standard Provisions PART "C" — Technical Special Provisions PART "D" - Contract Plans PART "E" - Reference Documents h. ADDENDUM NO.(S) (N/A or Add Addendum Numbers) 3.2 Contractor's Basic Obligation. Contractor promises and agrees, at his own cost and expense, to furnish to the Commission all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work for CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE MID COUNTY PARKWAY MITIGATION SITE Notwithstanding anything else in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall complete the Work for a total of One Million Seven Hundred Eighty -Two Thousand Six Hundred Fifty - Three Dollars ($1,782,653), as specified in the bid proposal and pricing schedules submitted by the Contractor in response to the above referenced Notice Inviting Bids. Such amount shall be subject to adjustment in accordance with the applicable terms of this Contract. All Work shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with the above referenced Contract Documents. 3.3 Period of Performance. Contractor shall perform and complete all Work under this Contract within 256 calendar days of the effective date of the Notice to Proceed, and in accordance with the Milestone Completion Dates set forth in the table below. Contractor agrees that if such Work is not completed within the aforementioned periods, liquidated damages will apply as provided by the applicable provisions of the Standard Provisions, found in Part "B" of the Contract Appendix. The amount of liquidated damages shall equal five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each day or fraction thereof, it takes to complete the Work, or specified portion(s) of the Work, over and above the number of days specified herein or beyond the Project Milestones established by approved Construction Schedules. 3.4 Commission's Basic Obligation. Commission agrees to engage and does hereby engage Contractor as an independent contractor to furnish all materials and to perform all Work according to the terms and conditions herein contained for the sum set forth above. Except as otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, the Commission shall pay to Contractor, as full consideration for the satisfactory performance by the Contractor of services and obligation required by this Contract, the above referenced compensation in accordance with Compensation Provisions set forth in the Contract Documents. Contract-3 1733 6.0601 K\29695231.1 244 3.5 Contractor's Labor Certification. Contractor maintains that he is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work. A certification form for this purpose is attached to this Contract as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, and shall be executed simultaneously with this Contract. 3.6 Successors. The parties do for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns agree to the full performance of all of the provisions contained in this Contract. Contractor may not either voluntarily or by action of law, assign any obligation assumed by Contractor hereunder without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.7 Notices. All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of the terms of the Contract or changes thereto shall be provided by the mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: Contractor: Commission: Riverside Construction Company 4225 Garner Rd. P.O. Box 1146 Attn: Donald Pim Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, California 92502-2208 Attn: Executive Director Any notice so given shall be considered received by the other party three (3) days after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid, addressed to the parry at the above address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. RIVERSIDE CONSTRUCTION RIVERSIDE COUNTY COMPANY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: By: Name Anne Mayer Riverside County Transportation Commission Title Tax I.D. Number: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Contract-4 1733 6.0601 K\29695231.1 245 By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel, RCTC Contract-5 1733 6.0601 K\29695231.1 246 EXHIBIT "A" CERTIFICATION LABOR CODE - SECTION 1861 I, the undersigned Contractor, am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 et seq. of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code. I agree to and will comply with such provisions before commencing the Work governed by this Contract. CONTRACTOR: Name of Contractor: Riverside Construction Company By: Signature Name Title Date 247 AGENDA ITEM 9M RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Michelle McCamish, Management Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with the California Department of Transportation for Senate Bill 1 Funding of the Freeway Service Patrol Program in Riverside County WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 19-45-101-00 with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the Senate Bill (SB) 1 funding of the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in an amount not to exceed $1,390,287; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 1986, the Commission established itself as the Riverside County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (RC SAFE) after the enactment of SB 1199 in 1985. The purpose of the formation of SAFES in California was to provide call box services and, with excess funds, provide additional motorist aid services. Funding for RC SAFE is derived from a one dollar per vehicle registration fee on vehicles registered in Riverside County. Initially, these funds were used only for the call box program. As additional motorist aid services were developed, SAFE funds were also used to provide FSP and the Inland Empire 511 traveler information services as part of a comprehensive motorist aid system in Riverside County. In 1990, Proposition C was passed to fund transportation improvements and to help reduce traffic congestion in California. From this, the FSP program was created by Caltrans, which developed the corresponding local funding allocation plan to distribute funds to participating jurisdictions through a formula based on population, urban freeway lane miles, and levels of congestion. The Commission, acting in its capacity as the RC SAFE, is the principal agency in Riverside County, in partnership with Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol, managing the FSP program. The Agenda Item 9M 248 purpose of the FSP program is to provide a continuously roving tow services patrol along designated freeway segments (referred to as beats) to relieve freeway congestion and facilitate the rapid removal of disabled vehicles and those involved in minor accidents on local freeways. In April 2017, the California Legislature passed SB 1 which included additional funding for FSP. In March 2018, Caltrans released the SB 1 FSP funding guidelines which allocated $25 million for FSP statewide to participating jurisdictions based on the existing formula, resulting in $1,656,973 for Riverside County for FY 2017/18. Per the guidelines, this allocation is to be applied to: • California Highway Patrol (CHP) costs for FSP oversight and supervision, • Inflation and hour adjustments to baseline service, and • For new or expanded FSP service. The Commission's FSP program is a popular service amongst motorists in Riverside County and has consistently demonstrated a very high benefit to cost score statewide. Currently, the Commission contracts with three tow truck operators to provide service during peak commute hours across 165 centerline miles. In FY 2017/18, FSP performed 41,417 assists. DISCUSSION: The first allocation of SB 1 funds for new FSP service was applied to expand coverage into southern Riverside County. The projected benefit cost for this expansion scored above the minimum benefit cost threshold (3.0). In September 2018, the Commission launched three new beats expanding FSP as far south as the 1-15/79 South interchange benefitting commuters traveling from and through Lake Elsinore, Wildomar, Menifee, Murrieta, and Temecula. Agenda Item 9M 249 Type of Assists OVER HEATED, 25S _, VEHICLE FIRE, 4 ACCIDENT, 287 DEBRIS REMOVAL, 230 ELECTRICAL PROBLEM, 114 MECHANICAL PROBLEM, __------- 1009 LOCKED OUT, S SOUTH COUNTY BEATS TOTAL ASSISTS 6,939 Sept 201E - May 2019 ■ ABANDONE❑ ■ ACCIDENT ■ DEBRIS REMOVAL ■ ELECTRICAL PROBLEM ■ FLAT TIRE ■ INFORMATION ■ LOCKED OUT ■ MECHANICAL PROBLEM ■ OUT OFGAS ■ OVER HEATED ■ VEHICLE FIRE Figure 1: Total South County Assists In FY 2018/19, total assists for all beats through May 31, 2019 are 43,496. Since September 2018, the three new south county beats have provided 6,939 assists (see Figure 1). As such, the south county beats make up about 16 percent of total FSP assists in the whole county. Since inception, the south county beats have scored an average estimated benefit cost of twice the minimum threshold. This second SB 1 allocation for FY 2018/19 in the amount of $1,390,287 provides funding to continue the new service in southern Riverside County as well as supplement inflation costs in the baseline service. The approximately $267,000 reduction in funding compared to the last allocation is due to a portion of the funding for CHP supervision of the FSP program being allocated directly from Caltrans to CHP, rather than passing through the SAFES. Caltrans funding agreements are reimbursement -based and allow for the carryover of contract balances not expended in the agreement's stated fiscal year. This allows the Commission to fully expend allocated amounts and also accommodates the timing of the Caltrans allocation release, which is typically later during the fiscal year for which it is intended. Staff recommends that the Commission approve the SB 1 funding agreement with Caltrans for Riverside County FSP operations in the amount of $1,390,287. Additionally, staff recommends that the Commission authorize the Executive Director to execute the final agreement. Agenda Item 9M 250 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2019/20 Amount: $ 1,390,287 Source of Funds: SB 1 state funds Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 002173 415 41510 201 45 41501 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \litiv4,4,14.&oz Date: 06/12/2019 Attachment: Caltrans SB 1 Fund Transfer Agreement FY 2019 Agenda Item 9M 251 FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL PROGRAM FUND TRANSFER AGREEMENT (Non Federal) Agreement No. FSP19SB1-6054(095) Location: 08-RIV-0-RCTC Project No. FSP19SB1-6054(095) AMS Adv ID: 0819000113 THIS AGREEMENT, effective on July 1, 2018, is between the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as STATE, and Riverside County Transportation Commission, a public agency, hereinafter referred to as "ADMINISTERING AGENCY". WHEREAS, Streets and Highways Code (S&HC) Section 2560 et seq., authorizes STATE and administering agencies to develop and implement a Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program on traffic -congested urban freeways throughout the state; and WHEREAS, STATE has distributed available Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) funds to administering agencies participating in the SB 1 FSP Program in accordance with S&HC Section 2562 and the 2018 FSP SB1 Funding Guidelines; and WHEREAS, ADMINISTERING AGENCY has applied to STATE and has been selected to receive funds from the FSP Program for the purpose of Freeway Service Patrol, hereinafter referred to as "PROJECT"; and WHEREAS, proposed PROJECT funding is as follows: Total Cost State Funds Local Funds $1,737,858.48 $1,390,286.79 $347,571.70; and WHEREAS, STATE is required to enter into an agreement with ADMINISTERING AGENCY to delineate the respective responsibilities of the parties relative to prosecution of said PROJECT; and WHEREAS, STATE and ADMINISTERING AGENCY mutually desire to cooperate and jointly participate in the FSP program and desire to specify herein the terms and conditions under which the FSP program is to be conducted; and WHEREAS, ADMINISTERING AGENCY has approved entering into this Agreement under authority of Resolution No. approved by ADMINISTERING AGENCY on , a copy of which is attached. For Caltrans Use Only I hereby Certify upon my own personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for this encumbrance 0 Accounting Officer ev- 1 DS/3 252 STATE OF CALIFORNIA. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM SUPPLMENT AND CERTIFICATION FORM PSCF (REV. 01/2010) TO: STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE Claims Audits 3301 "C" Street, Rm 404 Sacramento, CA 95816 Page 1 of 1 DATE PREPARED: 5130/2019 PROJECT NUMBER: 0819000113 REQUISITION NUMBER 1 CONTRACT NUMBER: RQS 081900000808 FROM: Department of Transportation SUBJECT: Encumbrance Document VENDOR/LOCAL AGENCY: Riverside County Transportation Commission 1,390,286,79 PROCUREMENT TYPE: Local Assistance CHAPTER 29 STATUTES 2018 ITEM 2660-102-0042 YEAR 18-1 9 PEC 1 PECT 2030010610 COE/Category 2620/0420 AMOUNT $ 1,390,286.79 ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For information, call (915) 654-6410 of TDD (916) - 3880 or write Records and Forms Management, 1120 N. Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814. 253 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: SECTION I STATE AGREES: 1. To define or specify, in cooperation with ADMINISTERING AGENCY, the limits of the State Highway segments to be served by the FSP as well as the nature and amount of the FSP dedicated equipment, if any that is to be funded under the FSP program. 2. To pay ADMINISTERING AGENCY the STATE's share, an amount not to exceed $1,390,286.79, of eligible participating PROJECT costs. This amount is comprised of $786,231.58 for Inflation and Hour Adjustment to Baseline and $604,055.21 for New or Expanded Service. 3. To make reimbursements to ADMINISTERING AGENCY, as promptly as state fiscal procedures will permit, but not more often than monthly in arrears, upon receipt of an original and two signed copies of invoices in the proper form covering actual allowable costs incurred for the prior sequential month's period of the Progress Payment Invoice. 4. When conducting an audit of the costs claimed by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under the provisions of this Agreement, STATE will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior audit of ADMINISTERING AGENCY performed pursuant to the provisions of state and federal laws. In the absence of such an audit, work of other auditors will be relied upon to the extent that work is acceptable to STATE when planning and conducting additional audits. SECTION II ADMINISTERING AGENCY AGREES: 1. A. To commit and contribute matching funds from ADMINISTERING AGENCY resources, which shall be an amount not less than 25% of the amount provided by STATE from the State Highway Account. 1. B. To maintain existing service hours and expand new service all as defined in the 2018 FSP SB 1 Funding Guidelines for SB 1 funds. 2. The ADMINISTERING AGENCY's detailed PROJECT Cost Proposal is attached hereto and made an express part of this Agreement. The detailed PROJECT Cost Proposal reflects the provisions and/or regulations of Section III, Article 8, of this agreement. 3. To use all state funds paid hereunder only for those transportation -related PROJECT purposes that conform to Article XIX of the California State Constitution. 4. STATE funds provided to ADMINISTERING AGENCY or sub-recipient(s) under this Agreement shall not be used for administrative purposes by ADMINISTERING AGENCY or sub-recipient(s). Said administrative costs may be credited toward ADMINISTERING AGENCY's or sub -recipient's PROJECT matching funds provided claimed administrative costs are specified on ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S invoice submittal. If said administrative costs are "indirect", as defined in 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirement for Federal Awards, the costs must be allocated in accordance with an Indirect Cost Allocation Plan (ICAP), submitted, reviewed, and approved in accordance with Caltrans Audits and Investigations requirements which may be accessed at: 254 www.dot.ca.gov/hq/audits/. 5. To develop, in cooperation with STATE, advertise, award, and administer PROJECT contract(s) in accordance with ADMINISTERING AGENCY competitive procurement procedures, in compliance with Public Contract Code (PCC) 10335-10381 (non-A&E services), and other applicable STATE and FEDERAL regulations. 6. Upon award of contract for PROJECT, to prepare and submit to STATE an original and two signed copies of progress invoicing for STATE's share of actual expenditures for allowable PROJECT costs. 7. Said invoicing shall evidence the expenditure of ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S PROJECT participation in paying not less than 20% of all allowable PROJECT costs and shall contain the information described in Chapter 5 of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM). Invoicing shall demonstrate ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S PROJECT participation by showing a matched expenditure of funds of at least 25% of the amount provided by the STATE (excluding the funds dispersed to CHP). ADMINISTERING AGENCY invoices shall be submitted to: State of California Department of Transportation Division of Traffic Operations, MS 36 Office of System Management Operations 1120 "N" Street Sacramento, CA 95814 8. Within 60 days after completion of PROJECT work to be reimbursed under this Agreement, to prepare a final invoice reporting all actual eligible costs expended, including all costs paid by ADMINISTERING AGENCY and submit that signed invoice, along with any refund due STATE, to the address referenced above under Section II, Article 7. Backup information submitted with said final invoice shall include all FSP operational contract invoices paid by ADMINISTERING AGENCY to contracted operators included in expenditures billed to STATE under this Agreement. 9. COST PRINCIPLES A) ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees to comply with, and require all sub -recipients and project sponsors to comply with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirement for Federal Awards, and all applicable Federal and State laws and regulations. B) ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees, and will assure that its contractors and subcontractors will be obligated to agree, that Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq., and all applicable Federal and State laws and regulations, shall be used to determine the allowability of individual PROJECT cost items. C) Any Fund expenditures for costs for which ADMINISTERING AGENCY has received payment or credit that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under 2 CFR, Part 200, or 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 3, are subject to repayment by ADMINISTERING AGENCY to STATE. Should ADMINISTERING AGENCY fail to reimburse Fund moneys due STATE within 30 days of demand, or within such other period as may be agreed in writing between the Parties hereto, STATE is authorized to intercept and withhold future payments due ADMINISTERING AGENCY from STATE or any third -party source, 255 including, but not limited to, the State Treasurer, the State Controller, and the California Transportation Commission. 10. THIRD PARTY CONTRACTING A) ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall not award a non-A&E contract over $5,000, construction contract over $10,000, or other contracts over $25,000 (excluding professional service contracts of the type which are required to be procured in accordance with Government Code sections 4525 (d), (e), and (f)) on the basis of a noncompetitive negotiation for work to be performed under this AGREEMENT without the prior written approval of STATE. B) Any subcontract or agreement entered into by ADMINISTERING AGENCY as a result of disbursing Funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall contain all of the fiscal provisions (Section II, Paragraphs 4, 9, 11, 12, & 13) of this Agreement, and shall mandate that travel and per diem reimbursements and third -party contract reimbursements to subcontractors will be allowable as project costs only after those costs are incurred and paid for by the subcontractors. C) In addition to the above, the preaward requirements of third party contractor/consultants with ADMINISTERING AGENCY should be consistent with Local Program Procedures as published by STATE. 11. ACCOUNTING SYSTEM ADMINISTERING AGENCY, its contractors and subcontractors shall establish and maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate Fund expenditures by line item for the PROJECT. The accounting system of ADMINISTERING AGENCY, its contractors, and all subcontractors shall conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion, and provide support for reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices. 12. RIGHT TO AUDIT For the purpose of determining compliance with this Agreement and other matters connected with the performance of ADMINISTERING AGENCY's contracts with third parties, ADMINISTERING AGENCY, ADMINISTERING AGENCY'S contractors, and subcontractors, and STATE shall each maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of such contracts, including, but not limited to the costs of administering those various contracts. All of the above referenced parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times for three years from the date of final payment of Funds to ADMINISTERING AGENCY. STATE, the California State Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of STATE or the United States Department of Transportation shall each have access to any books, records, and documents that are pertinent for audits, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall furnish copies thereof if requested. 13. TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE Payments to ADMINISTERING AGENCY for travel and subsistence expenses of ADMINISTERING AGENCY forces and its subcontractors claimed for reimbursement or applied as local match credit shall not 256 exceed rates authorized to be paid exempt non -represented State employees under current State Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) rules. If the rates invoiced are in excess of those authorized DPA rates, then ADMINISTERING AGENCY is responsible for the cost difference and any overpayments shall be reimbursed to STATE on demand. SECTION III IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED: 1. All obligations of STATE under the terms of this Agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the Legislature and the encumbrance of funds under this Agreement. Funding and reimbursement is available only upon the passage of the State Budget Act containing these STATE funds. The starting date of eligible reimbursable activities shall be JULY 1, 2018. 2. All obligations of ADMINISTERING AGENCY under the terms of this Agreement are subject to authorization and allocation of resources by ADMINISTERING AGENCY. 3. ADMINISTERING AGENCY and STATE shall jointly define the initial FSP program as well as the appropriate level of FSP funding recommendations and scope of service and equipment required to provide and manage the FSP program. No changes shall be made in these unless mutually agreed to in writing by the parties to this Agreement. 4. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this Agreement or affect the legal liability of either party to this Agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the maintenance of State highways different from the standard of care imposed by law. 5. Neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring or arising by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to ADMINISTERING AGENCY under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless the State of California, its officers, and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to ADMINISTERING AGENCY under this Agreement. 6. Neither ADMINISTERING AGENCY nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage, or liability occurring or arising by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, STATE shall fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless ADMINISTERING AGENCY, its officers, and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind, and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this Agreement. 7. ADMINISTERING AGENCY will maintain an inventory of all non -expendable PROJECT equipment, 257 defined as having a useful life of at least two years and an acquisition cost of $500 or more, paid for with PROJECT funds. ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall define in PROJECT contract who shall take ownership of all equipment at the conclusion of the Project. 