HomeMy Public PortalAbout01 January 30-31, 2020 Commission, Workshop, and Key Messaging TrainingRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
www.rctc.org
MEETING AGENDA
KEY MESSAGING TRAINING
9:00 a.m.
Thursday, January 30, 2020
Hilton Palm Springs, Whitewater Room
400 E Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, California
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
3. KEY MESSAGING TRAINING
4. ADJOURNMENT
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 and Government Code Section 54954.2, if special
assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at
(951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable
arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting.
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
www.rctc.org
WORKSHOP AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
January 30 – 31, 2020
Hilton Palm Springs
440 E Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
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 and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to
participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours
prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the
meeting.
The start times listed on the agenda are approximate and are included for guidance only. Agenda items may be taken out of the
order listed on the agenda.
THURSDAY, JANUARY 30, 2020
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.
1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. COMMISSION ROUNDTABLE – 2020 WHAT NEEDS OUR ATTENTION?
Ben J. Benoit, Chair
All Commissioners
2:00 p.m. – 2:40 p.m. PREVIEW OF DEBT REFINANCING OPPORTUNITIES
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
2:40 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. BREAK
Commission Workshop Agenda
January 30-31, 2020
Page 2
3:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. RCTC AT WORK: PANEL DISCUSSION
Moderated by Cheryl Donahue, Public Affairs Manager
Stephanie Blanco, Capital Projects Manager
Jennifer Crosson, Toll Operations Manager
Mark Lancaster, Capital Projects Manager
David Lewis, Capital Projects Manager
Bryce Johnston, Capital Projects Manager
David Thomas, Toll Project Manager
4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. LEGISLATIVE PANEL – WHAT’S HAPPENING IN WASHINGTON, D.C. AND
SACRAMENTO?
Panel Moderated by David Knudsen, Legislative Affairs Manager
Mark Watts
Kathy Ruffalo
Cliff Madison
5:00 p.m. – 5:15 p.m. WRAP UP AND NEXT STEPS
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
5:15 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. BREAK
6:00 p.m. DINNER
6:30 p.m. PRESENTATIONS ON SUNLINE AND NEW TECHNOLOGY
Lauren Skiver, CEO/General Manager SunLine Transit Agency
7:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT
The workshop will continue at 8:30 a.m., Friday, January 31, 440 E Tahquitz
Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California
FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 2020
7:30 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. BREAKFAST
8:30 a.m. –9:00 a.m. COMMISSION MEETING (SEE SEPARATE AGENDA)
9:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. SB 743 – VMT – THE FUTURE IN CALIFORNIA IS CHANGING
Charity Schiller, Best Best & Krieger, LLP
10:00 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. BREAK
10:15 a.m. – 10:45 a.m. ZERO FATALITIES TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS
Commissioner Lisa Middleton
10:45 a.m. – 11:15 a.m. HIGHWAY TECHNOLOGY UPDATE (AGENDA ITEM ATTACHED)
Darren Henderson, WSP
This item is for the Commission to receive and discuss
information on the use of technology for traffic relief strategies.
11:15 a.m. – 11:30 a.m. UPDATE ON PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT FOR TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN (AGENDA
ITEM ATTACHED)
Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
This item is for the Commission to receive information regarding
recent and upcoming public engagement for the Draft Traffic Relief
Plan.
11:30 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. RECAP AND FINAL THOUGHTS
Chair Ben J. Benoit
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
Commission Workshop Agenda
January 30-31, 2020
Page 2
11:45 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
RULES FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA AND NON AGENDA ITEMS. 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.
RCTC AT WORK: PANEL
Capital Projects Manager
• 15 Express Lanes Project
Southern Extension
Capital Projects Manager
• Route 60 Truck Lanes
• 1-15 Railroad Canyon Interchange
• Route 91 Pachappa Undercrossing
Capital Projects Manager
• Riverside Downtown Station
• Santa Ana River Trail (SART)
Toll Operations Manager
• Toll Operations
91 Express Lanes
15 Express Lanes
Capital Projects Manager
• 1-215 Placentia Avenue
(Mid County Parkway)
• 71/91 Interchange
Toll Project Manager
• 1-15 Express Lanes
• 15/91 Express Lanes Connector
• 91 Corridor Operations Project
PREVIEW OF 91 EXPRESS LANES DEBT REFINANCING OPPORTUNITIES
Workshop
January 30, 2020
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
1
No Leveraging of Surplus Toll Revenues
JANUARY 30, 2020
2
Desire to preserve future financings involving
surplus toll revenues from RCTC toll facilities
May return in future with innovative financing ideas
Existing surplus toll revenues still available to fund
91 corridor projects
Current 91 Express Lanes Toll Debt
JANUARY 30, 2020
3
Toll Revenue Bonds Original Amount Outstanding at
January 31, 2020
Senior Lien Bonds:
2013 Series A (Current Interest Bonds) $ 123,825,000 $ 123,825,000
2013 Series B (Capital Appreciation Bonds) 52,829,602 80,604,924
Subordinate Lien Bonds:
2013 TIFIA Loan 421,054,409 482,169,632
Total $ 597,709,011 $ 686,599,556
Why Consider a Refinancing?
JANUARY 30, 2020
4
Debt Management Tool
•Reduce interest costs
•Capture additional near-term surplus toll revenues
•Remove or change burdensome bond covenants
•Enhance future debt management flexibility
Criteria
•Net present value savings of at least 3% of par value of refunded bonds
•May be below 3% in certain circumstances with justification and Board
approval
Proposed Plan of Refinance
JANUARY 30, 2020
5
Debt Today
•Senior Lien (tax-exempt)
•2013 A Bonds
•2013 B Bonds
•Subordinate Lien (taxable)
•2013 TIFIA Loan
Debt after Refinancing
•Senior Lien
•2020 A Refunding Bonds (taxable)
•2013 B Bonds (tax-exempt)
•2020 B1 Refunding Bonds (tax-exempt)
•Subordinate Lien
•2020 B2 Refunding Bonds (tax-exempt)
•Advance refund 2013 A Bonds (tax-exempt) with 2020 A Refunding Bonds (taxable) due to tax reform
•No change in 2013 B Bonds as refunding not economically feasible
•Refinance 2013 TIFIA Loan with tax-exempt senior lien 2020 B1 and subordinate lien 2020 B2 Refunding Bonds
2020 Refinancing Objectives
JANUARY 30, 2020
6
Burdensome Covenants
•TIFIA Loan
prepayments
•TIFIA approvals
•Reporting and
administration
Future Debt Service
•Ensure funds available
for 91 corridor projects
•Lower debt service
payments
•Earlier final debt
maturity
Historical Basis for Tax-Exempt Rates
JANUARY 30, 2020
7
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
3.50%
4.00%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Historical Municipal Market Data (MMD) Rates
1-Year Historical MMD Range
____________________
Source: Thomson Reuters as of 1/21/2020.
1/21/2020 MMD
Summary: Option 1
JANUARY 30, 2020
8
Maintain
Existing Debt
Structure
•Final maturity:
•Toll bonds in 2048
•TIFIA Loan:
•Scheduled in 2051
•With prepayments ~2039
•Begin revenue sharing of surplus toll revenues
with TIFIA in December 2021 until maturity
•Surplus revenues available only after
revenue sharing with TIFIA
Summary: Option 2
JANUARY 30, 2020
9
Refinance
Debt
•Net present value savings
•Final debt maturity may be earlier than
2051
•Toll authority through 2067
•Level of gross debt service savings, if any
•Surplus toll revenues available sooner for
91 corridor projects in 2019-2029 Delivery
Plan
DISCUSSION
10
Today’s Transit for Tomorrow’s
World
Lauren Skiver
CEO/General Manager
SunLine Transit Agency
How SunLine Transit Agency is
Revolutionizing Transit
Routes
•14 fixed routes
•1 express route
•1 Riverside Commuter Link
•ADA Paratransit
Fleet
•61 CNG
•16 Electric Hydrogen Fuel Cell (2 in production)
•4 Electric Battery BYD
•39 CNG Paratransit Vehicles
Revenue Miles vs. Passenger Trips
•4.3 million revenue miles
•4.5 million passenger trips
SunLine Operations –350 Employees
SunLine’s Vision
Improve service quality and on-time performance
Progress on pioneering zero emission technology
Attracting talented and passionate team members
Investing in our team by expanding training and experience opportunities
Continued progress on Performance Management and Culture of Excellence projects
Today’s Transit for Tomorrow’s World
Creating a Transit System
Transformation
Ridership Snapshot
Route 111
Palm Springs/Coachella
Highest ridership route
Over 4,000 boardings per weekday
FY 18
3,947,023
FY 19
4,039,450
2.28%
= 35% of the entire system
average daily ridership
Transit Improvements
MicrotransitPilot
•Program launched January 2020 at College of the Desert
•On-demand service provided by local taxis
Commuter Link 10
•Starting May 2020
•Connect to more frequent MetroLinkservices at the San Bernardino Transit Center/Metrolink Station
111X
•Planned for September 2020
•Weekday express service with key transfer locations
System Improvements
Reduce Transfers/Speed Up System/Reduce Overlap
Eliminate and Reallocate Under Performing Routes
Launch Rideshare and Explore Flexible Services
Today’s Transit for Tomorrow’s World
What Do You Know About
Power/Energy?
