Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout03 March 15, 2021 Technical Advisory MEETING AGENDA Technical Advisory Committee Time: 10:00 a.m. Date: March 15, 2021 Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-29-20, (March 18, 2020), the Governing Board meeting will only be conducted via video conferencing and by telephone. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Farshid Mohammadi, Chair / Gilbert Hernandez, City of Riverside VACANT / Eric Cowle, CVAG Art Vela / Holly Stuart, City of Banning Jeff Hart / Robert Vestal, City of Beaumont Dan Ojeda / VACANT, City of Blythe Michael Thornton / VACANT, City of Calimesa Albert Vergel De Dios / Sean Young, Caltrans District 8 Brad Brophy / Mike Borja, City of Canyon Lake John A. Corella / Crystal Sandoval, Cathedral City Andrew Simmons / Maritza Martinez, City of Coachella Savat Khamphou / Rosalva Ureno, City of Corona Daniel Porras / Nick Haecher, City of Desert Hot Springs Jimmy Chung / Dahi Kim, City of Eastvale Steve Loriso / Nancy Beltran, City of Hemet Ken Seumalo / Tanya Williams, City of Indian Wells Timothy T. Wassil / Eric Weck, City of Indio Paul Toor / Rod Butler, City of Jurupa Valley Bryan McKinney / Julie Mignogna, City of La Quinta Remon Habib / Yu Tagai, City of Lake Elsinore VACANT / Carlos Geronimo, City of Menifee Michael Wolfe / Michael Lloyd, City of Moreno Valley Bob Moehling / Jeff Hitch, City of Murrieta Chad Blais / Sam Nelson, City of Norco VACANT / Randy Bowman, City of Palm Desert Joel Montalvo / Marcus Fuller, City of Palm Springs K. George Colangeli / Dale Reynolds, PVVTA VACANT / Brad Brophy, City of Perris Jesse Eckenroth / VACANT, City of Rancho Mirage Mark Lancaster / Mojahed Salama, County of Riverside Kristin Warsinski / Jennifer Nguyen, RTA Travis Randel / Brad Brophy, City of San Jacinto Brittney B. Sowell / Rohan Kuruppu, SunLine Patrick Thomas / Amer Attar, City of Temecula Christopher Grey / Chris Tzeng, WRCOG Dan York / Craig Bradshaw, City of Wildomar STAFF Jillian Guizado, Planning and Programming Director Jenny Chan, Planning and Programming Manager Martha Masters, Planning and Programming Senior Management Analyst AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY Subject to the supervision of the Commission, the Committee shall provide technical assistance to the Commission by reviewing and evaluating the various transportation proposals and alternatives within Riverside County. The Committee shall review, comment upon, and make recommendations on such matters as are referred to it by the Commission, including all matters relating to the programming of federal funds apportioned to the Riverside County and allocated by the Commission.   RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION  TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA*    *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda.    TIME:    10:00 A.M.     DATE:    March 15, 2021    LOCATION: Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N‐29‐20, (March 18,  2020), the Technical Advisory Committee meeting will only be conducted  via video conferencing and by telephone. Please follow the instructions  below to join the meeting remotely.      INSTRUCTIONS FOR ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION      Join Zoom Meeting ‐ from PC, Laptop or Phone   https://rctc.zoom.us/j/87932502148?pwd=M0lVbWVhM1hkMGJnMDZDOVFZSnF0Zz09  Meeting ID: 879 3250 2148  Passcode: 861643  One tap mobile    +16699006833,,87932502148#,,,,*861643# US (San Jose)    Dial by your location  +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)  Meeting ID: 879 3250 2148  Passcode: 861643    The following commands can be used on your phone’s dial pad while in Zoom meeting:  • *6 ‐ Toggle mute/unmute  • *9 ‐ Raise hand     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 public 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.                   Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda March 15, 2021 Page 2 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. HOUSEKEEPING REMARKS 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 16, 2020 MINUTES Page 1 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS ̶ This is for comments on items not listed on agenda. Comments relating to an item on the agenda will be taken when the item is before the Committee. 6. WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY (RCA) TRANSITION Page 9 Overview This item is to receive and file an update on the transition of the management of RCA to the Commission. 7. 15 EXPRESS LANES OPENING Page 10 Overview This item is to receive and file a presentation on the 15 Express Lanes opening. 8. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM CYCLE 5 – RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION REGIONAL PROGRAM Page 11 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the Riverside County Active Transportation Program (ATP) projects for inclusion in the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) ATP Regional Program Cycle 5 consisting of the highest scoring projects in the total amount of $11,305,000; 2) Authorize staff to adjust the ATP award request to include Riverside County – Public Health’s Safe Routes for All – Hemet Project to maximize available funds in Riverside County; 3) Submit the list of recommended and contingency projects to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for inclusion in the MPO ATP Regional Program and subsequent submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for final approval in June 2021; Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda March 15, 2021 Page 3 4) Authorize staff to request state-only ATP funds for all projects, which all have cleared and completed state environmental clearance; 5) Submit the MPO ATP regional projects to SCAG for programming in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); 6) Direct staff to coordinate with the MPO ATP Regional Program project sponsors regarding timely funding allocations, obligations, and project delivery; 7) Prioritize Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG)’s Coachella Valley Arts and Music Line project for any future supplemental ATP Cycle 5 funding; and 8) Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR VACANCY AND UPCOMING ELECTION Page 18 Overview This item is to receive and file an update regarding the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) vice chair vacancy and upcoming TAC election of officers. 10. RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY REPROGRAMMING REQUEST OF CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY FUNDS AS PROGRAMMED IN THE 2013 MULTI-FUNDING CALL FOR PROJECTS Page 19 Overview This item is to receive and file information about the Riverside Transit Agency’s request to reprogram Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding from the RapidLink Service Project to the Route 1 Weekend Service Improvements Project. 11. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE SALT CREEK TRAIL Page 30 Overview This item is to receive and file information about the County of Riverside’s request for additional funds for the Salt Creek Trail. 12. FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT, ARTICLE 3 (SB 821) CALL FOR PROJECTS Page 35 Overview This item is to receive and file an update on the release of Fiscal Year (FY) 2021/22 Transportation Development Act, Article 3 (SB 821) Call for Projects. Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda March 15, 2021 Page 4 13. CALTRANS DISTRICT 8 LOCAL ASSISTANCE UPDATE Page 66 Overview This item is to receive and file an update from Caltrans District 8 Local Assistance. 14. 2019 AND 2021 FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE Page 76 Overview This item is to receive and file an update on the 2019 and 2021 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). 15. CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING HIGHLIGHTS: DECEMBER 2020 AND JANUARY 2021 Page 79 Overview This item is to receive and file December 2020 and January 2021 California Transportation Commission (CTC) meeting highlights. 16. RCTC COMMISSION MEETING HIGHLIGHTS: DECEMBER 2020 AND JANUARY, FEBRUARY, AND MARCH 2021 Page 80 Overview This item is to receive and file December 2020 and January, February, and March 2021 Commission meeting highlights. 17. COMMITTEE MEMBER / STAFF REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the committee members and staff to report on attended and upcoming meetings/conferences and issues related to committee activities. 18. ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the TAC is scheduled to be held May 17, 2021, 10:00 a.m. via videoconference and telephone only, pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-29-20 (March 18, 2020). MINUTES TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Monday, November 16, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was called to order by Chair Farshid Mohammadi at 10:31 a.m. Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-29-20 (March 18, 2020) the TAC meeting was conducted via video conferencing and by telephone. 2.CHAIR FARSHID MOHAMMADI READ THE HOUSEKEEPING NOTES. 3.ROLL CALL Members Present By Teleconference: Jeff Hart, City of Beaumont Michael Thornton, City of Calimesa Albert Vergel De Dios, Caltrans District 08 Brad Brophy, Cities of Canyon Lake, Perris, San Jacinto Andrew Simmons, City of Coachella Martin Magana, CVAG Daniel Porras, City of Desert Hot Springs Timothy T. Wassil, City of Indio Paul Toor, City of Jurupa Valley Bryan McKinney, City of La Quinta Remon Habib, City of Lake Elsinore Carlos Geronimo, City of Menifee Michael Wolfe, City of Moreno Valley Bob Moehling, City of Murrieta Tom Garcia, City of Palm Desert Joel Montalvo, City of Palm Springs Jesse Eckenroth, City of Rancho Mirage Farshid Mohammadi, City of Riverside, Chair Patty Romo, Riverside County Kristin Warsinski, RTA Brittney Sowell, Sunline Patrick Thomas, City of Temecula Dan York, City of Wildomar 4.APPROVAL OF September 21, 2020 MINUTES B/C/A (Moehling/Habib) to approve the Minutes as submitted. There were no objections to this motion. 1 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting November 16, 2020 Page 2 5.PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. 6.INTERSTATE 15 TOLL PROJECTS UPDATE Stephanie Blanco, RCTC, provided an I-15 Corridor Toll Projects Update PowerPoint presentation. Her presentation included: •RCTC 10-Year Highway Delivery Plan •15 Express Lanes Construction and Tolling information. She stated the lanes are expected to open in Spring 2021. •15 Corridor Operations Project that included the estimated cost ($38 million); construction expected to start in 2023, and it should be opened to traffic by late 2024. •I-15 Express Lanes Project – Southern Extension: o 2 Express Lanes in each direction from Cajalco Road to SR-74 o Estimated Cost $550-$600 million o Construction as early as 2025 During the public scoping period, 150 comments were received. They may be reviewed at http://www.rctc.org/15expsouth. Question: Patrick Thomas, City of Temecula, said one of the requirements for state funding was to complete the Inland Empire Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan. He asked if that has been completed. Response: Jillian Guizado, RCTC, stated it was finalized in October. She also stated it is on RCTC’s website. Question: Patrick Thomas also asked if RCTC is going to apply for the Solutions for Congested Corridor Program for future funding on the 15 corridor. Response: Jillian Guizado said RCTC has not talked about future cycles yet. RCTC is waiting for the CTC to come out with their schedule for future cycles. Stephanie Blanco also said she’s been working with Jillian Guizado and the Planning and Programming team to ensure the I-15 Express Lanes Project – Southern Extension is included in the Plan. 7.CITY OF RIVERSIDE FUNDING REQUEST FOR THIRD STREET GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT Jillian Guizado reported that staff is seeking concurrence from the TAC on the city of Riverside’s (City) request for $18 million in Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funding for the Third Street Grade Separation project. She provided background information and indicated the City applied to the CTC on August 3, 2020 for Trade Corridor Enhancement Program funds from SB 1 for the right of way phase. The CTC is expected to announce its recommendations later today. 2 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting November 16, 2020 Page 3 Farshid Mohammadi, Chair, stated the intent is not to use CMAQ funds if the City can secure other funding. Question: Michael Thornton, City of Calimesa, asked for more information about the funding. Response: Farshid Mohammadi reported the total estimated project cost is $55.5 and the City has $4 million secured for engineering and design and the funding source is local TUMF. For the right of way phase, the City has $4.25 million secured and the City applied for $16.1 million in TCEP grant funding. For the construction phase, the City anticipates receiving $5 million in State CPUC Section 190 funds and anticipates using $3.5 million of city funds for the relocation of city sewer, water, and electric facilities. For grade separations, by law the railroads have to contribute five percent of the cost for a federal aid project or ten percent of the cost for a non-federal aid project. Currently, the City is assuming a $2 million participation from the railroad bringing the anticipated construction funding to $10.5 million . With the $18 million in CMAQ funding, assuming it is needed, the construction phase would be fully funded. The construction phase of the project is $28 million. Question: Michael Thornton said he would like to know more about the background on the CMAQ funds. Response: Jillian Guizado said the last time RCTC put out a call for projects was in 2012, which was the Multi-Funding Call for Projects. RCTC has been accumulating funds since that time. In 2019, the Commission adopted a policy to prioritize STBG and CMAQ funds coming into Riverside County on projects listed in the 10-Year Highway Delivery Plan. After Proposition 1B was passed, which created the TCIF program, the Commission did whatever it could to make grade separation projects as competitive as possible. There was either a set aside or the Commission just acted on a case-by-case basis for grade separation projects in the county. This is consistent with how we’ve treated top priority grade separation projects in the past. Lorelle Moe-Luna, RCTC, added that when the TCIF program was released in 2009, the Commission did take an action to put aside CMAQ funds of 25 percent to be used for grade separation purposes. Riverside’s Third Street, and other projects was identified as a top grade separation project in the 2017 grade separation update. Within the quarter block of downtown Riverside from Vine Street to Martin Luther King, there has been a lot of multimodal investment; therefore, the grade separation itself is a major project. Less than a quarter of a mile away, RCTC is going to be expanding the Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station and about $45 million of state and federal funds will be invested there. Across the street will be RTA’s new multimodal hub. Throughout that entire area, the City has also received several grants from the state to foster multimodal projects and new housing. In the end, this area will receive well over $100 million in state and federal funds and continuing with this project will be important to leverage these funds. Question: Michael Thornton asked if the funding is needed for construction, why does this action need to be taken today rather than further down the process of developing the project? Response: Jillian Guizado responded that because we do not know if the CTC will fund the City’s application for right of way funds on the Third Street project, RCTC’s goal is for RCTC not to be the reason that the City has to delay the project. If the City does not receive the TCEP funds it applied for, these funds would go toward the right of way phase, which the City will be ready to begin in February. RCTC’s goal is to have the funds ready and the City will still have to go through the RFA process with Caltrans 3 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting November 16, 2020 Page 4 and FHWA. The idea is to get this lined up as timely as possible. If the City does receive the TCEP funds, we are taking this action a little bit early. It is really just a formality and there is no harm in taking the action now even to the extent the City will continue to pursue other funds for the project. Eighteen million dollars would be the maximum amount RCTC would program on the project. The City does not have to obligate the full $18 million on the right of way phase or on the construction phase. B/C/A (Romo/Wassil) to approve the City of Riverside’s funding request. There were no objections. 8.OBLIGATION DELIVERY PLAN UPDATE – FFY 2020/21 Jenny Chan, RCTC, reported that the Draft Obligation Plan for 20/21 is attached to her staff report. She stated that the Commission’s goal is to help obligate 100 percent of obligation authority (OA) each year. RCTC still has not received its OA capacity for this year but based on the draft OA plan, it is slated to obligate close to $70 million this year in CMAQ and STBG funds. She requested the TAC review the plan and if there are any projects that are unable to be delivered this fiscal year, or if there are projects that are coming in early for obligation, to advise RCTC staff. She further reported RCTC is waiting for the final obligation numbers for FY 19/20 and once received, staff will provide an update to the TAC. 9.CALTRANS DISTRICT 8 LOCAL ASSISTANCE UPDATE Leslie Avila, Caltrans Local Assistance, reported the following: •California MUTCD Section 1A.10 has been updated to provide guidance on how new traffic control devices and new applications of existing traffic control devices not adopted in the California MUTCD be implemented on public roads and private roads open to the public in California. For new traffic control device policies to be implemented, an experiment must be completed to determine liability of the new device on the application of an existing d evice. In some cases, an experiment has already been completed and a new policy has received an interim approval. The interim approvals allow interim use pending official rulemaking of the new policy. On the fact sheet of the blog there is information, including what an agency would need to include in the request, what the experimentation process itself looks like, and some helpful links to resources. •For Office Bulletin 20-05, FHWA conducted a local public agency property management practices program review that found that Caltrans is not providing enough guidance or oversight of the local public agencies’ processes when it comes to property management and disposal of excess land. The agencies are not implementing the CFRs as expected and are not in compli ance with federal regulations. With the publication of Office Bulletin 20-05, oversight of the local public agencies will be completed by Caltrans from the acquisition phase through the construction phase by periodic risk based reporting. It’s recommended that the agencies complete Exhibit 13F local public agency real property services check list for reporting property purchases. Chapter 13 includes various sections of the Office Bulletin that were updated. 