8. In the event that ADMINISTERING AGENCY fails to operate the PROJECT commenced and reimbursed under this Agreement in accordance with the terms of this Agreement or fails to comply with applicable Federal and State laws and regulations, STATE reserves the right to terminate funding for PROJECT, or portions thereof, upon written notice to ADMINISTERING AGENCY. 9. This Agreement shall terminate on June 30, 2021. However, the non -expendable equipment and liability clauses shall remain in effect until terminated or modified in writing by mutual agreement. STATE OF CALIFORNIA Riverside County Transportation Commission By: By: Office of Project Implementation Title: Division of Local Assistance DATE: DATE: 258 AGENDA ITEM 9N RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendments for Construction Freeway Service Patrol Towing Services Supporting the State Route 60 Truck Lanes Project WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the following amendments to agreements to provide Construction Freeway Service Patrol (CFSP) services for the State Route 60 Truck Lanes Project (Project) for an additional amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $500,000: a) Agreement No. 15-45-060-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 15-45-060-00, with Airport Mobile Towing, Inc. (Airport); b) Agreement No. 18-45-131-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 18-45-131-00, with Coastal Pride Towing, Inc. (Coastal); c) Agreement No. 17-45-061-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 17-45-061-00, with Pepe's Towing, Inc. (Pepe's); and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission, acting in its capacity as the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), is the principal agency in Riverside County, in partnership with Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol (CHP), managing the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program. The purpose of the FSP program is to provide a continuously roving tow services patrol along designated freeway segments (referred to as beats) to relieve freeway congestion and facilitate the rapid removal of disabled vehicles and those involved in minor accidents on local freeways. Currently, the Commission contracts with three tow truck operators to provide service on a total of twelve general purpose lane beats Monday through Friday during the peak commute hours, 5:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. (12:30 p.m. on Fridays) to 6:30 p.m. In addition to regular FSP service, CFSP provides support for construction projects as a transportation mitigation strategy. CFSP is currently providing such support for the 1-15 Express Lanes Project. Agenda Item 9N 259 DISCUSSION: State Route 60 Truck Lanes Project The Commission, in cooperation with Caltrans, is constructing an eastbound truck -climbing lane and westbound truck -descending lane on SR-60 in a portion of unincorporated Riverside County between Gilman Springs Road and 1.4 miles west of Jack Rabbit Trail. The Project also will upgrade existing inside and outside shoulders to standard widths (10-foot inside shoulder and 12-foot outside shoulder). Construction is slated to start this summer; however, the most disruptive phase of the Project is scheduled to start in August 2019 and last through December 2019. This phase involves the permanent closure of one westbound lane leaving only one available lane for travel in the westbound direction. In addition to the loss of one westbound lane, shoulders or medians will not be available to provide relief for disabled vehicles or those involved in accidents. Therefore, the Project is strategically deploying several measures, including CFSP, to maintain optimal travel conditions through the Project limits. Construction FSP Coverage Due to the unique conditions of the Project (single lane of travel available westbound and absence of shoulders and medians), CFSP will not apply the traditional approach with continuously roving trucks. Instead, up to two tow trucks will be staged at strategic points within the construction zone to optimize response times. In addition, the trucks will perform a full sweep of the beat every half hour if they are not already actively involved in an assist at the half hour marks. The preliminary CFSP service schedule for the Project is Monday through Thursday, 6:OOam — 6:OOpm and Friday through Sunday, 7:OOam — 9:OOpm. The CFSP coverage approach and service schedule will be monitored regularly and may be adjusted by the CHP and Project team. CFSP can only be operated by the Commission's tow operators that have been specifically trained and certified to work FSP in Riverside County. Therefore, when CFSP is needed to support construction projects, amendments with existing operators are executed to add CFSP service. However, incremental work has become more challenging for the Commission's tow operators to staff. Rising costs to operate the program (vehicles, employee wages, insurance) and higher employee turnover and competition for employees in a healthy economy have made it more challenging for tow companies to maintain regular FSP operations. For these same reasons, coverage of incremental FSP service (e.g. CFSP or grant funded weekend service) has been more difficult for the Commission's current rotation of certified FSP tow operators to staff. Additionally, the Project presents some unique challenges for the certified tow operators in the Commission's FSP program. The Project is in an area that is not currently served by FSP; therefore, Agenda Item 9N 260 it is essentially an entirely new beat for a tow operator to cover on top of its existing beat(s). The Project entails CFSP shifts with a minimum of 12 hours and may run up to 16 hours or more, if needed. In order to fully staff such shifts and be compliant with driver laws, operators will need to staff multiple drivers for a single truck shift, seven days a week. Given the aforementioned challenges, distance to the construction zone, and extended service schedules that are unique to this Project, additional provisions are recommended to ensure CFSP coverage for the Project. Staff recommends that the following temporary provisions be applied to contract amendments for tow operators within the Commission's FSP program that agree to and provide CFSP services for the Project: • Drive Time Allowance. Drive time will be an allowable expense invoiced to the Commission at the applied contractor's rate; maximum of six hours per tow operator per truck shift. • Adjusted Penalty Schedule. Priority will be given to CFSP coverage of the Project during the most impacted construction period. Therefore, if a tow operator that is staffing CFSP for the Project runs short one truck on a regular FSP beat commitment for that same day, that operator will not incur penalties for that missed shift. Penalty charges will be incurred only if the number of regular FSP truck shift shortages exceed the number of CFSP truck shifts worked that day by the operator. Service shortages shall be communicated to the CHP as early as possible and no later than the start of the CFSP shift. Staff is currently negotiating with the Commission's three tow operators (Airport, Coastal, and Pepe's) and anticipates that multiple amendments will be executed. Staff recommends applying the amendment template (attached), which includes the temporary provisions, to amendments with each of the Commission's tow operators. The total projected cost, based on the preliminary CFSP service schedule, is estimated at $500,000; this amount will be divided among the participating tow operators. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2019/20 Amount: $ 500,000 State Transportation Improvement Source of Funds: Project, State Highway Operations and Protection Program, and Congestion Budget Adjustment: No Mitigation and Air Quality GL/Project Accounting No.: 003029 81304 00000 0000 262 31 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \litiud.aviiivz Date: 06/17/2019 Attachment: Amendment Template for SR-60 Truck Lanes CFSP Services Agenda Item 9N 261 Agreement No. AMENDMENT NO. _ TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, ACTING AS THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES, FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL FOR BEAT # WITHIN RIVERSIDE COUNTY WITH 1 PARTIES AND DATE 1.1 This Amendment No. _ is made and entered into as of 2019, by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission, a public entity ("COMMISSION"), acting as the Riverside County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (referred to herein as "SAFE"), and , a (referred to herein as "CONTRACTOR"). SAFE and CONTRACTOR are sometimes individually referred to herein as "Party" and collectively as "Parties". 2. RECITALS 2.1 SAFE and CONTRACTOR have entered into an agreement dated for the purpose of providing Freeway Service Patrol ("FSP") services on Beat No. within Riverside County (the "Master Agreement"). 2.2 SAFE and CONTRACTOR have entered into an Amendment No. _ dated in order to provide 2.3 SAFE and CONTRACTOR now desire to amend the Master Agreement in order to add construction FSP services required for the State Route 60 truck lane construction project (the "60 TL Project") which includes: (i) construction of an eastbound truck -climbing lane and westbound truck - descending lane on State Route 60 in a portion of unincorporated Riverside County between Gilman Springs Road and 1.37 miles west of Jack Rabbit Trail, and (ii) upgrade existing inside and outside shoulders to standard widths (10-foot inside shoulder and 12-foot outside shoulder). 17336.0002A\32107980.1 1 262 3. TERMS 3.1 The Services, as that term is defined in the Master Agreement, shall be amended to include construction FSP services for the 60 TL Project ("60 TL Construction FSP Services"). 3.2 60 TL Construction FSP Services will be provided by two trucks. SAFE may use other FSP contractors, in addition to CONTRACTOR, to perform the 60 TL Construction FSP Services. 3.3 Notwithstanding any other provision of the Master Agreement, 60 TL Construction FSP Services shall be performed under this Amendment at the following hourly rate: 3.4 The maximum compensation for the 60 TL Construction FSP Services to be provided under this Amendment shall not exceed Thousand Dollars ($ ). 3.5 The total not -to -exceed amount of the Master Agreement shall be increased from to 3.6 Under Attachment 1 to Exhibit "A" of the Master Agreement, CONTRACTOR incurs a penalty for the following violation: Not having a certified FSP back-up tow truck available during FSP hours and/or FSP Certified Driver During any 60 TL Construction FSP Services truck shift operated by CONTRACTOR, the above violation shall not incur a penalty on Beat , provided that (i) CONTRACTOR notifies SAFE and CHP, at the earliest time possible, but no later than the scheduled start time of the Beat shift, that the FSP Certified Driver or back-up tow truck driver is not available because such person is needed for performance of the 60 TL Construction FSP Services truck shift; and (ii) a FSP Certified Driver or back-up tow truck driver actually works the full 60 TL Construction FSP Services truck shift. 17336.0002A\32107980.1 2 263 3.7 For the 60 TL Construction FSP Services, CONTRACTOR shall be permitted to invoice SAFE for a maximum of one hour of driver travel time, at the hourly rate set forth above, to and from the beat ("Drive Time Allowance"). The Drive Time Allowance shall apply to a maximum of three drivers per each 60 TL Construction FSP Services truck shift. 3.8 Except as amended by this Amendment, all provisions of the Master Agreement, as previously amended, including without limitation the indemnity and insurance provisions, shall remain in full force and effect and shall govern the actions of the Parties under this Amendment. 3.9 This Amendment shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 3.10 This Amendment may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original. [Signatures on following page] 17336.0002A\32107980.1 3 264 SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT NO. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment on the date first herein above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES CONTRACTOR [insert] By: By: Anne Mayer, Executive Director Signature Name Title APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: By: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel to the Riverside County Its: Transportation Commission * A corporation requires the signatures of two corporate officers. One signature shall be that of the chairman of board, the president or any vice president and the second signature (on the attest line) shall be that of the secretary, any assistant secretary, the chief financial officer or any assistant treasurer of such corporation. If the above persons are not the intended signators, evidence of signature authority shall be provided to RCTC. 17336.0002A\32107980.1 265 AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee SUBJECT: 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan Review & Update FUTURE FUNDING INITIATIVES AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan Review & Update. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Riverside County voters approved Measure A Ordinance No. 02-001 (Measure A) in 2002 with more than 69 percent of the vote — extending an existing half -cent sales tax for transportation until 2039. As required by state law, the ballot measure required a detailed expenditure plan governing how the added revenue would be spent. In Riverside County, Measure A contains specific transportation projects based on the unique needs of the three geographic areas consisting of Palo Verde Valley, Coachella Valley, and Western County. In fact, Measure A includes a return -to -source provision that requires sales tax revenues generated in each of these areas be returned to the same geographic area. Accordingly, tax revenue generated from sales in the Coachella Valley can only be spent on transportation projects and services in the Coachella Valley Measure A Expenditure Plan and the same holds true in Western County and Palo Verde Valley. One unique requirement in Measure A and the Plan is a decennial review of the Plan to ensure that the changing needs and priorities of Riverside County are met. The specific language that appears in Measure A is as follows: "SECTION XIV. EXPENDITURE PLAN AMENDMENTS. The Expenditure Plan for Measure "A" funds may only be amended, if required, in accordance with Public Utilities Code section 240302, as amended. This section currently provides the following process for amendment: (1) initiation of the amendment by the Commission reciting findings of necessity; (2) approval by the Board of Supervisors; and, (3) approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population, unless such process is amended in a manner consistent with State legislation. Commencing in 2019 and at least every ten years thereafter, the Commission shall review and, where necessary propose revisions to the Expenditure Plan. Such revisions shall be submitted for approval according to the procedures set forth in this Section XIV. Until approved, the then existing Expenditure Plan shall remain in full force and effect." Agenda Item 10 266 The Plan includes the following reference to the decennial review: "MANDATORY PLAN UPDATE AND TERMINATION OF SALES TAX This Plan shall be updated by RCTC every 10 years that the sales tax is in effect to reflect current and changing priorities and needs in the County, as defined by the duly elected local government representatives on the RCTC Board. Any changes to this Plan must be adopted in accordance with current law in effect at the time of the update and must be based on findings of necessity for change by the Commission...." After a careful review of the Plan and current funding, staff and the Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee (FFI Committee) do not recommend formal amendments to the Plan; however, the Committee suggests the adoption of a Plan Update, which includes clarifications of the Commission's interpretation and implementation of the Plan that are consistent with and not contradictory to the original Plan's language or intent. This would also serve to provide the public with additional information and transparency regarding the implementation of Measure A. The Plan Update addresses the audit of the limitation of administrative salaries and benefits; the termination date of Measure A; Western County highway project cost estimate changes, new transportation corridors in development, public transit eligible programs, and funding assumptions that have changed in the nearly 17 years since Measure A was conceived; and Coachella Valley implementation of state highways and major regional road projects. The Plan Update also reaffirms the Plan as adopted by the voters in 2002. Legal counsel has opined that a formal amendment of the Plan is not necessary to make these clarifications, as they are consistent with and not contradictory to the Plan as it was approved by voters in 2002. The FFI Committee recommends approval of the Plan Update (Attachment 1). This item has no fiscal impact. Attachment: 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan Review & Update Agenda Item 10 267 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan Review & Update JULY 10, 1019 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan Review & Update Pursuant to its obligations to the public of Riverside County, RCTC has reviewed the 2009 Measure A Ordinance (2009 Measure A or Ordinance) Expenditure Plan (Plan). The review was conducted in a multifaceted manner that incorporated input from Commissioners, key stakeholders, the public, and professional RCTC staff and consultants. The review process was led by an ad hoc committee appointed by RCTC's Chair. This final report is accepted and adopted by the full Commission in a public meeting in accordance with state law. Upon careful review of the Plan and the circumstances that exist in 2019, RCTC reaffirms the Plan as adopted by Riverside County voters in 2002. RCTC recommends no amendment to the Plan; therefore, it will not submit any proposed amendments to the Board of Supervisors or the cities of Riverside County. In its review of the Plan, RCTC identified seven areas that bear clarification to uphold the intent of the Plan and support its implementation. Thus, RCTC provides this update to the public in the interest of transparency and openness. TAXPAYER ACCOUNTABIWY SAFEGUARDS 1. Mandatory Annual Rscal Audit Language in the Plan, Ordinance, and Public Utilities Code (PUC) limit administrative costs paid for by Measure A. RCTC's governing statutes set the limitation on administrative costs based on annual net revenue. Similarly, Section X of the Ordinance provides, "in no case shall the funds expended for salaries and benefits exceed one percent (1%) of the annual net amount of revenue raised by Measure 'A'." Providing further consistency, page 1 of the Plan states that it, "Provides for the strict limitation of administrative staff costs in implementing this Plan, by limiting, in law, funds expended for salaries and benefits to no more than one (1) percent of the annual net amount of revenues raised by Measure 'A'." However, within the Plan's section on Mandatory Fiscal Audit, the Plan states that the audit, "shall also insure that no more than 1(one) percent of total sales tax expenditures are used for administrative staff salaries and benefits in implementing this Plan." This later language in the Plan inconsistently refers to expenditures as the basis for calculating the limitation on administrative costs. Accordingly, this finding clarifies that the audit should insure that administrative staff salaries and benefits do not exceed one percent of sales tax revenues. 2. Mandatory Plan Update and Termination of Sales Tax The Ordinance provides for the "imposition of a retail transaction and use tax of one-half percent for a period of thirty (30) years" with collection commencing "upon the expiration of the existing tax." However, the taxpayer accountability standard related to the mandatory plan update and termination of sales tax cited the termination date as March 31, 2039. After voters approved the 2009 Measure A, RCTC's agreement with the State Board of Equalization for tax administration was amended to commence the 2009 Measure A tax collection upon expiration of the 1989 Measure A on June 30, 2009 269 and run for 30 years thereafter to June 30, 2039. Therefore, in accordance with the language in the Ordinance, this finding clarifies that the actual termination date of the 2009 Measure A is June 30, 2039. SPEC IFlC IRANSPORTA710N PRO JECIS73 BE FUNDED Western Riverside County 3. State Highways The Plan includes a table of specific state "highway projects to be implemented with funding returned to the Western County Area." RCTC reaffirms this list of specific projects and does not propose any additions or deletions. RCTC will provide the public with updated cost estimates for projects named in this section of the Plan as part of the 2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan, which will be adopted separately. New cost estimates will reflect changes in scope for many of the projects in the Plan in order to address changing conditions since the plan was originated in 2001, including changes in traffic patterns, growing traffic concerns and other needs in the county. New estimates will also reflect cost escalations due to economic factors outside the Commission's control, such as wage and construction material increases, and will be estimated using current (2019) dollar values. Estimates are for planning purposes and are subject to change over time. The cost updates, combined with decreased expectations of federal and state funding levels, will demonstrate the challenge of delivering all of the projects named in the table before the 2009 Measure A sunsets in 2039. 4. Development of New Transportation Corridors The Plan identifies four new transportation corridors identified as necessary through the Community Environmental Transportation Approval Process (CETAP). The actual corridors are not named nor identified in the Plan. Since the approval of the 2009 Measure A, RCTC has taken a number of policy actions to better define the corridors and remain in compliance with the Plan and CETAP. Specifically, in 2014, RCTC approved funding for a Project Study Report (PSR) for the Ethanac/State Route 74/Nichols Road Corridor with the possible intent to designate it as an east -west CETAP corridor along with Cajalco Road west of 1-215. RCTC continues to work with the County of Riverside on both projects and finds both corridors to be consistent with the Plan. 5. Public Transit C. Commuter Services, Ridesharing, Vanpools, Buspools, Park-N-Ride The Plan provides a minimum of $50 million of the 2009 Measure A funds for Commuter Services within the Public Transit component in Western County. The Plan's language discusses commuter traffic at peak hours and an inclusive list of several programs that can help alleviate congestion on the highway system. One program operated by RCTC that is not explicitly mentioned in the Plan's language, yet fulfills its purpose, is the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP). FSP provides roadside motorist aid during periods of heavy travel with the purpose of reducing congestion caused by accidents and enhancing safety for all motorists. RCTC finds FSP and any similar motorist assistance programs to be consistent with and eligible for the Commuter Services section of the 2009 Measure A. 270 6. Funding Awamptions The architects of the 2009 Measure A assumed a greater level of federal and state funding for transportation than has occurred. Unfortunately, prospects for federal funds to increase are not positive; instead, the federal Highway Trust Fund remains headed toward insolvency. While the State has recently increased and stabilized transportation funding, a vast majority of those funds are for repair and rehabilitation of existing infrastructure rather than construction of new infrastructure planned in the 2009 Measure A. Therefore, RCTC predicts that it will not be financially feasible to deliver all of the improvements listed in in the Plan before the 2009 Measure A sunsets in 2039. RCTC will continue to make every effort to deliver all of the improvements in the Plan through means such as: • Aggressively pursue state and federal grants, • Prioritize discretionary state and federal funding sources for 2009 Measure A priorities, • Use innovative project delivery methods to accelerate construction and create efficiencies, and • Pursue new local funding sources to supplement the 2009 Measure A. Coachella Valley 7. State Highwaysand Major Regional Road Projects The expenditure plan states that this segment of the plan will be implemented through the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). This relationship has served RCTC and taxpayers of the region well, and the Commission affirms the role of CVAG in implementing Measure A and setting priorities in the Coachella Valley, as well as the collaborative relationship between RCTC and CVAG in delivering projects, setting policy, and conducting future planning for the Coachella Valley. 