Dead plant/animal life, heat,pressure (>100s of millions of years) –Fossil Fuels
Solar (instant)SunEnergyevaporation, clouds, rain, lakes
Wind (days –weeks)
wind turbine
“Energy sustainability requires
conversion of resources at the
same rate at which they are
naturally replenished on earth
without externalities”
Primary Energy Sources
All Energy on Earth is from the Sun!
coal, oil, natural gas
ethanol,biogas, biomass
Corn/Trees/Grass (months –years)
Hydro (weeks –months)
Electricity Puzzle
Time of Use When you use it
Demand Charges
The largest use in a period in a billing cycle
Cost Per Kilowatt Hour
How much is power in your area and how much does it cost?
Energy Options for the Coachella Valley
Hydrogen Basics
Most abundant element on earth
Hydrogen makes up over 90% of all atoms in the universe
Smallest atom and lightest of all chemical elements
Hydrogen comes from water (H2O) and makes up 10% of
the mass of the human body
Odorless/tasteless/colorlessH
Hydrogen Benefits
Used as rocket fuel/vehicle fuel
Can be stored as liquid or gas
Can be converted from liquid to gas and back again
It can be converted into electricity
Does not produce harmful emissions
Renewable
Fuel Efficient
Hydrogen Safety
How many Hydrogen vehicle fires are there?
ANSWER
Hydrogen vehicle fires in the past 25 years -ZERO
How many gasoline vehicle fires in 2019?151,246
13,000 + deaths
Flammability
Gasoline @14.7-1 air fuel ratio 4.0%
CNG@18.1-1 air fuel ratio .55%
Hydrogen@24.0 -1 air fuel ratio 0.07%
Hydrogen Cost/Benefit
PROCURE
You can procure under long term, set priced contracts
1 FOR 1
Bus operations are 1 for 1 versus all-battery electric which require both capital, operational and labor cost increase
LONGER
RANGES
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Buses offer longer ranges (up to 350) miles per fill versus battery electrics that range 120 to 160 per full charge
FILL
TIMES
Range 15 to 20 minute fills versus in-route charging costs or long deport charge times
Normal fueling, cleaning, procedures through standard fuel lanes
Today’s Transit for Tomorrow’s World
The Motivation
SunLine Board Policy
Purpose:
•“To establish policy advocating the purchase and use of only vehicles fueled by alternative fuels with the lowest possible emissions.”
Policy:
•“It shall be the policy of SunLine Transit Agency that the replacement and/or addition of all vehicles, revenue or non revenue, be made with vehicles fueled with alternative fuel that provides the lowest emissions.”
Actions to be Followed:
•“The State of California has established four categories of alternate fuel vehicles: 1) Zero Emission Vehicles; 2) Ultra Low Emission Vehicles; 3) Low Emission Vehicles; 4) Transitional Low Emission Vehicles. SunLine will, whenever possible, purchase vehicles in the same order as listed above. We do recognize that it may not always be possible to buy a vehicle from these categories as alternate fueled vehicles are still relatively new and are not always available. We also have to be practical and take into consideration the cost of the vehicle, and the cost of the continued use and maintenance.”
Approved March 24, 1993
SunLine’s Technology Contribution
Operating H2for more than 20 years
Pioneered the electric drive
Expanded the commercialization of H2 technology
SunLine’s Long History in Hydrogen
Leaders in Hydrogen Electric Fuel Cell Bus Technology for over two decades
SunLine will have 19 Electric Fuel Cell Buses in 2020
(Grant Submissions for up to 12 Additional Buses)
CARB Innovative Clean Transportation (ICT) Regulation
Regulations
Regulates the heavy duty sector to zero emission (ZE) vehicles in California
All heavy duty trucking (including transit buses) transition to ZE vehicles by 2040
Transit Requirements
January 2023 –25% of fleet purchases must be ZEB
January 2026 –50% of fleet purchases must be ZEB
January 2029 –All fleet purchases must be ZEB
Requires the development of an agency deployment plan
Only 1 year extension will be authorized
CARB Advanced Clean Truck (ACT) Regulation
Regulations
The proposed Advanced Clean Truck Regulation is part of a holistic approach to accelerate a large-scale transition of zero emission medium-and heavy-duty vehicles
Medium & Heavy Duty Requirements
TRUCK SALES
By 2030, zero emission truck/chassis sales need to be 50% of Class 4–8 straight trucks sales and 15% of all other truck sales
COMPANY & FLEET REPORTING
Fleet owners, with 100 or more trucks, would be required to report about their existing fleet operations
Today’s Transit for Tomorrow’s World
How Does It Work?
A Fuel Cell Bus is an Electric Bus
•Hydrogen powered buses are
hybrid fuel cell battery electric
buses
•Fuel cell modules generate
power from hydrogen to
recharge onboard batteries
and power the electric drive
•Same maintenance and parts
as a battery electric bus, apart
from the fuel cell power
module and gas tanks
SunLine’s Hydrogen Program
Fueling Experience•Hyradix SMR
•220 Kg per day capacity
•Natural Gas / Bio Gas (landfill) source fuel
•Past its capacity for rolling stock
•Public fueling station –350 Bar
In Commissioning
•Proton/Nel PEM
Electrolyzer
•900 Kg per day
production
•60% renewable solar
electricity
•380 Kg use per day
•2 dispenser fast fill rate
•$8.7 Million CARB Grant
•Public Fueling –700 Bar
expansion for future
Today’s Transit for Tomorrow’s World
The Future Energy Vision for
SunLine and the Coachella Valley
Powering a Clean Tomorrow -Today
Future Fueling Exploration
•SunLine is looking to expand its fueling systems
•The creation of a micro-grid
•Phase 1 –Solar Farm
•Phase 2 –Solar to Hydrogen for Electricity Storage
•Phase 3 –Hydrogen/Electricity Truck Stop
•Looking to fund an upgrade at our second station in Indio for Hydrogen production and outside sales
Potential Funding Sources
$
Potential Funding Opportunities
How can we prioritize these types of economic development activities?
SunLine’s proud of continued grant awards and compliance of state and local funding management
State Resources
Air Quality Management
District
California Air Resources Board
California Energy Commission
Federal Assistance
Federal Transit
Administration
Department of Energy
Create Local Energy Commission
$$$
$
SunLine has achieved $25 million over 3 years in competitive funding.
Local Apportionments
Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality Funding
Measure A
State Transit Assistance
How Can We Do It?
Funded
•Hydrogen Electrolyzer ($8.7 million)
o Grant funding received by California Air Resources Board
Seeking Funding
•Solar Microgrid for Hydrogen Production ($4.7 million)
o Submitted Grant for Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program
•Hydrogen Electric Truck Stop
•Hydrogen Public Fueling Station
•Indio Hydrogen Station
Today’s Transit for Tomorrow’s World
Building The Future Workforce
West Coast Center of Excellence
Advanced Technology Technician Training Procurement Insights for ZEB purchases
Planning and executing ZEB’s in service
Leadership, mission, value creation for a successful ZEB Program
Completed Training Modules
Local Academic Institutions Manufacturers Private Business Coachella Valley Leaders
Looking for Partners
SunLine has made a deep commitment to reducing environmental impacts while delivering world-class transit services
Hydrogen will play a significant role in transportation and energy generation
SunLine Transit Agency is deeply involved in the transition to clean fuels and energy
Zero emission technology works
The ICT and ACT will change the way municipalities, private industry and transportation operate in the future
Key Takeaways
Thank You
lskiver@sunline.org
Riverside County Transportation Commission
January 31, 2020
Background
•CEQA requires agencies to consider transportation and traffic impacts prior to approving projects.
•Historically, a delay-based metric has been used.
•Level of Service (LOS) measures how efficiently traffic flows through roadways and intersections on an A through F scale.
•LOS impacts are often mitigated through roadway efficiency improvements (widening, restriping, signalization, interchange improvements, connectivity between communities, and fair-share fees).
•Separate from CEQA, LOS standards are also reflected in most city/county general plans.
The State Steps In
•By the early 2000s, there were growing concerns re greenhouse gases (GHG) and global warming.
•AB 32 (2006): Legislature recognizes global warming and establishes state-wide GHG reduction targets.
•State focused on the transportation-sector, sought to encourage infill, and tried to limit “sprawl.”
•SB 375 (2008) –Each Metropolitan Planning Organization must develop a Regional Transportation Plan that “caps” transportation-sector GHGs through a “Sustainable Communities Strategy.”
The State’s Next Step: Senate Bill 743
•SB 743 (2013) amended CEQA (Pub. Resources Code 21099) to require that transportation impacts in certain areas be analyzed using something other than LOS.
•Legislature focused on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the new metric.
•CEQA Guidelines 15064.3 confirmed that VMT is generally the most appropriate metric going forward.
Is SB 743 a Step Forward or Step Back?