4 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting November 16, 2020 Page 5 • There is a new website available, the Local Road Safety Plan Do It Yourself website, that includes training videos, downloadable templates, local agency insight videos, and example plans for other local agencies. This site can help maintain FHWA’s connection to various counties, cities, and towns. • The Innovation Expo 2020 starts today. • There is additional guidance provided in the blog to follow up on the changes made in Appendix E of the Title 6 Assurances, including some questions and answers. • In October, the CTC adopted eight projects for the ATP Quick Project Pilot Program. There were none submitted from Riverside or San Bernardino counties. Today the CTC will release recommendations for the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program, the Local Partnership Program, and the Trade Corridors Enhancement Program. • If you or anyone you know is a student, there is an opportunity for a scholarship up to $50,000 for qualified engineers and land surveying students in California. Visit the American Council of Engineering Companies California website for more information. Albert Vergel De Dios, Caltrans District 8, reported: • The HBP managers completed the HBP Financial Constraint List, which has been sent to the MPOs for financial programming and inclusion in the FTIP. Our HBP website will be updated soon to make it ADA compliant and will have the list available. On-system programming demand is extremely high, so projects that are in construction or ready to go to construction have been pushed out from the current fiscal year into AC conversion. Off-system demand is very high as well. The HBP financial constraint order of priorities was sent out about three weeks ago and that helped in managing the program. In that order of priority, there is about $74 million programming capacity for off-system, there is about $197 programming capacity for on-system. Per policy, EPSP and post-programming have been suspended until after March 30. Caltrans is reaching out to Headquarters to see what options agencies may have to pursue or continue with a project that has been pushed out. • HSIP Cycle 10 Call for Projects ended November 2 with a total of 429 applications compared to 389 last cycle. Total funds requested was $490 million. The total available for Cycle 10 is $220 million. Under BCR category, the average BCR for the 306 applications is 15.6. For District 8, for BCR there was a total of 39 applications received, set aside 7, for a total in the district, of 46. • DLA Publication – Caltrans receives a monthly publication report from Headquarters regarding upcoming changes. For local program procedures, there is LP-20-1. Completed and published items are Office Bulletin 20-5, Real Property Service Oversight, Policy Updates, Stakeholders Review, Office Bulletin 19-04 that discusses the local agency minimum qualifications, which is currently on hold, Office Bulletin 19-06 IDIQ that is also on hold, Active Fact Sheets, State Program 5 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting November 16, 2020 Page 6 Guidelines, State Master Agreement Update, that will be published as an Office Bulletin, along with LAPM Chapter 4, Emergency Relief Program Forms, and LAPM Chapter 7 Update. • Technical Updates – Exhibit 3-0, the finance letter, Exhibit 12-C, and Exhibit 5-K. He reported regarding current staffing, there is a staffer on loan who will be moving to another unit, which may not affect some of the agencies in Riverside. The external assignment sheet will be updated by the end of this week and it will be shared with all Caltrans’ partners. Question: Lorelle Moe-Luna asked Albert Vergel De Dios to email a recap of the Caltrans updates. Response: Albert Vergel De Dios said he will email a recap of his presentation to the TAC. 10. CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION HIGHLIGHTS: OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER 2020 Jillian Guizado reported that the CTC has resumed having two-day meetings, though it is still meeting 100 percent virtually. Its last meeting was October 21-22. The staff report highlights just two items of note from that meeting: a presentation on the Draft California Transportation Plan 2050 and adoption of the Local Streets and Roads eligible cities list. Staff was glad to see t hat all cities in Riverside County are now on the list of eligible cities. The California Transportation Plan is a long-range transportation plan that Caltrans develops to serve as a framework to lay out strategic goals, policies, and recommendations for improving mobility, combating climate change, facilitating housing growth, and more. The CTP, as it is known , is similar to SCAG’s RTP/SCS, but the CTP is for the entire state. The major difference being that the CTP is aspirational and by law cannot be financially constrained, lending itself to lofty assumptions and recommendations. The contents of the CTP then inform Caltrans’ six modal plans, including the Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan and the California Freight Mobility Plan that guides investments in the State. RCTC and many other regional agencies and statewide organizations provided comments to Caltrans on the Draft CTP 2050 which is anticipated to be finalized early next year. Based on comments by CTC Commissioners at November’s joint CTC, California Air Resources Board, and Department of Housing and Community Development meeting, it appears the aspirational goals within the Draft CTP resonate with these agencies. At that meeting, the various board and agency staff discussed recommendations for how state agencies can better align their programs and policies to achieve transportation, housing, air quality, and climate goals, similar to what the CTP aims to do. There is a lot of synergy between the three agencies and the make-up of the CTC is progressively becoming more in sync with the direction the state administration is taking on transportation, housing, and air quality matters. The California State Transportation Agency, known as CalSTA, made a presentation on its Climate Action Plan on Transportation Infrastructure, or CAPTI. CAPTI originated in a slightly different form but as a result of Governor Newsom’s executive order in 2019, N-19-19, that directed billions of dollars of transportation investments made by the state to, more or less, transportation projects that would facilitate housing density in urban areas and encourage active transportation modes. CalSTA had been working on a strategic framework for implementing that 6 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting November 16, 2020 Page 7 executive order which appears to be a manipulation of SB 1 dollars to the extent possible under state law. CalSTA and Caltrans are being directed to invest transportation dollars in projects that do not expand highway capacity and that reduce vehicle miles traveled while reducing GHG emissions. The presentation made by CalSTA to the joint meeting was included as an attachment to the agenda item. As seen on the 10th slide, the state’s intent is to finalize CAPTI by Spring 2021, which is likely just in time for the CTC to begin updating the SB 1 competitive program guidelines for the next cycle. All this is basically to say that seemingly, moving forward, Riverside County may be on its own again to fund highway transportation projects. Staff anticipates the state will divest itself in the highway projects contained in RCTC’s expenditure plan and future highway-improving projects led by cities and the county. RCTC staff are staying engaged and informed on these matters but are finding it challenging to be heard in Sacramento. With this work going on, it makes RCTC staff that much more eager to learn CTC recommendations for the current cycles of SB 1 competitive grant funding. Staff will continue to keep the TAC informed on the policy changes the state continues to advance. In the meantime, in addition to reacting to impacts you are likely already experiencing as a result of SB 743, local agencies would be wise to bear these policy changes in mind as they plan for the future. The next CTC meeting will be held on December 2 and 3 via webinar again. Staff wi ll report on that meeting at the January TAC meeting. 11. RCTC COMMISSION MEETING HIGHLIGHTS: DECEMBER 2020 AND JANUARY 2021 Lorelle Moe-Luna thanked the TAC for its review and input into the I nland Empire Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan, which was approved in October and submitted to the CTC. It allows RCTC to continue applying for funds through the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program. The I-15 Corridor Operations Project (15 COP) was approved by the Commission in October. It approved $25 million of Measure A tax revenue bond proceeds and $13.3 million of CMAQ for the project. This will provide congestion relief by adding an auxiliary lane from Cajalco Road southbound on -ramp to the Weirick Road southbound off-ramp. This should be completed by 2024. Third, the ATP 20-point distribution, which the TAC approved in September, was approved by the Commission last week. This will be forwarded to SCAG for incorporation into the regional MPO program guidelines. She also announced that RCTC will be growing by about 19 staff members. This is due to the approval of the implementation and management services agreement between RCTC and the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA). Currently, RCTC has just over 50 staff members. At last Thursday’s Commission meeting the agreement was unanimously approved and beginning January 1, RCTC will become the managing agency for RCA. RCA will still operate as a JPA with a separate board but managing staff will be RCTC. This structure is not a new concept. This is similar to how CVAG is managing the conservation commission in the Coachella Valley and how OCTA is the managing agency for LOSSAN. She further stated RCTC is excited about this new opportunity and is looking forward to working with 7 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting November 16, 2020 Page 8 new staff. This was an important decision for RCTC’s policy makers and since Measure A was the largest contributor to the MSHCP plan, this will be a good fit for RCTC to strengthen and carry out the plan. 12.2021 TAC MEEETING SCHEDULE Farshid Mohammadi pointed out the 2021 TAC Meeting Schedule and reminded the TAC that similar to past years, the meetings will be bi-monthly with the next meeting scheduled for January 25, 2021. Until further notice, all meetings will start at 10:00 a.m. and will be remote. Some members have asked about the continuation of videoconferencing after the end of the pandemic. Jillian Guizado reminded attendees that the TAC meetings are public meetings subject to the Brown Act and RCTC will have to do whatever is required by law. 13.COMMITTEE MEMBER / STAFF REPORT Farshid Mohammadi thanked Gabor Pakozdi and Patty Romo for their service on the TAC and wished them well in their retirements. Patty Romo, County of Riverside, said her last day will be December 17. She announced that her replacement will be Mark Lancaster, Transportation Director, who will be joining the TAC in January 2021. There was no other business presented. 14.ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Technical Advisory Committee, the meeting adjourned at approximately 11:45 a.m. The next meeting will be on January 25, 2021, 10:00 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Jillian Guizado Planning and Programming Director 8 AGENDA ITEM 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) Transition STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file an update on the transition of the management of RCA to the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On January 1, 2021, the Commission became the managing agency of RCA. Both the Commission and RCA retain its separate legal authorities and governing boards. The RCA Board of Directors requested the Commission to manage the Agency based on the Commission’s expertise and track record in land acquisition, partnerships with state and federal wildlife agencies, project delivery, fiscal management, public engagement, and legislative advocacy. This management change also provides for contract consolidation and resource efficiencies. While much progress has been made to acquire the lands needed to fulfill the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) since its inception in 2004, significant effort is needed to complete the MSHCP’s objectives while also maintaining buy-in from critical stakeholders. Amongst the immediate priorities of the RCA Board Chair Natasha Johnson is to enhance the RCA’s communication, education, and partnership with its member agencies. The TAC provides an ideal venue for this effort. Therefore, Commission / RCA staff will make a brief presentation to the TAC regarding the RCA transition, near term priorities, and seek input from TAC members. DISCUSSION: Topics to discuss include: •The 2020 Nexus Study Update for the MSHCP •Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF) which will become effective July 1, 2021 •Potential process and communication improvements •Clarifying RCA and member agency roles and responsibilities under the MSHCP 9 AGENDA ITEM 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Jennifer Crosson, Toll Operations Manager SUBJECT: 15 Express Lanes Opening STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file a presentation on the 15 Express Lanes opening. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission, in partnership with Caltrans and the Federal Highways Administration, invested $472 million to improve Interstate 15. The 15 Express Lanes will typically provide two express lanes in each direction, from State Route 60 to Cajalco Road. The 15 Express Lanes have been under construction since 2018. The design, implementation, and testing of the toll systems and customer services are near completion. DISCUSSION: Staff will provide a preview of the 15 Express Lanes operations and events leading up to the opening of the express lanes. The preview will include a highlight of the following: •Operating policies •Changes for 91 customers •Facilities •Services to be provided •Events preceding the express lanes opening 10 AGENDA ITEM 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Jenny Chan, Planning and Programming Manager SUBJECT: Active Transportation Program Cycle 5 – Riverside County Project Recommendations for Metropolitan Planning Organization Regional Program STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the Riverside County Active Transportation Program (ATP) projects for inclusion in the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) ATP Regional Program Cycle 5 consisting of the highest scoring projects in the total amount of $11,305,000; 2) Authorize staff to adjust the ATP award request to include Riverside County – Public Health’s Safe Routes for All – Hemet Project to maximize available funds in Riverside County; 3) Submit the list of recommended and contingency projects to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for inclusion in the MPO ATP Regional Program and subsequent submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for final approval in June 2021; 4) Authorize staff to request state-only ATP funds for all projects, which all have cleared and completed state environmental clearance; 5) Submit the MPO ATP regional projects to SCAG for programming in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); 6) Direct staff to coordinate with the MPO ATP Regional Program project sponsors regarding timely funding allocations, obligations, and project delivery; 7) Prioritize Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG)’s Coachella Valley Arts and Music Line project for any future supplemental ATP Cycle 5 funding; and 8) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Senate Bill 99 created the ATP focusing state and federal funds toward projects that improve public health and reduce greenhouse gases. The CTC is responsible for administering the program including the development of guidelines, which involves local agency and public input. Project categories for these funds mainly include pedestrian and bicycle facilities or programs that enhance or encourage walking and bicycling. ATP Cycle 5 began with the CTC releasing a call for projects on March 25, 2020. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, CTC staff held a virtual public workshop on April 8, 2020 to discuss schedule revisions. The CTC approved a three-month delay 11 to all aspects of the ATP, including application submittal, evaluation, and program adoption. The call for projects included three categories of funding: Funding Category Amount Statewide Competitive (50%) $ 220,780,000 Small Urban and Rural Competitive (10%) 44,156,000 Large MPO Competitive (40%) 176,624,000 Total Available ATP Funds – Cycle 5 $ 441,560,000 Applications were due to the CTC and Caltrans by September 15, 2020. The CTC received a total of 454 project applications requesting over $2.3 billion in ATP funds over four fiscal years (FY) 2021/22 through 2024/25. Scoring of applications was managed by the CTC and involved the participation of various agencies including, but not limited to, regional transportation planning agencies, MPOs, Caltrans, councils of governments, county public health departments, and advocacy and interest groups such as Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS), California Bicycle Coalition, and Rails to Trails. In total, Riverside County agencies submitted 30 projects requesting approximately $137 million of ATP funding in Cycle 5. The ATP process allows applicants two opportunities to receive funding – the statewide and large MPO levels. As part of the sequential project selection, projects are first evaluated statewide and those that are not ranked high enough to receive statewide funding are automatically provided a second opportunity for funding through the large MPO share. Applications were scored based on the following criteria established by the CTC: • Benefits to Disadvantaged Communities (DAC) • Need • Safety • Public Participation & Planning • Scope and Plan Consistency • Implementation & Plan Development • Context Sensitive & Innovation • Transformative Projects • Cost Effective • Leveraging Funds • Conservation Corps Coordination • Past Performance DISCUSSION: CTC Statewide Competitive Funding Recommendations On March 12, 2021, the CTC will approve the project recommendations for the statewide competitive component, which include the following two projects from Riverside County: 12 CTC ATP PROJECT FUNDING FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY – STATEWIDE COMPETITION Agency Project ATP Request *DAC CTC Score Perris City of Perris Bike & Pedestrian Network Project $1,931,000 X 98 Riverside County Safe Routes to School – San Jacinto 600,000 X 95 Riverside County Statewide Total $2,531,000 MPO Regional Program Recommendations The SCAG MPO ATP share is $93.4 million for the six-county region and includes approximately $88 million for implementation projects and $4.6 million for planning and non-infrastructure activities. The $88 million for implementation projects is distributed by county based on population. The remaining $4.6 million is allocated to SCAG’s Sustainable Communities Program (SCP). County Infrastructure Funding Amount Imperial $ 882,000 Los Angeles 47,506,000 Orange 14,930,000 Riverside 11,305,000 San Bernardino 10,157,000 Ventura 3,969,000 Total $ 88,749,000 ATP guidelines require that large MPOs, such as SCAG, work with the county transportation commissions to develop their regional program recommendations. In ATP Cycle 5, SCAG allowed each county transportation commission to develop its own point distribution methodology to award 20 points to the CTC score. In November 2020, the Commission approved the 20-point methodology as presented in Table 1. Table 1: RCTC-Adopted 20-Point Distribution Criteria Points 1. Requesting construction-only funding 6 2. Construction funding in the first two years of programming & PA/ED completed 10 3. Projects identified in WRCOG Sub-regional Active Transportation Plan or CVAG Non-Motorized Plan; or an adopted local active transportation plan, bike or pedestrian master plan, or Safe Routes to School Plan 4 13 Adding 20 points to Riverside County project scores for the projects not recommended for the statewide competitive program results in the next highest scored projects that can be funded from Riverside County’s share of MPO funding (Attachment 1). After fully funding the highest scoring project, Cathedral City’s Downtown Cathedral City Connector project, the balance available to fund the next set of projects is $6,922,000. The second highest scoring project is CVAG’s Coachella Valley Arts & Music Line, with an ATP request of $16,903,000. Staff inquired with CVAG if the agency could accept partial MPO funding and if CVAG had sufficient funding to cover the $9,981,000 balance. CVAG indicated it did not have funds to cover the remaining balance, therefore, staff moved down the project list to fully fund the next three highest scoring projects. After fully funding four infrastructure projects, a balance of $348,000 remained that would be returned to the SCAG MPO share. To utilize the remaining funds in Riverside County, staff recommends funding Riverside County Public Health’s non- infrastructure project, Safe Routes for All – Hemet, as it is the highest scored non-infrastructure project. Riverside County Health has committed to funding the remaining balance of $288,000 with agency funds. Staff recommends the following five projects for the MPO ATP Regional Program. Staff will continue to work with CVAG to review ways to improve the competitiveness for this type of transformative project in the next ATP cycle. Until then, CVAG is requesting the Commission to prioritize the project in the event supplemental funds are available to the ATP Cycle 5 Call for Projects (Attachment 2). Staff recommends prioritizing CVAG’s Coachella Valley Arts & Music Line project should ATP Cycle 5 supplemental funding become available. RIVERSIDE COUNTY MPO PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS Agency Project ATP Request Cumulative Total CTC Score/ RCTC Score Cathedral City Downtown Cathedral City Connectors $4,383,000 90/110 Desert Hot Springs Palm Drive Improvements 3,700,000 $8,008,300 86.5/106.5 Eastvale Southeast Eastvale SRTS Equitable Access Project 1,420,000 9,503,000 87/101 Wildomar Bundy Canyon Active Transportation Corridor 1,454,000 10,957,000 79/99 Riverside County – Public Health Safe Routes for All – Hemet (non-infrastructure) 348,000 11,305,000 91/NA SCAG Sustainable Communities Program As part of the MPO ATP share, SCAG sets aside 5 percent for planning and non-infrastructure activities. These funds are distributed through the SCP. SCAG staff is currently preparing its draft SCP recommendations. 14 Next Steps Upon Commission approval of staff’s recommendations, staff will submit the projects to SCAG for inclusion in the MPO ATP Regional Program Cycle 5. Subsequently, SCAG will submit the MPO Regional Program projects to the CTC for final approval at the June 2021 CTC meeting. ATP funds are administered through the CTC, Caltrans, and the Federal Highway Administration. The Commission is not a recipient of these MPO ATP funds; therefore, there is no fiscal impact to the Commission’s budget. Attachments: 1) ATP Scores for All Riverside County Applications 2)CVAG Letter for Coachella Valley Arts & Music Line 15 Agency Project Name  Total Project  Cost ATP Request PA/ED PS&E ROW CON CON‐NI 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 MPO  Score STATE  Score Perris City of Perris Bike & Ped Network Project 1,999              1,931              1,896          35             35             1,896       98 Riverside County Safe Routes for All ‐ San Jacinto 600 600 600           600          95 TOTAL 2,599              2,531               Agency Project Name  Total Project  Cost ATP Request PA/ED PS&E ROW CON CON‐NI 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 MPO  Score STATE  Score MPO  points Plan  4pts CON‐ONLY 6 pts CON in  first 2 &  CEQA  10 pts Cathedral City Downtown Cathedral City Connectors: Gap Closure &  Complete Streets Improvement                5,566                4,383 4,383          4,383       110 90 20 4 6 10 Desert Hot Springs Palm Drive Improvements 4,905                             3,700 3,700          3,700       106.5 86.5 20 4 6 10 Eastvale SE Eastvale SRTS Equitable Access Project 1,420                             1,420 150           1,270          1,420       101 87 14 4 0 10 Wildomar Bundy Canyon Active Transportation Corridor 3,990                             1,454 1,377          77             1,377       77             99 79 20 4 6 10 Riverside County Safe Routes for All ‐ Hemet 636 348 636           636          NA 91 NA NA NA NA TOTAL 16,517            11,305             Riverside Share 11,305            CVAG Coachella Valley Arts & Music Line 26,818            16,903            16,903        16,903     108 88 20 4 6 10 Desert Hot Springs Palm Drive Improvements ‐ I‐10 to Camino Aventura 6,995              6,154              6,154          6,154       94 74 20 4 6 10 Wildomar Mission Trail Active Transportation Project 6,548              3,638              168           168           115           3,110          77             451          3,110       77             94 90 4 4 0 0 Riverside County Hemet Area SRTS Sidewalk Project 1,946              1,946              25             225           340           1,181          175           25             565          1,356       93 89 4 4 0 0 Riverside Five Points Neighborhood Pedestrian Safety Improvements 6,953              6,113              1,070        5,043          1,070       5,043       92 88 4 4 0 0 Temecula Temecula Creek Southside Trail Project 3,637              3,218              3,160          58             58             3,160       92 82 10 4 6 0 Desert Hot Springs DHS CV Link Extension Project 32,572            29,035            1,290        27,745        1,290       27,745     91 87 4 4 0 0 Riverside County Theda Street Safe Routes to School Sidewalk Project 1,881              1,881              25             235           340           1,181          100           25             575          1,281       88 84 4 4 0 0 Menifee Harvest Valley Elementary SRTS 2,997              2,397              15             230           40              2,112          245          40             2,112       87.5 83.5 4 4 0 0 Riverside County Mecca‐North Shore Community Connector Bike Lanes 10,055            10,055            200           1,600        8,205          50             200          1,600       8,205       50             86 82 4 4 0 0 Riverside Mitchelle Avenue Sidepath Gap Closure 6,989              6,289              200           2,373        3,716          200          2,373       3,716       85 81 4 4 0 0 Menifee Romoland Elementary SRTS Sidewalk Gap Closure & Ped  Improvements                6,413 5,453              60             260           50              5,083          370          5,083       83 79 4 4 0 0 Riverside County Grand Avenue Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Imp Project 2,820              2,820              25             400           250           2,045          100           25             650          2,145       83 79 4 4 0 0 Jurupa Valley Pacific Avenue SRTS 4,132              2,403              233           2,170          233          2,170       92 78 14 4 0 10 Eastvale Cucamonga Creek 1,999              1,999              150           1,849          1,999       81 67 14 4 0 10 Moreno Valley South City Trail Project 7,781              7,781              80             900           250           6,551          80             1,150       6,551       72 68 4 4 0 0 Moreno Valley Heacock Street Improvements 2,265              2,265              50             200           660           1,355          50             860          1,355       53 49 4 4 0 0 Riverside County Skyview Road Pedestrian Bridge 10,343            7,970              7,870          100           7,970       37 31 6 0 6 0 Coachella Coachella Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Project 2,974              2,974              250           2,724          250          2,724       36 32 4 4 0 0 Murrieta Copper Canyon Park Bridge 664 664 20             60              584              20             644          30 26 4 4 0 0 Riverside County Safe Routes for All ‐ Coachella 657 657 657           657          89 NA NA NA NA Riverside County Lakeview/Neuvo Active Transportation Plan ‐ Plan Only 270 270 270           270          ineligible NA NA NA NA San Jacinto San Jacinto Complete Streets Plan 328 328 328           328          81 NA NA NA NA 148,037          123,213           STATEWIDE COMPONENT MPO COMPONENT CONTINGENCY LIST ATTACHMENT 1 16 Anne Mayer Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, CA 92501 M� Thank you for the recent update on the Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 5 awards. I suppose we should all take some pride in the fact that we have so many competitive ATP projects coming out of the Coachella Valley. Unfortunately, after speaking to our partners on the Avenue 48/ Arts and Music Line, the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) will have to pass on a partial ATP grant award of $6.9 million because it would require too large of a financial commitment locally. By passing on the funding, we recognize that the City of Desert Hot Springs' project along Palm Drive will become fully funded. Two other projects in western Riverside County are also expected to benefit. That's important for the safety of cyclists and pedestrians, who far too often are getting hit and killed on our roadways. However, this is the second year in a row where CVAG was in a competitive position, and just points away from full funding. RCTC has been a longstanding partner in our efforts to improve ATP access in the Coachella Valley, and we are hoping to talk with you about what RCTC resources (be it staff time, technical expertise and perhaps regional funding) may be available to help these projects be fully funded. Additionally, if ATP Cycle 5 funding is augmented, we look forward to working with you to ensure the Arts and Music Line is considered for full or partial funding. I'd add that, in the recent cycles of the ATP funding, we have heard from the State that there is a push to have larger, more transformative projects. I think the applications out of the Coachella Valley reflect that vision. They also reflect the needs of our valley. We intend to continue to think big when it comes to how we improve active transportation routes in the Coachella Valley. Please include this correspondence when the staff makes its recommendations to RCTC so it is provided to all the Commissioners. I am happy to address any questions or provide additional information. And thank you for your partnership. Sincerely, Tom Kirk Executive Director CITY OF BLvn1E · CITY or= CATHrnRAL CiTv · CITY OF CoArnELLA • CITY OF DEsrnT HOT SPRINGS. Clrv oF INDIAN WELLS Orv OF INDIO· CITY OF LA Qu1NTA · Clrv OF PALM DEsrnr • CITY OF PALM SPRINGS. CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE. CouNTY OF R,vrnslDE AGUA CALieNTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS . CABAZON BAND or MISSION INDIANS ATTACHMENT 2 17 AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Jillian Guizado, Planning and Programming Director SUBJECT: Technical Advisory Committee Vice Chair Vacancy and Upcoming Election STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file an update regarding the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) vice chair vacancy and upcoming TAC election of officers. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the May 20, 2019 TAC meeting, Farshid Mohammadi, TAC representative from the City of Riverside and Martin Magana, TAC representative from the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) were unanimously nominated and elected Chair and Vice Chair, respectively, for two-year terms commencing May 20, 2019. The next election of TAC officers is scheduled to take place at the May 17, 2021 meeting at which time the chair should be a representative from the eastern portion of the county while the vice chair should be a representative from the western portion of the county. DISCUSSION: On February 18, 2021, the Commission received a letter from CVAG’s Executive Director appointing Jonathan Hoy as CVAG’s TAC representative. Commission staff thank Mr. Magana for his service as the TAC Vice Chair and welcome Mr. Hoy back to the TAC. Due to the vice chair vacancy occurring in very close proximity to the next scheduled election of TAC officers, staff is not recommending the TAC take action to fill the vacancy at this time. Instead, staff respectfully requests TAC members to consider volunteering to serve as a TAC officer for the two-year period beginning May 17, 2021 and ending around May 15, 2023. TAC members interested in being nominated are asked to contact Jillian Guizado, Commission staff. 18 AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Jillian Guizado, Planning and Programming Director SUBJECT: Riverside Transit Agency Reprogramming Request of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funds as Programmed in the 2013 Multi-Funding Call for Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file information about the Riverside Transit Agency’s request to reprogram Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding from the RapidLink Service Project to the Route 1 Weekend Service Improvements Project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its January 8, 2014 meeting, the Commission approved staff recommendations for the 2013 Multi-Funding Call for Projects, programming approximately $56 million in CMAQ funds to qualifying projects throughout Riverside County. RTA received approval for two projects: Systemwide Intelligent Transportation Systems in the amount of $4,125,000 and RapidLink Service Project in the amount of $9,211,800. RapidLink, also known as the Gold Line, implemented limited-stop service along the Route 1 alignment during weekday peak commute periods every 15 minutes on the University and Magnolia Avenue corridors. The CMAQ funds awarded to RTA for the service funded both the purchase of 14 40-foot RapidLink buses and operations between University of California, Riverside and the Galleria at Tyler. In July 2014, RTA requested an administrative change to the project to extend the service limits from Galleria at Tyler in Riverside to Smith Avenue and Sixth Street in Corona. RTA began RapidLink service in summer 2017 and ran it continuously until April 5, 2020 when the service was no longer viable due to the coronavirus pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, the CMAQ funding for this project was set to be exhausted in December 2020. CMAQ funds are Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) formula funds that are suballocated by California to agencies like the Commission. CMAQ funds are available for transportation projects and programs that reduce congestion and improve air quality. All CMAQ projects are required to have an air quality analysis performed to prove the project or program utilizing the funds will indeed reduce congestion and improve air quality. In addition, all projects and programs that will utilize federal funds, such as CMAQ, must be included in the adopted Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and be programmed into the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) before implementation. Both the RTP/SCS and FTIP 19 are developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) with updates and amendments that vary throughout the year. The RTP/SCS is a long-range planning document that includes all regionally significant and federally funded projects in the SCAG region. Specific types of projects and programs that reduce congestion or improve air quality are considered Transportation Control Measures (TCMs). Implementing TCM projects and programs demonstrates to the federal government that an RTP/SCS will meet air quality conformity as required by the Clean Air Act. If a TCM project is not able to be implemented, it must be replaced with a project of similar or greater air quality benefit and must be delivered within the same timeframe as the original project. The RapidLink Service Project was able to utilize CMAQ funds because it was a TCM project, reduced congestion and improved air quality, was modeled and included in the 2012 RTP/SCS, and was included in the 2015 FTIP. According to SCAG, the TCM requirement for the RapidLink Service Project was fulfilled when RTA completed the purchase of the 14 RapidLink buses. DISCUSSION: In April 2020, RTA reduced its transit service to Sunday level services and stopped running RapidLink. Much like every other transit operator in the nation, RTA has had to retool transit service to meet the greatest rider demand and to ensure social distancing requirements can be maintained. Because RTA stopped RapidLink service due the pandemic, the agency has not been able to utilize the $466,130 balance of CMAQ funds remaining in the agreement for this project. Of note, CMAQ funds utilized for transit projects and programs need to be transferred from FHWA to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Once these funds are transferred, they cannot be transferred back to FHWA; they can either be used for another transit project or the funds can be forfeited to FTA. Upon stopping RapidLink service, RTA approached the Commission with a proposal to utilize the remaining CMAQ funds (Attachment 2). RTA identified a service, Route 1 Weekend Service Improvements Project, which increased frequency from every 30 minutes to every 15 minutes and started in September 2019. The Commission had an air quality analysis performed for the Route 1 Weekend Service Improvements Project which had positive air quality results, making it an eligible service to receive CMAQ funds. The Route 1 Weekend Service Improvements Project is also a TCM project and was modeled as part of the current 2020 RTP/SCS. The project was entered into the FTIP by Commission staff in November 2020. To allow RTA to utilize the remaining CMAQ balance awarded to the agency during the 2013 Multi-Funding Call for Projects and to not allow Riverside County to lose these funds, staff recommended, and the Commission approved at its January 13, 2021 meeting, allowing RTA to reprogram the balance of its CMAQ funds, in the amount of $466,130, from the RapidLink Service Project to Route 1 Weekend Service Improvements Project. The original local match funding commitment of 25 percent for the RapidLink Service Project will be maintained on the Route 1 Weekend Service Improvements Project. 