271 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FUTURE FUNDING INITIATIVES AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS July 10, 2019 IMISTVE W y2 wzi Z' EDUCATION MEITZSOLUTIONSANNERs PUILICEELOCAL LIFE PROACTIVE =MI OPTMNS ECONOMY ASPIRATION STRATEGY ICHIEVABLE RESPONSIBILITY ENGAGEMEN1 Ad Hoc Committee'sAssignment from January 31: Measure A Expenditure Plan Review Innovative Financing: 91 Express Lanes surplus revenue 10 Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan 2020 Ballot Measure Feasibility Recommend to Commission Priorities & Funding Strategy July 10, 2019 3 ROTC Prioritization History 2002 Voters approve Measure A Ordinance & Plan 2006 2009-2019 Western County Highway Delivery Plan 2010 Great Recession = Recalibrate Delivery Plan 2016 Strategic Assessment 2019 Prioritization & Funding Strategy 2019- Future 4 Agenda Item 10 Measure A Decennial Review • Required every 10 years by Measure A Ordinance • Does the Measure A Expenditure Plan still reflect the needs of the county today? • Amendments require ratification by cities and the County • Ad Hoc Committee recommends: ➢ No amendments ➢ Implementation policy clarification 5 Agenda Item 11 Innovative Financing • Accelerate congestion relief projects in western Riverside County • Use 91 Express Lanes surplus toll revenue for maximum public benefit • Prioritize federal formula funds • Responsive to stated public and Commissioner priorities 91 Surplus Toll Revenue (To 2067) Borrow against portion of surplus $228-$467 million Proceeds ava ila ble for projects be nefitting 91 corridor 6 Agenda Item 11 TIIE PRESS -ENTERPRISE LOCAL NEWS Money in hand to add $42 million lane on 91Freeway, from Green River Toad to 241toll road Riverside Counter transportation officials say they can get the lane built - even if they don't land a S75 million federal rant. By DAVID DOWNEY I ddowney c seng,cem I The Pross-Entorprise PUBLISHED: June 1S, 2019 at 5.30 am I UPDATED: June 18, 2919 at 2.35 pm LOCAL NEWS Could long -delayed makeover of 71/91 freeway interchange in Corona finally happen? LOCAL NEWS New 91 Freeway westbound lane OK'd from western Corona to 241 toll road The 542 million project could shave 15 minutes off morning commutes in Corona and may open in 2021. By DAVID DOWNEY I ddownay@scng.com I The Press-Entcrprisc PUBLISHED: December 12, 201S at 11:50 am I UPDATED: December 12, 201B at 324 pm LOCAL NEWS By DAVID DOWNEY ddowney@scng.cem 1 The Press -Enterprise PUBLISHED:April 14, 2018 at 3:59 pm I UPDATED: April 14, 2018 at 4:95 pm A $180 million Corona project could speed some commutes by linking 15, 91 Freeway toll lanes 7 Agenda Item 11 Limits of surplus toll expenditures Today: ✓ OC Line to I-15 Committee Recommendation: ✓ Expand east to 60/91/215, south to SR-74 ✓ Seek legislation Rationale ✓ Helps congestion on 91 system ✓ Helps fund 91 and 15 deferred segments Er jiniji a 60,411iirimmviiii p II Valley � � s 60 , gh Eastvale AR �ino HMIs y i Norco Riverside Agenda Item 11 Reimburse Measure A for 91 Investments 2013 financing of 91 CIP Agenda Item 12 Highway priorities for the next 10 years What can we accomplish with the resources (we think) we will have? 7 Criteria: 1. Consequence of deferring delivery 2. Deferred projects from 2009-2019 3. Measure A Expenditure Plan 4. Realistic attainment of funding for something usable 5. Minimize Measure A contributions 6. Eligibility for restrictive funding sources 7. Economic benefit of constructed improvements 10 Agenda Item 12 2019-2029 Western County Highway Priorities Full fund phase' Partially fund phase Partner No Action Partner - No Action na :hino Hills r� E3 ... Ontario SAN BERNARDINO CO. MIMI%•IVERSIDE CO. a , Jurupa E sa - Valley rEastvale IMP i r� Q r�iiir: r m Corona �F 9� O,Q4‘‘'‘9s. tt` Off, 00 n0 0 Norco Q Lake Matthews RIVERSIDE CO. SAN DIEGO CO. 5 10 Miles Riverside Lake Elsinore \Viimesa M� itafismiti2hmtimmuoilmin Canyon Labe Wildomar Murrieta Menifee Temecula Beaumont Banning e San Jacinto Diemdnd Valley Lake Vail Lake o 11 Agenda Item 13 Engaging with the public on solutions #RebootMyCommu • Qualitative Publ. Opinion Research • Qualitative and Quantitative 12 #rebootmyfr_ COIVIIVIUTENv# • March 6 - June 3 = 90 days • 948 comments received and reviewed (included in agenda) • Multiple tools for public to tell their stories, offer suggestions • Residents understand where investment is needed 13 #rebootmytr ` COMMUTEV COMMENTS BY TOPIC co co M co CO a n ACTIVE TRANS. ECONOMY -JOBS HIGHWAYS- LOCAL -STREETS PUBLIC TRANS. SAFETY EXPRESS LANES TRAFFIC t i 14 #rebootmy � COMMUTEC Origin of Comments 15 #rebootmytr ` COMMUTEV Positive public sentiment 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 3/1 -0.5 3/15 Social Media Public Sentiment March 1 -June 7, 2019 3/29 V 4/12 4/26 5/ 10 L Reboot Engagement ❑ Other Engagement 5/24 6/7 ' 3/6: #Reboot program launches • 3/30: Round 2 ends. Ad data used to optimize targeting, messaging • 5/21: #Reboot digital ads ramp down 16 Agenda Item 13 Public Opinion Survey • May 22 — June 6, 2019 • English and Spanish • Online and phone • Random sample of 1,511 registered voters likely to vote in November 2020 • Margin of error for full sample: +/- 3.4% • Survey designed with input from Ad Hoc Committee, previous surveys, focus groups 17 Agenda Item 13 Need for additional funding for Riverside County's transportation system Great/Some Need Little/No Real Need 12% 78% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%> ° 70 0 80 ° 90 ° 18 Agenda Item 13 Support for a ballot measure peaksabove 2/3 Initial Vote Definitely yes Probably yes Undecided, lean yes . 39% 19% 58% 4% Undecided, lean no 1 % Probably no I 7% Definitely no - 25% Undecided 1 4% (All Riverside County — November 2020) Tota I Yes 63% Tota I No 34% After Education i 5% Tota I -s 68% Tota I No 28% After Critical Statement 36% 1� Tota El 16% 52% i Yes 5% 5% I 7% 25% J 57% Tota I No 36% 19 Agenda Item 13 E3allot features most important to voters ■ (6-7) Very Impt. ■ (5) Smwt. Impt. ■ (4) Neutral ■ (1-3) Not Too/Not at All Impt. (8) DK Requiring all funds used to benefit Riverside County residents Improving traffic flow Maintaining local roads Keeping transportation infrastructure in good condition Repairing potholes Creating local jobs Accelerating the completion of freeway upgrade projects ^Maintaining local streets in every city and unincorporated area • 87% 5% 81% 8% 6% 79% 12% 79% 11% 6% 78% 74% 72% 71% 11% 20 Agenda Item 13 Promects most important to voters We ste m Flve rsid a County: 1. Adding at least one lane in each direction to the 10, 15, 215, 60, 71, and 91 freeways 2. Improving on and off -ramps and bridges 3. Adding new exits and off -ramps on the 15 and 215 Coachella Valley: 1. Daily train service between Coachella Valley and Los Angeles (via Riverside and OC) 2. Reducing bottlenecks and safety concerns on the 10, 111, and 86 3. Improving safety and traffic flow where the 10, 60, and 79 meet near Beaumont 21 Agenda Item 13 Issues most important to voters Western County • Free -up time • Aging system • Accountability • Growth • Local plan • Jobs closer to home Coachella Valley • Senior independence • Aging system • Local control in CV • Emergencies • Accountability • Local plan • Air quality • Jobs closer to home • Growth 22 Agenda Item 13 Ad Hoc Committee Recommendations Develop a Transportation Improvement/Traffic Relief Plan and Ordinance Enhance the Public Engagement Program Adjust FY 2019/20 Budget Sponsor clarifying legislation, as needed 23 d-1 N Public comments • Several emails received as of July 8 requesting delay of items 11, 12 and 13 • Concern over public notice, time to review • Agenda originally posted July 2, item 9K revised on July 3 • Posted early considering holiday • January 31, 2019 public agenda and Commission action • Concern over proposed use of surplus toll revenue • Commission policy decision 25 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION AGENDA ITEM 11 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee SUBJECT: Innovative Financing Opportunities FUTURE FUNDING INITIATIVES AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize staff to continue to develop a plan of finance for the 2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan (Delivery Plan) eligible projects that includes, but is not limited to, the issuance of RCTC 91 Express Lanes surplus toll revenue bonds; 2) Adopt as Commission policy that priority shall be given to Delivery Plan -supporting projects for programming of federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) designated for the South Coast Air Basin, and Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) funds; 3) Authorize staff to pursue legislation that amends the Commission's authorizing statutes to extend the eligible use of RCTC 91 Express Lanes surplus toll revenues east to the 60/91/215 interchange and south on 1-15 to SR-74; and 4) Approve the reimbursement of all or a portion of the Measure A investment in the 91 Project that was not previously financed as an eligible use of surplus toll revenues. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its January 31 Annual Workshop, the Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee (FFI Committee) was tasked with making a recommendation regarding innovative financing of RCTC 91 Express Lanes revenues for the purpose of accelerating currently -unfunded transportation improvements. The Commission used innovative financing approaches in the original financing structures for its two express lanes projects and significant Measure A contributions: • SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (2013) — $1.3 billion project financing included $174 million of current interest and capital appreciation toll revenue bond proceeds and a $421 million federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan secured by toll revenues, state funds comprised of $2 million from State Transportation Improvement Program and $37 million from State -Local Partnership Program, $501 million of Measure A sales tax revenue bond proceeds, Measure A contributions exceeding $170 million, and $6 million of investment earnings; and Agenda Item 11 272 " 1-15 Express Lanes Project (2017)  $471 million project financing included $152 million of toll revenue bonds consisting of a TIFIA loan secured by toll revenues, state funds comprised of $110 million from federal CMAQ and STBG, $114 million of Measure A sales tax revenue bond proceeds, $94 million of Measure A contributions, and $1 million of investment earnings. Additionally, the Commission provided contingent Measure Afunds of up to $56.5 million to provide a TIFIA debt service reserve and support operations and maintenance as well as debt service. The toll revenue debt (toll revenue bonds and TIFIA loans) for each project will be repaid by future tolls collected through the Commission's operation of the respective express lanes for each project. The Commission's authority to collect tolls extends 50 years after opening of each facility, which is at least 15 years beyond the final maturities of the toll revenue debt. State legislation authorizing the Commission to develop and operate the express lanes requires that surplus toll revenues (after operations and maintenance costs, debt repayment, repair and rehabilitation expenses, and reserves/other funds) be spent on transportation projects in the corridor from which the revenues were generated. For the purposes of expending surplus toll revenues, the legislation defines the SR-91 corridor as between the Riverside/Orange County line and 1-15. The entirety of the 1-15 corridor within Riverside County is eligible for expenditure of I- 15 Express Lanes surplus revenue. Multimodal improvements are eligible on each corridor. The RCTC 91 Express Lanes opened in March 2017 with performance exceeding initial expectations. A December 2018 update of the original investment grade traffic and revenue study forecast approximately $926 million more in RCTC 91 Express Lanes toll revenue than the original study. Given the current financial success of the RCTC 91 Express Lanes, the Commission has an opportunity to use future anticipated toll revenues to accelerate transportation improvements within and related to the SR-91 corridor. DISCUSSION: Innovative Financing Structure The significance of surplus toll revenues is important to evaluate now, as this opportunity may influence the project prioritization strategy for the Delivery Plan and the potential for a new local funding measure. It is important to note that not all surplus toll revenue will be available to invest in new transportation projects. The Commission must share a portion of any surplus revenues with the federal government to prepay the TIFIA loans. Each TIFIA loan has a unique repayment structure as negotiated between the Commission and the U.S. Department of Transportation. For instance, on the 91 Project, 100 percent of the surplus toll revenue is distributed to the Commission through December 1, 2021. Thereafter, 50 percent of the surplus toll revenues are allocated to TIFIA to prepay the TIFIA loan and 50 percent to the Commission. Agenda Item 11 273 Financing based on the Commission's share of surplus toll revenues has required legal research by the Commission's general/TIFIA counsel and bond counsel. Yet more research may be necessary if the Commission wishes to move forward. Staff, in consultation with its municipal and legal advisors and an investment bank, considered and analyzed innovative financing options related to the RCTC 91 Express Lanes that include: Innovative Financing Options Description Senior lien toll revenue bonds • Additional toll revenue bonds payable from toll revenues at the highest priority level, which is above the subordinated TIFIA loan. • Bonds can be issued if certain conditions per the existing bond documents are met. Surplus toll revenue bonds • New toll revenue bonds payable only from surplus toll revenues. • The Commission designates a fixed percentage of surplus toll revenues to be deposited with a trustee for bond debt service, and the remaining balance is retained by the Commission for eligible projects. • The bonds are zero -coupon bonds, or capital appreciation bonds (CABs), and do not bear current interest. Interest and principal are paid as revenues are available prior to the maturity date. • Bond issuance requires new debt documents related solely to the securitization of the surplus toll revenues. Other surplus toll revenue debt • New direct loan from a U.S. instrumentality, such as a public pension fund, payable only from surplus toll revenues. • Similar to the surplus toll revenue bonds, a fixed percentage of surplus toll revenues is deposited to with a trustee for loan payments with the balance retained by the Commission for eligible projects. • Similar to the surplus toll revenue bonds, the loan does not bear current interest. Interest and principal are paid as revenues are available over a specified term; however, failure to pay off the loan during would not be an event of default. • A loan requires new debt documents related solely to the securitization of the surplus toll revenues. Agenda Item 11 274 At the April 24 FFI Committee meeting, staff presented a matrix that summarized key considerations for each innovative financing structure based on funding capacity, transaction complexity, legal complexity, TIFIA consent requirement, and timeframe. Based on an evaluation of each financing structure, the most immediately feasible option is the issuance of surplus toll revenue bonds. Assuming securitization of an amount between 50 and 75 percent of the projected surplus toll revenues and a final maturity between 35 and 40 years, this option could generate estimated proceeds of $228 to $467 million. Such proceeds could have a significant impact on funding Delivery Plan project priorities. Actual proceeds will be dependent on a number of variables, including but not limited to: • Percentage of future surplus toll revenues pledged by the Commission as security; • Nominal final maturity date; • Interest yield rate; • Other deal terms; • Market conditions; and • Continued strong performance of the RCTC 91 Express Lanes. While the final maturity date may be between 35 and 40 years and after the maturity of toll revenue debt, the surplus toll revenue bonds are projected to be paid off 7 to 10 years prior to that final maturity date. Therefore, the potential risk of default as low. There appears to be significant market interest in this type of debt, as investment managers desire longer -term investments reflecting the higher range of yields currently available in the market. Additional senior lien toll revenue bonds were not considered feasible as they generated the least amount of proceeds (approximately $158 million) and required TIFIA consent among other restrictive conditions. Other surplus toll revenue debt was seriously considered since the range of potential proceeds were similar to the surplus toll revenue bonds; however, the borrowing cost is higher than the surplus toll revenue bonds due to increased risk related to payment. Additionally, U.S. public pension funds do not currently invest in direct loan arrangements. This type of transaction may gain investor interest after at least five years, negatively impacting the use of innovative financing to fund Delivery Plan projects. Based on the considerations summarized above, the Commission's issuance of CABS in 2013, and potential investor interest, the FFI Committee recommends that the Commission authorize staff to continue to develop a plan of finance for the Delivery Plan eligible projects that includes the issuance of toll revenue bonds secured by the Commission's share of RCTC 91 Express Lanes surplus toll revenues. Commission direction to proceed with exploration of this option in conjunction with Delivery Plan prioritization decisions will allow staff to develop an implementation timeline. Any specific plan of finance will be presented to the Commission for approval at a future date. Agenda Item 11 275 Priority Use of Federal Funds Staff anticipates that federal CMAQ and STBG funds will be available for these projects and other Commission capital projects that are not fully funded. CMAQ funds are restricted to projects that improve air quality such as carpool or express lanes; STBG are not as restrictive. Occasionally in the past, the Commission has conducted a call for projects for federal funds; however, eligible projects needed to follow federal processes. This often limits the number of eligible project applications from local jurisdictions. The available federal funds could significantly impact the Commission's ability to fund projects on the Delivery Plan and move them to a higher priority. Therefore, the FFI Committee recommends that the Commission direct staff to prioritize federal CMAQ (South Coast Air Basin -related portion) and STBG funds for programming on Delivery Plan eligible projects. Eligible Uses of Financing Proceeds and Potential Legislative Amendments The Commission co -sponsored Senate Bill 1316 (SB 1316) along with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) in 2008 to make the 91 Project possible. SB 1316 was approved by the Governor. Among the authorities bestowed on the Commission in SB 1316 was the ability to impose tolls, set toll rates, issue debt against the tolls, and to expend toll revenue for specified purposes. As previously mentioned in this report, the legislation authorizes the Commission to invest surplus tolls into multi -modal transportation facilities that improve congestion on the SR-91 corridor between the Orange and Riverside County line to the west and 1-15 to the east. Accordingly, the innovative financing bond proceeds contemplated today could be spent on various SR-91 corridor multimodal services including express bus, rideshare, Metrolink, and freeway service patrol, and capital projects such as the 71/91 connector, 15/91 Express Lanes Connector, 91 Corridor Operations Project (westbound auxiliary lane from Green River to SR-241), and 91 Project close-out. Two projects that have been initiated by the Commission in close proximity and arguably related to improving congestion on the SR-91 corridor include the 1-15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension (between Cajalco Road and SR-74) and the 91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes (between 1-15 and 60/91/215 interchange). The proximity and connection of these two projects to the SR-91 corridor is significant; however, under current legislation, these two projects are not eligible to use 91 Express Lanes surplus toll revenues. Federal and state funds have been programmed or may be available to fund the eligible capital projects along the SR-91 corridor noted previously; this may reduce the need for innovative financing bond proceeds. However, a significant portion of the traffic congestion at the 15/91 interchange is generated by traffic coming from the east on SR-91 and south on 1-15 from SR-74. The development of the 91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes and design/construction phases of the 1-15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension could potentially be accelerated with a portion of the innovative financing bond proceeds and available federal funds. For these projects, innovative financing proceeds and the resulting project development acceleration was assumed in the Delivery Plan development and FFI Committee recommendations contained in Agenda Item 11 276 the concurrent July Commission report. Amending current legislation could provide this acceleration of traffic congestion relief to a wider area that has a major connection to the currently -defined SR-91 corridor limits which can utilize surplus toll revenues. Accordingly, the FFI Committee recommends that the Commission authorize staff to pursue legislation that amends the Commission's authorizing statutes to extend the SR-91 corridor limits east to the 60/91/215 interchange and south on 1-15 to SR-74. Reimbursement for Measure A Investments in the 91 Project Another alternative related to the eligible use of surplus toll revenues relates to the reimbursement of a portion of the Commission's Measure A investment in the 91 Project. The prime directive during the development of the 91 Project plan of finance was to minimize the amount of Measure A required to fund the project. Initial financial models from the financing team assumed a sizeable issuance of toll revenue bonds to finance the project; however, extremely conservative rating agency and TIFIA assumptions related to traffic and revenues significantly decreased the amount of toll revenue bonds that could be issued by approximately $50 million and increased the amount of Measure A sales tax revenue bonds required. Additionally, market factors that developed in May and June 2013 impacted the financial model and required additional Measure A investment. Subsequently, the 91 Project cost increased primarily as a result of right of way cost increases, requiring additional Measure A contributions for project completion. Should the Commission desire to maximize the use of the potential innovative financing bond proceeds, it could take the position that reimbursement of a portion of the Measure A equity contribution in the 91 Project of at least $170 million that was not previously financed is an eligible use of surplus toll revenues. Such reimbursement would increase the amount of Measure A funds available to fund Western County highway projects. The FFI Committee recommends that the Commission approve the reimbursement of all or a portion of the Measure A investment in the 91 Project that was not previously financed as an eligible use of surplus toll revenues. Financial Impact These recommendations do not have a financial impact, as staff will need to return to the Commission with a specific plan of finance and programming recommendations. Agenda Item 11 277 AGENDA ITEM 12 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee SUBJECT: 2019-2029 Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan FUTURE FUNDING