•Extensive debate on whether VMT is “better” than LOS. (If your trip is only ten miles, but it takes you two hours to make that trip because of congestion, are you really reducing GHGs?)
•Although intended to facilitate residential infill, does SB 743 unintentionally worsen the housing crisis by making it harder/more expensive for less urbanized areas to build affordable housing?
•Doesn’t the switch to VMT disproportionately affect development in areas that are not yet fully developed (like much of the Inland Empire)?
The Bottom Line Requirement
•Regardless of the uncertainty and arguments,
agencies must change their method of analyzing traffic
impacts in CEQA documents no later than July 1st.
•LOS/delay will no longer be considered a “impact”.
•VMT analysis is “generally” required.
•Caveat per Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation
v. City of Sacramento (cert. 12/2019). Argument that
LOS is no longer a CEQA impact now.
Why Is The July 1st Deadline Important? (cont.)
•It flips traditional traffic impact analysis and
mitigation on its head.
•Things that we once viewed as traffic mitigation
because they reduced vehicle delay (i.e., new,
wider, better roads), might now be viewed as
causing a traffic impact because they arguably
facilitate VMT in some circumstances.
Why Is The July 1st Deadline Important? (cont.)
•Issues re Cost/Timing:
•“If the [CEQA] document meets the content requirements in effect when the document is sent out for public review,” it need not be updated. (CEQA Guideline 15007.)
•But some real uncertainties with regard to documents that are in mid-preparation.
Why Is The July 1st Deadline Important? (cont.)
•Issues re how much VMT is “significant”?
•Do agencies want a jurisdiction-wide threshold; a regional
threshold; or attempt to address on a project-by-project basis.
•If VMT threshold is too low, an EIR will be required for
virtually every project. (Discourages development?)
•If VMT threshold is too high, an EIR may never be required.
(Illusory?)
•OPR recommends a threshold of reducing VMT to a level of
“15% below that of existing development.”
•What happens when thresholds conflict?
•Any threshold must be supported by substantial evidence and
be adopted through a public process.
Why Is The July 1st Deadline Important? (cont.)
•Issues re Caltrans and RTPs :
•Caltrans working on a proposed VMT threshold.
•How will it apply when local sponsor (RCTC or
others) are CEQA lead agency, but Caltrans review
is required?
•Will RTPs re-focus on reducing VMTs , rather than
facilitating vehicular circulation?
Why Is The July 1st Deadline Important? (cont.)
•Issues re technical analysis:
•CEQA process still fundamentally the same:
describe project; calculate VMT impact; compare to
threshold; mitigate if significant.
•However, technically complex:
•How “far out” from Project site must VMT be
calculated? When does it become speculative?
•Particularly for transportation projects, how do
we calculate the existing “baseline” VMT for
purposes of evaluating the impact.
Why Is The July 1st Deadline Important? (cont.)
•Issues re mitigation:
•CEQA requires all “feasible”
mitigation for significant impacts.
•Greater emphasis on measures that
reduce VMT (bicycles, pedestrian,
train, busing, carpool).
•But can we “feasibly” mitigate to a
level of less-than-significant for large
projects?
•Large-scale mitigation comes with
large-scale price tags. A regional
mitigation approach may be an
option.
Why Is The July 1st Deadline Important? (cont.)
•More issues re mitigation:
•How to show that “mitigation” is additive (over and
above what would normally happen)?
•More pressure to “bundle” projects that reduce VMT
with projects that increase VMT? A new way of
looking at project planning?
•If LOS is no longer an “impact,” what does this
mean for current “mitigation” schemes?
Why Is The July 1st Deadline Important? (cont.)
•Litigation issues:
•CEQA continues to be a cudgel for many groups.
•Every uncertainty is an opportunity for legal challenge.
•Litigation costs are especially tough on public projects without private sponsors –including nearly all transportation projects.
With all the uncertainties around VMT, can
agencies at least scratch LOS off their list?
•Probably not.
•LOS still used in many planning documents
(e.g., general plans).
•Land use consistency, land use adjacency,
public health, and quality of life issues are
tied to LOS in some jurisdictions.
•LOS goals might still be an important factor
for decision-makers to weigh before acting
on a proposed project.
Where do we go from here?
•Up to RCTC. Potential for active engagement
at local, regional, and state levels to help:
•Maintain project delivery schedules.
•Control costs.
•Reflect stakeholder/partner interests.
•Develop a record to reduce risk and uncertainty.
What can RCTC do?
•Proactive Caltrans, CTC, CalSTA , legislative engagement to ensure project impacts considered in rulemaking and guideline implementation
•Collaboration with partners to build consensus and best practices:
•WRCOG and CVAG
•Self Help Counties Coalition
•Mobility 21
•Regional Transportation Planning Agencies
•SCAG
•Create solutions; don’t wait to be told what to do:
•Coordinated VMT mitigation program like TUMF?
•Mitigation Bank?
•Self-mitigate per Traffic Relief Plan
•Pursue Legislative Clarifications
QUESTIONS??
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 31, 2020
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery director
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Highway Technology Update
This item is for the Commission to receive and discuss information on the use of technology
for traffic relief strategies.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In November of 2019 staff presented to the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee information about
technology-based strategies used by various agencies around the world to manage traffic (as
seen in the photographic examples below), in order to reduce congestion, reduce pollution,
increase safety, and improve the quality of commutes. This presentation by Darren Henderson
of WSP will build on that introduction.
Example of lane control sign from the U.K. Example of lane control sign from Contra Costa County, CA
Riverside County Transportation Commission WorkshopJanuary 31, 2020
Darren Henderson, WSPDaniel Suter, TransmaxAdam Myers, Transmax
Highway Technology Update:
SMART FREEWAYS
The most important transportation strategy
you’ve probably never heard of!
R e f i n e s t h e w a y w e u s e f a m i l i a r h i g h w a y t r a f f i c
m a n a g e m e n t t e c h n o l o g i e s
P r o v i d e s a c o m p r e h e n s i v e
p a c k a g e o f s t r a t e g i e s t o
b e t t e r m a n a g e f r e e w a y
o p e r a t i o n s a n d
o p t i m i z e t r a f f i c f l o w s
S m a r t F r e e w a y s p r o v i d e s a n e w a p p r o a c h t o f u l l y c o n t r o l f r e e w a y o p e r a t i o n s
S o u r c e : V i c R o a d s
M 8 0 ,
M e l b o u r n e , V I C
W o r k s b y s y n c h r o n i z i n g t h e f l o w o f v e h i c l e s e n t e r i n g a n d
e x i t i n g t h e f r e e w a y t o t h o s e a l r e a d y o n t h e f r e e w a y .
P r o v i d e s r e a l t i m e
d e m a n d m a n a g e m e n t
t o c o n t r o l t r a f f i c a n d
o p t i m i z e o v e r a l l
f r e e w a y e f f i c i e n c y
S m a r t F r e e w a y s u s e s t e c h n o l o g y t o o p t i m i z e f r e e w a y o p e r a t i o n s i n r e a l t i m e
S o u r c e : T r a n s m a x
S T R E A M S � S c h e m a t i c I n t e r f a c e
��C a n i n c l u d e :
��F r e q u e n t h i g h l y p r e c i s e v e h i c l e d e t e c t i o n
��C o o r d i n a t e d d y n a m i c r a m p m e t e r i n g
��L a n e - u s e m a n a g e m e n t s y s t e m s :
��V a r i a b l e s p e e d l i m i t s
��V a r i a b l e l a n e c o n t r o l
��S h o u l d e r r u n n i n g
��I n c i d e n t d e t e c t i o n a n d C C T V s u r v e i l l a n c e
��T r a v e l e r i n f o r m a t i o n
��C o m p r e h e n s i v e a n d c o o r d i n a t e d I T S c o n t r o l
s y s t e m r u n n i n g a d v a n c e d t r a f f i c a l g o r i t h m s
P r e c i s e d a t a a n d a d v a n c e d s y s t e m m a n a g e m e n t t e c h n o l o g y a r e k e y t o S m a r t F r e e w a y s
S o u r c e : V i c R o a d s
M 8 0 ,
M e l b o u r n e , V I C
��C a n i n c l u d e :
A d d r e s s i n g m a i n l i n e b o t t l e n e c k s
O n r a m p q u e u e s t o r a g e a n d d i s c h a r g e
M e r g e l a n e s a n d w e a v e a r e a s
O f f r a m p d i s c h a r g e
P r i o r i t y v e h i c l e l a n e s a n d
r a m p q u e u e b y p a s s .