20 Attachment: 1) Map of RapidLink and Route 1 2) Reprogramming Request from Riverside Transit Agency, dated December 1, 2020 21 34 | RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Downtown UNIVERSITY LINDEN CA N Y O N C R E S T D R MISSION INN A V E LE M O N S T 14TH ST 12TH ST 11TH ST MA R K E T S T IO W A A V E CH I C A G O A V E MADISON S T CENTRAL AVE ADAMS ST VAN BURE N B L V D TYLER ST LA SIERRA A V E HOLE AVE MCKINLEY ST MAI N S T GR A N D B L V D MA G N O L I A A V E ARLINGTON AVE UCR Riverside Plaza University Village Riverside Community Hospital Kaiser Medical Center Corona City Hall California Baptist University Riverside City CollegeRIVERSIDE CORONA No service on weekends or: Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day and New Year’s Day. RAPIDLINK GOLD LINE | CORONA - DOWNTOWN RIVERSIDE - UCR GOLDLINE SIXTH S T Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. Corona Park- And-Ride 91 Information Center (951) 565-5002 RiversideTransit.com RTABus.com 91 91 UNIVERSITY & LEMON GOLD LINE•1•10•12 14•15•22•29•49 200•204•208•210 OMNITRANS 215 GALLERIA AT TYLER GOLD LINE•1•10•12 13•14•15•21•27•200Boarding diagram pg 28 6TH & BELLE GOLD LINE•1 CORONA CRUISER BLUE, RED MAGNOLIA & MCKINLEY GOLD LINE•1 CORONA CRUISER BLUE MAGNOLIA & LA SIERRA GOLD LINE•1•15 CHICAGO & UNIVERSITY GOLD LINE•1•13 14•22 CORONA TRANSIT CENTER GOLD LINE•1•3•205•206 CORONA CRUISER BLUE, RED METROLINKBoarding diagram pg 27 UCR AT BANNOCKBURN GOLD LINE•1•16•51 52•204 IOWA AT UNIVERSITY GOLD LINE•1•14•16•51 52•204 Stop Location NOTE: RapidLink buses serve these stops only. Legend | Map not to scale Hours of Service: BUSES DEPART EVERY 15 MINUTES. Monday – Friday only. 6:30-8:30 a.m. and 1:30-5:30 p.m. ATTACHMENT 1 22 RTA RIDE GUIDE - January 12, 2020 | 35 Gold Line Weekdays | Eastbound to UC Riverside A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD | Times are approximate • RapidLink has 14 bus stops in each direction as shown on the map. Buses are scheduled to arrive at each stop every 15 minutes. • TIMES SHOWN ARE ESTIMATES ONLY. THEY ARE NOT TIMEPOINTS. Buses may arrive or depart earlier or later than time shown. • For real-time bus arrival information, please use BusWatch or Transit app. Gold Line Weekdays | Westbound to Corona A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD | Times are approximate Corona Transit Center Galleria at Tyler University & Lemon UCR at Bannockburn 6:30 6:55 7:17 7:35 then buses arrive every 15 minutes until 8:30 8:57 9:20 9:38 1:30 2:00 2:30 2:50 then buses arrive every 15 minutes until 5:30 6:00 6:27 6:45 UCR at Bannockburn University & Lemon Galleria at Tyler Corona Transit Center 6:30 6:40 7:00 7:35 then buses arrive every 15 minutes until 8:30 8:40 9:02 9:35 1:30 1:40 2:05 2:45 then buses arrive every 15 minutes until 5:30 5:40 6:05 6:40 23 Downtown UNIVERSITY A V E MISSION INN A V E LE M O N S T 14TH ST MA R K E T S T VI N E S T MU L B E R R Y IO W A A V E CH I C A G O A V E CA N Y O N C R E S T BLAINE ST 3RD ST 9TH MADISON S T CENTRAL AVE ADAMS ST VAN BURE N B L V D TYLER ST LA SIERRA A V E HOLE AVE MCKINLEY ST MAI N S T GRAND BL V D MA G N O L I A A V E ARLINGTON AVE UCR Parkview Community Hospital Riverside Plaza Cesar ChavezCommunityCenter University Village Marcy Library Central M.S. Riverside Community Hospital Kaiser Medical Center Corona City Hall Chemawa M.S. Arlington Library Villegas M.S. Home Gardens Library Sherman Indian H.S. California Baptist University Ramona H.S. RiversideCity College SMITH AVERAILROA D BU S I N E S S C N T R CO M M E R C E PO M O N A AUTO CENTER RIVERSIDE CORONA RTA and Corona Cruiser honor each other’s Day and 30-Day passes at shared stops. UCR - DOWNTOWN RIVERSIDE - CORONA1 SIXT H S T WEST CORONA METROLINK STATION Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. Corona Park- And-Ride Information Center (951) 565-5002 RiversideTransit.com RTABus.com T T T T T T T 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 10 1 2 91 91 91 91 UNIVERSITY & LEMON 1•10•12•14•15•22•29•49 200•204•208 OMNITRANS 215 MARKET & UNIVERSITY 1•12•13•14•15•22•29•49 204 RIVERSIDE - DOWNTOWN METROLINK STATION 1•15•29•49•200•208 OMNITRANS 215 METROLINK•AMTRAK Boarding diagram pg 25 GALLERIA AT TYLER 1•10•12•13•14•15•21 27•200Boarding diagram pg 21 CHICAGO & UNIVERSITY 1•13•14•22 MAGNOLIA & LA SIERRA 1•15 MAGNOLIA & MCKINLEY 1•CORONA CRUISER BLUE 6TH & MAIN 1•CORONA CRUISER BLUE, RED SMITH & 6TH 1•CORONA CRUISER RED CORONA TRANSIT CENTER 1•3•205•206 CORONA CRUISER BLUE, RED METROLINKBoarding diagram pg 20 UCR AT BANNOCKBURN 1•16•204 IOWA & UNIVERSITY 1•14•16•204 IOWA & BLAINE 1•10•14 1 Time and/or Transfer Point Alternate Routing Transfer Point Long-term Detour Routing Legend | Map not to scale T BROCKTON ARCADE 1•10•14•15 MAGNOLIA & 15TH 1•13•15•50 24 1 Eastbound to Downtown Riverside /UCR | Weekdays & Weekends A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD | Times are approximate We s t C o r o n a Me t r o l i n k S t a t i o n Sm i t h & 6 t h Co r o n a T r a n s i t Ce n t e r Ma g n o l i a & Mc K i n l e y Ga l l e r i a a t T y l e r Ma g n o l i a & Ad a m s Br o c k t o n A r c a d e Ri v e r s i d e C i t y Co l l e g e Un i v e r s i t y & Le m o n Ri v e r s i d e - Do w n t o w n Me t r o l i n k S t a t i o n UC R a t Ba n n o c k b u r n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 —5:44 5:56 6:06 6:16 6:24 6:30 6:35 6:41 —6:54 —6:14 6:26 6:36 6:46 6:55 7:01 7:06 7:12 7:16 7:29 —6:51 7:06 7:17 7:28 7:37 7:43 7:48 7:54 —8:07 —7:25 7:40 7:51 8:02 8:11 8:17 8:23 8:29 8:33 8:47 7:52 7:58 8:13 8:24 8:35 8:44 8:50 8:56 9:02 9:06 9:20 8:22 8:28 8:43 8:54 9:05 9:14 9:20 9:27 9:34 —9:50 —8:49 9:07 9:20 9:32 9:44 9:50 9:57 10:04 —10:20 9:08 9:15 9:33 9:46 9:58 10:10 10:17 10:24 10:32 —10:50 9:38 9:45 10:03 10:16 10:28 10:40 10:47 10:54 11:02 —11:20 —10:00 10:18 10:31 10:43 10:55 11:02 11:09 11:17 —11:35 —10:15 10:33 10:46 10:58 11:10 11:17 11:24 11:32 —11:50 —10:27 10:45 10:58 11:13 11:25 11:32 11:39 11:47 —12:05 —10:42 11:00 11:13 11:28 11:40 11:47 11:54 12:02 —12:20 —10:57 11:15 11:28 11:43 11:55 12:02 12:09 12:17 —12:35 —11:12 11:30 11:43 11:58 12:10 12:17 12:24 12:32 —12:50 —11:27 11:45 11:58 12:13 12:25 12:32 12:39 12:47 —1:05 —11:42 12:00 12:13 12:28 12:40 12:47 12:54 1:02 —1:20 —11:57 12:15 12:28 12:43 12:55 1:02 1:09 1:17 —1:35 —12:12 12:30 12:43 12:58 1:10 1:17 1:24 1:32 —1:50 —12:28 12:46 12:59 1:14 1:26 1:33 1:40 1:48 —2:06 —12:43 1:01 1:14 1:29 1:41 1:48 1:55 2:03 —2:21 —12:58 1:16 1:29 1:44 1:56 2:03 2:10 2:18 —2:38 —1:13 1:31 1:44 1:59 2:11 2:18 2:25 2:33 —2:53 —1:30 1:48 2:01 2:16 2:28 2:35 2:42 2:50 —3:10 —1:45 2:03 2:16 2:31 2:43 2:50 2:57 3:05 —3:25 —2:00 2:18 2:31 2:46 2:58 3:05 3:12 3:20 —3:40 —2:15 2:33 2:46 3:01 3:13 3:20 3:27 3:35 —3:55 —2:33 2:51 3:04 3:19 3:31 3:38 3:45 3:53 —4:13 —2:48 3:06 3:19 3:34 3:46 3:53 4:00 4:08 —4:28 —3:05 3:23 3:36 3:51 4:03 4:10 4:17 4:25 —4:45 —3:18 3:36 3:49 4:03 4:15 4:22 4:29 4:37 —4:57 —3:32 3:50 4:03 4:17 4:29 4:36 4:43 4:51 4:56 5:14 —3:47 4:05 4:18 4:32 4:44 4:51 4:58 5:06 5:11 5:29 —4:03 4:21 4:34 4:48 5:00 5:07 5:14 5:22 —5:40 —4:19 4:37 4:50 5:04 5:16 5:23 5:30 5:38 —5:56 —4:39 4:57 5:09 5:22 5:33 5:39 5:46 5:54 —6:12 4:52 4:59 5:17 5:29 5:42 5:53 5:59 6:06 6:14 —6:32 5:23 5:30 5:48 6:00 6:13 6:24 6:30 6:37 6:45 6:50 7:08 —5:58 6:16 6:28 6:41 6:52 6:58 7:05 7:13 7:31 6:27 6:34 6:50 7:02 7:14 7:25 7:31 7:38 7:45 —8:03 6:49 6:56 7:12 7:24 7:36 7:47 7:53 8:00 8:07 —8:25 —7:23 7:39 7:51 8:03 8:14 8:20 8:27 8:34 —8:52 —7:46 8:02 8:14 8:26 8:37 8:43 8:49 8:55 9:00 9:15 8:43 8:49 9:04 9:16 9:28 9:39 9:45 9:51 9:57 —10:10 25 1 Westbound to Corona | Weekdays & Weekends A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD | Times are approximate UC R a t Ba n n o c k b u r n Ri v e r s i d e - Do w n t o w n Me t r o l i n k S t a t i o n Un i v e r s i t y & Le m o n Ri v e r s i d e C i t y Co l l e g e Br o c k t o n A r c a d e Ma g n o l i a & Ad a m s Ga l l e r i a a t T y l e r Ma g n o l i a & Mc K i n l e y Co r o n a T r a n s i t Ce n t e r Sm i t h & 6 t h We s t C o r o n a Me t r o l i n k S t a t i o n 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 5:48 —5:56 6:02 6:08 6:14 6:23 6:35 6:45 6:56 — 6:18 —6:26 6:33 6:39 6:45 6:54 7:06 7:16 7:27 7:36 6:43 6:55 6:59 7:06 7:12 7:18 7:27 7:39 7:50 8:01 8:10 7:20 7:34 7:38 7:45 7:51 7:58 8:10 8:25 8:36 8:47 8:56 7:54 —8:07 8:14 8:20 8:27 8:39 8:54 9:06 9:17 9:26 8:22 8:36 8:40 8:47 8:54 9:02 9:14 9:29 9:41 9:52 — 8:45 8:59 9:03 9:10 9:17 9:25 9:37 9:52 10:04 10:17 — 9:07 —9:20 9:28 9:35 9:43 9:55 10:10 10:22 10:35 — 9:37 —9:50 9:58 10:05 10:13 10:27 10:42 10:54 11:07 — 10:02 —10:15 10:23 10:30 10:39 10:53 11:09 11:23 11:36 — 10:17 —10:30 10:38 10:45 10:54 11:08 11:24 11:38 11:51 — 10:32 —10:45 10:53 11:00 11:09 11:25 11:41 11:55 12:08 — 10:47 —11:00 11:08 11:15 11:24 11:40 11:56 12:10 12:23 — 11:02 —11:15 11:23 11:30 11:39 11:55 12:11 12:25 12:38 — 11:17 —11:30 11:38 11:45 11:54 12:10 12:26 12:40 12:53 — 11:32 —11:47 11:55 12:02 12:11 12:27 12:43 12:57 1:10 — 11:47 —12:02 12:10 12:17 12:26 12:42 12:58 1:12 1:25 — 12:02 —12:17 12:25 12:32 12:41 12:57 1:13 1:27 1:40 — 12:17 —12:32 12:40 12:47 12:56 1:12 1:28 1:42 1:55 — 12:32 —12:47 12:55 1:03 1:12 1:28 1:46 2:00 2:13 — 12:47 —1:02 1:10 1:18 1:27 1:43 2:01 2:15 2:28 — 1:02 —1:17 1:25 1:33 1:42 1:58 2:16 2:30 2:43 — 1:17 —1:32 1:40 1:48 1:57 2:13 2:31 2:45 2:58 — 1:32 —1:47 1:55 2:03 2:12 2:27 2:45 2:59 3:12 — 1:47 —2:02 2:10 2:18 2:27 2:42 3:00 3:14 3:27 — 2:02 —2:17 2:26 2:34 2:43 2:58 3:16 3:30 3:43 — 2:18 —2:33 2:42 2:50 2:59 3:14 3:32 3:46 3:59 — 2:33 —2:48 2:57 3:05 3:14 3:29 3:47 4:01 4:14 — 2:50 —3:05 3:14 3:22 3:31 3:46 4:04 4:18 4:31 4:39 3:05 —3:20 3:29 3:37 3:46 4:01 4:19 4:33 4:46 — 3:22 —3:37 3:46 3:54 4:03 4:18 4:36 4:50 5:03 5:11 3:37 —3:52 4:01 4:09 4:18 4:33 4:51 5:05 5:18 — 3:52 —4:07 4:16 4:24 4:33 4:48 5:06 5:20 5:33 — 4:07 —4:22 4:31 4:39 4:48 5:03 5:21 5:35 5:48 — 4:25 —4:40 4:49 4:57 5:06 5:21 5:39 5:53 6:06 6:14 4:40 4:56 5:00 5:09 5:17 5:26 5:40 5:57 6:09 6:21 6:30 5:09 5:25 5:29 5:38 5:46 5:55 6:09 6:25 6:37 6:49 — 5:26 —5:41 5:49 5:56 6:04 6:18 6:34 6:46 6:58 — 5:52 —6:05 6:13 6:20 6:28 6:41 6:56 7:07 7:19 — 6:15 —6:28 6:36 6:43 6:50 7:03 7:18 7:29 7:41 — 6:51 7:05 7:09 7:17 7:24 7:31 7:44 7:59 8:10 8:22 8:31 7:43 —7:56 8:04 8:11 8:18 8:30 8:45 8:56 9:08 — 8:25 —8:38 8:46 8:53 9:00 9:12 9:27 9:38 9:50 — 9:04 9:18 9:22 9:30 9:37 9:44 9:56 10:11 10:22 10:34 — 26 ATTACHMENT 2 27 28 SCAG 2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program ($000) RIV201105TIP ID Implementing Agency RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY SCAG RTP Project #: 3120034 Conformity Category: TCM Committed Project Description: In Western Riverside County for RTA: Route 1 Service Improvements during weekend peak commute periods along Magnolia and University Avenues (Riverside/Corona Corridor) between UCR and Corona. Transfer remaining CMAQ operating funds from RapidLink Project (RIV151211). Study:N/A Is Model: YES Model #: PM: Kristin Warsinski - (951)565-5136 LS: N LS GROUP#: PPNO:EA #: Program Code: BUO00 - BUS OPERATIONS/OPERATING ASSISTANCE Stop Loc: UCR to Corona with 71 stops EB and 78 WB along Magnolia Ave./Market St. and University Ave Air Basin: SCAB Envir Doc: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT - Uza: Riverside-San Bernardino Sub-Area: Sub-Region: CTIPS ID: Trans Fee:0.00Fare:1.75 Prk Ride Loc:Transit Mode: BusTransit Rt: 1 Headway Peak: 15 min Headway OP: 0 Stop Time :16.00 Parking $: 0.00 Stop Dist: System :Transit Completion Date 07/31/2022Phase: Construction/Project Implementation beginsPostmile: Route : PRIOR PROG TOTAL BEYONDPHASE23/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19 PEFTA 5307 (FHWA TRANSFER FUNDS) CON RW SUBTOTAL $466 $466 $466 $466 $153 $153 $153 $153 LOCAL TRANS FUNDS SUBTOTAL CON RW PE $0 $0 $0 $619 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL TOTAL PE: $0 TOTAL RW: $0 TOTAL CON: $619 $619 TOTAL PROGRAMMED: $619 - General Comment: - Modeling Comment: New project modeled under RTP ID 3120034. - TCM Comment: - Amendment Comment: 2019 FTIP A29: New project with already obligated CMAQ/5307 remaining funds from RIV151211. - CMP Comment: - Narrative: Change reason:NEW PROJECT Total Project CostLast Revised Amendment 19-29 - In Progress $619 1Page Tuesday, November 10, 2020 29 AGENDA ITEM 1 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Jillian Guizado, Planning and Programming Director SUBJECT: County of Riverside Request for Additional Funds for the Salt Creek Trail STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file information about the County of Riverside’s request for additional funds for the Salt Creek Trail. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 2014, the Commission approved a Multifunding Call for Projects consisting of federal CMAQ, Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG), and 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial funds. From that call for projects, the Salt Creek Trail project was approved for $5,090,000 of CMAQ funds to construct a 4-mile segment in the city of Menifee and a 1-mile segment in the city of Hemet. The original project called for a Class I bike path and a soft pedestrian path was to be constructed along the north side of the Salt Creek flood control channel and along Domenigoni Parkway (Attachment 1). The County of Riverside (County) was, and continues to be, the lead agency for the project, and was required to complete a lengthy and complex environmental process through the National Environmental Protection Act. The project is located within a major creek which required extensive biological and cultural studies. The project was originally an 8-mile segment; however, a decision to remove a 3-mile segment was necessary to offset significantly increased costs for offsite habitat restoration and environmental documentation. Coordination efforts with private and public property owners including Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District, Caltrans, and the cities of Hemet and Menifee were also undertaken. Approval of design review, maintenance agreements, and permits were required by each of these agencies. In addition, reviews were required by Caltrans Headquarters and the Federal Highway Administration as the trail crosses under Interstate 215 necessitating an encroachment permit exception. The County also worked on securing a public trail easement as a gift with no cost to the County. The Salt Creek Trail is an important regional active transportation project and benefits the cities of Hemet and Menifee and many nearby communities. The ultimate length of the trail is planned to be 16 miles and this first segment will serve as a catalyst for future extensions. As a regional facility, this project provides significant greenhouse gas and public health benefits. 30 When the County opened bids for the construction phase of the project, the low bid was higher than the engineer’s estimate. The total cost of construction was established as $5,684,203. The County awarded the contract in December 2019. In the same month, the Commission approved an increase in CMAQ funding for the project in the amount of $594,203 and the Technical Advisory Committee received and filed a related item. DISCUSSION: On December 16, 2020, the County reached substantial completion of the project and it was opened to the public for use. During construction, the project experienced unexpected delays and expenses related to burrowing owls, COVID-19, mitigation fees for off-site habitat restoration, storm damage repair, and underestimated costs of a material and utility relocations. In total, the project is over budget $478,055. The County submitted a letter to the Commission on January 12, 2021 (Attachment 2) requesting an increase in CMAQ funds on the project for approximately one-third of the overage. The current and proposed funding contributions from each participating agency are summarized in the table below. Current and Proposed Funding Contributions for the Salt Creek Trail Project Agency Current Funding Proposed Addt’l Funding Total Proposed Funding CMAQ (RCTC) $ 5,684,203 $ 160,000 $ 5,844,203 County Park District 1,737,000 157,000 1,894,000 County Transportation 242,610 161,055 403,665 E. Municipal Water District 40,650 0 40,650 Total Construction $ 7,704,463 $ 478,055 $ 8,182,518 On March 10, 2021, staff recommended the Commission increase CMAQ funds for this project, bringing the total of CMAQ funding for the Salt Creek Trail to $5,844,203. Currently, there are sufficient CMAQ funds to cover the $160,000 shortfall without impacting other approved CMAQ projects. Given the regional benefit and importance of the project, staff believes Commission approval of a portion of the cost increase is appropriate and will assist in ongoing trail development without an impact to local funding. Federal CMAQ funds are administered through Caltrans. Therefore, there is no fiscal impact to the Commission’s budget. Attachments: Salt Creek Trail Map January 12, 2021 Letter from County of Riverside 31 0 ----Mile 16 MILE SALT CREEK TRAIL LEGEND Current Project -environmental document and construction limits ,Current Project -environmental document only Future Project ATTACHMENT 1 32 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY Transportation Department 4080 Lemon Street, 8th Floor · Riverside, CA 92501 · (951) 955-6740 P.O. Box 1090 · Riverside, CA 92502-1090 · FAX (951) 955-3198 Mark Lancaster, P.E. Director of Transportation Mojahed Salama, P.E. Deputy for Transportation/Capital Projects Richard Lantis, P.L.S. Deputy for Transportation/Planning and Development January 12, 2021 Ms. Anne Mayer Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Subject: Request for additional construction funds – Salt Creek Trail Project Dear Ms. Mayer: The County of Riverside is currently finalizing construction of the first phase of an ultimate 16- mile long Salt Creek Trail. The first phase improvements consisted of constructing a Class I paved bike path, with an adjacent soft-surfaced pedestrian path, for 4 miles along the north side of the Salt Creek flood control channel in the City of Menifee, and for 1 mile along the north side of Domenigoni Parkway in the City of Hemet. The County substantially completed the construction of the trail and opened it for public use on December 16, 2020. The project utilizes funding from the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality program (CMAQ), Riverside County Regional Park and Open-Space District (County Park District), Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), and County of Riverside -Transportation Department (County Transportation). The purpose of this letter is to seek additional CMAQ funds to cover unexpected costs. Extra costs were incurred to protect birds in accordance with environmental regulatory agency permits, including the installation of noise barriers for nesting migratory birds, as well as the suspension of construction along a one-mile segment of the trail for 4 months as burrowing owl fledglings grew mature enough to leave nests. In addition, extra costs were incurred due to delays in the manufacturing and delivering of traffic signal poles due to the COVID pandemic, and an increase in the mitigation fees charged by the resource conservation district performing offsite habitat restoration. Other costs included an underestimated quality of aggregate base, the relocation of unknown utilities, and storm damage repair. Additional costs, such as right-of-way payment to an affected property owner and increased construction management fees, are proposed to be funded through the County Park District and County Transportation. Shown below are the project costs and proposed funding breakdown to cover current funding shortfalls. ATTACHMENT 2 33 34 AGENDA ITEM 1 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Jenny Chan, Planning and Programming Manager SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2021/22 Transportation Development Act, Article 3 (SB 821) Call for Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file an update on the release of Fiscal Year (FY) 2021/22 Transportation Development Act, Article 3 (SB 821) Call for Projects. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: SB 821 is a discretionary program administered by the Commission to fund local bicycle and pedestrian projects. The program is funded through the Local Transportation Fund (LTF), a ¼ percent of the state sales tax. Each year, 2 percent of LTF revenues is set aside for the SB 821 program. On every odd-numbered year, the Commission conducts a competitive call for projects in which all local agencies within the county can submit applications. Eligible projects include construction of bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and Americans with Disabilities Act curb ramps, and the development of bicycle and pedestrian master plans. At its January 2021 meeting, the Commission adopted a series of policy changes for the program. The summary of changes is provided in Table 1. This year’s Call for Projects opened on February 1, 2021 and will remain open until April 29, 2021 (Table 2). Unlike previous years, applications will be submitted online; no hardcopies are required. The programming capacity for this cycle is $4,325,000. As such, the maximum funding request per application is $432,500 and maximum funding for each jurisdiction is $865,000. The guidelines and application forms are attached and available for download through the RCTC website under the Call for Projects tab. Table 1 – SB 821 Summary of Changes CURRENT PROPOSED Policy & Guidelines Revisions 24 months to complete project 36 months to complete project. New - Limit 3 applications per city. For Riverside County, limit 2 applications per Supervisorial District. New - Maximum request for each application is 10 percent of current Call for Projects programming capacity. 35 New - Total award to one jurisdiction is limited to 20 percent of current Call for Projects programming capacity. Project can start upon MOU execution Project can start on July 1 of the Call for Projects Fiscal Year Cycle. E.g.: for FY 2021/22 Call for Projects, awarded projects can start on July 1, 2021. New - MOU executed by October 1 of the Call for Project Fiscal Year Cycle. E.g.: for FY 2021/22 Call for Projects, MOUs must be executed by October 1, 2021. New - Use Safety Question to settle tiebreakers. Evaluation Criteria Safety Question – 10 points max Safety Question – 15 points max, added question regarding Project Feature Safety Enhancements. Destinations Served – 15 points max, 3 points for each destination Destinations Served – 14 points max, 2 points for each destination. Multi-Modal Access – 4 points max Multi-Modal Access – 6 points max, added “bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and crosswalks” as eligible multi-modal elements for consideration. Table 2 – FY21/22 SB 821 Call for Projects Schedule February 1, 2021 Call for Projects released. Guidelines and application available at http://rctc.org/sb821call February 2 – April 22, 2021 One-on-one Sessions on program eligibility and guidance with RCTC staff are available on request. Submit requests to Jenny Chan at jchan@rctc.org April 29, 2021 @ 5:00 p.m. Proposals due to RCTC May 12, 2021 Evaluation Committee scores proposals June 9, 2021 Present recommended funding allocations to Commission for project awards July 1, 2021 Project start October 1, 2021 Deadline to execute MOU with Commission July 1, 2024 Project completion Attachments: 1) FY 2021/22 SB 821 Call for Projects Guidelines 2) FY 2021/22 SB 821 Application Form 36 TDA Article 3 (SB 821) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Biennial Call for Projects Guidelines FY 2021/2022 ATTACHMENT 1 37 1 Background/Funding Capacity: TDA Article 3, or SB 821, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program, is provided through the Transportation Development Act (TDA), funded through a ¼ cent of the general sales tax collected statewide. The TDA provides two major sources of funding for public transportation: the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and the State Transit Assistance (STA). The LTF provides funding for essential transit and commuter rail services, TDA Article 3/SB 821 and planning. Each year, two percent of the LTF revenue is made available for use on bicycle and pedestrian facility projects through TDA Article 3/SB 821 program. This is a discretionary program administered by the Commission. Based on the FY 2020/21 mid-year adjustments, FY 2021/22 apportionments, and project savings, the amount available for programming in the 2021 TDA Article 3/SB 821 Call for Projects is an estimated $4,325,000. Eligible Applicants: Per TDA, Riverside County cities and the County are eligible to submit applications. Each city is eligible to submit up to three applications, and Riverside County is eligible to submit two applications per Supervisory District. Each application is limited to a maximum request of 10% of the current Call for Projects programming capacity. For this cycle, each application is limited to $432,500. For total award, each agency is limited to 20% of the current Call for Projects programming capacity. For this cycle, each agency is limited to $865,000. Program Schedule: The SB 821 Call for Projects occurs on a biennial basis, with a release date on the first Monday in February and a close date on the last Thursday in April. Per Commission’s Article 3/SB 821 adopted policies, awardees receiving an allocation have 36 months from award, defined as July 1 of the Call for Projects fiscal year cycle to complete construction and submit final claim forms. Where substantial progress or compelling reason for delay can be shown, awardees may be granted time extensions in twelve-month increments at the discretion of the Executive Director. Calendar February 1, 2021 Call for Projects released. Guidelines and application available at http://rctc.org/sb821call February 2 – April 22, 2021 One-on-One Sessions on program eligibility and guidance with RCTC Staff are available on requests. Submit requests to Jenny Chan at jchan@rctc.org 38 2 April 29, 2021 @ 5:00 p.m. Proposals due to RCTC. Submit to SB 821 Portal May 12, 2021 Evaluation Committee scores proposals June 9, 2021 Present recommended funding allocation to Commission for project award. July 1, 2021 Project Start October 1, 2021 Deadline to Execute MOU with Commission July 1, 2024 Project Completion Eligible Projects: Per TDA, eligible projects include:  Construction, including related engineering expenses, of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, or for bicycle safety education programs.  Maintenance of bicycling trails, which are closed to motorized traffic.  Maintenance and repairs of Class I off-street bicycle facilities only.  Restriping Class II bicycle lanes.  Facilities provided for the use of bicycles that serve the needs of commuting bicyclists, including, but not limited to, new trails serving major transportation corridors, secure bicycle parking at employment centers, park and ride lots, and transit terminals where other funds are available.  Development of comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian plans (limitations apply). Plans must emphasize bike/pedestrian facilities that support utilitarian bike/pedestrian travel rather than solely recreational activities. Temporary facilities, projects in the bid process, or projects that are under construction will not be funded. One-on-One Sessions: RCTC Staff is available for one-on-one sessions with interested applicants to discuss project eligibility, scoping and any other program guidance. Sessions will occur between February 2 to April 22, 2021. Please note, applications are due on April 29, 2021 at 5:00 P.M., or four (4) business days after the last available one-on-one session. Please contact Jenny Chan (jchan@rctc.org/(951) 787-7924)) to schedule a one-on-one session. 39 3 Project Proposal Submittal Process: The FY21/22 SB 821 Call for Projects guidelines and application will be posted on the Commission webpage at http://rctc.org/sb821call on Monday, February 1, 2021. Project proposals are due on Thursday, April 29, 2021 by 5:00 p.m. Submit completed project applications to: SB 821 Portal. Applicants are required to create a new Gmail account or utilize an existing Gmail account to submit applications. Applicants can use one Gmail account for all applications. Additionally, applicants will need to complete a project questionnaire in the portal. Please note, responses cannot be saved so it is advised to complete the questionnaire and upload the completed application in one sitting. The project questionnaire is provided in Exhibit A. It is highly recommended to limit the application to only 15-20 pages. Please contact Jenny Chan (jchan@rctc.org/(951) 787-7924) if you have any questions regarding the submittal process or for any other questions. Evaluation Criteria: DESTINATIONS SERVED (14 pts) – Two points will be awarded for each destination served by the proposed project (e.g. employment center, school/college, retail center, downtown area, park or recreation facility, library, museum, government office, medical facility) up to a maximum of 14 points. *Must include map on listing all destinations served. •For pedestrian projects, destinations served must be within a ¾-mile or less radius of the proposed project. •For bicycle projects, destinations served must be within a two-mile or less radius of the proposed project. SAFETY (15 pts) – The extent to which the proposed project will increase safety for the non- motorized public. Additionally explain any safety countermeasures or safety enhancement features included in the project scope, such as rectangular rapid flashing beacons, bicycle box, see (https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/). Points will be given for any combination of the following project characteristics: no existing shoulder within project limits, no existing/planned sidewalk or bike route/lane/path adjacent to the project; and/or by providing: documented pedestrian/bicycle collision history, most current and valid 85th percentile speed of motorized traffic in project limits, photos of existing safety hazards project will address, existing pedestrian/bicycle traffic counts, student attendance figures for school served by project. 40 4 MULTIMODAL ACCESS (6 pts) – One point will be awarded for each transit route, Metrolink stations, or park and ride facility, bicycle lanes, sidewalks or crosswalks improved by the proposed project up to a maximum of six points. *Must include map listing all transit stops or park and rides served. • For pedestrian projects, transit stops served must be within a ¾-mile or less radius of the proposed project. • For bicycle projects, transit stops served must be within a two-mile or less radius of the proposed project. MATCHING FUNDS (10 pts) – One point is awarded for each 5% of match provided by the local agency, for a maximum of 10 points at a 50% match. *Supporting documentation of proposed match must be included. POPULATION EQUITY (5 pts) – Points for population equity is calculated by RCTC Staff. Population equity is scored by comparing the agency’s total SB 821 allocation received in the last ten fiscal years versus the agency’s share based on per capita basis. RCTC Staff calculates the ratio between the two factors and assigns points based on the table below. Ratio of Total Allocation to Per Capita 0.80 – 0.99 1 Point 0.60 – 0.79 2 Points 0.40 – 0.59 3 Points 0.20 – 0.39 4 Points 0 – 0.19 5 Points The equity table for the 2021 SB 821 Call for Projects is provided on the following page. 41 FY 2021-22 SB 821 PROGRAM AGENCY POINTS POP. 1 % POP. --------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- BANNING 0.0 31,125 1.28% BEAUMONT 1.0 51,475 2.12% BLYTHE2 5.0 16,499 0.68% CALIMESA 5.0 9,329 0.38% CANYON LAKE 2.0 11,000 0.45% CATHEDRAL CITY 2.0 53,580 2.21% COACHELLA 0.0 47,186 1.95% CORONA 5.0 168,248 6.94% DESERT HOT SPRINGS 0.0 29,660 1.22% EASTVALE 4.0 66,413 2.74% HEMET 3.0 85,175 3.51% INDIAN WELLS 3.0 5,403 0.22% INDIO 1.0 90,751 3.74% JURUPA VALLEY 4.0 107,083 4.42% LAKE ELSINORE 0.0 63,453 2.62% LA QUINTA 1.0 40,660 1.68% MENIFEE 1.0 97,093 4.01% MORENO VALLEY 1.0 208,838 8.62% MURRIETA 5.0 115,561 4.77% NORCO 5.0 27,564 1.14% PALM DESERT 5.0 52,986 2.19% PALM SPRINGS 0.0 47,427 1.96% PERRIS 2.0 80,201 3.31% RANCHO MIRAGE 0.0 19,114 0.79% RIVERSIDE 2.0 328,155 13.54% RIVERSIDE COUNTY3 0.0 369,395 15.24% SAN JACINTO 2.0 51,028 2.11% TEMECULA 3.0 111,970 4.62% WILDOMAR 0.0 37,183 1.53% TOTAL 2,423,555 100.00% 1Source: http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ 2Less Chuckawalla State Prison Population of 2,864 1/1/2018, from RCTC Finance 1/23/2019 3Includes Chuckawalla Population 42 5 Evaluation Committee: The SB 821 evaluation committee will be comprised of a minimum of five evaluators representing a wide range of interests and geographic areas, such as: accessibility, bicycling, Coachella Valley, Western Riverside, public transit, and the region. Staff, consultants, and other representatives from agencies submitting project proposals will not be eligible to participate on the evaluation committee that year. Allocation: Based on the results of the evaluation committee’s scores, staff will develop a recommended funding allocation. Starting from the highest ranked project on the list, the full amount requested will be allocated until a project cannot be fully funded. The allocation recommendation will be presented to the Commission for final approval on June 9, 2021. If a project cannot be fully funded, RCTC may recommend partial funding for award. If there is insufficient funding to award all projects with the same score, RCTC may recommend funding based on, in order of priority, safety question, then construction readiness. Memorandum of Understanding: Per Commission’s SB 821 adopted policies, awardees receiving an allocation have 36 months upon award, defined as July 1 of the Call for Projects fiscal year cycle to complete construction and submit final claim forms. Memorandum of Understandings (MOU) shall be executed by October 1, 2021. A sample MOU is provided in Exhibit B. Where substantial progress or compelling reason for delay can be shown, awardees may be granted time extensions in twelve-month increments at the discretion of the Executive Director. Claims: The claim form is to be used to claim reimbursement for approved SB 821 projects. Adequate supporting documentation substantiating the cost of the claim is required. Supporting documentation are: before and after pictures of project site, copy of notice of completion, and copies of paid invoices from project contractor. Claim form is provided in Exhibit B. Exhibit A: Project Questionnaire Exhibit B: Sample Memorandum of Understanding 43 44 45 46 47 Page 1 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 AGREEMENT No. __________ [Model Agreement for FY 21/22] RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING UNDER SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM (Transportation Development Act Article 3; Senate Bill 821) This Funding Agreement (“AGREEMENT”) is entered into as of ________, 2021 (“Effective Date”), by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (“RCTC”) and the ____________ (“RECIPIENT”). RCTC and RECIPIENT may be referred to herein individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.” RECITALS A.RCTC is a county transportation commission created and existing pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 130053 and 130053.5. B.Under RCTC’s SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program (“PROGRAM”), cities and counties in the County of Riverside are notified of the availability of PROGRAM funding and a call for projects (“CALL FOR PROJECTS”) is anticipated to be issued biennially by RCTC. C.On February ___, 2021, a CALL FOR PROJECTS was published by RCTC seeking applications for FY 2021/22 PROGRAM funding, which applications were reviewed in accordance with the applicable evaluation criteria included in the CALL FOR PROJECTS. D.Based on the application attached as Attachment 1 and incorporated herein by this reference, RECIPIENT has been selected to receive PROGRAM funding for its proposed _____________________ (“PROJECT”). E.Funding for the PROJECT shall be provided pursuant to the terms contained in this AGREEMENT and pursuant to applicable PROGRAM policies adopted by RCTC, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment 2. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the preceding recitals and the mutual covenants and consideration contained herein, the Parties mutually agree as follows: 1.Incorporation of Recitals. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the above recitals are true and correct, and hereby incorporate those recitals by this reference into the AGREEMENT. 2.RCTC Funding Amount. RCTC hereby agrees to distribute to the RECIPIENT, on the terms and conditions set forth herein, a sum not to exceed ___________________ ($____________), to be used exclusively for reimbursing the RECIPIENT for eligible 48 Page 2 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 expenses as described herein (“FUNDING AMOUNT”). RECIPIENT acknowledges and agrees that the FUNDING AMOUNT may be less than the actual and final cost of the PROJECT, which final costs are the sole responsibility of RECIPIENT, and RCTC will not contribute PROGRAM funds in excess of the maximum authorized in this Section 2 unless otherwise mutually agreed to in writing by the PARTIES. In the event the FUNDING AMOUNT is not fully utilized by RECIPIENT for the PROJECT, the unused FUNDING AMOUNT must be returned to RCTC within ninety (90) ninety days of a written request by RCTC unless RECIPIENT can demonstrate in writing, subject to written approval by RCTC in its sole discretion, the following: (i) valid reason for why PROJECT costs were significantly lower than the estimate included in RECIPIENT’s attached application for funding, and (ii) written proposal for how any unused FUNDING AMOUNT will be used for a proposal to support the PROJECT or other use that supports the goals and requirements of the PROGRAM. 2.1 Eligible Project Costs. Reimbursement for PROJECT costs (“REIMBURSEMENT”) may only include those items expressly allowed for under Article 3 of the Transportation Development Act (California Public Utilities Code section 99200 et seq.), which provides that funding shall be allocated for the construction, including related engineering expenses, of facilities based on the PROGRAM policies adopted by RCTC, provided that such items are included in the scope of work included in the application, attached as Attachment 1 (“SCOPE OF WORK”). All PROJECT costs not included in the SCOPE OF WORK and not expressly permitted under Article 3 of the Transportation Development Act and the PROGRAM policies shall be considered ineligible for REIMBURSEMENT. In the event the SCOPE OF WORK needs to be amended, RECIPIENT shall submit a letter requesting such amendment, the reasons for the requested change and confirmation that costs associated with the proposed amendment are eligible for PROGRAM reimbursement for written approval by RCTC, which approval is subject to RCTC’s discretion. In the event of any ambiguity between this AGREEMENT, PROGRAM policies, and applicable law, the following order of precedence will govern: (1) Applicable law; (2) PROGRAM policies; (3) this AGREEMENT. In the case of any conflict between this Agreement and any of its attachments, the body of this Agreement shall govern. 2.2 Timing for Project Completion. In accordance with the PROGRAM policies attached hereto as Attachment 2, RECIPIENT has thirty six (36) months to complete the PROJECT from the date of this AGREEMENT, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the PARTIES. If the PROJECT is not completed within 36 months, RCTC shall have the sole discretion to delete the PROJECT from the PROGRAM and reprogram the funding for future approved PROGRAM projects. RECIPIENT will not be reimbursed until the PROJECT is accepted as complete in writing by RCTC following the submission of the PROGRAM funding claim form (“CLAIM FORM”) attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment 3. In the event additional time is needed for the completion of the PROJECT, RECIPIENT may submit a letter to RCTC requesting an extension of time to complete the PROJECT with an explanation of why the PROJECT cannot be completed under the existing schedule for completion included as Attachment 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein. Before and after PROJECT photographs 49 Page 3 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 must be included with the CLAIM FORM upon PROJECT completion, as well as copies of paid invoices and any other backup requested for repayment and audit purposes. 2.3 Increases in Project Funding. The FUNDING AMOUNT may, at RCTC’s sole discretion, be augmented with additional PROGRAM funds and local agency match funds proportionate to the amounts included in Section 3 if there is a FUNDING AMOUNT balance and the RECIPIENT provides justification as to the reason for the funding increase. Any such increase in the FUNDING AMOUNT must be approved in writing by RCTC’s Executive Director and RCTC shall be under no obligation whatsoever to approve any increase in the FUNDING AMOUNT. No such increased funding shall be expended to pay for any PROJECT work already completed. 2.4 Cost Savings. In the event that bids or proposals for the PROJECT are lower than anticipated, or there are cost savings for any other reason, the FUNDING AMOUNT shall be reduced through an amendment to the AGREEMENT mutually agreed to in writing by the Parties. RECIPIENT shall inform RCTC of any cost savings and any cost savings shall be returned to RCTC or may be reprogrammed with written approval by RCTC for other RECIPIENT projects that align with the PROGRAM. No PROGRAM funding may be used for projects not approved by RCTC. If RECIPIENT provides a local match commitment and there are cost savings on the PROJECT, RCTC will still be reimbursed at the matching ratio as presented in the Project application despite such cost savings in accordance with PROGRAM policies. 2.5 No Funding for Temporary Improvements. Only segments or components of the PROJECT that are intended to form part of or be integrated into the PROJECT may be funded by PROGRAM funds. No improvement(s) which is/are temporary in nature, including but not limited to temporary lanes, curbs, or drainage facilities, shall be funded with PROGRAM funds except as needed for staged construction of the PROJECT. 2.6 Review and Reimbursement by RCTC. Upon receipt of the final detailed invoice from the RECIPIENT clearly documenting work completed and corresponding costs, RCTC may request additional documentation or explanation of the SCOPE OF WORK costs for which reimbursement is sought. Undisputed amounts shall be paid by RCTC to the RECIPIENT within thirty (30) days. In the event that RCTC disputes the eligibility of the RECIPIENT for reimbursement of all or a portion of an invoiced amount, the Parties shall meet and confer in an attempt to resolve the dispute. Additional details concerning the procedure for the RECIPIENT’s submittal of invoices to RCTC and RCTC’s consideration and payment of submitted invoices are set forth in Attachment 3. 2.7 Recipient’s Funding Obligation to Complete the Work. In the event that the PROGRAM funds allocated to the SCOPE OF WORK represent less than the total cost of the PROJECT, RECIPIENT shall be solely responsible for providing such additional funds as may be required to complete the PROJECT. RCTC has no obligation with respect to the safety of any SCOPE OF WORK performed at a PROJECT site. Further, RCTC shall not be liable for any action of RECIPIENT or its contractors relating to the condemnation of property undertaken by RECIPIENT or construction related to the PROJECT. 50 Page 4 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 2.8 Recipient’s Obligation to Repay Program Funds to RCTC. In the event it is determined, whether through a post-completion audit or otherwise, the PROJECT was not completed in accordance with the PROGRAM requirements or this AGREEMENT, RECIPIENT agrees that any PROGRAM funds distributed to RECIPIENT for the PROJECT shall be repaid in full to RCTC. The Parties shall enter into good faith negotiations to establish a reasonable repayment schedule and repayment mechanism which may include, but is not limited to, withholding of Measure A Local Streets and Roads revenues, if applicable. RECIPIENT acknowledges and agrees that RCTC shall have the right to withhold any Measure A Local Streets and Roads revenues due to RECIPIENT, in an amount not to exceed the total of the PROGRAM funds distributed to RECIPIENT, and/or initiate legal action to compel repayment, if the RECIPIENT fails to repay RCTC within a reasonable time period not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days, including any good faith negotiations, from receipt of written notification from RCTC that repayment is required due to failure to comply with the PROGRAM policies or this AGREEMENT. 2.9 Records Retention and Audits. RECIPIENT shall retain all PROJECT records in an organized manner for a minimum of three (3) years following completion of the PROJECT. PROJECT records shall be made available for inspection by RCTC upon request. If a post PROJECT audit or review indicates that RCTC has provided reimbursement to the RECIPIENT in an amount in excess of the maximum PROGRAM provided for in this Section 2, or has provided reimbursement of ineligible PROJECT costs, the RECIPIENT shall reimburse RCTC for the excess or ineligible payments within thirty (30) days of notification by RCTC. This Section 2.9 does not supersede any rights or remedies provided to RCTC under Section 2.8 or applicable law. 3. Recipient’s Local Match Contribution. RECIPIENT shall provide at least ______________ ($_______) of funding toward the SCOPE OF WORK, as indicated in RECIPIENT’S application attached as Attachment 1 and submitted to RCTC in response to its CALL FOR PROJECTS. RECIPIENT costs related to (i) preparation and administration costs related to invoices, billings and payments; (ii) any RECIPIENT fees attributed to the processing of the SCOPE OF WORK; and (iii) expenses for items not included within the attached SCOPE OF WORK shall be borne solely by the RECIPIENT and shall not qualify towards RECIPIENT’s local match requirement in this Section 3. (Note: Include this Section only if RECIPIENT identified Local Match funds in its Project Nomination Form.) 4. Term: The term of this AGREEMENT shall be from the date first herein above written until: (i) the date RCTC formally accepts the PROJECT as complete, pursuant to Section 2.2; (ii) termination of this AGREEMENT pursuant to Section 14; or (iii) RECIPIENT has fully satisfied its obligations under this AGREEMENT. All applicable indemnification and insurance provisions of this AGREEMENT shall remain in effect following the termination of this AGREEMENT. 51 Page 5 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 5. Recipient Responsibilities. RECIPIENT shall be responsible for all aspects of the PROJECT, in compliance with all applicable state and federal laws, including: (i) development and approval of plans, specifications and engineer’s estimate in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations and building codes; obtaining any necessary environmental clearances; right of way acquisition; and, obtaining all permits required by impacted agencies prior to commencement of the PROJECT; (ii) all aspects of procurement, contracting, and administration of the contracts and claims for the PROJECT; (iii) all construction management of any construction activities undertaken in connection with the PROJECT, including surveying and materials testing; and, (iv) development of a budget for the PROJECT and SCOPE OF WORK prior to award of any contract for the PROJECT, taking into consideration available funding, including PROGRAM funds. 6. Indemnification. RECIPIENT shall defend, indemnify and hold RCTC, its officials, governing board members, officers, employees, agents, and consultants free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property, persons or government funding agency, including wrongful death, to the extent arising out of or incident to any intentional or negligent acts, errors or omissions of the RECIPIENT, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants related to a breach of this AGREEMENT or any act or omission arising out of the activities governed by this AGREEMENT. RECIPIENT’S obligation to indemnify includes without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and reasonable attorneys’ fees, expert witness fees and other related costs and expenses of defense. RECIPIENT shall defend, at its 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 RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants in connection with this AGREEMENT. RECIPIENT shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants in any such suits, actions or other legal proceedings, including any settlement. RECIPIENT’s obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds. 7. Expenditure of Funds by Recipient Prior to Execution of Agreement. RECIPIENT may commence the Project starting July 1, 2021, and costs incurred following such date will be eligible for reimbursement under this AGREEMENT, provided they otherwise meet the requirements herein, and provided that this AGREEMENT is executed no later than October 1, 2021. 8. Compliance with Applicable Laws and Insurance. RECIPIENT agrees to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including public contracting laws, requirements for any local state or federal funding used, and records retention and performance reporting requirements concerning the SCOPE OF WORK and PROJECT, which applicable laws and regulations shall be passed on to contractors by RECIPIENT as applicable. RECIPIENT shall have the responsibility of making sure the appropriate amounts of insurance are included in all applicable agreements for the construction of the PROJECT and RCTC shall be named as an Additional Insured on all insurance certificates obtained for the completion of the PROJECT. PROJECT insurance funds shall be looked to first for the repayment of any claims determined to have merit. 52 Page 6 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 9. Representatives of the Parties. RCTC’s Executive Director, or his or her designee, shall serve as RCTC’s representative and shall have the authority to act on behalf of RCTC for all purposes under this AGREEMENT. RECIPIENT’s representative shall be the individual identified in the Project application as RECIPIENT’S representative to RCTC. RECIPIENT’S representative, or designee, shall have the authority to act on behalf of RECIPIENT for all purposes under this AGREEMENT and shall coordinate all activities with RCTC concerning the SCOPE OF WORK under the RECIPIENT’s responsibility. RECIPIENT shall work closely and cooperate fully with RCTC’s representative and any other agencies which may have jurisdiction over or an interest in the PROJECT. 10. Monitoring of Progress by RCTC. RECIPIENT shall allow RCTC’s designated representative, or designee, to inspect or review the progress of the work at any reasonable time with prior written notice by RCTC. RCTC may request that the RECIPIENT provide RCTC with progress reports concerning the status of the SCOPE OF WORK and PROJECT completion. 11. Binding on Successors in Interest. Each and every provision of this AGREEMENT shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the successors in interest of the Parties. Due to the specific obligations contemplated herein, this AGREEMENT may not be assigned by any Party hereto except with the prior written consent of the other Party. 12. Independent Contractors. Any person or entities retained by RECIPIENT or any contractor shall be retained on an independent contractor basis and shall not be employees of RCTC. Any personnel performing services on the PROJECT shall at all times be under the exclusive direction and control of the RECIPIENT or contractor, whichever is applicable. The RECIPIENT or contractor shall pay all wages, salaries and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of services on the SCOPE OF WORK and as required by law. The RECIPIENT or contractor shall be responsible for all reports and obligations concerning such personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance and workers’ compensation insurance. 13. Conflicts of Interest. For the term of this AGREEMENT, no member, officer or employee of RECIPIENT or RCTC, during the term of his or her service with RECIPIENT or RCTC, as the case may be, shall have any direct interest in this AGREEMENT, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom. 14. Termination. This AGREEMENT may be terminated for cause or convenience as further specified below. 14.1 Termination for Convenience. Either RCTC or RECIPIENT may, by written notice to the other party, terminate this AGREEMENT, in whole or in part, for convenience by giving thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. 53 Page 7 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 14.2 Effect of Termination for Convenience. In the event that RECIPIENT terminates this AGREEMENT for convenience, RECIPIENT shall, within 180 days, repay to RCTC in full all PROGRAM funds provided to RECIPIENT under this AGREEMENT. In the event that RCTC terminates this AGREEMENT for convenience, RCTC shall, within 90 days, distribute to the RECIPIENT PROGRAM funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from RECIPIENT regarding the SCOPE OF WORK for the PROJECT at the time of the notice of termination; provided, however, that RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 2.6, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional information from RECIPIENT. This AGREEMENT shall terminate upon receipt by the non-terminating party of the amounts due it under this Section 14. 14.3 Termination for Cause. Either RCTC or RECIPIENT may, by written notice to the other party, terminate this AGREEMENT, in whole or in part, in response to a material breach hereof by the other Party, by giving written notice to the other Party of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. The written notice shall provide a thirty (30) day period to cure any alleged breach. During the 30 day cure period, the Parties shall discuss, in good faith, the manner in which the breach can be cured. 14.4 Effect of Termination for Cause. In the event that RECIPIENT terminates this AGREEMENT in response to RCTC's uncured material breach hereof, RCTC shall, within ninety (90) days, distribute to the RECIPIENT PROGRAM funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from RECIPIENT regarding the SCOPE OF WORK for the PROJECT at the time of the notice of termination. In the event that RCTC terminates this AGREEMENT in response to the RECIPIENT's uncured material breach hereof, the RECIPIENT shall, within one hundred eighty (180) days, repay to RCTC in full all PROGRAM funds provided to RECIPIENT under this AGREEMENT. Notwithstanding termination of this AGREEMENT by RCTC pursuant to this Section 14.4, RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 2.6, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional information. This AGREEMENT shall terminate upon receipt by the terminating Party of the amounts due it under this Section 14.4. 