INITIATIVES AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt the 2019-2029 Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In December 2006, the Commission approved a 10-year project delivery plan for the Western Riverside County Measure A Highway program. The intent was to establish priorities for the implementation of the renewed Measure A sales tax program, which began collecting sales tax revenue in July 2009 for a 30-year period. Due to the economic recession in the late 2000's, the related decrease in Measure A and other revenues, project development cost increases, and other factors, it was necessary to reassess prior project delivery decisions and assumptions. The Commission approved a recalibration of the original 10-year project delivery plan for the Western Riverside County Measure A Highway program 2009-2019 at its January 2010 annual workshop. The recalibrated plan revised project priorities including the deferral of several projects and set the direction for project delivery for the ensuing years. At its January 31, 2019 Annual Workshop, the Commission assigned the Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee (FFI Committee) to thoroughly vet and make specific recommendations in several areas to the Commission by July 2019. One of the areas for recommendation is the establishment of the new 10-year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan for 2019- 2029 (Delivery Plan). This Delivery Plan focuses on RCTC-sponsored highway projects in Western Riverside County that can be delivered between 2019 and 2029 (the middle decade of the renewed Measure A period). At the March 25, 2019 FFI Committee meeting, staff presented a draft Delivery Plan for the FFI Committee's review and input. FFI Committee members discussed several factors including the importance of a transportation project's benefit to economic development. The FFI Committee therefore requested that economic benefit be considered as part of the Delivery Plan prioritization effort. FFI Committee members also requested more information to evaluate the draft Delivery Plan including existing and future trends in population, employment, and traffic congestion. Agenda Item 12 278 At the April 15, 2019 FFI Committee meeting, staff presented an update to the prioritization criteria including a new economic benefit factor. Staff also provided additional trend information related to population, employment, and traffic congestion. FFI Committee members provided additional input to the Delivery Plan including direction to staff to evaluate the economic benefit factor to determine whether it could be more quantitative or used as a greater differentiator between projects. FFI Committee members also requested further breakdown of population and employment trends by supervisorial district. In response to these committee member interests, the Delivery Plan was updated to reflect work done to better describe the economic benefits of constructed projects. These results were added to attachment 1 in a qualitative manner. The economic benefit analysis performed did not result in a change in staff recommendation of projects in the Delivery Plan. Additionally, an updated exhibit reflecting population and employment trends by supervisorial district was provided at the committee meeting. Attachments 1 and 2 represent the final Delivery Plan approved by the FFI Committee and associated project map, respectively. The recommendation states that the Commission's Delivery Plan consist of the RCTC-sponsored projects listed in groups 1 and 2. Group 1 projects (or project phases) are considered fully -funded given existing and expected local funding from Measure A, tolls, and other local sources as well as state and federal funding. Group 2 projects (or project phases) are partially funded with full funding likely available over the 2019-2029 period. Group 1 recommendations include noted projects that will benefit from additional funds generated by the financing of 91 Express Lanes surplus toll revenue. This innovative financing approach is estimated to result in $228-$467 million of additional funds for qualifying projects and uses. This approach is fully addressed in a concurrent July Commission staff report. Group 3 projects are Partner Agency -sponsored projects being assisted by Commission funding. While not part of the Commission's Delivery Plan these notable projects are reflected for reference. Group 4 projects are not part of the 2019-2029 Delivery Plan but are either part of the overall 2009-2039 Measure A Expenditure Plan or a candidate for the future 2029-2039 Delivery Plan. Lastly, Group 5 projects represent other notable Partner Agency -sponsored projects not currently being assisted by Commission funding. The FFI Committee is seeking Commission adoption of the 2019-2029 Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan. Attachments: 1) 2019-2029 Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan, June 24, 2019 2) Delivery Plan project map, June 24, 2019 Agenda Item 12 279 Attachment 1 10-Year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan 2019-2029 RCTC-Sponsored Group 1 and Group 2 Projects Projects Phase Sponsor Cost Available Funding 1 2 PRIORITIZATION FACTORS All 3 4 1.5 IMF 7 Consequence of deferring delivery Deferred projects from the 2009-2019 Western County Highway Delivery Plan Projects that fulfill or enhance projects named in the approved Measure A expenditure plan Projects that can realistically attain sufficient funding to achieve completion of a usable segment Projects with the potential to minimize Measure A contributions Eligibility for "restrictive" funding sources Economic benefit to the region due to the constructed traffic improvement Group 1 Fully Funded: Part of the 2019-2029 Delivery Plan COMPLETE BUILD START Group 2 91 CIP Completion 1-15 ELP Completion 15/91 Express Lanes Connector SR-60 Truck Lanes Design -Build RCTC $ (in millions $) Design -Build RCTC Design -Build RCTC Construction RCTC Mid -County Parkway: Placentia Interchange at 1-215 Construction RCTC 91 Pachappa UP Project: Railroad realignment Construction RCTC Mid County Parkway: Sweeney Grading Construction RCTC *71/91Interchange Construction RCTC 36 22 220 123 60 18 5 128 *SR-91 Corridor Operations Project (Westbound auxiliary lane: Green River to 241) Construction RCTC 40 * 1-15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension (Cajalco to 74): Advanced Operations 1-15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension (Cajalco to 74) * 1-15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension (Cajalco to 74) * 91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes Environmental through Construction Environmental RCTC RCTC 28 33 Design -Build phase 1 RCTC 24 Environmental RCTC 22 (in millions $) X X X X X n/a (project closeout) X X X X n/a (project closeout) X X X X X X MEDIUM X X X X X MEDIUM X X X X X MEDIUM X X X X X n/a (railroad constr.) X X X X n/a (no lane const.) X X X X X X MEDIUM X X X X X HIGH X X X X X MEDIUM X X X X X n/a (no lane const.) X X X X X n/a (no lane const.) X X X n/a (no lane const.) Group Total * = project (or project phase) fully -funded based on the June FFI Committee Innovative Financing Opportunities staff report recommendations and potential July 2019 Board approval Note: The June FFI Committee Innovative Financing Opportunities staff report estimated between $228M and $467M of proceeds available, use of $241M of proceeds are assumed above Partial Funding Likely Available: Part of the 2019-2029 Delivery Plan Group 3 Mid County Parkway: Right of Way and Environmental Mitigation Mid -County Parkway: Package 2 Mid County Parkway: I-215 Project, Nuevo to Alessandro 1-15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension (Cajalco to 74) 60/215 Riverside -Moreno Valley Express Lanes 60/215 Riverside -Moreno Valley Express Lanes 60/215 Riverside -Moreno Valley Express Lanes 1-215 Gap Project (1-215 to French Valley Parkway) 91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes Partner Agency Projects: Assist with Funding in 2019-2029 ROW/Environmental Design/Construction RCTC RCTC Design/Construction RCTC Design -Build phase 2 construction RCTC Environmental RCTC 757 $ 40 84 145 470 38 Design/Construction RCTC 342 Environmental to Construction RCTC 18 Group 4 Lake Elsinore: I-15/Railroad Canyon Interchange (fully funded) RCTLMA: Cajalco Road Corridor Temecula: French Valley Parkway Phase 2 Not Part of 2019-2029 Delivery Plan: RCTC Projects Design/Construction Construction RCTC Group Total $ Lake Elsinore 197 1,335 36 Environmental to Construction County 452 Group 5 Mid County Parkway: Packages 3 and thereafter 79 Realignment 1-15 Corridor (SR-74 to 215/15interchange) SR-91 Corridor Ultimate Project: SR-91 Corridor Ultimate Proj.: 2035 (EB & WB general purpose lanes: 71 to 241) SR-91 Corridor Ultimate Proj.: 2035 (EB & WB general purpose lanes: I-15 to Pierce) 1-10 Truck Climbing Lane 1-15 Corridor (215/15 interchange to San Diego County line) SR-71 Widening 10/60Interchange 215 Ultimate widening (60 to San Bernardino County line) 60Jurupa Valley -Riverside Express Lanes Managed Freeway Projects Not Part of 2019-2029 Delivery Plan: Partner Agency Projects SBCTA: 15 Express Lanes RCTLMA: Ethanac Corridor Temecula: French Valley Parkway Phase 3 Environmental to Construction Environmental to Construction Design/ROW to Construction Project Study to Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental to Construction Project Study to Environmental Environmental to Construction Environmental to Construction Environmental to Construction Environmental Pilot Project Environmental to Construction Temecula Group Total $ RCTC $ RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC Group Total SBCTA Environmental to Construction County Environmental to Construction Temecula 120 608 800 1,300 35 50 25 75 35 100 500 1,000 51 50 4,022 N/A N/A N/A 757 $125-$525 $36-$1oo X X X X n/a (no lane const.) X X X X HIGH X X HIGH X X X X MEDIUM X X X X n/a (no lane const.) X X X HIGH X X X n/a X X HIGH X X X MEDIUM X X HIGH X MEDIUM X X X HIGH X X MEDIUM X X X X n/a (no lane const.) X X X X n/a (no lane const.) X X X X n/a (no lane const.) X X X n/a X X X n/a (no lane const.) X X MEDIUM X X MEDIUM X MEDIUM X X n/a (no lane const.) n/a (benefit unknown) X n/a (cost unknown) n/a (cost unknown) n/a (cost unknown) Group Total N/A $ June 24, 2019 280 1 \ wri Riverside 2019-2029 Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Pla rhino Hills `Elt ■ ■ Ontario SAN BERNARDINO CO. Jurupa Valley IVERSIDE CO.: Eastvale i /Lid. pp~ 11 m 10 Corona 241 0 i i i Norco i i i .1 i SAN DIEGO CO. Lake Matthews i RIVERSIDE CO. 5 10 Miles Moreno Valley Perris +F1:7 Canyon ' Lake Wildomar Murrieta ake erris Menifee iidAttachment 2 \alimesa 10 FULLY FUNDED Phase Sponsor O 0 0 0 0 O 10 m Banning / Beaumont •; 3 Er �� Err 2ST--- ' San Jacinto Diam•nd Valley Lake Vail `Lake 91 CIP Completion 15 ELP Completion 15/91 Express Lanes Connector 60 Truck Lanes Mid -County Parkway: Placentia Interchange at 215 91 Pachappa UP Project: Railroad Realignment Mid County Parkway: Sweeney Grading 15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension 91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes 71/91 Interchange 91 Corridor Operations Project 15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension - Advanced Operations Design -Build Design -Build Design -Build Construction Construction Construction Construction Environmental/ Design -Build Phase 1 Environmental Construction Construction Environmental to Construction RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC PARTIAL FUNDING AVAILABLE Phase Sponsor m m m Mid County Parkway: Right of Way and Environmental Mitigation Mid County Parkway: Package 2 15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension 60/215 Riverside -Moreno Valley Express Lanes 215 Gap Project Mid County Parkway: 215 Project, Nuevo to Alessandro 91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes ROW/Environmental Design/Construction Design -Build Phase 2 Construction Environmental/ Design/ Construction Environmental to Construction Design/Construction Design/Construction RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC ASSIST WITH FUNDING - PARTNERS 20 Lake Elsinore: 15/Railroad Canyon Interchange (Fully Funded) RCTLMA: Cajalco Road Corridor Temecula: French Valley Parkway Phase 2 NO ACTION - RCTC 30 Mid County Parkway: Packages 3 and thereafter 79 Realignment 15 Corridor (SR-74/Central to 1-215) 91 Corridor Ultimate Project: 71 to 241 91 Corridor Ultimate Project: 15 to Pierce Street 10 Truck Climbing Lane 15 Corridor (1-215 to County Line) 71 Widening 10/60 Interchange Cl 215 Ultimate Widening 32 NO ACTION - PARTNERS el SBCTA: 15 Express Lanes Ci RCTLMA: Ethanac Corridor ® Temecula: French Valley Parkway Phase 3 60 Jurupa Valley -Riverside Express Lanes Phase Construction Environmental to Construction Environmental to Construction Environmental to Construction Design/Right of Way to Construction Project Study to Environmental Environmental Project Study Environmental to Construction Project Study to Environmental Environmental to Construction Environmental to Construction Environmental to Construction Environmental Phase Environmental to Construction Environmental to Construction Environmental to Construction Sponsor Lake Elsinore County Temecula RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC RCTC Sponsor SBCTA County Temecula June 24, 2019 AGENDA ITEM 13 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee SUBJECT: Countywide Transportation Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan and Ordinance FUTURE FUNDING INITIATIVES AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize staff to develop a Countywide Transportation Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan and implementation ordinance for potential presentation to Riverside County voters in November 2020; 2) Authorize the Executive Director to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 18-15-086-01, an amendment to Agreement No. 18-15-086-00, pursuant to legal counsel review, with AlphaVu for an additional amount not to exceed $3.85 million to enhance the Public Engagement Program to include a Countywide Transportation Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan and implementation ordinance; 3) Approve an increase of an amount not to exceed $1,997,500 in FY 2019/20 expenditures to accommodate the enhancement of the Public Engagement Program; and 4) Sponsor any legislation necessary to clarify its authorizing statutes to implement a voter - approved sales tax measure. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee (Committee) voted 10-2 on June 24, 2019 to recommend Commission approval of the above actions. Prior to the vote, the Committee reviewed and approved recommendations on three other related items assigned to the Committee by the Commission: • The required decennial review of the current Measure A expenditure plan; • The 2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan; and • An innovative financing strategy to advance Western County highway projects with 91 Express Lanes surplus toll revenue. The Commission at its Annual Workshop on January 31, 2019 delegated all four items to the Committee with a mandate to make recommendations to the Commission no later than July 2019. All four items pertain to the status and future outlook of the Commission's ability to address transportation and quality of life needs in Riverside County. The Commission charged the Committee with assessing challenges and proposing priorities and solutions. The Committee Agenda Item 13 282 met three times after the Annual Workshop, engaging in substantial deliberations and requesting detailed information from staff and consultants. After reviewing the status of the current Measure A expenditure plan and available resources for the next decade, the Committee discussed the need for: • Improvements to traffic flow beyond what can be achieved with current funding levels; • Infrastructure that promotes economic benefits including local employment growth and minimizes commute distances and times; • Improvements to state and federal approval processes; • Expeditious delivery of transportation projects; • Local control and understanding of transportation funding decisions in Riverside County; • Overall quality of life improvement for Riverside County residents; and • Options to present to the public of Riverside County to improve transportation. To address these concerns in a meaningful way, the Committee deliberated the merits of proceeding to the next step toward proposing a transportation improvement plan funded by a half -cent sales tax to Riverside County voters in the November 2020 general election. The Commission possesses legal authority to implement such a plan and accompanying tax if approved by two-thirds of the Riverside County electorate. Such a measure could generate between $3-6 billion countywide over the next thirty years, all of which would be under the control of local government and outside of state or federal coffers. If approved by two-thirds of voters, the half -cent sales tax would be exempt from the State of California's statutory cap on local sales taxes, thereby maintaining capacity for other local governments interested in proposing their own jurisdiction -specific revenue measures. Based on analysis by Commission staff and consultants over the last three years, there are no other funding mechanisms available to the Commission that can reliably achieve the level of investment in Riverside County's transportation system required to meet the Committee members' objectives. The Commission has been transparent about its exploration of a new local funding measure since 2016. The issue has been discussed in multiple approved Commission staff reports, legislation approved by the State Legislature and Governor, and covered in local media outlets. Public Opinion Research & Results The Committee further grounded its recommendation upon public opinion research conducted under its oversight between April and June 2019. The research firm Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Metz (FM3) assessed Riverside County voters' attitudes toward a potential transportation improvement plan and sales tax. FM3 convened focus groups of Riverside County voters followed by a countywide transportation issues survey of likely voters. FM3, staff, and legal counsel developed the research instruments in accordance with best practices and the law. Results demonstrate that nearly 80 percent of Riverside County voters perceive a need for additional transportation funding. According to the survey, after receiving educational Agenda Item 13 283 information about a potential countywide transportation improvement plan, approximately two- thirds of likely voters in the November 2020 general election would vote in favor of a sales tax to fund the plan. A majority of likely 2020 voters within every sub -region of the county expressed support for a ballot measure, even after hearing hypothetical opposing arguments. Local control and benefit of all funds was the paramount priority expressed by survey respondents. Additionally, voters countywide expressed strong support for using funds to improve traffic flow; maintaining local roads; keeping infrastructure in good condition; repairing potholes; creating local jobs; accelerating completion of freeway upgrade projects; and reinforcing infrastructure from flooding, earthquakes, and natural hazards. Distinct regional preferences also emerged in the survey results. For example, Coachella Valley voters most strongly supported funding for daily passenger train service between the desert and Riverside, Orange, and Los Angeles Counties. Reducing bottlenecks and safety concerns on 1-10, SR-111, and SR-86 was the second most important improvement identified by Coachella Valley voters. In western Riverside County, voters most preferred adding at least one lane to 1-10, 1-15, 1-215, SR-60, SR-71, and SR-91. Improving on- and off -ramps and bridges (interchanges) at freeways was the second most favored "project" for voters in western Riverside County. Across the county, voters expressed significant concern for aging of the county's infrastructure and the need to perform adequate maintenance. Accountability of transportation funds through independent financial audits and a public oversight committee was also a major priority for survey respondents countywide. Particularly in western Riverside County, population growth registered as a driving factor in support for raising additional funding for a transportation improvement plan. Western Riverside County voters' most important reason for supporting funding for a transportation improvement plan is to save time on their long commutes. In the Coachella Valley, voters were strongly interested in ensuring the plan would invest in mobility options for senior citizens to retain their independence and reduce the burden on their families and caregivers. Additionally, Coachella Valley voters insisted on local return and control of any sales tax revenues within their area of the county. FM3 also modeled the likely outcome of a 2020 vote in the March Primary and November General elections. Survey results and schedule practicalities reveal that a November vote is more feasible. Agenda Item 13 284 Conclusions The Committee found that the research results present a quantifiable rationale for the Commission to advance into the next stage of work toward a potential ballot measure. The survey results provide sufficient information to serve as a launching point for development of a draft transportation improvement plan, implementing ordinance, and further research and public engagement. Committee members debated the likelihood of whether a ballot measure would pass and whether passage would be impacted by other municipal ballot measures in 2020 (and whether a Commission -sponsored measure would impact municipal measures). Committee members concluded that the Commission has a responsibility to educate the public and engage with them further on the choices facing Riverside County when it comes to addressing transportation challenges. Committee members also expressed that the public should ultimately be empowered to make a decision on transportation plans and funding. Committee members emphasized the need for strategic, honest, and accurate communications with the public. Further, the Committee concluded that the state and federal governments are unlikely to assist Riverside County to the extent needed and that it was important for the Commission to develop its own strategy reflective of local understanding and priorities. Next Steps The Commission does not need to commit to placing a measure on the November 2020 general election ballot at this time. Based on the California Elections Code, the deadline for such an action will be no later than the first week of August 2020. Pragmatically, this means that in June or July of 2020 the Commission could vote on adoption of a final transportation improvement plan and implementing ordinance. Upon Commission approval at that time, the Commission would also need to request that the Riverside County Board of Supervisors adopt a resolution setting the measure for election. Prior to final action, the Commission will have interim opportunities to provide direction to staff and review additional research. To create a viable plan and ordinance ready for Commission approval and voter consideration next year, technical plan development and public engagement activities must commence immediately. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the Commission authorize staff to undertake all necessary activities to develop a Countywide Transportation Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan and implementation ordinance. The Commission does not meet in August and delaying action until September would stall the team's efforts by two months out of the eleven months remaining before the Commission may consider whether to place a measure on the November 2020 ballot. Concurrently, Commission staff will begin development of a draft plan. Agenda Item 13 285 Additionally, it is advisable that legal counsel carefully review the Commission's existing authorizing statutes and ensure that the Commission's eventual plans are harmonious with its state laws. If legal counsel advises that clarity in the law would be helpful, the Committee recommends the Commission sponsor clean-up legislation to achieve such clarity. Plan Development The Commission's first Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) is in final stages of development. Staff anticipates submitting the LRTP to the Commission for approval in the fall of 2019. The LRTP will provide a high-level review of all currently planned transportation projects and funding opportunities available. Completion of the LRTP provides a natural transition to development of an transportation improvement plan to present to the public. Plan development can commence immediately using the existing resources from Commission staff and Bechtel Infrastructure, the Commission's capital program manager. It will take several months to create a draft plan. It is critical that the draft plan be based on reasonable and justifiable assumptions, objective needs, and input from a variety of stakeholders. No draft will be perfect in its first iteration and therefore the Commission will want ample time and process for review and amendments. The first draft will likely be available for public release in late fall or early winter. Public Engagement The Commission's Public Engagement Program is a metrics -based approach to communications. The Commission's External Affairs department, with the assistance of AlphaVu, delivers multi- faceted two-way communication between the Commission and residents. Public engagement will allow the Commission to refine the list of projects and programs to be funded by a sales tax measure. Additionally, public engagement provides openness and transparency to government decision -making on this topic of high import. The Committee proposes that the program be significantly enhanced using the same performance -driven approach that has been successful to date. In the year since this program began, results have exceeded goals set forth in the base contract. Quantity of direct engagements with Riverside County residents has far surpassed established goals. Reach of the Commission's "annual report" (framed as the #RebootMyCommute initiative) has also exceeded minimum thresholds established by the Commission. Meanwhile, overall public sentiment toward the Commission has remained quantifiably positive. The program is within budget for the currently established goals and scope. Given the transformative implications of the Commission potentially submitting a transportation improvement plan to voters, staff recommends the Commission commit approximately $3.85 million to the effort. The enhanced program will build on the foundation of successful work performed by AlphaVu and staff's data -driven, results -oriented management philosophy. The size and diversity of Riverside County drive staff's recommendation for this level of investment. Most of the likely expenses of direct public engagement with a county of this size will be direct costs for items such as educational mailings, multi -media advertisements requesting feedback, Agenda Item 13 286 and a physical presence within communities including at local events and civic organizations. A proposed budget, scope, and high-level schedule are included as Attachment 1 to this staff report. The Committee recommends that the Commission authorize the Executive Director to negotiate and execute an amendment to Agreement No. 18-15-086-00 with AlphaVu for an additional amount not to exceed $3.85 million. Implementation Ordinance Following the development of a transportation improvement plan and the expanded Public Engagement Program, staff will assess the information gathered and develop an implementation ordinance for the transportation improvement plan. Legal counsel and staff will draft an ordinance with assistance from Bechtel, AlphaVu, and other consultants, as necessary. At a later date, staff may request Commission consideration for any contract amendments or budget assessments to complete this task, or use the Executive Director's single signature authority if appropriate under the Commission's procurement policies. Preliminary Proposed Schedule As discussed above, this effort to develop a transportation improvement plan and implementing ordinance along with an enhanced Public Engagement Program includes several interim steps before placing a sales tax measure on the November 2020 ballot. If approved by the Commission, these steps include: July 10, 2019 Commission action July 11, 2019 Begin developing Plan and Ordinance Notice to Proceed to AlphaVu for Phase 1 of enhanced Public Engagement Program July 2019 - May 2020 Development of transportation improvement plan, including public and stakeholder review, revisions, and thorough communications and engagement activities. Additional public opinion research to inform the Commission's final decision. Interim reports to the Commission on status of the plan, ordinance, and public engagement, with opportunities for Commissioners to provide direction along the way, as warranted. June —July 2020 Review of final research and Commission consideration of adopting the final transportation improvement plan, implementation ordinance. If the plan and ordinance are adopted, the Commission must request that the Riverside County Board of Supervisors call a hearing to pass a resolution calling for an election on the plan as part of the November 2020 general election. Agenda Item 13 287 Notice to Proceed to AlphaVu for Phase 2 of enhanced Public Engagement Program Even if the Commission ultimately decides not to place a measure on the 2020 ballot, the plan development process and public engagement efforts will have valuable independent utility to the Commission and residents of Riverside County. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff did not include any amounts in the FY 2019/20 Budget for the Phase 1 efforts discussed above. Accordingly, the Committee recommends the Commission approve an increase of an amount not to exceed $1,997,500 in FY 2019/20 expenditures to accommodate the enhancement of the Public Engagement Program. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No N/A Year: FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21+ Amount: $1,997,500 $1,852,500 Source of Funds: Measure A, Local Transportation Funds, and other administration cost allocation sources Budget Adjustment: Yes N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 001001 65520 00000 0001 101 15 65520 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \I-ke/Ledz:4, Date: June 20, 2019 Attachments: Draft Agreement No. 18-15-086-01 with AlphaVu Agenda Item 13 288 Agreement No. 18-15-086-01 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROGRAM SE WITH ALPHAVU 1 PARTIES AND DATE This Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Publi► .agement Progra ces is made and entered into as of , 201 • and between the RIV COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ommissio) and ALP ("Contractor"), a Delaware limited liability comp 2. RECITALS 2.1 Commission and Con July 24, 2018 for P Agreement"). 2.2 The parties now desire to the Public Engagement Countyw' •ortation add c• sa .r the ad 2.3 for have enters o an agreement dated ement Pro • services (the "Master etermined ent in order to enhance related the development of a ement & Traffic Relief Plan (Plan) and to al services. the services require two phases of 2.3a .t phase includes research, public education and engagement es related to the Plan as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached to this ent (Phase 1). Services included under Phase 1 will be by the Commission under Notice to Proceed 1 (NTP1). ces shall not commence until Consultant has received P1 from Commission. e second phase includes public education and engagement rvices related to the Plan and implementing ordinance (Phase 2). hase 2 Services are set forth in Exhibit "A" attached to this Amendment. Services included under Phase 2 are not guaranteed and will be authorized by the Commission under Notice to Proceed 2 (NTP2). Phase 2 Services shall not commence until Consultant has received a formal NTP2 from Commission. 17336.02109\32072977.2 289 3. TERMS 3.1 The Scope of Services for the Master Agreement shall be amended to include Services, as that term is defined in the Master Agreement, required to provide an enhanced Public Engagement Program relat= • the Plan for Phase 1 and Phase 2, as more fully describe• xhibit "A" attached to this Amendment and incorporated herein b ence. 3.2 Consultant shall perform the Services in accordan -rms of the Master Agreement and with the schedule includ- xhibi tached to this Amendment No. 1 and incorporated here' •y reference. 3.3 The maximum compensation for Seryperformed pursuant is Amendment shall not exceed Three Eight Hundred Fifty Tho Dollars ($3,850,000). Work shall • -rformed - rates set forth in Exhibit "B" attached to this Am: -nt an• orporated herein by reference. 3.4 Except as amended b this Amendmen Agreement, including limitation th provisions, shall remai d effect a of the parties under this 3.5 This Amendment shall be Venue s verside 3.6 This c ay be si rovisions of the Master emnity and insurance II govern the actions y the of the State of California. in counterparts, each of which shall ignatures on following page] 290 SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT NO. 18-15-086-01 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, for good and valuable consideration w acknowledged, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment on th above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Anne Mayer, Executive Director APPROVED AS B Krie e Riv County Its: Comm .n ALPHA is hereby first herein Title Attest: By: tore e signatures of two corporate officers. One sig - that of the chairman of board, the president or any vice president and the second signature est line) shall be that of the secretary, any assistant secretary, the chief financial officer or any assistreasurer of such corporation. If the above persons are not the intended signators, evidence of signature authority shall be provided to the Commission. 291 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF WORK/SCHEDULE ',VIEWING THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC OPINION ALPHIAVU MillI 110 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Statement of Wor' and Service, for Enhanced Public En_, cler .ant Program RCTC June 2019 293 294 2 Summary In order to enhance RCTC's outreach efforts under the existing Public Engagement Program, AlphaVu proposes additional budget for contractor services and advertising costs. This additional activity will be carried out in two phases, each corresing with RCTC's fiscal years. The purpose of the enhanced Public Engagement Program is to fulf ommission's directive to communicate with Riverside County residents regard •rtation improvement plan that could be proposed to voters for a decisi. 2020. -ffort builds upon Goal #4 in the base contract for the Public Eng. ent Program. Contractor Services With this enhanced program, AlphaVu and the foilctors will provide the services listed below throughout both phases of the • Rapid Constituent Response (A aVu) • Community Group Outreach ( ociates) • Multi-Media/Graphic Design (T • Strategic/Message Consulting ( • Media and Press Engagement (G • Website Design ' ction (0 • Polling & Fo oup 3) • Tele-Tow Meeting -le-Town • Video -nt Creatio ird Story • Comm Broadcast Newspapers isplay Ads lic Tr • dition. •,et for the following advertising modes: (TV & Radio) Spaces irect Mail AlphaVu m. propose additional modes for advertising and will seek RCTC approval for adding those modes to the program. AlphaVu will be mindful of the need for dual language (English and Spanish) communication throughout the program. 295 296 3 Program Phases and Activities Phase 1: July 2019 — June 30, 2020 Activity Estimated Tim' Collateral Material Will begin video and print production early in Phase 1 so that content will be available during message testing and advertising for the remainder of Phase 1. Summer-F 9 Research Will conduct polling with regional focus in summer 20 Will host focus groups to understand how resident process and understand complex transportatio . in fall. Will conduct final tracking poll in spring 202 determine whether to proceed to November 2020 b mmer-Fall 201 Spring 2020 Advertising Will focus on digital and radio in fall • expand to video and television in spring 2020. 12019-Spring 2020 Tele-Town Hall Meetings Will conduct first meeting in fall 2019 a - • meeting in spring 20 ► and tele- .II meeting will take p .ppr. .tely one th before the final trackin► 019-Spring 2020 Other Will include ra► sti ._ unity group outreach, . sign, strategic message coedia e ent, and website design. Ongoing throughout Phase 1 Phase 2: July - N ber, 2 ote: This phase nclude all services carried out in Phase 1, except for polling and s group resear Ac Estimated Timing Collate al A second d of video production will occur for this phase to build upon the Phase 1 activity. Summer 2020 Advertising After a three-month hiatus, a significant public education Fall 2020 297 4 effort will begin in September 2020. Ads will run in fall 2020, providing the public with neutral, factual information regarding the potential ballot measure. During this time, constituents will be paying the most attention and the need for factual information will be greatest. Advertising modes will include newspapers, display ads, public transit spaces, and radio and television media to ensure a comprehensive outreach effort. A direct mailing also is planned for the fall. Tele-Town Hall Meetings Will conduct the third and fourth tele-town hall meeti mmer and Fall 2 Other Will continue to include rapid constituent respon community group outreach, graphic design, strateg message consulting, media engagement, and website design. Accountability All services provided the base contract to RCTC staff o extent possi RCTC Commi this work. Alpha including but not li an• • stat requi ong Riversi ublic Engageme mmunications fr • ity Ong throughout Phase 2 nhanced , am will adhere to the same standards in gageme ogram. This includes bi-weekly reports ch effort ing on quantitative metrics to the ist RCTC stcreating a quarterly report to the ommissioners and the public regarding ue to og- . :ccording to the highest ethical standards, conducting regular reviews of privacy protection protocols e egarding public education work. RCTC approval of content ore it ributed to the public. Further, recognizing the interest my re s in discussing transportation issues, the enhanced ogram i ludes additional resources for "rapid response" to RCTC constituents. As the rogram develops, AlphaVu will work with RCTC to adapt schedules, sequenc ents, sub -contractor assignments, and line -item budgets as needed. 298 EXHIBIT "B" COMPENSATION 299 EXHIBIT "B" COMPENSATION SUMMARY' FIRM ADDITIONAL PROJECT TASKS/ROLE COST Prime Consultant: AlphaVu Rapid Constituent Response 59,945 Sub Consultants: TBWB Strategic/Message Consulting, Direct Mail, Graphic Design 204,000 Arellano Associates Public Events 89,975 Third Story Video Content Creation 75,000 OH Partners Website Design & Construction 55,120 Tele Town Hall Tele Town Hall Events 12,000 FM3 Polls and Focus Groups 262,000 Gale Hammons Media and Press Engagement 9,380 TBD Community/Stakeholder Engagem ,000 ODC - Advertising Display Ads, Newspaper Printin Transit Ads, an ing 144,740 ODC - Direct Mail Direct Mail 325,000 ODC - Broadcast Media TV and Radio 2,342,840 TAL COSTS $ 3,850,000 BBy Phase PHASE COST Phase 1 Rapid inquire se, broadc. . ads, ne paper printing, printin. egic mess • ail, graphic design, public e video reatio 'esign and construction, tele . all- groups ad regi. al sruvey earch, press an. 4agement, community stakeholder ement. $ 1,997,497 Phase 2 nquire respon- :ds, newspape ng, direct mail, . n, website design . -.'. engagement, c, adcast media, display ads, public g, printing, strategic message design, public events, video content nstruction, tele town halls, press .nity stakeholder engagement. $ 1,852,503 TOTAL COSTS $ 3,850,000 ' Commission authorization pertains tt the maximution author Tact award amount. Compensation adjustments between consultants and phases may occur; however, not be exceeded. 300 AGENDA ITEM 14 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Coachella Festival Special Events Train Platform Development Project BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 19-25-103-00 with the California State Transportation Agency (CaISTA) regarding a State Rail Assistance (SRA) grant to fund the Coachella Festival Special Event Train Platform Development Project (Platform Project) for an amount not to exceed $5,942,510; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 19-012, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding Authorization for the Execution of the Certifications and Assurances and Authorized Agent Forms for the State Rail Assistance"; 3) Adopt Resolution No. 19-013, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding Authorization for the Execution of the State Rail Assistance Project"; 4) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Agreement No. 19-25-102-00 with Los Angeles — San Diego — San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor (LOSSAN) and Amtrak for the coordination and development of the Platform Project; 5) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to negotiate and execute the final CaISTA and MOU agreements on behalf of the Commission; 6) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to negotiate and execute a cooperative agreement with Amtrak for construction of the Platform Project based on estimated costs established by the Commission and within the Platform Project budget estimated at $8,688,241; and 7) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to negotiate and execute agreements with LOSSAN, the city of Indio (City), Goldenvoice, Valley Music Travel, and host railroads, as may be needed for the full implementation of the Platform Project, provided that all such agreements are within the Platform Project budget estimated at $8,688,241. Agenda Item 14 301 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In close cooperation with Caltrans and the Federal Rail Administration, the Commission has been actively engaged in the development of a Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Service Development Plan for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor. Production of the program level EIS is intended as the first step in the investigation toward the provision of daily round trip passenger rail service between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley. This corridor has limited transit connectivity with the Los Angeles basin and currently has no intercity rail service. On a related yet stand-alone effort, the Commission has been supporting efforts to provide for the operation of a Special Event Train for the annual Coachella Music and Arts and Stagecoach Festivals (Festivals). With Interstate 10 as the sole major corridor to access the Coachella Valley, the Festivals have a significant impact on mobility both for festival attendees and Coachella Valley residents. The Festivals attract in excess of 125,000 people each weekend they are held, leading to severe impacts on the quality of life and mobility for Coachella Valley residents. The Special Event Train will contribute to congestion relief along the 1-10 corridor through a reduction in vehicle miles traveled as well as vehicle emissions and greenhouse gases, making for an improved experience for both residents and festival attendees. For several years staff has been coordinating with LOSSAN, Amtrak, the host railroads, and the concert promoter to determine the best possible alternative to allow for operation of special trains for the Festivals. Through these discussions, it was determined that one of the major obstacles to operating these trains was the need for a separate train track and station platform in the City. This would allow passengers to safely unload and not impact freight train operations in the process. In January 2019, the Commission applied for SRA funding through CaISTA to complete a Special Event Train platform at the City's Transportation Center near the Empire Polo Club where the Festivals are held. In March 2019, CaISTA announced that the Platform Project was awarded SRA capital funding in the amount of $5,942,510. The Platform Project will also be funded with $2,745,731 in previously awarded Proposition 18 funds to meet the total anticipated Platform Project capital cost of $8,688,241. The Platform Project has an aggressive goal to complete the work prior to the April 2020 festival season. As required by the SRA grant guidelines, staff requests approval of two resolutions to authorize use of the funds for the Platform Project. Resolution No. 19-012 relates to certifications and assurances and authorized agents for the SRA funding. Resolution No. 19-013 relates to the execution of the SRA grant. In addition, staff requests approval of the draft SRA grant agreement (Attachment 3) and authorization for the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to negotiate and execute the final agreement with CaISTA. The Platform Project scope is intended to be a simple, yet useful design that will allow for quick construction of a temporary 10-train car platform. It will also include the turnout off the Agenda Item 14 302 mainline, track, ties, ballast, sub -ballast, and drip pan panel. Ancillary work will include asphalt paving for passengers to safely access shuttle buses to transport them to the Festivals. Commission staff already initiated the platform and track design utilizing an on -call engineering consultant, with the goal of having the design ready in the next couple of months. In order for the Platform Project to be successful, it will take significant cooperation from several partner agencies. Staff is working closely with LOSSAN and Amtrak to move the Platform Project forward and seeks approval of an initial MOU with these agencies to ensure cooperation and define roles. The draft MOU prepared by the Commission is included as Attachment 4. In the future, a more extensive cooperative agreement with Amtrak will be necessary to defined roles regarding construction and to transfer grant funds to Amtrak for reimbursement of construction and support activities. LOSSAN is supporting the Platform Project by taking the lead in train operation discussions with the host railroads. It has the funding in its budget to operate the train service after the platform is constructed. Amtrak is the train operator under contract to LOSSAN and will run the service. It is currently planned that Amtrak will construct the track and platform in close coordination with the host railroads. In addition, future agreements may be needed with the host railroads for site access and construction and maintenance for the track and infrastructure. Staff is also working with the City, as the City recently approved the station site as its preferred location as part of its Multi -Modal Feasibility Study. It is likely that the City will be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the facility. Staff is also coordinating with Valley Music Travel, an entity that works closely with the concert promoter, Goldenvoice, to discuss shuttle transportation, train marketing and ticketing. All parties are working together to advance this Platform Project with the hope of having it ready by 2020. Staff will continue to provide updates as the process continues. In light of the aggressive timing goals for the Platform Project implementation, staff requests advance authority for the Executive Director to negotiate and execute agreements, as may be necessary or beneficial and pursuant to legal counsel review, with all or some of the above - referenced entities for the purpose of full project implementation. The foregoing authority will be limited to agreements that, cumulatively, are within the total Platform Project budget currently estimated at $8,688,241. Funding received from this grant is included in the final Fiscal Year 2019/20 budget. Additionally, the Platform Project is included in the Coachella Valley Rail FY 2019/20 Short Range Transit Plan. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2019/20 Amount: $5,942,510 Source of Funds: CaISTA SRA Grant Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 454000 415 41510 0000 245 25 41501 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \lie4Li, Date: 06/17/2019 Agenda Item 14 303 Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 19-012 2) Resolution No. 19-013 3) Draft SRA Agreement 4) Draft LOSSAN/Amtrak Agreement Agenda Item 14 304 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 19-012 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGARDING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES AND AUTHORIZED AGENT FORMS FOR THE STATE RAIL ASSISTANCE Coachella Festival Special Event Train Platform Development Project - $5,942,510 WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission is an eligible project sponsor and may receive state funding from State Rail Assistance (SRA) for transit projects; and WHEREAS, the statutes related to state -funded transit projects require a local or regional implementing agency to abide by various regulations; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1 (2017) named the California State Transportation Agency (CaISTA) as the administrative agency for the SRA; and WHEREAS, CaISTA has developed guidelines for the purpose of administering and distributing SRA funds to eligible project sponsors such as the Riverside County Transportation Commission; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission wishes to delegate authorization to execute these documents and any amendments thereto to Anne Mayer, Executive Director. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission that the fund recipient agrees to comply with all conditions and requirements set forth in the Certification and Assurances and the Authorized Agent documents and applicable statutes, regulations and guidelines for all SRA funded transit projects. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Anne Mayer, Executive Director be authorized to execute all required documents of the SRA program and any Amendments thereto with the CaISTA. AGENCY BOARD DESIGNEE: APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of July 2019. 305 Chuck Washington, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission _y 7' 306 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. 19-013 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGARDING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE STATE RAIL ASSISTANCE PROJECT: Coachella Festival Special Event Train Platform Development Project - $5,942,510 WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission is an eligible project sponsor and may receive state funding from State Rail Assistance (SRA) now or sometime in the future for transit projects; and WHEREAS, the statutes related to state -funded transit projects require a local or regional implementing agency to abide by various regulations; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1 (2017) named the California State Transportation Agency (CaISTA) as the administrative agency for SRA; and 4 WHEREAS, CaISTA has developed guidelines for the purpose of administering and distributing SRA funds to eligible project sponsors (local agencies); and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission wishes to implement the SRA project listed above, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission that the fund recipient agrees to comply with all conditions and requirements set forth in the applicable statutes, regulations and guidelines for all SRA funded transit projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission that it hereby authorizes the submittal of the following project nomination and allocation request to CaISTA in FY 2017-18 SRA funds: 307 Project Name: Coachella Festival Special Event Train Platform Development Project Amount of SRA funds requested: $5,942,510 Short description of project: Provide a special events platform and tracks in the city of Indio to allow for trains to carry passengers to various music festivals and events. Contributing Sponsors (if applicable): N/A AGENCY BOARD DESIGNEE: APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of July 2019. Chuck Washington, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 308 ATTACHMENT 3 State of California California State Transportation Agency GRANT AGREEMENT Grant Number SRA 2019-5 1. GRANT TITLE Coachella Valley Special Event Train Platform, Indio CA 2. NAME OF RECIPIENT AGENCY (GRANTEE) Riverside County Transportation Commission 3. Grant Period From: 03/18/2019 To: 06/30/2021 4. AGENCY TO ADMINISTER GRANT California State Transportation Agency (CaISTA) 5. GRANT DESCRIPTION The award funds the design for Coachella Valley Special Event Train Platform, obtain the appropriate permits from the host railroad and to construct the platform. The special event platform will be designed to accommodate a 10-car set. Access to the platform will be accomplished by means of a new switch from the existing mainline track connecting to approximately 1,500 ft of new track, ties, ballast, and sub -ballast to create the spur to the platform. Other elements include a 40 feet drip pan panel and asphalt paving for passenger access to and from the City of Indio transit center and Indio Boulevard. 6. State Funds Allocated Under This Agreement Shall Not Exceed: $5,942,510 7. TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The parties agree to complywith the terms and conditions of this Agreement. We, the officials named below, hereby swear under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that we are duly authorized to legally bind the Grant recipient to the described Grant terms and conditions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties hereto. 8. APPROVAL SIGNATURES A. AUTHORIZING OFFICIAL OF RECIPIENT AGENCY B. AUTHORIZING OFFICIAL OF CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY NAME: Anne Mayer, PHONE: (951) 787-7920 NAME: Elissa Konove PHONE: (916) 323-5400 TITLE: Executive Director TITLE: Undersecretary, California State Transportation Agency (CaISTA) ADDRESS: 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor ADDRESS: 915 Capitol Mall, Suite 350B, Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Sacramento, CA 95814 EMAIL: amayer@rctc.org EMAIL: Elissa.Konove@calsta.ca.gov (Signature) (Date) (Signature) (Date) 1 I 5 309 State of California California State Transportation Agency GRANT AGREEMENT Grant Number SRA 2019-5 Page 2 1 5 310 State of California California State Transportation Agency GRANT AGREEMENT Grant Number SRA 2019-5 9. ACCOUNTING OFFICER, CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY NAME: CarolynVu ADDRESS: 2208 Kausen Drive, Suite 300 Elk Grove, CA 95758 10. PROJECTED EXPENDITURES Public Utility Code §99312.3 FUND CFDA ITEM/APPROPRIATION F.Y. CHAPTER STATUTE AUTHORIZED EXPENDITURES Public Transportation Fund NA 0521-601-0046 2017 86/2017 2017 $5,942,510 AGREEMENT TOTAL $8,688,241 AMOUNT ENCUMBERED BY THIS DOCUMENT $5,942,510 1 CERTIFY upon my own personal knowledge that the budgeted funds are available for the period and purpose of the expenditure stated above. PRIOR AMOUNT ENCUMBERED FOR THIS AGREEMENT $0 ACCOUNTING O F F I C E R' S SIGNATURE DATE SIGNED TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED TO DATE $1,441,969 315 311 State of California California State Transportation Agency GRANT AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS Grant Number SRA 2019-5 1. BACKGROUND The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, Senate Bill (SB) 1 provides increased funding to maintain and improve California's transportation system. SB 1 directs funding specifically to commuter rail and intercity rail through Public Utility Code section 99312.3 which continuously appropriates the revenue received from a 0.5 percent sales tax on diesel fuel to State Rail Assistance. State Rail Assistance (SRA) projects benefit the public by improving rail service and maximizing the quality of the rail service in California, promoting connectivity, improving integration of intercity rail service, and efforts that have the greatest potential to grow rail ridership. 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Engineering, design and construction activities for the Coachella Festival special event train platform that will support special event passenger trains for improved passenger loading/unloading and baggage handling operations in Indio. 3. PROJECT DELIVERABLES • Final design for temporary station (platform) • Agreements with UPRR for site access_and track and platform construction. • Construction of the platform including; turnout, track, ties, ballast, sub -ballast, and drip pan panel. Ancillary work will also include asphalt paving for passenger access to and from the City of Indio Transportation Center and Indio Boulevard. Evidence of Deliverables completion to be verified through reporting, or upon request by CaISTA. 4. FUNDING SRA Funding Amount, $5,942,510, Other Project Funds $2,745,731, Total Project Amount, $8,688,241. Funds will be distributed by the State Controller to the Grantee and distributed quarterly, up to the SRA funding amount. The Grantee is responsible for the implementation of the project consistent with the funding plan submitted with allocation request and ensuring the all matching requirements are met. The Grantee is responsible for ensuring funds are only applied to approved expenditures in accordance with the guidelines. 5. PROJECT ADMINISTRATION: The Grantee shall comply with the State Rail Assistance Guidelines (October 13, 2017). The Grantee certifies that any required environmental documentation was complete before expending SRA funds on construction. The Grantee assures that project complies with Public Resources Code §21100 and §21150. The Grantee certifies that a dedicated bank account for SRA funds only will be established within 30 days of receipt of SRA funds. The Grantee certifies that when SRA funds are used for a transit capital project, that the project will be completed and remain in operation for its useful life. The Grantee certifies that it has the legal, financial, and technical capacity to carry out the project, including the safety and security aspects of that project. The Grantee certifies that they will notify CaISTA of pending litigation, dispute, or negative audit findings related to the project, before receiving an allocation of funds. 312 State of California California State Transportation Agency GRANT AGREEMENT Grant Number SRA 2019-5 Any interest the Grantee earns on SRA funds must be used only on approved SRA projects. The Grantee shall notify CaISTA within 60 days of any changes to the approved project with a Corrective Action Plan (CAP), subject to approval and acceptance by CaISTA Funds must be encumbered and liquidated within the time allowed under this agreement. The Grantee shall be responsible for complete performance of the work described in this award. All work shall be accomplished in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Public Utilities Code, the Government Code, and other applicable statutes and regulations. Failure to complete the funded work could require repayment of any or all funds, plus any interest earned, as determined by CaISTA. 6. REPORTING The Grantee shall comply with the Reporting Obligations defined in the SRA Guidelines. The Grantee is required to provide a Semi -Annual Progress Report on the activities and progress of this grant to ensure activities are performed timely, within approved scope and cost, and are achieving the intended purpose for which they are to be utilized. The Grantee must provide completed and signed progress reports every six months that covers information accrued from July 1st to December 31st and January 1st to June 30th. The reports will be due by February 15th and August 15th of each year the Grant Period, until the approved project is completed, and the final project report has been filed. Final Project Report shall be completed once the project has been completed. The Grantee must notify CaISTA by email or letter and submit a final project report within six months of completion. Please note, once an agency has received all SRA funding for a particular project, the project must be fully expended within four years. Corrective Action Plans shall be submitted to CaISTA for approval for any changes to the originally approved scope, schedule, or costs of the approved Allocation Request or the SRA Award. Agencies, with delinquent reports will NOT receive further State Rail Assistance allocations until reports have been received by CaISTA. 7. RECORD RETENTION The Grantee agrees and will assure that its contractors and subcontractors shall establish and maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate incurred project costs and matching funds by line item for the project. All accounting records and other supporting papers of the Grantee, its contractors and subcontractors connected with SRA funding shall be maintained for a minimum of three (3) years after the "Project Closeout" report, and shall be held open to inspection, copying, and audit by representatives of the State and the California State Auditor. Copies thereof will be furnished by the Grantee, its contractors, and subcontractors upon receipt of any request made by the State or its agents. In conducting an audit of the costs claimed, the State will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior audit of the Grantee pursuant to the provisions of federal and State law. In the absence of such an audit, any acceptable audit work performed by the Grantee's external and internal auditors may be relied upon and used by the State when planning and conducting additional audits. For the purpose of determining compliance with Title 21, California Code of Regulations, Section 2500 et seq., when applicable, and other matters connected with the performance of the Grantee's contracts with third parties pursuant to Government Code § 8546.7, the project sponsor, its contractors and subcontractors and the State shall each maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of such contracts, including, but not limited to, the costs of administering those various contracts. All of the above referenced parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during the entire project period and for three (3) years from the date of final payment. The State, the California State Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of the State, shall each have access to any books, records, and documents that are pertinent to a project for audits, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and the Grantee shall furnish copies thereof if requested Page515 313 State of California California State Transportation Agency GRANT AGREEMENT Grant Number SRA 2019-5 The Grantee, its contractors and subcontractors will permit access to all records of employment, employment advertisements, employment application forms, and other pertinent data and records by the State Fair Employment Practices and Housing Commission, or any other agency of the State of California designated by the State, for the purpose of any investigation to ascertain compliance with this document. 8. Special Situations The State may terminate the grant for any reason at any time if it is determined by the State, that there has been a violation of any State or federal law or policy by the Grantee during performance under this or any other grant agreement or contract entered into with the State. If the grant is terminated, the Grantee may be required to fully or partially repay funds The State may perform an audit and/or request detailed project information of the project sponsor's SRA funded projects at CaISTA' discretion at any time prior to the completion of the SRA funded project. Under extraordinary circumstances, The Grantee may terminate a project prior to completion. In the event the Grantee terminates a project prior to completion, the Grantee must (1) contact CaISTA in writing and after receipt of such notice; (2) pursuant to verification, submit a final report indicating the reason for the termination and demonstrating the expended funds were used on the intended purpose; (3) submit a request to reassign the funds to a new project within 180 days of termination. 9. OTHER PROVISIONS All obligations of State under the terms of this Agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the Legislature and the encumbrance of funds under this Agreement. All obligations of the Grantee under the terms of this Agreement are subject to authorization and allocation of resources by the Grantee. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this Agreement or affect the legal liability of either party to this Agreement by imposing any standard of care imposed by law. Neither State nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring or arising by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by the Grantee under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to the Grantee under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, the Grantee shall fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless the State of California, its officers, and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by the Grantee under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to the Grantee under this Agreement. Neither the Grantee nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage, or liability occurring or arising by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by State under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to State under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, State shall fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless the Grantee, its officers, and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind, and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by State under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to State under this Agreement. 10. This Agreement shall terminate on 06/30/2021 or upon receipt of all deliverables and the final report, whichever occurs first. Page 615 314 State of California California State Transportation Agency GRANT AGREEMENT Grant Number SRA 2019-5 FUND NUMBER CATALOG NUMBER FUND DESCRIPTION TOTAL AMOUNT 2019-5 SRA 2019-5 State Rail Assistance $5,942,510 The Grantee Agency officials named on the grant agreement, certify by way of signature on the grant agreement signature page, that the Grantee Agency complies with all applicable State rules, guidelines, policies and laws in effect with respect to the periods for which it receives grant funding. 715 315 ATTACHMENT 4 Agreement No. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AMONGST RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR AGENCY AND AMTRAK This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is made and entered into this day of 2019 by and amongst the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission"), the LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency ("LOSSAN") and the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, d/b/a Amtrak ("Amtrak"). Commission, LOSSAN and Amtrak are sometimes referred to herein individually as "Party", and collectively as the "Parties". RECITALS WHEREAS, the Coachella Valley Music Festival ("Coachella") and the Stagecoach Country Music Festival ("Stagecoach") are two of the largest events (collectively, the "Festivals") regularly held at the Empire Polo Club in the City of Indio, California ("Indio"), and the Festivals draw large crowds and create major traffic impacts. WHEREAS, the Commission has received a grant award from the California State Transportation Agency ("CaISTA") of over $5.9 million to fund the design and construction of a Coachella Valley Special Event Train Platform (the "Platform Project"). The Project includes obtaining the appropriate permits from the host railroad and construction of the platform, a 40 foot drip pan panel, drainage and oil separator tank construction, a water cabinet, electrical service, air compressor installation and a storage shed. Ancillary work will also include asphalt paving for passenger access to and from the City of Indio Transportation Center and Indio Boulevard. The Project will also be funded with approximately $2.7 million in Proposition 1 B funds received by the Commission from the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans"). WHEREAS, the CaISTA funding and the Caltrans Proposition 1 B funds are referred to herein as the "Grants". WHEREAS, the Commission desires to partner with other agencies and companies to complete the Platform Project, and to provide special round-trip rail service from Los Angeles Union Station to Indio and shuttle service to and from the rail station in Indio and the Festivals (the "Special Service") and to market the Special Service and the air quality benefits of alternative commute modes. 29253.00002\32118210.1 1 316 WHEREAS, the Platform Project and the Special Service are sometimes referred to herein, collectively, as the "Project". WHEREAS, the Parties desire to enter into this MOU to specify the mutual understandings of the Parties as relates to the Project. TERMS 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this MOU as though fully set forth herein. 2. Term. This MOU shall be effective as of the date first set forth above and shall continue in effect until terminated as provided herein. 3. Responsibilities of Commission. Commission agrees to the following related to the Project. a) To act as the lead agency for the design and environmental approval of the Platform Project, including utilizing existing on -call contracts for these services. b) To cause the services described in (a) above to be completed in accordance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations. c) To enter into agreements with CaISTA and Caltrans for the Grants, and to manage the Grants including, but not limited, processing reimbursement applications for eligible Grant funding. d) To provide Project management services. e) To coordinate the Platform Project and the Special Service with other applicable agencies. f) To negotiate the terms of a Cooperative Agreement with Amtrak, as further described in Section 5(b) below, in good faith. 4. Responsibilities of LOSSAN. LOSSAN agrees to the following related to the Project. a) To operate the Special Service through its contractor, Amtrak. b) To plan and fund the operation of the Special Service. c) To serve as the lead agency in negotiating train access with UPRR, and to work in good faith to obtain such access in a timely manner so as not to delay the Project. 29253.00002\32118210.1 2 317 d) To fund the efforts described in this section using its own funding sources including, but not limited to, any grants obtained by LOSSAN. 5. Responsibilities of Amtrak. AMTRAK agrees to the following related to the Project. a) To timely and safely operate the Special Service for LOSSAN, contingent on and in accordance with the terms of any existing or future agreement with LOSSAN for the Special Service. b) Contingent on and in accordance with the terms of a future cooperative agreement for the funding and construction of the Platform Project ("Cooperative Agreement") to be negotiated with the Commission, to serve as the lead entity for construction, including completion of all construction work with its own forces or using contractors. c) To negotiate the terms of the Cooperative Agreement with the Commission in good faith. d) In order to receive reimbursements under the Grants, to agree to comply with applicable Grant requirements, and to flow down such requirements to its contractors, as applicable. e) To coordinate with Union Pacific Railroad ("UPRR"), and obtain access rights to construct the Platform Project on UPRR railroad right of way, including, as needed, negotiation of a Construction and Maintenance ("C&M") agreement with UPRR and the City of Indio, as applicable, for construction and future maintenance of the Platform Project. 6. Mutual Responsibilities. Each Party agrees to the following related to the Project. a) Each Party will assign a qualified member of its staff to coordinate with the other Parties to facilitate the objectives of this MOU. b) The Parties will regularly consultant on strategies to facilitate the timely completion of the Project, within the Project budget. c) To make best efforts to help achieve Project completion by April, 2020. 7. General Provisions. 7.1. Withdrawal/Termination of MOU. In the event a Party defaults in the performance of its obligations under this MOU or breaches any of the provisions of this MOU, a non -defaulting Party shall have the option to withdraw from this MOU upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the other Parties. If two non -defaulting Parties provide 29253.00002\32118210.1 3 318 notice of an intent to withdraw from this MOU, this MOU shall terminate upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice from such Parties. This MOU may also be terminated upon mutual consent of all Parties. 7.2. Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this MOU shall be given to the respective Parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective Parties may provide in writing for this purpose: To Commission: To LOSSAN: To Amtrak Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, California 92502-2208 Attn: Anne Mayer, Executive Director AMayer@rctc.org Attn: [INSERT NAME, TITLE] [INSERT E-MAIL ADDRESS] Attn: [INSERT NAME, TITLE] [INSERT E-MAIL ADDRESS] y Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the Party at its applicable address. Notice may also be provided via electronic mail and shall be deemed made the date sent, provided that any notice sent via electronic mail shall also be sent by U.S. mail, per the requirements set forth in the foregoing sentence, within twenty-four (24) hours of the notice via electronic mail. Notice sent via electronic mail that is not followed by notice sent via U.S. mail, as required in this paragraph, shall not be considered notice for purposes of this MOU. 7.3. Governing Law. This MOU shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 7.4. Amendments. This MOU may be amended at any time by the mutual consent of the Parties by an instrument in writing; however, no amendments or other modifications of this MOU shall be binding unless executed in writing by all Parties hereto, or their respective successors or assigns. 7.5. Counterparts. This MOU may be executed and delivered in any number of counterparts, each of which, when executed and delivered shall be deemed an original 29253.00002\32118210.1 4 319 and all of which together shall constitute the same agreement. Facsimile signatures shall be considered originals. 29253.00002\32118210.1 5 320 SIGNATURE PAGE TO MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AMONGST RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR AGENCY AND AMTRAK IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this MOU as of the date first written above. Commission: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION LOSSAN By: By: Anne Mayer, Executive Director a Title: APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel to the Riverside Title: County Transportation Commission AMTRAK By: Title: ATTEST: By: Title: 29253.00002\32118210.1 6 321 Tara Bve rl From: Tara Byerly Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2019 3:41 PM To: Tara Byerly Cc: Lisa Mobley; Anne Mayer; JOHN STANDIFORD Subject: RCTC: July Commission Agenda - July 10, 2019 Good afternoon Commissioners, The July Agenda for the Commission meeting scheduled for Wednesday, July 10 @ 9:30 a.m. is available. Please copy the link: https://www.rctc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/July-Commission-Agenda.pdf Also attached for your review and information is the conflict of interest memo and form. Conflict of Interest Memo.p... Conflict of Interest Form.pdf Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you. Respectfully, Tara Byerly Deputy Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 951.787.7141 W 1951.787.7906 F 4080 Lemon St. 3rd FI. l P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502 rctc.org in 1 Tara Bve rl From: Tara Byerly Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2019 3:44 PM To: Tara Byerly Subject: RCTC: July Commission Agenda - July 10, 2019 Good afternoon Commission Alternates, The July Agenda for the Commission meeting scheduled for Wednesday, July 10 @ 9:30 a.m. is available. Please copy the link: https://www.rctc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/July-Commission-Agenda.pdf Respectfully, Tara Byerly Deputy Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 951.787.7141 W 1951.787.7906 F 4080 Lemon St. 3rd FI. 1 P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502 rctc.org f If in i TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Riverside County Transportation Commission Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board July 3, 2019 G.C. 84308 Compliance — Potential Conflict of Interest California Government Code 84308 states a Commissioner may not participate in any discussion or action concerning a contract or amendment if a campaign contribution of more than $250 is received in the past 12 months or 3 months following the conclusion from a bidder or bidder's agent. This prohibition does not apply to the awarding of contracts that are competitively bid. The Commission's procurement division asks potential vendors to disclose any contributions made to the campaigns of any Commissioner as part of their submitted bid packets. As an additional precaution, those entities are included below in an effort to give Commissioners opportunity to review their campaign statements for potential conflicts. Please note the entities listed in this memo are not encompassing of all potential conflicts and are in addition to any personal conflicts of interest such as those disclosed on Statement of Economic Interests — Form 700 or prohibited by Government Code Section 1090. Please contact me should you have any questions. Agenda Item No 9K — Agreement with WSP USA Inc. for the Completion of the Project Initiation Document Phase for Consultant(s): Agenda Item No 9N Supporting the State Consultant(s): the Riverside County Next Generation Express Lanes WSP USA Inc. Victor J. Martinez, Vice President/Area Manager 862 E. Hospitality Lane, Suite 350 San Bernardino, CA 92408 — Amendments for Construction Freeway Service Patrol Towing Services Route 60 Truck Lanes Project Coastal Pride Towing Frank Barks, President 12005 Magnolia Avenue Riverside, CA 92503 Pepes Towing Manuel Acosta, Secretary 14351 Veterans Way Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Airport Mobil Towing Moris Musharbash, President/Owner 1046 E. California Street Ontario, CA 91761 RCTC Potential Conflicts of Interest July 3, 2019 Page 2 Agenda Item No 13 — Countywide Transportation Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan and Ordinance Consultant(s): AlphaVu LLC Scott G. Wilkinson, CEO 1725 DeSales Street NW, Suite 806 Washington, DC 20036 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL DULY 10, 2019 County of Riverside, District County of Riverside, District II County of Riverside, District III County of Riverside, District IV County of Riverside, District V City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Calimesa City of Canyon Lake City of Cathedral City City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Eastvale City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio City of Jurupa Valley City of La Quinta City of Lake Elsinore City of Menifee City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Norco City of Palm Desert City of Palm Springs City of Perris City of Rancho Mirage City of Riverside City of San Jacinto City of Temecula City of Wildomar Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 Present Absent D O ar CI O Jd � O � El kJ O 8 O )21, � O O � O � O f2r O O O O O CI O O O 0 O O CI O CI O O A 0 0 O RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET JULY 10, 2019 NAME AGENCY EMAIL ADDRESS y a r tVa- LL ).-1- C , Ty ax,//tim/6-,- 4R7D/1/51.en)94,4! fiki -1/\ C- / i c.)'Z 61VP.A.‘ c_c.' 1,Z. c5WA A Ic4iyid.z.,4 ..›. ), Jul% 0 pn4r-\:.,cz c, uFek,,,��.-1- jr,..„,+,c.c.cb�..M.,��... J �G(�lt j�� � n-t 0'i� /1/61 ?Al G 4'CE �P�.� ji'I �'(7M2�o aA1'4'v%U GVy. 8rl a�1/ l3�Cf)e---30, 3-dt vPq c/a !(P� i 17C� V19J *-Mtt t\k0Ul�� SUI11To'0QlAU/gi.rkQ4 (i A-C-ICIy J`�rne-YGt c_ActlitilcsA you hieff! o, ItAM.6/Q AG6 AO-- -TET: lkA ifl(-1 - $(4-rezi4-3 -6L____ ,"2,V-e-----,--4V- peitels . siam,-6. iiele,-/-11 op,-,/ m - 6.1_,- , 114: I'''(-- Zi Alit RI,/ I 4 I'l 2 A)fli. le;11, 4 ...dy . )1</a., i(-/Nk /1- (2 i-7-232 '-S--IY\' Ci2- 4'vj. -gyp V"� ICFREL 3j141102,71A-#`� ' 5 c3���A�'� d DhFlZ/i C4t,--,.u�/ �2r/ag �rwozP Wgc,��a�n � 1 lL "Pd-1 -tvk .-D�--SEIlzT i(ev/r c-i-F---"»,/,--7 ,7•--7--- , ,rt/? d'..ri e&,;/ eo S D / sq. r (,.)fl\5.Me�e, f\A vez C��,�a� �oc-71-slo, GS`l ez 6 S`/9/ Kie.,, S(ae./It____ �/7 v � 6),C)••••K__ FlSI!( zotinitow41440.1 ififeivi,-ere LA '-'4.-- \\-)\ ,L.,1- L.,--7-_-- --r c-_,—.) V");.-tv- _.' 't,'- , t-2)C-C, .5-- i 744rA-'S IS, i_._)r--s ."- b-t-o7- L / ,e,e 1 .4-4,3e-, 170 44 re, R 2_pe 6, `,..TS:A, 6 t)-K), e Ws Jo Attvicolo�(�YLYU. bU/� �{�,1 Di 0 "'"�� A i/to vu a (4 A , CI( ty Cry 4 � . Kon cal Cat RCTC Conflict of Interest Form Purpose: This form is provided to assist members of the RCTC Commissioners in meeting requirements of 87100 in documenting conflict of interests as related to RCTC RCTC Commission may be required to disclose and disqualify or voting on an agenda item due to personal income, real positions, or receipt of campaign contributions. If applicable, the following information, for entry into the public record, prior to item(s) and turn in the completed form to the Clerk of the Board RCTC member may not participate in any discussion or action a campaign contribution of more than $250 is received in the past conclusion from any entity or individual. Government Code Section 84308 and Commission/Committee agenda items. Instructions: Under certain circumstances, themselves from participating in, influencing, property interests, investments, business Commissioners must personally state consideration of the involved agenda prior to leaving the meeting. An concerning a contract or amendment if 12 months or 3 months following the I. Board Member Information Board Member Name City/County Name Meeting Date II. Campaign Contributions 1. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution and therefore I am abstaining from participation 2. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution and therefore I am abstaining from participation 3. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution and therefore I am abstaining from participation 4. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution and therefore I am abstaining from participation of over $250 from patoef, ria,,„1�1 , (Identif the name of the com ny and/or Individual) , on Agenda item 1)1) , Subject: Fv'e,ea) 76t,/,,, . of over $250 from , (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item , Subject: . of over $250 from , (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item , Subject: . of over $250 from , (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item , Subject: . III. Financial Interest 1. I have a financial interest of , from/in (State income, and therefore I am abstaining from participation 2.. I have a financial interest of real property interest, investment or business position) (Identify name of company or property location) on Agenda Item , Subject: - , from/in (State income, and therefore I am abstaining from participation real property interest, investment or business position) (Identify name of company or property location) on Agenda Item , Subject: IV. Signature Board Member Signature: Date: 7//a 2,09 Please remember you must state the information into the public record prior to consideration of the involved agenda item(s) and turn in the completed form to the Clerk of the Board prior to leaving the meeting. Lisa Mobley From: Sent: To: Subject: Brenda Tibbetts <tuffytibbs@aal.com> Friday, July 05, 2019 9:16 PM D3email@rivco.com; District2@rivco.com; Lisa Mobley Next meeting agenda items z Please delay approval of items 11,12, & 13 at the next meeting. These issues need to be explained fully to the public and input given by the public for the promised transparency to exist. Thank you for your representation and service to the residents of Corona. Brenda Tibbetts 11395 Foxglove Ln Corona Sent from my iPhone Lisa Mobley From: jeango360@gmail.com Sent: Friday, July 05, 2019 9:17 PM To: Lisa Mobley Subject: AGENDA ITEMS 11,12,13 Please forward my urgent request to ALL RCTC Commissioners that AGENDA ITEMS 11, 12, & 13 be Set aside, tabled, or delayed until there can be a public discussion. 4th of July Holiday weekend is no time for a 1000+ page report to be dropped from the skies on residents. Jean Ardaiz Gonzalez 1 Lisa Mobley From: cathy <catherinejeanette@live.com> Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2019 10:37 AM To: Lisa Mobley Subject: Judy Commission Agenda Dear Ms Mobley, I am writing you to ask for a delay on voting for Items 11,12, and 13. As this 1045 page agenda was just released over the holiday, I do not feel it is fair to the Supervisors nor to all the people that travel along the 91 corridor for this to be voted on with such short notice. Everyone should be given adequate time to properly assess this document. Thank you. Sincerely, Cathy Donaldson Sent from my iPad Lisa Mobley From: Michael Shay <mvshay@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2019 5:29 PM To: Lisa Mobley Subject: Request postponement of RCTC vote Dear RCTC Clerk, I request postponement of the upcoming voting on this Wednesday's (7/10) RCTC agenda items 11, 12, and 13. Thank you for your consideration, Violeta Shay Corona, CA 92882 Lisa Mobley From: Karen Alexander <0146retired@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2019 10:00 PM To: districtl@rivco.org Cc: Lisa Mobley Subject: Postpone Agenda Items #11, #12, #13 Dear Supervisor Kevin Jeffries, Your upcoming July 10th RCTC meeting has several agenda items of which I'd like to request the Commission postpone voting on them. The last-minute 1,046 page report submitted surely has important information to be discussed further instead of this holiday -rushed push through attempt. There is much at stake for the Corona area when the bottom line is to defer toll revenue overages to projects outside our area. The 91 Corridor Project has had $600M scaled back from the original design and at this point is in severe need to restore the FULL circulation project as promised by Anne Mayer when she said in that public meeting: the removed portions of the $1.6B design will be of the HIGHEST priority for restoration with any excessive toll fees acquired.. That has not happened yet. Please consider postponing your agenda items # 11, # 12, and # 13 as this is too important to rush through without proper digestion of this massive 1,046 page report. Sincerely, Karen Alexander 36 yr west end Corona Resident City of Corona Planning Commission Chair * * Ms. Mobley, pls forward to supervisors * * Thank you * * i Lisa Mobley From: Info Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 7:41 AM To: Aaron Hake; Lisa Mobley; Cheryl Donahue Subject: FW: RCTC Meeting Wednesday July 10, 2019 Good Morning, Please see email below. Thanks. Best Regards, Jennifer Anderson From: Dean Stamp [mailto:deanstamp@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, July 05, 2019 9:44 PM To: Info <info@RCTC.org>; wes.speake@coronaca.gov Cc: michele.wentworth@coronaca.gov Subject: RCTC Meeting Wednesday July 10, 2019 RCTC Commissioners, On behalf of the Mountain View Civic Association (MVCA) and myself, please delay voting on items 11, 12, and 13 of the agenda for the RCTC meeting on Wednesday July 10, 2019, to allow for further discussion and input from the public. Thank you. Dean Stamp, MVCA and Coronita Resident deanstamp hotmail.com i Lisa Mobley From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Lisa, Michele Wentworth <michele.wentworth@gmail.com> Monday, July 08, 2019 2:05 PM Lisa Mobley Email pass to RCTC commissioners Can you pass the following correspondence to the RCTC commissioners? My email is to address my concerns on the July loth agenda. Thank you! Michele Dear RCTC Commissioners, Before you vote on the July 10, 2019 agenda please consider pulling items 11,12 and 13 for further consideration and delay your vote. The agenda is proposing to fundamentally change the way we reinvest the toll revenue in the 91 corridor with little time to daylight these sweeping changes to the public. Without transparency, the commission will be breaking promises to complete the 91 corridor with all available toll revenue. RCTC promoted and promised, to Corona and the county, that the toll lane additions would be the reinvestment we need to complete the unfinished projects in the 91 corridor. We were assured repeatedly by RCTC that toll revenues (excess included) are protected by legislation AB 1010. Never was there a mention that amending legislation was the direction RCTC wanted to lead us. With the completion of the 91 slowed, toll prices will remain higher than they need to be, effectively causing commuters to pay for projects that do not benefit their commute through the canyon. By approving the agenda item 11, excess toll revenue will leave the 91 corridor. Therefore, projects accelerated outside of the 91 corridor become the infrastructure created to accommodate future housing growth. The economic reality for Riverside County is housing construction while job production will still remain in the financial and tech centers west of us in LA and OC. Using excess revenues in other places does not solve the problem. It decelerates RCTC's ability to finish the 91 corridor to better handle the growing commuting population. RCTC is committing excess 91 toll revenue to clear the veins while pushing the blood of commuters to a constricting aorta valve without the surgery to correct the valve. Once these changes occur, the excess revenues can be used throughout the county. Although I understand how this proposal stands to benefit the individual commissioner's who live in cities where the Delivery Plan would be accelerated with creative financing solutions, it is short term thinking creating risky financing on potential excess revenue. By approving these changes you are stating to voters that you are confident the toll prices will remain high due to your commitment to decelerating the projects on the 91 which enhance toll lane capacity and general lane capacity. * RCTC is committing to bonding excess 91 toll revenue * Paying back all or a portion of Measure A spent on 91 with excess revenue *Begin the process to amend the legislation to allow excess 91 toll revenue to be invested in the 60/91 /215 and south I-15 to SR-74 *prioritize Western Projects outside of the 91 corridor that supports the CMAQ and the STGB funds A better analogy would be to say that RCTC is our contractor that we hired to build a house. Our contractor took our deposit, built 2/3 of our house and promised to finish the other 1/3 as fast as possible. But now our contractor wants more of our material deposit fees (excess toll revenue) to start working on all the other projects he's been hired to build. Items 12 is the Western County Delivery Plan which RCTC wants both to leverage excess 91 toll revenues and raise a sales tax on a rushed vote in agenda item 13 because the ballot measure is time sensitive. Please delay your votes for further public discussion. Please consider that voters in Corona are holding you to your commitment to using all available toll revenue to expedite the unfinished work. We ask that you delay voting and discuss the huge changes proposed. Perhaps it will be a bigger uphill battle for a ballot initiative in Corona with the 91 project "house" 2/3 built while you've invited more commuters over for breakfast and dinner. Sincerely, Michele Wentworth Corona Resident and Member of Greater Corona Traffic Alliance 1 Lisa Mobley From: dfuller1944@aol.com Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 8:28 PM To: D3email@rivco.org; District2@rivco.org; districtl@rivco.org; Lisa Mobley Subject: Wednesday RCTC meeting Agenda Items 11, 12 and 13 To whom it may concern: Regarding the RCTC meeting Agenda for July 10, 2019: I most sincerely request that Agenda Items 11, 12 and 13 be removed from the calendar and held for further discussion or a more extensive nature at a later date. You will likely be receiving other messages on this same subject and I will not into a lot of detail that would be repetitive here. But, I do have this to add: This morning, Monday, July 8, I attended the Board meeting of the Orange County Transportation Authority. There was a considerable, lengthy and even somewhat heated discussion regarding what sounded like me to a turf war between Orange and Riverside Counties. It involved the 241/91 connector and the potential inability of 91 traffic eastbound to handle the increased flow from that planned connector. It seems to boil down to this: Without Riverside County taking care of the matter east of the 241/91 connector, it will mean nothing more than moving the traffic jam to different places. As this pertains to Agenda Item 11, which is an effort to divert money planned for the 91 to other spots: If that diversion is made, and the 91 remains only partially capable, then it will indeed mean the planned 241/91 connector will be a waste of time and money until the 91 is properly finished to accept the traffic flow. Therefore, the diversion of money from the 91 to other spots in the IE will make a mess and a mockery of the 241/91 connector effort. Items 11, 12 and 13 are the wrong things to do. I will see you Wednesday morning at the meeting. Sincerely, Don Fuller 725 Huntley Drive Corona, CA 92882 Home/office: 951-817-8871 Cell: 714-271-8091 Lisa Mobley From: Alyse Freeland <alyse.freeland@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 8:32 PM To: d3email@rivco.org; districtl@rivco.org; district2@rivco.org; Lisa Mobley Subject: Please vote against diverting surplus 91 toll revenues Good evening, I'm going to keep this short and sweet. I'm in complete disagreement with RCTC's proposal so divert surplus toll revenues from the 91 express lanes and use them for purposes other than improving the 91 corridor, as originally intended. Western Corona is in dire need of help to alleviate the traffic nightmare and diverting these funds makes no sense. Karen - as my elected representative specifically, I implore you to vote no on this senseless proposal. Lisa - as clerk, please pass my message along to the commissioners. Thank you for your time. Alyse Freeland 2361 Northmoor Drive Corona, CA 92882 (Coronita) Email: Alyse.Freeland@gmail.com Cell: 562-972-2603 i Lisa Mobley From: Stan <sehilljr@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 8:53 AM To: District2@rivco.org; districtl@rivco.org; Lisa Mobley; D3email@rivco.org Subject: RCTC Agenda Items 11, 12, and 13 Dear RCTC Commissioners, Please consider pulling items 11,12 and 13 for further consideration and delay your vote. The community impacted has not been able to formally access these items to properly comment on how this will affect all of us. The commission wants to have these items voted on before the community understands the impact. The commission is accountable to the constituents that reside in the area and as such it should be willing to listen the community. What has happen to the transparency that the commission promised? I urge you to delay your vote on these items until their impact can be properly accessed by all parties. Sincerely Stanley Hill Monterey Peninsula Dr., Corona i Lisa Mobley. From: Lorelle Moe -Luna Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 4:09 PM To: Aaron Hake; JOHN STANDIFORD; Lisa Mobley - Subject: FW: Comments for RCTC Public Hearing on 7-9-19 We held a public hearing for transit needs today. Just got this email regarding transit service and toll roads. Sharing in case you are collecting the comments for tomorrow. Lorelle From: Adam Williams Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 4:00 PM To: Lorelle Moe -Luna <LMoe-Luna@RCTC.org> Subject: Comments for RCTC Public Hearing on 7-9-19 Ms. Moe -Luna: I am providing input on Riverside County transit needs after the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) held its public hearing this morning. I am an unemployed, disabled Marine Corps Reserve veteran, University of California, Riverside (UCR) alumnus, and a part-time Riverside City College (RCC) student (taking classes to update my job skills) living in Moreno Valley. I currently rely on Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) buses (usually leaving from a RTA Route 11 bus. stop on John. F Kennedy (JFK) Dr. near the old part of March ARB) for transportation after junking my car last November due to a bad engine. I am pleased with RTA bus service so far but plan to buy another car later this year so I may return to driving the 215, 60, and 91 freeways soon. My comments address the proposed toll roads and RTA bus service. The Press -Enterprise reported today in the article, "More Inland toll lanes are likely" that RCTC plans to approve building more toll roads in sections of the 91, 60, and 215 freeways. I understand the some of the proposed toll roads will replace carpool lanes. I am against toll roads because I do not believe that taxpayers should have to pay beyond their taxes for freeways and consider toll roads discriminatory against low-income county residents who are already struggling with high gas prices that are partly the result of the recent state gas tax increase. I believe RCTC should find another funding mechanism such as bonds or increased taxes to pay for freeways instead of using toll roads. I hope RCTC will reject the proposed toll roads or at least require pairing any new toll roads with additional freeway or car pool lanes for drivers who cannot afford using toll roads. My comments on RTA bus service centers on