S t r a t e g i c d e s i g n c o n s i d e r a t i o n s a r e i n t e g r a l t o S m a r t F r e e w a y s e f f e c t i v e n e s s
S o u r c e : V i c R o a d s
M 8 0 ,
M e l b o u r n e , V I C
��R e q u i r e s e m b r a c i n g a n e w h o l i s t i c a p p r o a c h t o f r e e w a y
t r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s
S y s t e m s a p p r o a c h t o f r e e w a y p l a n n i n g , d e s i g n a n d o p e r a t i o n s
N e c e s s i t a t e s a p p r o p r i a t e
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a n d
m a n a g e r i a l s u p p o r t
M u s t b e i m p l e m e n t e d
w i t h a r o b u s t p a r t n e r s h i p
w i t h C a l t r a n s
M a n a g e d [ F r e e w a y s ] i s n o t a t r i v i a l m a t t e r
M a r k o s P a p a g e o r g i o u 2 0 0 7
S o u r c e : V i c R o a d s
M 8 0 ,
M e l b o u r n e , V I C
��I n i t i a l l y d e v e l o p e d b y V i c R o a d s
��M e l b o u r n e s M a n a g e d
M o t o r w a y s y s t e m n o w
e x t e n d s o v e r m o r e
t h a n 1 0 0 m i l e s o f
f r e e w a y s
��A l s o i n o p e r a t i o n
i n B r i s b a n e
S m a r t F r e e w a y s a r e o p e r a t i n g o n m u l t i p l e f r e e w a y c o r r i d o r s i n A u s t r a l i a
S o u r c e : V i c R o a d s ( h t t p s : / / v 2 . c o m m u n i t y a n a l y t i c s . c o m . a u / v i c r o a d s / m a n a g e d - m o t o r w a y s / m a p )
��M e l b o u r n e s t h r o u g h p u t o n S m a r t F r e e w a y s i n c r e a s e d b y u p
t o 2 5 % d u r i n g t h e p e a k p e r i o d s
T h a t s t h e e q u i v a l e n t o f a d d i n g a f i f t h l a n e o n a f o u r l a n e f r e e w a y
��T h e e c o n o m i c b e n e f i t s o f t h e i n i t i a l S m a r t F r e e w a y m a d e t h e
b u s i n e s s c a s e f o r c o m p l e t i n g t h e e n t i r e n e t w o r k
S m a r t F r e e w a y s i s t h e o n l y p r o v e n s t r a t e g y t o r e l i a b l y c o n t r o l f r e e w a y o p e r a t i o n s
S o u r c e s : V i c R o a d s a n d T r a n s m a x
��T h e c h a l l e n g e &
S m a r t F r e e w a y s c a s e s t u d y : B r u c e H i g h w a y , B r i s b a n e , A u s t r a l i a
B r u c e H i g h w a y ( 2 0 1 4 ) ,
B r i s b a n e , Q L D
S o u r c e : R A C Q
��B e f o r e M a n a g e d F r e e w a y s &
S m a r t F r e e w a y s c a s e s t u d y : B r u c e H i g h w a y , B r i s b a n e , A u s t r a l i a
D i r e c t i o n o f f l o w ( 1 1 m i l e s ) A M p e a k p e r i o d ( 5 : 0 0 A M t o 9 : 0 0 A M )
��A f t e r M a n a g e d F r e e w a y s &
S m a r t F r e e w a y s c a s e s t u d y : B r u c e H i g h w a y , B r i s b a n e , A u s t r a l i a
D i r e c t i o n o f f l o w ( 1 1 m i l e s ) A M p e a k p e r i o d ( 5 : 0 0 A M t o 9 : 0 0 A M )
��A r i z o n a , C a l i f o r n i a , C o l o r a d o ,
G e o r g i a , N o r t h C a r o l i n a , U t a h
a n d O n t a r i o a r e d o i n g ( o r h a v e
d o n e ) i n i t i a l f e a s i b i l i t y a s s e s s m e n t s
S m a r t f r e e w a y s h a v e b e e n
i d e n t i f i e d a s a v i a b l e s t r a t e g y
f o r v a r i o u s f r e e w a y c o r r i d o r s
S m a r t F r e e w a y s i s s e e i n g i n c r e a s i n g i n t e r e s t a c r o s s N o r t h A m e r i c a
S o u r c e : V i c R o a d s ( h t t p s : / / v 2 . c o m m u n i t y a n a l y t i c s . c o m . a u / v i c r o a d s / m a n a g e d - m o t o r w a y s / m a p )
I - 2 5 ,
D e n v e r , C O
I - 4 0 ,
R a l e i g h , N C
��C D O T i s p r o c e e d i n g w i t h a
d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f S m a r t
F r e e w a y s o n N B I - 2 5 i n D e n v e r
��S M A R T 2 5 i n c l u d e s :
S t r a t e g i c r a m p m o d i f i c a t i o n s
i n c l u d i n g f r e e w a y t o f r e e w a y
c o n n e c t o r s
U p g r a d e d v e h i c l e d e t e c t i o n
c a p a b i l i t i e s
S m a r t F r e e w a y s i s s e e i n g i n c r e a s i n g i n t e r e s t a c r o s s N o r t h A m e r i c a
S o u r c e : V i c R o a d s ( h t t p s : / / v 2 . c o m m u n i t y a n a l y t i c s . c o m . a u / v i c r o a d s / m a n a g e d - m o t o r w a y s / m a p )
��S M A R T 2 5 e l e m e n t s i n c l u d e :
E n h a n c e d I T S c o n t r o l s y s t e m
u s i n g T r a n s m a x S T R E A M S �
C l o u d b a s e d o p e r a t i o n s u s i n g V i c R o a d s
e x i s t i n g c o n t r o l a l g o r i t h m s
��C o n s t r u c t i o n i s o n g o i n g
w i t h o p e r a t i o n s s c h e d u l e d
t o c o m m e n c e b y f a l l 2 0 2 0
S m a r t F r e e w a y s i s s e e i n g i n c r e a s i n g i n t e r e s t a c r o s s N o r t h A m e r i c a
��H i g h l e v e l s c r e e n i n g o f f r e e w a y s a c r o s s t h e c o u n t y t o
i d e n t i f y c a n d i d a t e l o c a t i o n s
��E v a l u a t e e x i s t i n g t r a f f i c
t o d e v e l o p c o n c e p t u a l
d e s i g n a n d c o s t f o r
a p o t e n t i a l p i l o t p r o j e c t
S m a r t F r e e w a y s i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
I - 1 5 ,
T e m e c u l a , C A
P h o t o c r e d i t : S h a n e G i b s o n , V i l l a g e N e w s
After
Before
Speed
Volume
Occupancy
Site Measures
Speed
Volume
Occupancy
Site Measures
Thank you!
Questions
Riverside County Transportation Commission WorkshopJanuary 31, 2020
Darren Henderson, WSPDaniel Suter, TransmaxAdam Myers, Transmax
Highway Technology Update:
SMART FREEWAYS
The most important transportation strategy
you’ve probably never heard of!
Managed Freeways requires a new approach following a holistic policy framework
1.New Understanding Contemporary traffic
theory
Data requirements and
analytic tools
Nature of traffic flow and
problems
2. Design and
Planning (System
Approach)
Infrastructure Capacity
-Flexibility for operations
-Mainline, entry,exits,
interchanges, intersections
-Reducing mainline
turbulence
Systems Design and
Architecture
-Control systems
-Devices
-Communications
New Design Standards and
Technical Specifications
-Supporting additional
requirements
3. Operations Technically Effective
Algorithms
-Development
-Deployment
Technical Expertise of
Personnel
-Different disciplines
-Ongoing learning
-New staff training
Maintenance Regime
-Support network operational
performance
-Achieve high level reliability
4. Organizational and
Managerial Support
Network Operational
Philosophy and Strategies
Appropriate Operational
Resources
Appropriate ITS
Maintenance Budgets
��T h e s o l u t i o n &
M a n a g e d F r e e w a y s c a s e s t u d y : B r u c e H i g h w a y , B r i s b a n e , A u s t r a l i a
I m p l e m e n t a
S m a r t
F r e e w a y s
p i l o t p r o j e c t
e n c o m p a s s i n g
f i v e a r t e r i a l
i n t e r c h a n g e s
a l o n g
s o u t h b o u n d
B r u c e H i g h w a y
T r a f f i c
b o t t l e n e c k
��B e f o r e M a n a g e d F r e e w a y s
M a n a g e d F r e e w a y s c a s e s t u d y : B r u c e H i g h w a y , B r i s b a n e , A u s t r a l i a
��A f t e r M a n a g e d F r e e w a y s
M a n a g e d F r e e w a y s c a s e s t u d y : B r u c e H i g h w a y , B r i s b a n e , A u s t r a l i a
��T h e n e w n o r m a l
S m a r t F r e e w a y s c a s e s t u d y : B r u c e H i g h w a y , B r i s b a n e , A u s t r a l i a
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
4 : 3 0 4 : 3 6 4 : 4 2 4 : 4 8 4 : 5 4 5 : 0 0 5 : 0 6 5 : 1 2 5 : 1 8 5 : 2 4 5 : 3 0 5 : 3 6 5 : 4 2 5 : 4 8 5 : 5 4 6 : 0 0 6 : 0 6 6 : 1 2 6 : 1 8 6 : 2 4 6 : 3 0 6 : 3 6 6 : 4 2 6 : 4 8 6 : 5 4 7 : 0 0 7 : 0 6 7 : 1 2 7 : 1 8 7 : 2 4 7 : 3 0 7 : 3 6 7 : 4 2 7 : 4 8 7 : 5 4 8 : 0 0 8 : 0 6 8 : 1 2 8 : 1 8 8 : 2 4 8 : 3 0 8 : 3 6 8 : 4 2 8 : 4 8 8 : 5 4 9 : 0 0 9 : 0 6 9 : 1 2 9 : 1 8 9 : 2 4 9 : 3 0 9 : 3 6 9 : 4 2 9 : 4 8 9 : 5 4 1 0 : 0 0 T r a f f i c f l o w d e p a r t i n g B r u c e H i g h w a y
B e f o r e A f t e r
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 31, 2020
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Public Engagement Update for Draft Traffic Relief Plan
This item is for the Commission to receive information regarding recent and upcoming public
engagement for the Draft Traffic Relief Plan.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Following the Commission’s approval of the Draft Traffic Relief Plan (draft Plan) for public review
and comment on January 8, 2020, Commission staff initiated public engagement activities as
authorized by the Commission. Initial results from these engagement activities are arriving. RCTC
will present interim metrics to the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee from February through
May 2020 and a final public engagement report to the Commission by June 2020. This item is a
brief status report on general engagement trends.
At the time of agenda publication, the following has occurred:
•Members of the public submitted more than 1,900 surveys through trafficreliefplan.org.
•There have been more than 12,500 visits to trafficreliefplan.org.
•RCTC social media accounts have served ads to over 260,000 county residents
encouraging them to learn more about the draft Plan, read the draft Plan itself, and
provide feedback.
•Riverside County residents began to hear ads requesting public input on the draft Plan via
streaming radio services.
•The Press-Enterprise, Desert Sun, and several local versions of the Patch news website
have published articles about the draft Plan.
•The draft Plan is available in Spanish at trafficreliefplan.org.
•RCTC staff has received requests for presentations from the cities of La Quinta and Norco,
the California Desert Association of Realtors, and several transportation industry
organizations.
•RCTC staff presented the draft Plan and other transportation updates to the Riverside City
Council and staff of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians at their request.
Through June 10, 2020, public engagement efforts will continue and increase in reach pursuant
to the enhanced public engagement program authorized by the Commission in 2019. As stated
by Commissioners in prior meetings, engagement efforts are intended to educate and engage
residents of Riverside County regarding their transportation needs and soliciting their input on
the draft Plan that the Commission has developed and will consider adopting in mid-2020.
Commissioners are invited to refer staff to organizations and individuals within their communities
who would benefit from a presentation of the draft Plan.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Neither Somwhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
Early Qualitative Results: Jan. 9-23
1
Our Communication Tools
2
•Social media
•Email notices
•Digital radio
•Earned media
•Member agencies
•Billboards
•Mail (English/Spanish)
•Tele -town hall meetings
•Community events
•Presentations to
city councils,
service clubs,
industry groups
News Coverage
3
Committee/Commission Updates
4
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Commission
February 24, 2020 April 8, 2020
March 23, 2020 June 10, 2020
April 27, 2020
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.
MEETING AGENDA
TIME/DATE: 8:30 a.m. / Friday, January 31, 2020
LOCATION: HILTON PALM SPRINGS
440 E Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
COMMISSIONERS
Chair – Ben J. Benoit
Vice Chair – Jan Harnik
Second Vice Chair – V. Manuel Perez
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 / Kimberly Muzik, 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
Yxstain Gutierrez / Carla Thornton, City of Moreno Valley
Scott Vinton / To Be Appointed, City of Murrieta
Berwin Hanna / Ted Hoffman, City of Norco
Jan Harnik / Kathleen Kelly, City of Palm Desert
Lisa Middleton / Dennis Woods, 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
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
www.rctc.org
MEETING AGENDA
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
8:30 a.m.
Friday, January 31, 2020
Hilton Palm Springs
440 E Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, California
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 and Government Code Section 54954.2, if special
assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at
(951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that
reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
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 Agenda
January 31, 2020
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. ADDITIONAL AWARDS FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS
Page 1
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve additional project awards for the Fiscal Year 2019/20 SB 821 Bicycle and
Pedestrian Facilities (SB 821) program for an additional amount of $1,611,395 and a
total amount of $5,513,310;
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.
7. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE REQUEST FOR A LOAN ON HAMNER BRIDGE PROJECT
Page 4
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve a loan to the County of Riverside (County) of 2009 Measure A Western County
Regional Arterial (MARA) and/or Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF)
Regional Arterial program funds in the amount of $33,463,000 for construction of the
Hamner Bridge Replacement and Widening Project (Hamner Bridge Project) with the
County’s repayment of the loan anticipated from federal Highway Bridge Program
(HBP) funds;
2) Authorize the Executive Director to develop, finalize and execute Agreement
No. 18-31-074-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 18-31-074-00, with the County
and cities of Eastvale and Norco for the construction of the Hamner Bridge Project to
include terms of a loan agreement, pursuant to legal counsel review;
3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to develop, finalize,
and execute a new or amend an existing agreement with the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) related to the Commission’s loan on the Hamner Bridge
Project; and
4) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to develop, finalize,
and execute agreements with the County, city of Eastvale, city of Norco, and/or Caltrans
related to the loan for the Hamner Bridge Project.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda
January 31, 2020
Page 3
8. REMEDIAL WORK CONTRACT FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Page 9
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 20-31-043-00 with Atkinson/Walsh a Joint Venture (AWJV) to
perform remedial work for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project
(SR-91 CIP) in an amount not to exceed $500,000; and
2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to finalize and
execute the agreement.
9. 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.
10. CLOSED SESSION
10A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
POSSIBLE INITIATION OF LITIGATION PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION (D)(4) OF
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9
Potential Number of Case(s): 1
11. ADJOURNMENT
AGENDA ITEM 6
Agenda Item 6
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 31, 2020
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM: Jenny Chan, Planning and Programming Management Analyst
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Additional Awards Fiscal Year 2019/20 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian
Facilities Program Funding Recommendations
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve additional project awards for the Fiscal Year 2019/20 SB 821 Bicycle and
Pedestrian Facilities (SB 821) program for an additional amount of $1,611,395 and a
total amount of $5,513,310;
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.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
On June 12, 2019, the Commission awarded SB 821 funding for 12 bicycle and pedestrian
improvement projects with scores of 39 and above, totaling $3,901,915 for the FY 2019/20
SB 821 Call for Projects. On January 8, 2020, the Commission approved the FY 2019/20
Mid-Year Revenue Projections for Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenues, resulting in
increased LTF revenues for the SB 821 program of $462,000. Additionally, staff identified
$1,793,433 in SB 821 unallocated reserves and project savings. As such, there is capacity to
award additional funding of up to approximately $2.26 million for projects from the FY 2019/20
SB 821 program.
Staff reached out to agencies with scores of 36, 37, and 38 to inquire about project status and
construction readiness. It was determined that all projects with scores of 38 and 37, and two
projects with scores of 36 are construction-ready within the next nine months. Staff
recommends awarding SB 821 funding to seven unfunded projects from the original FY 2019/20
program. In order to maintain a healthy SB 821 reserve amount, $644,038 is reserved for future
opportunities to supplement bicycle and pedestrian related calls for projects. The seven
projects recommended for award can be viewed in Attachment 1 under “Additional Allocation.”
In summary, staff recommends allocating SB 821 funding for an additional seven projects in the
amount of $1,611,395.
1
Agenda Item 6
A summary of the total allocations and geographic distribution of SB 821 funding is provided in
the table below, and a full list of the projects is provided in Attachment 1.
Summary of Recommended Allocations
Coachella Valley Western
Riverside Total
# of Recommended Projects 7 12 19
Total SB 821
Recommended Allocations
$1,760,426 $3,752,884 $5,513,310
Recommended Allocations as a
% of Total Allocations
32% 68% 100%
Per the Commission’s SB 821 adopted policies, jurisdictions receiving an allocation have
24 months to complete approved projects and submit claim forms for reimbursement upon
project completion. Staff recommends that the Commission direct staff to prepare MOUs with
the sponsor for each project to outline the project schedule, funding plan, and local agency
match commitment. Further, staff recommends that the Commission authorize the Chair or
Executive Director to execute the MOUs, pursuant to legal counsel review.