Route 11 service in Moreno Valley and future bus fare increases. I request RTA continue considering military veterans who live along Route 11 when determining bus routes. I noticed many U.S. Vets residents take the bus to go to work and run errands among other activities. I hope RTA keep the current route schedule and consider in the future shortening the wait times to once every half hour or 45 minutes for Route 11 buses. also hope RTA consider delaying future bus fare increases or mitigate the impact of future fare increases to low income bus riders especially after increased bus fares went into effect this month. Thank you for receiving and considering this message about Riverside County transit needs. Sincerely, Adam Williams 1 Lisa Mobley From: Janis Dority <luaubee@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 12:59 PM To: districtl@rivco.org; District2@rivco.org; D3email@rivco.org; Lisa Mobley Subject: July loth AGENDA Items ROTC Commissioners, Before voting on July 10, 2019 agenda please pull items 11,12 and 13 for further consideration & delay this vote. This agenda would change the way that the county promised to reinvest the toll revenue in the 91 corridor with little time to let the public you each serve be aware of this proposed change. RCTC talked a good game and promised the people of Corona and the county, that the toll lane additions would be the reinvestment we need to complete the unfinished projects in the 91 corridor. ROTC told us over and over that toll revenues including those in excess, are protected by AB 1010. No mention was ever made that amending legislation was being planned behind closed doors by the RCTC .With the completion on the 91 slowed to a bare minimum & toll prices higher than they need to be, YOU, RCTC, are causing commuters to pay for projects not improving their commute through the canyon as promised. The house building farther and farther afield needs to be managed to the South and East of the choke point of the 91. Focus on Job growth in our county not the storage of people with few ways to commute to far away job centers. Do you jobs by representing the people with transparency and promise keeping. Finish what you started with an improved 91 corridor for ALL the commuters not just to line the pockets of future home builders and toll collectors. Janis Dority Native Corona resident Virus -free. www.avast.com 1 i Lisa Mobley From: John Estep <john.estep@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 1:12 PM To: D3email@rivco.org; District2@rivco.org; districtl@rivco.org; Lisa Mobley Subject: July 10, 2019 agenda Dear ROTC Commissioners, Before you vote on the July 10, 2019 agenda please consider pulling items 11,12 and 13 for further consideration and delay your vote. The agenda is proposing to fundamentally change the Imay we reinvest the toll revenue in the 91 corridor with little time to daylight these sweeping changes to the public. Without transparency, the commission will be breaking promises to complete the 91 corridor with all available toll revenue. RCTC promoted and promised, to Corona and the county, that the toll lane additions would be the reinvestment we need to complete the unfinished projects in the 91 corridor. We were assured repeatedly by RCTC that toll revenues (excess included) are protected by legislation AB 1010. Never was there a mention that amending legislation was the direction RCTC wanted to lead us. With the completion of the 91 slowed, toll prices will remain higher than they need to be, effectively causing commuters to pay for projects that do not benefit their commute through the canyon. By approving the agenda item 11, excess toll revenue will leave the 91 corridor. Therefore, projects accelerated outside of the 91 corridor become the infrastructure created to accommodate future housing growth. The economic reality for Riverside County is housing construction while job production will still remain in the financial and tech centers west of us in LA and OC. Using excess revenues in other places does not solve the problem. It decelerates RCTC's ability to finish the 91 corridor to better handle the growing commuting population. RCTC is committing excess 91 toll revenue to clear the veins while pushing the blood of commuters to a constricting aorta valve without the surgery to correct the valve. Once these changes occur, the excess revenues can be used throughout the county. Although I understand how this proposal stands to benefit the individual commissioner's who live in cities where the Delivery Plan would be accelerated with creative financing solutions, it is short term thinking creating risky financing on potential excess revenue. By approving these changes you are stating to voters that you are confident the toll prices will remain high due to your commitment to decelerating the projects on the 91 which enhance toll lane capacity and general lane capacity. * RCTC is committing to bonding excess 91 toll revenue * Paying back all or a portion of Measure A spent on 91 with excess revenue *Begin the process to amend the legislation to allow excess 91 toll revenue to be invested in the 60/91/215 and south I-15 to SR-74 `Prioritize Western Projects outside of the 91 corridor that supports the CMAQ and the STGB funds A better analogy would be to say that RCTC is our contractor that we hired to build a house. Our contractor took our deposit, built 2/3 of our house and promised to finish the other 1 /3 as fast as possible. But now our contractor wants more of our material deposit fees (excess toll revenue) to start working on all the other projects he's been hired to build. Items 12 is the Western County Delivery Plan which RCTC wants both to leverage excess 91 toll revenues and raise a sales tax on a rushed vote in agenda item 13 because the ballot measure is time sensitive. Please delay your vote for more public discussion. Please consider that voters in Corona are holding you to your commitment to using all available toll revenue to expedite the unfinished work. We ask that you delay voting and discuss the huge changes proposed. Perhaps it will be a bigger uphill battle for a ballot initiative in Corona with the 91 project "house" 2/3 built while you've invited more: commuters over for breakfast and dinner. Sincerely_ 1 From: Crystal Nettles To: Lisa Mobley Subject: Forward to commissioners - comments for July 10 Date: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 5:27:20 PM ***Please forward to commissioners*** I am writing to urge you to delay the approval of items 11, 12 and 13 on July 10th's RCTC agenda so that you, county and city staff and members of the public have time to read, absorb and study the 1,045 pages of documentation that accompanies these three agenda items. No one denies that the 60, 215 and 15 freeways need traffic improvements. However, this vote would allow funds to be diverted from the 91 to other areas of the county. Before giving money to new projects, RCTC should finish what it started and complete the 91 freeway at is was intended, with an auxiliary lane from Green River to the 241 as well as improve the connector from the 91 to 71. Again, I am not denying RCTC should discuss possible solutions to the traffic east and south of Corona. But rather, the commission should talk about what a change would mean, both the positives and negatives. It deserves time, and a vote should be delayed until that time is provided. How many of you read the entire 1,045 pages? Based upon five days (Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday) at a rate of one minute per page, that's 3.5 hours of reading per day. Did you honestly spend 3.5 hours per day reading and digesting the information over a holiday weekend? Your vote has major ramifications to Riverside County residents. If you did not read everything and comprehend everything, then it is your duty to delay this vote so that not only you have time to read it, but that your constituents do as well. It is disappointing that this agenda was released over a holiday weekend. It sends a message of shadiness that RCTC is trying to pull one over on the public and get this passed when no one will notice. Voters deserve an agency committed to them and not their own pocketbooks. Voters deserve time. Voters deserve transparency. The 91 freeway at Green River is the gateway between Orange County and the Inland Empire. If it does not flow well the entire region is impacted. Your vote on agenda items 11, 12 and 13 will show whether you care about your constituents or if you want the 91 freeway to fail in order to increase toll revenue. I hope you choose the former on July 10. Crystal Nettles Corona resident Lisa From: Info Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 4:49 PM To: Lisa Mobley Cc: Aaron Hake Subject: FW: RCTC Commission Meeting Public Comment and Agenda Item #14 Comment Attachments: RCTC Coachella Valley Platform Comment.docx; RCTC Meeting Porous -Reflective Pavements Public Comment.docx Hi Lisa, Please see email below. Thanks! Best Regards, Jennifer Anderson From: Eric Reese [mailto:ericvreese94@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 3:26 PM To: Info <info@RCTC.org> Cc: Eric Reese <ericvreese94@yahoo.com> Subject: RCTC Commission Meeting Public Comment and Agenda Item #14 Comment Dear RCTC Staff, Hello, my name is Eric Reese. I have attached a public comment/proposal and comment for agenda item #14 for this Wednesday's RCTC Commission Meeting at 9:30 am. Since I will not be able to attend the meeting in person and give my public comment testimony, I was wondering if you could please forward the two comments to the RCTC Clerk of the Board for dissemination to the commissioners as well as inclusion into the meeting minutes. I would greatly appreciate your help. The public comment contains a proposal that can help make the county and the cities more resilient to climate change, which would be of interest to the commissioners. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for your time and help. Have a great day. Sincerely, Eric Reese RCTC Meeting Agenda Item #14 (Coachella Valley Special Events Train Platform) Public Comment Dear RCTC Commissioners, Hello, my name is Eric Reese. I want to first commend staff for the significant progress made in moving the Coachella Valley Special Events Train Project forward. This is a crucial step in helping to make the Coachella Valley Rail Project a reality. While the special events train platform will be a game changer in alleviating traffic congestion to the Coachella Valley, I would highly recommend that the commission continue to research the possibility of establishing a dedicated passenger rail right of way for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Project, as well as working with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) in establishing a station for the Loma Linda Medical Center. Having a passenger rail right of way would separate passenger trains from freight railroad traffic from Highgrove to Indio using the abandoned Union Pacific Riverside Industrial Line and a new southern track on the Union Pacific Yuma Subdivision. Establishing a dedicated passenger rail right of way would give RCTC and the LOSSAN Agency complete dispatch control of trains from Highgrove to Indio, would allow for tilting trains to be used on the route, and Would reduce train travel times by up to 30 minutes by creating a 125 mph straight section from Beaumont to Indio. Most importantly it would allow RCTC to create multiple train frequencies up to twelve round trip trains per day as opposed to the planned two round trips per day, all without having to deal with Union Pacific (UP) for approval. As the results indicate in agenda item #9c, passenger rail is a high priority to residents in the Coachella Valley and San Gorgonio Pass region. Through my collaboration with the RCTC rail team, I have shared my design renderings, PowerPoint presentations, and train slot schedules that show the benefits of a dedicated passenger rail right of way. I am collaborating with the rail team in designing a system that is both viable and beneficial to the traveling public. Establishing the Coachella Valley train service with multiple train frequencies would help tremendously in reducing the traffic levels on the 10 freeway as well as providing train frequencies that appeal to business travelers and recreational travelers. Relying on the existing UP main line for Coachella Valley Service would severely impact on time performance, would reduce the number of train slots available, would hamper the ability of both agencies to increase train service in the future, and would increase train travel times from two and a half hours to over three hours. With the special event service on the horizon and the demand for Coachella Valley Service, now is the time for RCTC and LOSSAN to chart their own territory in the quest to provide train service to the Coachella Valley, while moving away from Union Pacific's impediments. Thank you for your time and consideration of my recommendation to make the Coachella Valley Service a viable service and a more accessible service to Riverside and San Bernardino County riders. Sincerely, Eric Reese RCTC Meeting Public Comment Dear RCTC Commissioners, Hello, my name is Eric Reese. My comment for future consideration is on a proposal that can help make cities and the county more resilient to extreme temperatures and can help improve quality of life while also reducing healthcare costs and roadway costs for the county. My proposal would be for staff and commissioners to work with the county, cities, California Transportation Commission, Caltrans, and Federal Highway Administration in researching the feasibility of using porous -reflective pavements as preferred roadway material for highway projects throughout the county. Porous -reflective pavements can reduce pavement surface temperatures by up to 11 °F, can reduce sound levels from vehicles by up to 6 decibels, can reduce air pollution by reducing cooling demands, and can recharge groundwater supplies by absorbing up to 98% of storm water runoff. These benefits are possible due to the ability of the pavement to reflect heat away from the surface as well as allowing for evaporative cooling to occur. Porous -reflective pavements also filter out particulates, meaning that they are able to perform the same function as wastewater treatment plants but for free. Reducing pavement surface temperatures by up to 11 °F would help immensely in reducing healthcare costs by reducing heat related illnesses by 3 93 % and strokes by 3 %. Porous -reflective pavements also help reduce roadway costs through their flexibility. Because porous -reflective pavements are not rigid, they are able to tolerate seismic events/earthquakes, extreme temperatures, and weathering at a higher rate than traditional pavements. This results in a decrease in pavement cracks and potholes that occur from pavement stress. With a lower amount of pavement cracks and potholes there is a lower need to repair and/or replace roadways, resulting in lower maintenance costs. Researching the feasibility of porous - reflective pavements would help save the county and cities money over the long term especially in healthcare costs, public works costs, and municipal water costs. With the proposed creation of a state Chief Climate Resilience Officer via Senate Bill 168, now would be the opportunity to join forces with the state legislature in leveraging the proposed position to help create a pavement program that can make cities and counties more resilient to climate change. I would highly encourage the commission to partner with the cities, the state, and the federal government in researching and developing a porous -reflective pavement that can improve quality of life, adapt cities and the county to become more resilient to extreme temperatures, and achieve fiscal savings over the long term. Thank you for your time and hopeful consideration of my proposal that can make the county, cities, and the commission a leader in innovation and sustainability. Sincerely, Eric Reese 3aop dIZ AID 133b1S 3003 dIZ rON 3NaHd =SS3Haad SS3N1S118 df10!!O / NOLLVZINVJaO / AON391/ d0 3WVN J1I3 1331l1S =9NI1N3S3k1d3111 Z.2962Z4 vr-yea-Fiac7 zia 71C4/7# 6ZZ. 1 LAP L4 7 Va r ON 3N0Hd 7/Zd rY00) :3WtlN 1 3/Yr7 Are/ /6. =SS31Iaa1/ :W311 VaN3JV (daN391/ 3111 NO a31S17 Sd) 1 d033P8fIS �% — rON W311 t/dN3DV :S1N3WW03 mBAd *-14/ :S1N3WW03 mend d10 1o3P8f1S Al )133H3 atIVOSI 3H1 A4 31E1313 3H101lumens aNV H3V13a L =31Va 3003 d1Z A110 .1.33EI1S 3403 dIZ Q.A8 Zib rON 3N0Fid S-17/71NOHd =SSMICICIV SS3NIS119 dt10a0 / N011VZINV9 10 / A3N3OV AO 31A1VN 1.113 :ON I1N3S31:Id3/1 13atus � (A09y) )U y114 1 :ssaaaad 110)1 -WA/ :1A1311 VdN3JH '(VaN3'JV 3111 NO 431SI1 SV) d01.33P8f1S rON 1A1311 daN3'JV =31NdN I/0},w vA � 'S1N3WW0.1�31'8t1S .S1N3WW03 onand I )133113 b)-01-1, alda CRIV08 3111 dO }1a313 311101MINIMS ONV I13d13a 3003 dta A113 133a1.S =SS31:1001► SS3NISna dnoao / NQIIVZIN1 DHO / A3N3911 d0 3INVN rON 3N0Hd JNI1N3S31:1d31:1 3Q09 d12 /W3 -Neisr‘ Vac-do-0 962.—/504.isvp. ' ON 3NOHd 4z1vn.4.4-kb* 2.861'6 1338-1S =1A131111ON3311 ao 133rans t414.fi- r =SS311CICI of =31A1tl'N (vaN3ov 3141 No ansn sv) rON 11113111/CMGOd MIN31N1A103 onand l5l :S1N31A11A103 onand ao Iowans I }133H3 7 01 [1EIVOS 3H1 do NE13'13 ELL o1111A1ans GN1/ HMO-30 3003 dIZ Alta J33�I1S rON 3NOHd =SSMIaOV SS3NIS118 dn01l9 / NOIIVZINdaao / A3N39b d0 3wdN 3aoa dlz ALIO rON 3NOHd -mac 7 1.4 r^ a --D-A' 1 =JN11N3S3tId3E1 J33!!1S 5-1,-// :SS31:IaOV =�V11�gIN :W311 VaN3J1/ (1/dN3°JV 3111 NO 431517 SV) dO 133P8AS `. rON W311 VaN3'Jt/ =S.1N31/111 Woa an8nd o =S1N31N1A103 onand do Iowans �1)Ia3Ha (4? :311Ia auvos AO NE1313 311101 limns aNd H3d1.310 3003 dIZ A 13 1331:I1S rON 3N0Hd 3000 dIZ All3 =SSMICICIV SS3N1S119 anoao / NouvzINV9110 / w3N3sv ao awrrni rON 9NOHd 216 7 Cy/ `.-z 02:"6/a 9 rY / rot NLyA ofidi:1A1311VCIN3OV ao i3arens i I MNIIN3S31:Id31:1 1331:11S =SSMICICIV =�IrWI©►N (VON3OV 3H1 N0 O31SIl sv) oN IA13111113N3DV :S1N311V1A1oa mend :S1h131A11A103 mend ao 133rSnS 3133H3 a1:11►0s 3Hl do 311:1313 3H1 mums ONV H31 13C1 /oa/oilL = lva moo dIZ A.LI3 1331:I1S =SSMIaad SS3N1sn9 wimp NOLLVZIN D1:10 / A3N3DV AO 3IAIVN rON 3N0Hd JN11N3S31:1d3E1 3aoo dIZ A119 133a1S ZeP VrY00,.7 &(7' ryc7 =W311 VaN3JV (V4N3911 3H1 NO 431SI1 SV) d0133P8AS rON W311 VaN39V ' ON 3N0Hd dzZnSY�ly =ss3Saan =3IN1©►N =S1N31A11A103 onand o :S1N311WINO3 onand ao 133r'Sns 3133H3 =31da aados aHi ao Na313 3111 01 iiwans anro H311.1.3a 3003 dIZ AlI3 133kL1S 3403 dIZ 2 Zb =SS3tIO01©► SS3NISn8 dnoao / NOLLVZINVOHO / A3N3OV AO 3INVN rON 3NOHd v/ A113 511)-c) hhlf 2(CAJ C1� :ssaaaav rON 3NOHd -T1 S -1 1,4 M alc\c"\ :3WtlN =JNI1N3S3l1d3l1 5d-c\ikr-i 11Q It:113°3749n: 1 1331:I1S (VON39V 3H1 NO O31Si1 sv) ON IN311 VON3DV :S1N3ININO3 onsnd ❑=S1N3ININO3 onand AO 133ranS �1 N33H3 :31110 MVOS 3H1 AO NEI3'13 3H1 Q11iIlVBnS ONv H3V13O 3003 dIZ A113 .1331IJ.S =SSM1C1CIV SS3N1sna df101:I9 / NOLLYZIN D}10 / A3N391/ AO 31NYN rON 3NOHd 9N11N3S31:1d3k1 3003 dIZ 1113 Z4P4Ob b1.40#(67 1004,492414 rON 3N0Hd vi2rW/11 1-11° IA ?Si 0 --t.±1 :W311 \/aN3JV (VON391/ 3H1 NO a31S11 SV) d0 Jo3P8f1S rON W311 t/aN3'Jd .133S1S =SS3HaCIV =3 V11VN =S1N311111NO3 311and=91N31NwO3 mend dO 133ranS a1 N33113 �JI � olaiva CII:11108 3H1 dO 311i313 3111 01=mans ONV H31113CI 3aoa dIZ A113 133a19 3aoa dIZ =SS31:1aad SS3N1Sns dnomo / No11VZINVoao / A31‘13911 A0 3INVN :"ON 3N0Hd o1Wi1N39311d3i1 JL .Ia J 331:119 '"--1 se a . 6 lictoticp 74-.1 -1•0 wit 1 coY e°z 1:461..... 1544,,, rON 3NOHd cslcs S Con, 4:14Q (1146r :31A1VN pa-, ~�yy W �311 VaN3JV (Vd'Jd N33H1 NO 431SI1 SV) '�'����v�• d01o3P8AS rON 1/141311 V4N3'JV :S1N31A11A103 mend ji, :S1N31AlW03 aI1811d d01331'8f1S di )1133H3 Q1 �L =311/a 11 144_13 =SS31laatl' aSVoa 3H1 do )111313 3H101Limns aNd H31/130 moo dIZ M.13 rON 3N0Hd 3aoo dIZ A113 133H1S :SSMICICIV SS3N1S119 dnotio / N011. INVDHO / A3N3DV AO AWN la MAIII mit .1D la rON 3N0Hd :DNIIN3S3E1d311 1331:11S -Noy ftt os :31AWN :1A13.1.11/0N3DV , (V4N3DV 31111 NO 431311 SV) AO 133rans 1 I I rON W311 VON3911 :SIN3ININ03 311118fid 0 :SIN3INIA103 onand AO imarans 3133H3 bl Oil II iL :31VC1 3Fil AO 31t1313 3 11 al. limns C1NV H3V130 3003 dlz A113 1331119 rON 3NOHd 3000 dlz 4:4.1 isbrON 3N0Hd A113 =SS3LICK111 SS3NISt18 �s anoaD N0LLtlZINVf1110 / A3N39V d0 31NdN i�r S o )n Q 133tl18 ss,443t)(tem :JNI14N3S3EId31J =SS3lJ1:1011 =3IJII'Id'N =1A1311 VaN3JV I t (V0N3'JV 3H1 NO 431SI1 Sd) 133P8AS �rON W311 V4N3JV 31"q 114a- :S1N3WW03 mend "S1N3WW03 mendi �o 33rens ` d1 3133H3 )010z III I � :31Va 4!lV09 3H1 d0 H11313 3H1 O111W8f1S aNd H311130 3aoa d1z A113 133lJ1S rON 3NOHd =SSMICICI ©► MNISifls dnoao / I' OIIVZINVOLIo / A3N3OV A0 MOWN :DNI.LN3S31Id31:1 340; dIZ _ JLLI3 1331:11S enel iQ; :ssmiciav /16 gb e 0 :31NVN 114.0 "h) C s b ' ON 3N0Hd G i MdN3'Jtl 3H1 NO O31SIl SV) AO Iowans RI- rON W3L VaN39V C1i :s1N3ww03 onand AoJaarens 0=S1N3ININO3 mend �I 3I33H3 b 1 I 41 I � :3�da [OEIVo9 Mil AO 31E1313 3H1 011IINsf"iS C1Nb H3111.3a 3fl03 dIZ A113 133a1S rON 3NOHd :MUGGY SS3NISf18 dt10a0 / NOLLVZINVD110 / A3N3 V d0 MOWN :DNI1N3S311d31:1 ei114117» i /(31\1Q .a :1A1311 VdN3JV � 1r,���,,, �(VcamN3flV 3H1 NO a3SV) d0133P8t1S �t � ='ON W311 ddN3911 =SS3klaO�► =3lNVN =S1N31NINO3 onand X:S1N3ININO3 anend aO 133P91"1S )133H3 31110 auvoa Ell AO 31t1313 3H1 Ol mums aNV 1113V13a 3aa9 dIZ A.LI3 133lJ1S 3aa3 dIZ rON 3NOHd All3 —zSsz.� dt NevO7 /a/16 ''ON 3N0Hd �SS38aad SS3NI911e df10aD / NOIlVZINtlf1a0 / A3N3'JV d0 3WVN =JNI1N3S3lld38 133S1S vU vo°wftdvoN l E-11r -9 rno-7 d :W311 VaN39V d0133P811S :SS3tiaad altia- :31AIVN =S1N3IN INaa mo nd do Iowans (VON3DV Sal N4 0131811 SV) rON 1A13.11 daN3ad #S1N3INIA103 oIlBfld �1 3133H3 atiV08 3H1 AO 1118313 3H101 lumens aNV H3V13a 3000 dIZ A110 .1.33a1S r �- rON 3N0Hd 3ao3 dlZb Z S3Z- 01-(1-A;77 Et/L-Z 9��' hbb, ''ON 3NOHd =ss3saad ss3Nlsns dnovo NO11VZINV9110 / A3N39V AO MINIM CVO 0701 --v vGba A.4--70tv =1A1311 VaN3JV i a° 133rsns :9NI1N39311d31:I 133lLLS =ssaaaav :3WVN a :s11113INw03 mend AO Iowans (vaN3ov 3H1 NO a311911 SV) :'ON IN31I 1►OIV3'DV 0 :s1N31Nwo3 onend �1 N33H3 to :Mara aados 3111 AO 31E1313 aFu 01 swans aNv H31/134:1 3aop dIZ A113 133i11S ffigis 3003 dIZ :s93110011 ssaNisna df10!!t1 / NOLLVZI O / A3N39p dMOWN0 3N rON 3N0Hd (19V V CU VD \,4 :DNI1N39311d311 JW3 J33lLLS jg,."--)411i$1191 Qq\0\ ='ON 3N0Hd p��,/ � � 1 (� =31NVN :1A1311 VaN3JV 1� (VaN3�JV 3H1 NO 431SI1 SV) Iowans�Iowans cc/ Z� � I rON W311 VaN39V (-zt // gardt, :S1N3INI O3 onsnd :S1N3ININO3 onand AO Iowans 3133113 b/10// :3111a 0111108 aHu AO )11:1313 3H1 of swans aNv HOv13a 3aoa dIZ AJ.Ia 1331:I LS 3003 dIZ =SS3aaad SS3Nlsns dnoao / NC LLVZINVOII / AON39V 31NYN �'ON 3NOHd�JU�I��¢ '71�'1�'��� C� :JNI1N3S3ad3!! Sla7l V' ThuscucpD J33�lJ.S :ssaaaav ='ON 3N0Hd VILVDIeW �3Wt/N :W311 VaN3Jt/ „ (VaN3oV 3H1 NO Q31SIl SV) d0133P8f1S ='ON W311 VaN3JV :S1N3INIA103 anand o=S1N01AIV110a onend d0 .l.a3rsns d1 }I33113 I 01 `31JL1O auvo8 31H1 d0 311:1313 Mil 01limns aNv H3V.L3a 3amo dIZ JA.LI9 133EllS 3003 dIZ :MUGGY MINIMS d OHO / NOLL ZINIJE10 / A3N30V A0 31NVN rON 3NOFId MNIIN39311d311 All3 133111S VINIQVV) ='ON 3NOHd "I''19 e)01 01) crt ,-7,40'900 �✓ =SS3baaV =3IAIVN �W311 VaN3JV (VaN3°JV 3111 NO a31Sll SV) d0 J.13P8AS (7/ rON W311 VaN3DV :S1N3WW03 m9fld O :S1N3WW03 oIlBAd d0133P8fIS dl )133H3 )9-61-L :3111a aMVOS 3FII AO 3I1:1313 3111 Oil mums ms aNi©►Hov±3a 3003 dIZ A113 133ELLS 3©03 dIZ =SS3UCK11/ SMN1S118 dn01:I9 / NOLLVZINd51:10 / A3N3911/ AO 31NVN rON 3N0Hd :DNI1N3S311d31:1 w3 4C7Infn rON 3NOHd J33lLLS r19 &Jr() C,0)0--e-- rfre-t -3//9"\ =SSMICICI o► =31N1IN :W311 daN3011 q (VaN3t1V 3111 NO O31SIl SV) d0133P9f1S `J rON W311 VdN3JV :s1N3ww03 nand o=sJUN3ww03 mend Ao i3arens Al 3133H3 :31114 0MVOS 3H1 NUM 3111101limns (INV H31113a 3003 dIZ 3aoa dIZ ALI3 133a.1.S =S931113011 SS3NISf18 dnoaJ / NOM ZINN/MO / A3N3OV A0 3IIIIVN rON 3N0Hd JNI1N3S3E1d31:1 Au3 -121nov� � rON 9NOHd J3311.LS 2-i-vo via) r'l qa)c)--e, �7v°w /;Pc SS3HaaV =31rVdN :1A1311 VaN3JV (VdN39V 3141 4 NO 3112I1 SV) 1 d033P811S �— rON W311 t/aN39V =91N31AIW03 onend ❑=S1N3ININO3 onend AO.1.33rSnS 3133H3 101-0i-L ativoS 3H1 Jo 31E1313 3141011111VEMS aNv H3V1343 30oa d1Z A113 13381S 30oa d1Z =993tICKIV SS3Nisns dnotio No111o►ZINV9k10 / A3N3Dif AO 31NVN rON 3NOHd JNI1N3S3}Id31:1 Alta 1331119 rON 3N0Hd V1 4kJ ("1 O-Q :ssaaaad ----)//c7)ZJOW :1A1311 tIaN3JV (VaN391f 3H1 NO 43LSIl Sd) d01331'8nS � � rON W311 VdN39V =S1N3il'l IA10a onsnd o=S1N311' llAIoa anend AO Iowans 3I33H3 51�0/ L 31Va C11:1V08 3H1 AO )111313_ NUL 01 mans ONV H3V130 3a0o dIZ A110 133a1S rON 3N0Hd moo dIZ =9931:IOGV1 SS3NISn8 dnoup / NOLLV►ZINV OE10 / A3N3OV A0 3IAIVN Alin =JN11N3S31:1d31:1 133kI1S .31)'rON 3N0Hd �r s :SS3EIaaV =3 W'dN IA1311 VG DV (V►aN3DV 3111 N0 a31sn sd) d10133rens rON IN311 WHOM/ :S1N31NIA103 onand ❑=S.1N3111IA103 onsnd �0133rans b7 -467 :31VG �I 3133H3 MVOS 3H1 dO NI1313 3H101limns GNV► H3V1313