Staff will monitor the progress of the projects to ensure timely implementation and delivery
and expenditure reimbursements, as the intent of the SB 821 program is to deliver and expend
SB 821 funds within the timeframe of the cycle.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A
N/A Year: FY 2019/20
FY 2020/21+ Amount: $0
$1,611,395
Source of Funds: Local Transportation Funds-SB 821 Budget Adjustment: N/A
N/A
GL/Project Accounting No.: 601 62 86106
Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 01/16/2020
Attachment: SB 821 FY 2019 Call for Projects Funding Recommendation
2
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROGRAM
FY 2019 CALL FOR PROJECTS
FUNDING RECOMMENDATION
Agency Project Name
Total Project
Cost
SB 821 Funds
Requested
Recommended
Allocation Score
Menifee Paloma Wash Trail 999,530$ 499,765$ 499,765$ 45
Riverside County Mecca Curb Ramp Accessibility Project (District 4)500,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 42
Desert Hot Springs DHS Bike Lanes and ADA Improvements 630,906$ 330,906$ 330,906$ 42
Moreno Valley Cactus Avenue/Redwing Drive Ped Hybrid Beacon 400,000$ 200,000$ 200,000$ 42
Wildomar Palomar Street/Clinton Keith Road 781,540$ 275,000$ 275,000$ 42
Menifee Scott Road/Menifee Road Sidewalk 366,526$ 183,263$ 183,263$ 42
Eastvale 65th Street Bicycle and Pedestrain Safety Enhancement 700,000$ 350,000$ 350,000$ 42
Riverside County
Carver Tract Sidewalk Safety Improvement - Leyte Avenue,
Corregidor Avenue, Lingayen Avenue, and Luzon Street
(District 4)1,150,000$ 575,000$ 575,000$ 41
Palm Springs Sidewalk Gap Closure Improvements - Sunny Dunes Road 293,000$ 146,500$ 146,500$ 41
Riverside Adair Avenue Sidewalk 300,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 39
Riverside Bonita Avenue Sidewalk 420,000$ 210,000$ 210,000$ 39
Riverside County
El Nido Avenue Sidewalk Safety Improvement Project -
Orange Avenue to Placentia Avenue (District 5)1,282,481$ 731,481$ 731,481$ 39
Cathedral City Cathedral Canyon Drive Sidewalk Gap Closure 451,000$ 338,400$ 338,400$ 38
Cathedral City
Gerald Ford Drive Bike Lanes Project - Date Palm Drive and
Da Vall Drive 27,400$ 21,920$ 21,920$ 38
Moreno Valley Heacock Street south of Gregory Lane Sidewalk Improvements 650,000$ 520,000$ 520,000$ 38
Perris Ruby Drive & Redlands Ave Ped Improvements 320,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 38
La Quinta
Washington Street at Ave 50 and Calle Tampico Sidewalk
and ADA Improvements 195,400$ 97,700$ 97,700$ 37
Perris North A Street Sidewalk Improvement 250,000$ 125,000$ 125,000$ 36
Riverside County
Mayberry Avenue Sidewalk Safety Improvement - Peartree
Lane to Casino Road (District 3)544,500$ 408,375$ 408,375$ 36
Riverside Cleta Drive & Thrush Drive Improvements 340,000$ 170,000$ 36
Lake Elsinore Joy Street Sidewalk Project 121,777$ 60,889$ 36
Lake Elsinore Colier Avenue Bike Lane 52,000$ 26,000$ 36
Lake Elsinore Machado Street Sidewalk Project 213,318$ 106,659$ 35
Rancho Mirage Missing link Sidewalk 639,964$ 319,982$ 35
San Jacinto Lyon Avenue Sidewalk Installation 120,000$ 60,000$ 35
Lake Elsinore Lincoln Street Bike Lanes 25,000$ 12,500$ 35
Riverside County
Tolton Avenue Sidewalk Safety Improvement Project -
Grant Street to Truman Street (District 2)390,000$ 310,000$ 35
Temecula Ynez Road Sidewalk Improvement 125,000$ 91,000$ 34
Hemet Kirby Street Improvements 149,775$ 124,775$ 34
Jurupa Valley Etiwanda Avenue & Wineville Bike Lane Striping Project 100,000$ 100,000$ 34
Cathedral City Perez Road Sidewalk Gap Closure 508,000$ 508,000$ 33
Lake Elsinore Avenue East Sidewalk Project 234,139$ 117,070$ 31
Lake Elsinore Avenues West Sidewalk Project 224,129$ 112,065$ 31
San Jacinto Cottonwood Avenue Ped Improvement Project 600,000$ 90,000$ 30
Riverside County
La Sierra Avenue Sidewalk Safety Improvement Project -
Orchard View Lane to Carrara Court (District 1)230,000$ 115,000$ 22
TOTAL 14,335,385$ 7,837,250$ 5,513,310$
Coachella Valley
Number of Applications 9
Total Funding Request 2,588,408$
Number of Funded Applications 7$
Funding Received 1,760,426$ 32%
Western Riverside
Number of Applications 26
Total Funding Request 5,248,842$
Number of Funded Applications 12$
Funding Received 3,752,884$ 68%
Riverside Region
Total Number of Applications 35
Total Funding Request 7,837,250$
Number of Funded Applications 19
Funding Available 5,513,310$
UNFUNDED
ADDITIONAL ALLOCATION
3
ATTACHMENT 1
ADDITIONAL AWARDS FOR FY 2019/20 SB821 PROGRAM
Additional Funding Recommendations
Jenny Chan, Management Analyst, Planning & Programming
1
FY19/20 SB 821 Additional Awards
SB 821
2
•2% of Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenue
•Bicycle and Pedestrian projects
•Bike and Pedestrian Master Plans
FY19/20 SB 821 Additional Awards
Past Commission Actions
3
•June 2019 Commission Meeting
Coachella Valley Western Riverside Total
# of Awarded Projects 4 8 12
June 2019 SB 821 Allocations $1,302,406 $2,599,509 $3,901,915
Awarded Allocations as a % of
Total Allocations 33%67%100%
FY19/20 SB 821 Additional Awards
Awarded
4
Agency Project Name Total Project Cost SB 821 Funds
Requested
Recommended
Allocation Score
Menifee Paloma Wash Trail $999,530 $499,765 $499,765 45
Riverside
County
Mecca Curb Ramp Accessibility Project
(District 4)$500,000 $250,000 $250,000 42
Desert Hot
Springs DHS Bike Lanes and ADA Improvements $630,906 $330,906 $ 330,906 42
Moreno Valley Cactus Avenue/Redwing Drive Ped Hybrid
Beacon $400,000 $200,000 $200,000 42
Wildomar Palomar Street/Clinton Keith Road $781,540 $275,000 $275,000 42
Menifee Scott Road/Menifee Road Sidewalk $366,526 $183,263 $183,263 42
Eastvale 65th Street Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety
Enhancement $700,000 $350,000 $350,000 42
Riverside
County
Carver Tract Sidewalk Safety Improvement -
Leyte Avenue, Corregidor Avenue, Lingayen
Avenue, and Luzon Street (District 4)
$1,150,000 $575,000 $ 575,000 41
Palm Springs Sidewalk Gap Closure Improvements -Sunny
Dunes Road $293,000 $146,500 $146,500 41
Riverside Adair Avenue Sidewalk $300,000 $ 150,000 $150,000 39
Riverside Bonita Avenue Sidewalk $420,000 $210,000 $210,000 39
Riverside
County
El Nido Avenue Sidewalk Safety Improvement
Project -Orange Avenue to Placentia Avenue
(District 5)
$1,282,481 $731,481 $731,481 39
Total Awarded $3,901,915
FY19/20 SB 821 Additional Awards
Staff Recommendation: Additional
Awards
5
Agency Project Name Total Project Cost SB 821 Funds
Requested
Recommended
Allocation Score
Cathedral City Cathedral Canyon Drive Sidewalk Gap Closure $451,000 $338,400 $338,400 38
Cathedral City
Gerald Ford Drive Bike Lanes Project -Date
Palm Drive and Da Vall Drive $27,400 $21,920 $21,920 38
Moreno Valley
Heacock Street south of Gregory Lane Sidewalk
Improvements $650,000 $520,000 $520,000 38
Perris Ruby Drive & Redlands Ave Ped Improvements $320,000 $100,000 $100,000 38
La Quinta
Washington Street at Ave 50 and Calle Tampico
Sidewalk and ADA Improvements $195,400 $97,700 $97,700 37
Perris North A Street Sidewalk Improvement $250,000 $125,000 $125,000 36
Riverside
County
Mayberry Avenue Sidewalk Safety Improvement
-Peartree Lane to Casino Road (District 3)$544,500 $408,375 $408,375 36
Total Additional Award $1,611,395
6
Project locations
are approximate
FY19/20 SB 821 Additional Awards Coachella
Valley
Western
Riverside Total
# of Total Awards 7 12 19
Total SB 821 Allocations $1,760,426 $3,752,884 $5,513,310
Allocations as a % of
Total Allocations 32%68%100%
AGENDA ITEM 7
Agenda Item 7
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 31, 2020
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM: Lorelle Moe-Luna, Multimodal Services Director
Jillian Guizado, Planning and Programming Manager
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: County of Riverside Request for a Loan on Hamner Bridge Project
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve a loan to the County of Riverside (County) of 2009 Measure A Western County
Regional Arterial (MARA) and/or Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional
Arterial program funds in the amount of $33,463,000 for construction of the Hamner
Bridge Replacement and Widening Project (Hamner Bridge Project) with the County’s
repayment of the loan anticipated from federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds;
2) Authorize the Executive Director to develop, finalize and execute Agreement
No. 18-31-074-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 18-31-074-00, with the County
and cities of Eastvale and Norco for the construction of the Hamner Bridge Project to
include terms of a loan agreement, pursuant to legal counsel review;
3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to develop, finalize,
and execute a new or amend an existing agreement with the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) related to the Commission’s loan on the Hamner Bridge Project;
and
4) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to develop, finalize,
and execute agreements with the County, city of Eastvale, city of Norco, and/or Caltrans
related to the loan for the Hamner Bridge Project.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In April 2017, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 132, creating and funding the Riverside County
Transportation Efficiency Corridor consisting of five projects in Western Riverside County,
including the Hamner Bridge Project funded for $6.3 million. The Hamner Bridge Project is
located on Hamner Avenue between Sixth Street in the city of Norco to the south and
Citrus Street in the city of Eastvale to the north, as shown in the vicinity map in Attachment 1.
The project replaces the existing structurally deficient and functionally obsolete 2-lane bridge
(originally built in 1939) over the Santa Ana River with a longer, wider, multi-purpose bridge that
will enhance public safety and traffic circulation. The County serves as the implementing agency
for the project. Following the Commission’s approval in December 2017, the Commission,
4
Agenda Item 7
County, and the cities of Eastvale and Norco executed Agreement No. 18-31-074-00 to formalize
the process for invoicing of costs incurred for the project and reimbursement from SB 132 funds
passed-through the Commission. The agreement provides for the County to invoice the
Commission for reimbursement, and the Commission is then reimbursed SB 132 funds by
Caltrans.
SB 132 funds are programmed for the environmental, design, right of way, and construction
phases. The Hamner Bridge Project qualifies for federal HBP funds through Caltrans, and the
County has submitted the requisite documentation for programming these funds. The estimated
cost for construction is approximately $61.6 million and is funded by the following revenues:
Hamner Bridge Project – Total Construction Cost
Funding Source Amount (in millions)
HBP $ 54.5
SB 132 5.6
TUMF 1.5
Total $ 61.6
The Highway Bridge Program is extremely limited in funding (approximately $300 million per year
statewide) and oversubscribed. Caltrans has developed a separate obligation process for high
cost bridge projects, which are defined as a bridge project with federal funds for a right of way
or construction phase in excess of $20 million. Since the HBP is fiscally constrained, an annual
schedule for disbursement of funds is established in accordance with available programming
capacity. Caltrans has scheduled the obligation of HBP construction funds to the Hamner Bridge
Project over a five-year period as follows:
Caltrans’ Projected Obligation of HBP Funds
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 Total
$10,000,000 $5,300,000 $0 $19,603,961 $19,603,960 $54,507,921
The County anticipates awarding a construction contract in July 2020, and construction is
projected to occur over a 20-month period. Caltrans indicated that the County can request an
advance of Fiscal Years 2022/23 and 2023/24 funds; however, there is no guarantee that funding
will be available to advance at that time.
Based on the obligation/reimbursement schedule, the County prepared a cash flow plan
(Attachment 2) that indicates a funding shortfall of $26.2 million in FY 2021/22 and $7.3 million
in FY 2022/23, for a total of approximately $33.5 million. Federal HBP reimbursements are
expected in FYs 2022/23 and 2023/24 at $19.6 million per fiscal year, completing the
reimbursement of federal bridge funding.
The cities of Eastvale and Norco asked the County to serve as the implementing agency given its
project delivery expertise; however, the project is not within the County’s jurisdiction. Therefore,
5
Agenda Item 7
the County does not have the ability or resources to commit local funds, and the cities also are
not in a position to commit local funds to address the cash flow needs for the project.
Commission staff recommends loaning the County $33,463,000 in MARA and/or TUMF Regional
Arterial funds to ensure this critical regional bridge project is delivered on schedule and meets
the requirements set forth by Caltrans for HBP funds and the SB 132 legislative requirement to
fully expend funds by June 30, 2023. If approved, staff will work with Caltrans, the County, and
the cities of Eastvale and Norco to enter into or amend existing agreements to reflect the terms
of the loan. Due to this rapidly evolving situation regarding the HBP program and in an effort to
keep the project on schedule, a draft amendment to Agreement No. 18-31-074-00 and an
agreement with Caltrans was unavailable for inclusion in this staff report. The Commission may
also be required to enter into an agreement(s) to initiate the loan or loan repayment. Staff
recommends authorization for the Executive Director to develop, finalize and execute all
necessary agreements, including amendments, pursuant to legal counsel review prior to
execution. Staff will also continue to work with Caltrans and the County to minimize the use of
local funds, including facilitating advancement of HBP funds, and will further evaluate the impact
the HBP program may have on other bridge projects in the region.
A budget adjustment is not required as this is a loan rather than an expenditure of funds and
repayment of the loan is expected upon receipt of the federal funds in FYs 2022/23 and 2023/24.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A
N/A Year: FY 2021/22
FY 2022/23 Amount: $26,189,000
$ 7,274,000
Source of Funds: MARA and/or TUMF Regional Arterial Budget Adjustment: N/A
N/A
GL/Project Accounting No.: 266 12301 (MARA loan receivable)
210 12301 (TUMF loan receivable)
Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 01/21/2020
Attachments:
1) Project Vicinity Map
2) Hamner Ave Bridge Replacement Project Cash Flow Plan
6
Hamner Avenue Bridge Replacement
Over Santa Ana River
VICINITY MAP
Hamner Avenue Bridge
Project Location
City of Eastvale
City of Norco
ATTACHMENT 1
7
19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 Total
Federal Funds (HBP)$8,853 $15,291,147 $5,242,000 $20,542,000
SB 132 $1,147 $5,427,853 $136,000 $5,565,000
WRCOG (TUMF)$2,000,000 $2,000,000
RCTC (Advanced Funds)$26,189,000 $7,274,000 $33,463,000
Total $10,000 $22,719,000 $26,325,000 $12,516,000 $0 $61,570,000
19/20
(June 2020)
20/21
(Mar 2021)21/22
22/23
(Dec 2022)
23/24
(Dec 2023)Total
Federal Funds (HBP)$10,000,000 $5,300,000 $19,603,961 $19,603,960 $54,507,921
19/20 20/21 21/22
22/23
(Dec 2022)
23/24
(Dec 2023)Total
RCTC $14,361,961 $19,101,039 $33,463,000
WRCOG $502,921 $502,921
Total $14,361,961 $19,603,960 $33,965,921
County of Riverside
Hamner Ave Bridge Replacement Project
Cash Flow Plan
Cash Flow from FHWA
Reimbursement to RCTC & WRCOG
Notes:
1. The total construction cost including construction management and engineering is $61,570,000.
2. The total estimated funds that RCTC needs to advance is $33,463,000.
3. The total local match needed from WRCOG (TUMF) is $1,497,079. WRCOG will advance $2,000,000 and will be
credited $502,291 on Fiscal Year 23/24.
4. This cash flow plan includes the local match funds of $7,062,078 needed to match the federal funds.
5. The estimated construction cash flow plan provided in the above table is based on 90% design plans.
Additional advanced funds may be needed if the estimated cost of construction is higher once the plans
are finalized, the project is advertised, and the County opens bids.
Cash Flow to Contractor
ATTACHMENT 2
8
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE LOAN REQUEST FOR THE HAMNER AVE BRIDGE WIDENING PROJECT
Lorelle Moe-Luna, Multimodal Services Director
1
2
Project Location
3
Cash Flow to Contractor
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 Total
Federal Funds (HBP) $ 8,853 $ 15,291,147 $ 26,189,000 $ 12,516,000 $ -$ 54,005,000
SB 132 $ 1,147 $ 5,427,853 $ 136,000 $ -$ -$ 5,565,000
WRCOG (TUMF) $ -$ 2,000,000 $ -$ -$ -$ 2,000,000
Total $ 10,000 $ 22,719,000 $ 26,325,000 $ 12,516,000 $ -$ 61,570,000
Cash Flow from FHWA
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 Total
Federal Funds (HBP) $ 10,000,000 $ 5,300,000 $ 19,603,961 $ 19,603,960 $ 54,507,921
Loan Request
FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 Total
Federal Funds (HBP) $ 8,853 $ 15,291,147 $ 5,242,000 $ 20,542,000
SB 132 $ 1,147 $ 5,427,853 $ 136,000 $ 5,565,000
WRCOG (TUMF) $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000
RCTC (MARA/TUMF Loan) $ 26,189,000 $ 7,274,000 $ 33,463,000
Total $ 10,000 $ 22,719,000 $ 26,325,000 $ 12,516,000 $ -$ 61,570,000
Funding shortfall beginning FY22 due
to federal obligations available in
FY23 and FY24
Staff Recommendations:
4
1.Approve a loan to the County of Riverside of 2009 Measure A Western County
Regional Arterial (MARA) and/or Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF)
Regional Arterial program funds in the amount of $33,463,000 for construction of the
Hamner Bridge Replacement and Widening Project with the County’s repayment of
the loan anticipated from federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) funds;
2.Authorize the Executive Director to develop, finalize and execute Agreement
No. 18-31-074-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 18-31-074-00, with the
County and cities of Eastvale and Norco for the construction of the Hamner Bridge
Project to include terms of a loan agreement, pursuant to legal counsel review;
3.Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to develop,
finalize, and execute a new or amend an existing agreement with Caltrans related to
the Commission’s loan on the Hamner Bridge Project; and
4.Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to develop,
finalize, and execute agreements with the County, city of Eastvale, city of Norco,
and/or Caltrans related to the loan for the Hamner Bridge Project.
rctc.org
951.787.7141
info@rctc.org
@theRCTC
Questions?
5
AGENDA ITEM 8
Agenda Item 8
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 31, 2020
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM: David Thomas, Toll Project Manager
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Remedial Work Contract for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 20-31-043-00 with Atkinson/Walsh a Joint Venture (AWJV) to
perform remedial work for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP)
in an amount not to exceed $500,000; and
2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to finalize and execute
the agreement.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The SR-91 CIP (see Figure 1 Vicinity Map) was completed in 2017. The design-build contract
included a two-year warranty period and three years of plant establishment for landscaping and
habitat restoration. Inclusion of warranty requirements as part of a design-build contract is
beneficial as the warranty requirements serve as an incentive for both design and construction
quality. AWJV continues under contract with the Commission to perform this work.
Figure 1: SR-91 CIP Vicinity Map
9
Agenda Item 8
Since the opening of the facility. AWJV has performed requested warranty work without dispute.
However, additional remedial work, such as sealing of pavement joints, remains which is the
subject of a dispute as to responsibility. This is not uncommon on major projects and represents
a minor part of the overall project. Specifically, it must be determined if the remedial work is
necessary as a result of the contractor’s work on the project or if it is required due to a condition
that existed prior to the project. Staff continues to coordinate with Caltrans and to work through
this dispute with AWJV; however, staff considers it prudent to perform the disputed remedial
work now to minimize future corrective work that could be impacted by winter weather. This
proactive approach will ensure that the needed work is addressed in a timely and cost-effective
manner and the final resolution of warranty issues and reconciliation of responsibility is ongoing
and will be completed as a part of project close out. AWJV has agreed at this time to perform
the remedial work at cost. Once the parties determine who should be responsible for funding
the work, the final allocation of the cost will be agreed upon.
Funding for this remedial work is included in the current budget for the SR-91 CIP; therefore, no
budget adjustment is needed. Staff recommends approval of a remedial work contract with
AWJV for the SR-91 CIP for a total amount not to exceed $500,000 and authorization for the
Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to finalize and execute the agreement.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2019/20 Amount: $500,000
Source of Funds: Measure A Western County Highway
Funds Budget Adjustment: No
GL/Project Accounting No.: 003028 81603 00000 0000 262 31 81603
Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 01/16/2020
Attachment: Draft Remedial Work Contract
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
EXHIBIT .,A'
SCOPE OF REMEDIAL WORK
To be Determined by Project Staff
r 7336.02100\32458061.2
-22-
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
KEY MESSAGING TRAINING
ROLL CALL
JANUARY 30, 2020
Present Absent
County of Riverside, District I 0 O
County of Riverside, District II tiV gu67/1.i O O
County of Riverside, District III 0 Qr
County of Riverside, District IV O d
County of Riverside, District V O
City of Banning 0 O
City of Beaumont 0 O
City of Blythe O 0
City of Calimesa 0 0
City of Canyon Lake 0 O
City of Cathedral City 0 0
City of Coachella O O
City of Corona 0 0
City of Desert Hot Springs O O
City of Eastvale 0 0
City of Hemet O O
City of Indian Wells 0 O
City of Indio O
City of Jurupa Valley
City of La Quinta O O
City of Lake Elsinore O 0
City of Menifee O O
City of Moreno Valley O O
City of Murrieta O 0
City of Norco O 0
City of Palm Desert
City of Palm Springs O
City of Perris O O
City of Rancho Mirage O O
City of Riverside O 0
City of San Jacinto O 0
City of Temecula O O
City of Wildomar 0
Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 O O
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET
KEY MESSAGING TRAINING
JANUARY 30, 2020
NAME
AGENCY
E_MAIL ADDRESS
'-
VANLt„
lk
Walz
D
&41.ee/ 131 /-4/
crekadig
3-,00‘ /4,ili/1
0(4 m c/o r3
/1or - 9-s1
h 5�ecZay�,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WORKSHOP
COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET
JANUARY 30, 2020
NAME
AGENCY
EMAIL ADDRESS
'o-r Vt, -roI1
M 8P L A
6V1AYric> QM
/L 7 z GCJ/f/
Z2/4Uma fr
%4 4#m<6-0
449-4 �� Mcfh
CAL <MeSr
/"8-/-6(ki flEpltneAa4_
&el 62)./".1 pi
,-------
vt wN Al &X
I)o R w
X/-4; <04 �))
�
C. .
_
dsnUakinral
�
tArynd
v ti�
C►at-c2 -LA-
i.. _�
e
/2u-e-vi c
- ,) - S fi ___
J /V/
7vC7 �j
e_
Qe
e
iw� rl
/1& / cT ' / c=
DS T-. ._
ai !/ Z/ 4ir? & t.4-4/
/t' &W(GE�
uoc).Q.. h Oizco,t);&c.f\
/r
Lj4 , -e e /l.<_
C c'/ cr1' n
/Ls21Ge) Je".41.
_...,--1.4,,...e.er
,'fr%3-,
w,00��,7:
f/ 4,-HGI , �&
D;xT4 y , v cb
" 7 Z •,-ir..at.
.tJ G?�
Gv rnelJA
Cl iiMva
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
ROLL CALL
JANUARY 31, 2020
Present Absent
County of Riverside, District I 17 O
County of Riverside, District II 0
County of Riverside, District III 0,..,
0
County of Riverside, District IV Ef O
County of Riverside, District V el O
City of Banning (a 0
City of Beaumont $ 0
City of Blythe Er O
City of Calimesa 13 0
City of Canyon Lake 0 0
City of Cathedral City la 0
City of Coachella P 0
City of Corona 0
City of Desert Hot Springs 0 0
City of Eastvale A 0
City of Hemet ,1 O
City of Indian Wells Zi 0
City of Indio 0 M
City of Jurupa Valley Er 0
City of La Quinta 41 0
City of Lake Elsinore 0 ,E1
City of Menifee 21 0
City of Moreno Valley 0 0
City of Murrieta )71" 0
City of Norco 0 0
City of Palm Desert 21 0
City of Palm Springs g 0
City of Perris ZI. 0
City of Rancho Mirage 0 A.
City of Riverside 0 0
City of San Jacinto 0 71
City of Temecula 0 2
City of Wildomar 0 0
Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8Pr0
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET
JANUARY 31, 2020
NAME
AGENCY
E_MAIL ADDRESS
/f L
i' T L, s ri.K ewe/-57
V'
cv-n V l I.27C:> N(
AA URLA Cart
/ . ( v7 <a LAJtA +
i,to,a4.4.1otit
--, t y s 144,44,
CO- 4-(Ness
-A77-/tiri ppfrDet, ,i-e._
/>i4- cpi / hu771--
a �+ 8 to/m-) -
.
Jt, LJ/04r v� /ipy
J�‘
e_itv.r1J g- iVA-
,v4
w/2 X,?J//
/i-I�da i %/1(4-5
Pc? 5
C; °4 Cg IYalS
ke.J..).e_'-lant_e,r.,,,, „.6.,.._to..,
Ck.k_L( q
/ er /, Jq)L
&/-' xv/o�c—
?"e(r //de,u% ft
00.5
f.)-441-0s_.4A----
fir-
52. c
4 m.1/
-5Pitic/�/
:21
1
v
.
,► 12_ Pe(k.
" 1.;14\) L l is
eI1I Z/M-E/t
..�
_n vsi
n�Aiaitl�
1 vv8 , VeJ.12.te
l-Ibtpt) ..k._
4.4-vt
,
0 1 13_
Old vS t.s, -
C _ r% t'v A.
M, G ,+�OEE L-MA.c.�J
GR� 14y
o5 C wvi tC
VAL. 1 DPT
Tara Byerly
From: Tara Byerly
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 3:46 PM
To: Tara Byerly
Cc: Lisa Mobley
Subject: RCTC: January Workshop and Commission Agendas - January 30-31, 2020
Good afternoon Commission Alternates,
The Agendas for the January Workshop and Commission Meetings scheduled for Thursday and Friday, January 30-31,
2020 at the Hilton in Palm Springs, CA is now available.
https://www.rctc.ore/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Januarv-Commission-Workshop-agenda-1.30-31.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.orq_
f 11' in 0
1
Tara Byerly
From: Tara Byerly
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 3:45 PM
To: Tara Byerly
Cc: Anne Mayer; JOHN STANDIFORD; Lisa Mobley
Subject: RCTC: January Workshop and Commission Agendas - January 30-31, 2020
Good afternoon Commissioners,
The Agendas for the January Workshop and Commission Meetings scheduled for Thursday and Friday, January 30-31,
2020 at the Hilton in Palm Springs, CA is now available.
https://www.rctc.ore/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Januarv-Commission-Workshop-agenda-1.30-31.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 1 951.787.7906 F
4080 Lemon St. 3rd FI.1 P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502
rctc.orq_
f If in O
1