14.5 No Program Funding. In the event that RCTC determines there are inadequate PROGRAM funds for whatever reason, RCTC shall have the ability to immediately terminate the AGREEMENT with written notice to RECIPIENT. In the event that RCTC terminates this AGREEMENT under this Section 14.5, RCTC shall, within 90 days, distribute to the RECIPIENT PROGRAM funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from RECIPIENT regarding the SCOPE OF WORK for the PROJECT at the time of the notice of termination; provided, however, that RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 2.6, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional information from RECIPIENT. 14.6 Cumulative Remedies. The rights and remedies of the Parties provided in this Section 14 are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this AGREEMENT. 54 Page 8 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 15. Notice. All notices hereunder shall be in writing and shall be effective upon receipt by the other Party. All notices and communications, including invoices, between the Parties to this AGREEMENT shall be addressed as set forth below and provided by any of the following methods (i) personally delivered; (ii) sent by electronic mail, with a subject line clearly identifying this AGREEMENT, read receipt requested, and a cc: provided to the identified staff; (iii) sent by first-class mail, return receipt requested; or (iv) sent by overnight express delivery service with postage or other charges fully prepaid. Notwithstanding the foregoing, notices of dispute or termination sent by electronic mail must be followed by hard copy mailed notice to be effective. TO RCTC: TO RECIPIENT: Anne Mayer Executive Director RCTC 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, California 92501 Phone: (951) 787-7141 e-mail: amayer@rctc.org cc: __________________ [TO BE INSERTED] Any party may update its address and contact information by providing written notice of the new information to the other Parties in accordance with this Section 15. 16. Prevailing Wages. RECIPIENT and any other person or entity hired to perform services on the SCOPE OF WORK are alerted to the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1770 et seq., which require the payment of prevailing wages where the SCOPE OF WORK or any portion thereof is determined to be a “public work,” as defined therein. RECIPIENT shall ensure compliance with applicable prevailing wage requirements by any person or entity hired to perform the SCOPE OF WORK or any portion thereof falling within the definition of “public work.” RECIPIENT shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, employees, consultants, and agents from any claim or liability, including without limitation reasonable attorneys’ fees, arising from any failure or alleged failure to comply with California Labor Code Sections 1770 et seq. on the PROJECT. 17. Equal Opportunity Employment. The Parties represent that they are equal opportunity employers and they shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, sexual orientation, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. 18. Entire Agreement. This AGREEMENT embodies the entire understanding and agreement between the Parties pertaining to the matters described herein and supersedes and cancels all prior oral or written agreements between the Parties with respect to these matters. Each Party 55 Page 9 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 acknowledges that no Party, agent or representative of the other Party has made any promise, representation or warranty, express or implied, not expressly contained in this AGREEMENT, that induced the other Party to sign this document. Modifications to this AGREEMENT shall be in the form of a written amendment executed by authorized representatives of the Parties to be bound. 19. Governing Law and Severability. This AGREEMENT shall be governed by, and be construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of California. If any portion of this AGREEMENT is found to be unenforceable by a court of law with appropriate jurisdiction, the remainder of the AGREEMENT shall be severable and survive as binding on the Parties. 20. Attorneys’ Fees. If any legal action is initiated for the enforcement/interpretation of this AGREEMENT, or because of any alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any of the provisions of this AGREEMENT, the successful or prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees, witness fees and other costs incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled as determined by a court of law or appointed decider under alternative legal proceedings. 21. No Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties. 22. Section Headings and Interpretation. The section headings contained herein are for convenience only and shall not affect in any way the interpretation of any of the provisions contained herein. The AGREEMENT shall not be interpreted as being drafted by any Party or its counsel. 23. No Waiver. Failure of RCTC to insist on any one occasion upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants or conditions in this AGREEMENT 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 provided under applicable law. 24. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this AGREEMENT. 25. Counterparts. This AGREEMENT may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all which together will constitute but one agreement. 26. Form of Signatures. A manually signed copy of this Agreement which is transmitted by facsimile, email or other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original executed copy of this Agreement for all purposes. This Agreement may be signed using an electronic signature. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] 56 Page 10 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT NO. _____________ RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING UNDER SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed by their duly authorized representatives as of the Effective Date. RCTC By:____________________________ Name: _____Anne Mayer__________ Title: ____Executive Director_______ RECIPIENT [INSERT NAME] By:____________________________ Name: _________________________ Title: __________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM By: _________________________ Name: _______________________ Title: ________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM By: _____________________________ Name: ___________________________ Title: ____________________________ 57 Page 11 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 ATTACHMENT 1 (RECIPIENT APPLICATION FOR FUNDING) 58 Page 12 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 ATTACHMENT 2 [TO BE INSERTED] 59 Page 13 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 ATTACHMENT 3 TDA ARTICLE 3 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES NON-TRANSIT CLAIM FORM CLAIMANT: _________________________________________________ COUNTY: _Riverside__ ADDRESS: ___________________________________________________________________ CONTACT PERSON: TITLE: _____________________________ I verify that the information on this Claim Form is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Signed: Date: ________________________ PROJECT NAME: ______________________________________________________________ PROJECT AWARDED IN FY: START DATE (Mo/Yr): _____________________________________ COMPLETED DATE (Mo/Yr): ________________________________ TDA ARTICLE 3 REVENUES AND EXPENSES OF CLAIMANT: Total Project Cost $_______________________ ( 100 % ) Local Match Spent: $_______________________ ( %) SB 821 Funds Spent: $_______________________ ( %) Breakdown of Project Cost (must add up to “Total Project Cost” above): Administration $___________________ PA/ED $___________________ PS&E $___________________ Right-of-Way $___________________ Construction $___________________ Other (specify): ____________________________ $___________________ Other (specify): ____________________________ $___________________ Supporting Document Checklist: o Notice of Completion o Before and After pictures of project site o Paid Invoices 60 Page 14 of 14 17336.00005\33639218.2 ASSURANCE OF MAINTENANCE SB 821 SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY FACILITIES WHEREAS, THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION HAS ALLOCATED $_____________ TO THE CITY/COUNTY OF __________________________ FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE _______________________________________________ SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY PROJECT; AND, WHEREAS, THIS INVESTMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS CAN BE FULLY REALIZED IF THIS FACILITY IS MAINTAINED TO ADEQUATE OPERATING STANDARDS FOR USE BY COMMUTER AND RECREATIONAL PEDESTRIANS/BICYCLISTS; THEREFORE, THE CITY/COUNTY OF ______________________________ ASSURES THAT THIS FACILITY WILL BE MAINTAINED AT ADEQUATE OPERATING STANDARDS. SIGNED:______________________________ TITLE:_______________________________ DATE:_______________________________ 61 FY21/22 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program ATTACHMENT 2 BIENNIAL CALL FOR PROJECTS APPLICATION A. SCOPE OF WORK (500 Characters) Insert response here. B. FUNDING Double click on table below to complete project costs for PA/ED, PS&E, ROW, Construction and Local Match in the Excel spreadsheet. The gray cells contain formulas that will calculate the Total Project Cost, SB 821 Request, and the Percentage Splits. Provide a letter on agency letterhead committing to the local match as Appendix A and Project’s Engineers Estimate as Appendix B. PA/ED 80,000$ PS&E 250,000$ ROW -$ Construction 400,000$ Administration 20,000$ Total Project Cost 750,000$ Split % Local Match 200,000$ 27% SB 821 Request 550,000$ 73% 100.00% C. SCHEDULE For completed phases, provide supporting documentation such as copies of environmental clearance, title sheet of 100% plans with engineer’s stamp, or right of way clearance as Appendix C. START END* PA/ED PS&E ROW CON CLOSE OUT 62 FY21/22 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program ATTACHMENT 2 BIENNIAL CALL FOR PROJECTS APPLICATION D. PROJECT BACKGROUND & PROJECT DESCRIPTION Describe the project background and the existing conditions of the larger project area and or project vicinity. Discussion can include background information on current roadway configuration, missing bike and pedestrian facilities, and importance of project to local active transportation users. If possible, provide photographs of existing conditions. Describe the project in its entirety. Include the purpose and need, benefit, and location of the project. Provide a map showing existing and proposed project improvements. If available, provide typical cross- sections showing vehicular lane widths, active transportation facilities width, and any landscaping or lighting features. Insert response here: E. DESTINATIONS SERVED (2 points for each destination served, max 14 points) Briefly summarize and list all the destinations served by the proposed project. Provide a project vicinity map identifying all the destinations served by the proposed project within a ¾ mile or a 2-mile radius. Destinations are schools or higher education facilities, commercial centers, municipal or any other civic centers, medical facilities, and recreational centers. For pedestrian projects, the destinations need to be within ¾ mile radius to be eligible. For bicycle or multi-use trail projects, destinations need to be within a 2-mile radius. Each destination served will receive 3 points each. On the map, provide a ¾ mile buffer or a 2-mile buffer surrounding the project site. Maps without the marked buffer will receive half of its eligible points. Summarize and list all destinations here. Reminder to provide a map. F. SAFETY (15 points) Describe the extent to which the proposed project will increase safety for the non-motorized public. Additionally, explain any safety enhancement features included in the project scope, such as rectangular rapid flashing beacons, bicycle box (see https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/). Include information about project characteristics such as: no existing shoulder within project limits, no existing/planned sidewalk 63 FY21/22 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program ATTACHMENT 2 BIENNIAL CALL FOR PROJECTS APPLICATION or bikeway adjacent to the project, etc. Applicants may wish to consider including documented pedestrian/bicycle collision or injury history, most current and valid 85th percentile speed of motorized traffic in project limits, photos of existing safety hazards the project will address, existing pedestrian/bicycle traffic counts, student attendance figures for school served by project. Additionally generate a collision heat map for the project site using collision data from the last ten years. Heat map can be generated using the ATP Maps & Summary interface from TIMS (https://tims.berkeley.edu/) or Crossroads. Insert response here. Reminder to provide a map. G. MULTIMODAL ACCESS (1 point each, max 6 points) In a project vicinity map, identify all the bus routes, Metrolink stations, park-and-ride facilities, bicycle lanes, sidewalks or crosswalks improved by the proposed project within a ¾ mile or a 2- mile radius. For pedestrian projects, these amenities need to be within ¾ mile radius to be eligible. For bicycle or multi-use trail projects, amenities need to be within a 2-mile radius. Each amenity will receive 1 point. On the map, provide a ¾ mile buffer or a 2-mile buffer surrounding the project site. Maps without the marked buffer will receive half of its eligible points. Discuss how the project along with its nearby amenities encourage multi-modalism. Briefly summarize and list all the bus stops, Metrolink Stations, park-and-ride facilities, missing bicycle or sidewalks, or crosswalks enhanced by the proposed project and indicate if the items are existing or planned. Insert response here. Reminder to provide a map. H. MATCHING FUNDS (10 points) Points will be calculated based on the Funding Table above. Match % Points 50% 10 45% 9 40% 8 35% 7 64 FY21/22 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program ATTACHMENT 2 BIENNIAL CALL FOR PROJECTS APPLICATION 30% 6 25% 5 20% 4 15% 3 10% 2 5% 1 0% 0 I. POPULATION EQUITY (5 Points) Points will be assigned based on population equity table provided in FY20/21 SB 821 Call for Projects Guidelines. J. CERTIFICATION I certify that the information presented herein is complete and accurate and, if this agency receives funding, it will be used solely for the purposes stated in this application and following the adopted policies. If awarded, agency is committed to executing the Memorandum of Understanding with the Riverside County Transportation Commission by October 1, 2021. Signature ______ Title Date Appendix A: Commitment to Local Match Appendix B: Engineers Estimate Appendix C: If applicable, copies of completed environmental document, title sheet, or right-of- way clearance. 65 AGENDA ITEM 1 3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Jenny Chan, Planning and Programming Manager SUBJECT: Caltrans District 8 Local Assistance Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file an update from Caltrans District 8 Local Assistance. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Caltrans' Local Assistance Program oversees more than one billion dollars annually available to over 600 cities, counties, and regional agencies for the purpose of improving their transportation infrastructure or providing transportation services. This funding comes from various Federal and State programs specifically designated to assist the transportation needs of local agencies. Annually, over 1,200 new projects are authorized through the Local Assistance Program of which approximately 700 are construction projects. Caltrans District 8 Local Assistance is responsible for obligating and allocating federal and state funds, providing guidance on federal and state regulations, and direction on processes and procedures that are tied to each funding program. Local Assistance is responsible for the current funding programs as identified in Table 1. Table 1: Caltrans Local Assistance funding program responsibilities Federal Programs State Programs Active Transportation Program (ATP) Active Transportation Program (ATP) Emergency Relief (ER) Local Partnership Program (LPP) Off-system Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Solutions for Congested Corridors Program (SCCP) Off-system Highway Bridge Program (HBP) State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Off-system Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Trade Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP) Off-system State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Off-system Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Attachment: D8 Local Assistance Pins 66 LOCAL ASSISTANCE SUBMITTAL EMAIL General Inquiries & E-Submittals: D8.Local.Assistance@dot.ca.gov Unless otherwise instructed, all Local Agencies submittals are being accepted electronically. LOCAL ASSISTANCE SENIORS Supervising Transportation Engineer CRESENCIO GARCIA Senior Environmental Planner; Back-Up DLAE SEAN YEUNG Senior Environmental Planner AARON BURTON Construction Oversight Engineer (COE) CHAD YANG TRAINING LINKS LTAP Local Technical Assistance Program SUBSCRIBE NOW BTT Berkeley Tech Transfer TTAP Tribal Technical Assistance Program TRB Transportation Research Board NHI National Highway Institute TC3 Transportation Curriculum Coordination Council LOCAL ASSISTANCE INFORMATIONAL LINKS Caltrans, Local Assistance Homepage LAB Local Assistance Blog SUBSCRIBE NOW LAPM Local Assistance Procedures Manual ATRC Active Transportation Resource Center SUBSCRIBE NOW ATP Reporting Announcements ATP Project Reporting Mailing List SUBSCRIBE NOW LAPG Local Assistance Program Guidelines DLA-OBs Division of Local Assistance– Office Bulletins LPPs Local Programs Procedures Invoice Payment Vendor Payment History E-76 Status E-76 Waiting List Local Assistance Mail Log Local Assistance Project Search D8 LOCAL ASSISTANCE PINS FEBRUARY 2021 NATIONAL MUTCD REVISION COMMENTS SOLICITED BY FHWA The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has announced the Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devic- es (MUTCD) and is soliciting comments. The proposed marked-up and a clean copy of MUTCD is at: https://beta.regulations.gov/docket/FHWA-2020- 0001/document. Comments are due March 15, 2021. Following the comment period, FHWA staff will review and respond to the comments, and eventually publish a revision to the MUTCD later in 2021. This MUTCD is the basis for the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devic- es (CA MUTCD), published by Caltrans and issued to adopt uniform standards and specifications for traffic control devices on all public roads in Califor- nia. Once the national manual is published, Caltrans will update accordingly the CA-MUTCD within two years. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE-FILLABLE EXHIBIT 6-A PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FORM The Exhibit 6-A Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) Form is now Electronic Signature-fillable. Please use the PDF posted on the Local Assistance Proce- dures Manual forms Webpage located at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local- assistance/forms/local-assistance-procedures-manual-forms. Note: Please do not convert the Word version to PDF. IMMEDIATE ACTION NEEDED FOR LAPSED PROJECT END DATES (PED) Please review the Project End Date lookahead report posted at: Projects with expired and expiring Project End Dates | Caltrans and take appropriate ac- tion ASAP. Any work done on projects past the PED is not eligible for reimbursement. PEDs should be extended prior to the expiration of the current PED. If a PED is extended after its lapse, then the work done during the lapsed period is not reimbursable. PEDs must be extended through an E-76 modification. Please plan on the E-76 approval process to take at least 4 weeks. Projects with final invoices submitted do not require a PED extension. Contact your DLAE for further assistance. Guidance on PEDs can be found at Caltrans Local Assistance Policy Manu- al: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/local-assistance/ documents/lapm/ch03.pdf Summary of PED Per Agency on page 6 of D8 Local Assistance Pins. SEEKING APPLICANTS FOR THE FY21 INFRA GRANT PROGRAM The USDOT recently announced that it is seeking applicants for the FY21 round of the INFRA Grant Program. Some key points are: The funding available for this year’s grants totals approximately $889 million; The FY21 round will fund transportation projects of national and regional sig- nificance that result in: good-paying jobs, improved safety, transformative technology, and, for the first time, explicitly address climate change and ra- cial equity. This announcement also included the creation of the “INFRA Extra” Program, which “will identify competitive INFRA applicants who do not receive an IN- FRA award and authorize them to seek a Transportation Infrastructure Fi- nance and Innovation Act of 1998 (TIFIA) loan up to 49 percent of their pro- ject cost” If you’re interested in the full announcement or the actual Notice of Funding Availability please select the following links: Infrastructure For Rebuilding America and INFRA 2021 Notice of Funding Opportunity. Request for Caltrans Letter of Support (LOS) Deadline: March 4, 2021 −Please send LOS requests to Rena.Tang@dot.ca.gov INFRA Grant Application Deadline: March 19, 2021 More information on FY2021 INFRA on page 3 of D8 Local Assistance Pins. REMINDER: AGENCY TO D8 LOCAL ASSISTANCE SUBMITTALS Unless otherwise instructed, all Local Agencies submittals are being received and accepted electronically. Submit to: D8.Local.Assistance@dot.ca.gov (CC: DLAE and Local Assistance Area Coordinator) Current Staff Assignment List can be found on page 9 of the D8 Local Assis- tance Pins. ATTACHMENT 67 HBP POST PROGRAMMING/EPSP PRIORITIES Due to the challenges of limited funding and high demand, the HBP will not follow its normal first-come-first-serve advancement pro- cedure this year on April Below you will find the priorities for advancing projects as additional programming capacity becomes availa- ble. Additional programming may become available as de-obligations occur from previous years’ obligations, or if projects decide not to RFA for their programmed funds this year. These priorities will be used for this entire federal fiscal year. The HBP had a programming demand of $652 million and capacity of $289 million this year. Therefore, many projects that had re- quested federal funds this year will not be receiving the funding until a future year. A handful of these projects are ready to enter or already in construction. Of the projects already in construction, numerous sought Advance Construction (AC) conversions this year. The challenge to apportion limited funding has brought many questions forward as to how HBP funds will be prioritized when addition- al programming becomes available. Below are the HBP Managers’ priorities to apportion and advance federal funds into FFY 20/21 as de-obligations from prior projects and additional programming becomes available. The priorities are applicable to the current Post Programming/Expedited Project Se- lection Procedures (EPSP) process only. Due to limited programming capacity, future years’ projects may be subject to these same priorities. Projects in construction will receive priority over Preliminary Engineering (PE) or Right-of-Way (R/W) funds. The below priorities do not include high cost bridge projects that have signed agreements. In a workshop with HBP Advisory Committee members held February 4, 2021, the below priorities will be used for advancing projects in FFY 20/21, even after EPSP and Post Programming open on April 1.  Prop 1B seismic projects in construction with cost increases are the top priority.  Projects in construction requesting project close out.  Projects in construction based upon the Project Ranking Policy as prescribed in the LAPG Chapter 6 Guidelines. This includes pro- jects that have gone to construction using AC and the project has been awarded. Projects that have utilized AC may receive a partial AC conversion, at the local agencies request.“The lowest number rank is the highest priority. Within each rank, projects are sortedby AASHTO Sufficiency Rating (SR to reflect the general condition of the bridge. The lowest SR is the highest priority.”  Cost increases to BPMP projects in construction. Priority will be based upon the construction authorization date, oldest to newest.  Cost increases to Low water crossing projects in construction. Priority will be based upon the construction authorization dat e, old- est to newest.  R/W evaluated on a case-by-case basis.  PE evaluated on a case-by-case basis. HBP managers have latitude to revise the order for a project as necessary. For example, if there are still $750,000 funds available and the next rank order project is $1.5 million and a higher rank (lower priority) project is less than $750,000; we can fund the higher rank project in lieu of the $1.5 million project. HBP PROGRAMMING OF ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION AND MONITORING Highway Bridge Program (HBP) Managers recognize the confusion amongst our program’s stakeholders in regards to what is HBP eligi- ble towards environmental mitigation and monitoring. There have been many meetings and discussions amongst Division of Local As- sistance (DLA) and the HBP Advisory Committee on what is required by the environmental permitting agencies versus what is eligible for HBP reimbursement per the policies in LAPG Chapter 6. Specifically, items on environmental maintenance have recently been challenged to be HBP eligible. Further discussions within DLA and with the HBP Advisory Committee will be held on this topic. However, in an effort to prevent further delays on project delivery, all HBP projects that are Ready-To-Advertise (Rank 1E or lower) be- fore September 30, 2021 will be programmed for and be eligible to be reimbursed against the environmental efforts as required by the environmental permitting agencies. HBP Managers will be leading a training on this topic of HBP eligibility of environmental mitigation in the coming months. A notification will be sent out once the training has been scheduled. COOPERATIVE WORK AGREEMENT (CWA) TIMELINE A Cooperative Work Agreement is an agreement between the State of California and a local agen- cy which extends the budget authority life on local agency projects. This is accomplished through the CWA process. Section 16304.3 of the California Government Code authorizes the Department of Fi- nance (DOF) to approve a one-time extension of budget authority life by two years on all projects with Local Assistance funding. there is no appeal process for denied CWA time extensions by DOF. All projects using federal and/or state funds which pass through Local Assistance must be assigned budget authority to be eligible for reimbursement. When budget authority lapses, Local Program Ac- counting cannot reimburse invoices. Please note: If budget authority lapses, and funding is consequently lost, failure to complete the pro- ject may result in the local agency having to repay any state or federal funds already reimbursed to the agency for the project. The timeline below provides an estimated schedule of the CWA process. December - February 1 1. HQ CWA Coordinator will upload the Eligible Projects Lists for CWA Time Extensions to the CWA webpage by end of the third week of December. 2. HQ CWA Coordinator will also email the lists to the DLAE’s and affected local agencies. 3. Local agencies will need to review the lists, provide the infor- mation required in each spreadsheet, and return them to HQ CWA Coordinator by the end of the second week of January. 4. HQ CWA Coordinator will review and reconcile local agency comments and submit the finalized lists, three-year comparison report, and form DF-600 to Division of Budgets by the end of the third week of January. 5. Division of Budgets will review and reconcile the above docu- ments and submit to Department of Finance (DOF) by the end of the first week of February. February – March 6. DOF approves/denies CWA time extensions. 7. Division of Budgets informs HQ CWA Coordinator, Local Pro- gram Accounting, and State Controller Office of the DOF’s CWA approval/denial decisions on Monday, the second week of March. 8. HQ CWA Coordinator notifies the DLAEs and the local agencies of DOF’s approved CWA lists and posts them on the CWA webpage by mid-second week of March. 9. HQ CWA Coordinator inputs approved CWA reversion date into HQ database (LP2000) by the end of the second week of March. CWA CYCLE 18 SUMMARY Agency Entries Apple Valley 1 Caltrans 2 Chino 2 CVAG 1 Montclair 1 Moreno Valley 2 Needles 1 Ontario 1 Palm Springs 1 Riverside 3 Riverside County 1 San Bernardino 2 SANBAG 1 San Bernardino County 9 Temecula 2 TOTAL 30 68 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM PROGRAM MILESTONES STATEWIDE, SMALL URBAN, & RURAL Commission Adoption March 24-25, 2021 ATP Cycle 5 Staff Recommendations for Statewide Pro- jects:  City of Ontario: Vine Ave & B St Bike Boulevard Project  City of Perris: City of Perris Bike and Pedestrian Network Pro- ject  Riverside County (RU- Public Health): Riverside County Safe Routes for All - San Jacinto  San Bernardino County: Muscoy Area Safe Routes to School Pedestrian Improvements Project MPO COMPONENT Projects not programmed distributed to large MPOs based on location March 24-25 2021 MPO COMPONENT Deadline for MPO Draft project programming recommendations to the Commission April 15, 2021 MPO COMPONENT Deadline for MPO Final project programming recommendations to the Commission May 14, 2021 MPO COMPONENT Commission Adoption June 23-24 2021 For more information, visit: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/fed-and-state-programs/active-transportation-program/cycle5 & https:// catc.ca.gov/programs/active-transportation-program ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES WITH ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTS While the Active Transportation Program has successfully funded projects across the State, the Program is incredibly oversubscribed and cannot meet all of the State’s needs. Therefore, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) and Caltrans have developed a list of additional programs that fund active transportation projects and elements to serve as a resource for cities, counties, and agencies looking to fund valuable active transportation projects in their communities. Click her for downloadable Link HIGHWAY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM (HIP) Any remaining FFY17-18 HIP funds not obligated on or be- fore September 30, 2021 shall lapse. For more information, visit: HIP Webpage FUNDING UPDATES HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT SELECTION HSIP Cycle 10 applications are in the final stage of the project selection process. The list of funded applications is expected to be released around March 1, 2021 March 15, 2021. District 8 BCR: 39 Set Asides: 7 Total Applications Received for the District: 46 For information on the HSIP, visit: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/fed-and-state-programs/highway-safety-improvement-program FY2021 INFRASTRUCTURE FOR REBUILDING AMERICA (INFRA) GRANT PROGRAM The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) announced it is seeking applicants for the FY 2021 round of the Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) discretionary grant program to fund trans- portation projects of national and regional significance that are in line with the Biden Administra- tion’s principles for national infrastructure projects that result in good-paying jobs, improve safety, apply transformative technology, and explicitly address climate change and racial equity. The fund- ing available for this year’s grants totals approximately $889 million. The Department recognizes the role that infrastructure investment plays in economic development and job creation, and the added urgency of this funding at time when the COVID-19 pandemic has put stress on state and local budgets. For the first time, the USDOT seeks INFRA projects that address climate change and environmental justice. Projects will be evaluated on whether they were planned as part of a comprehensive strate- gy to address climate change, or whether they support strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emis- sions such as deploying zero-emission-vehicle infrastructure or encouraging modal shift and a reduc- tion in vehicle-miles-traveled. Racial equity will also be considered as a selection criterion, to the extent that project sponsors have completed equity-focused community outreach, and projects are designed to benefit underserved communities. The Department will also consider whether the project is located in a federally desig- nated community development zone, including qualified Opportunity Zones, Empowerment Zones, Promise Zones, or Choice Neighborhoods. USDOT seeks projects that apply innovative technology, delivery, or financing methods with proven outcomes to deliver projects in a cost effective manner. The Department will make awards under the INFRA program to both large and small projects. For a large project, the INFRA grant must be at least $25 million. For a small project, the grant must be at least $5 million. Under statutory require- ments, 10 percent of available funds are reserved for small projects, and the Department must award at least 25 percent of funding for rural projects. INFRA grants may be used to fund a variety of components of an infrastructure project, however, the Department is specifically focused on pro- jects in which the local sponsor is significantly invested and is positioned to proceed rapidly to con- struction. Eligible INFRA project costs may include: reconstruction, rehabilitation, acquisition of prop- erty (including land related to the project and improvements to the land), environmental mitigation, construction contingencies, equipment acquisition, and operational improvements directly related to system performance. The INFRA NOFO also announces the creation of the “INFRA Extra” Program, which will identify com- petitive INFRA applicants who do not receive an INFRA award and authorize them to seek a Trans- portation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 1998 (TIFIA) loan up to 49 percent of their pro- ject cost. The Department will post and respond to questions related to the expanded INFRA program criteria, and post notices of upcoming webinars for stakeholders through this site and at INFRA- grants@dot.gov. This NOFO will remain open through Friday, March 19, 2021. For more information and webinars, visit: www.transportation.gov/INFRA. INFRA Grant Application Deadline: March 19, 2021 Request for Caltrans Letter of Support (LOS) Deadline: March 4, 2021 − Please send LOS requests to Rena.Tang@dot.ca.gov FY 2021 Webinar Series The Department will host informational webinars for the 2021 INFRA Round. Each webinar will be recorded and made available below in the event you are unable to participate directly. Links to register for the webinars can be found here. 69 BERKELEY TECH TRANSFER: ONLINE TRAINING CODE TITLE DATES CCA-01 Introduction to Pavement Engineering and Management (Waitlist Only) March 8-11, 2021 TE-32 Pedestrian Facilities: Planning and Conceptual Design for Accessibility and Safety March 16-18, 2021 TE-55 Parking Management for Sustainable Development March 29 - April 1, 2021 TS-34 Bikeway Facility and Master Planning March 30 - April 8, 2021 TS-18 Excavation & Trenching Safety (English) April 6, 2021 TS-18 Seguridad en Excavaciones y Zanjas (Español) April 8, 2021 TE-62 California MUTCD Overview and Updates (Waitlist Only) April 12-15, 2021 CCB-02 Pavement Management Systems and Preservation Strategies (Waitlist Only) April 19-26, 2021 T R A I N I N G / C O N F E R E N C E / W O R K S H O P O P P O R T U N I T I E S A N D P R E S E N T A T I O N S LOCAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LTAP) TITLE DATES FAS: Getting Your Federal Aid Started March 10-11 (or) April 14-15, 2021 FAS: Environmental Requirements March 16-17 (or) May 11-12, 2021 Mini Roundabout Training March 30, 2021 Labor Compliance March 23, 24, 25 (or) April 20, 21, 22, 2021 Resident Engineer Academy (Waitlist Closed– Full Capacity) March 1-5 (or) April 5-9, 2021 EDC-5 Value Capture Strategies Webinar Series TITLE DATES Free! Register for the Upcoming EDC-5 Value Capture Strategies Webinar Series FHWA is hosting a series of Value Capture Strategies webinars beginning March 10, 2021. The webinar series will detail the Val- ue Capture techniques promoted in the Federal Highway Admin- istration’s Every Day Counts (EDC-5) initiative. This year’s series focuses on the intersection of Innovative Finance and Innovative Project Delivery Tools. These webinars will detail more Value Capture best practices collected from throughout the na- tion. They will also highlight FHWA’s recently completed Value Capture Primer series of technical documents. Value Capture is a set of powerful techniques that recover a por- tion of property value and economic activities created by public infrastructure investments, and can: address funding gaps; lever- age and optimize Federal and State resources; accelerate pro- ject delivery; meet and improve system performance goals; maintain transportation infrastructure assets in good repair; and, save time and money. The program features subject matter experts and peers who suc- cessfully utilized Value Capture in tandem with innovative fi- nance and project delivery techniques to advance new and modernized infrastructure projects. Registration is free but is lim- ited. Certificates of Completion and Confirmation of Attendance are available! Use Transportation Utility Fee (TUF) to Fund Roadway Maintenance & Enhance Safety-The Primer March 10, 2021 Intro to Development Agreements and Other Contract-Based Value Capture Techniques – The Primer March 24, 2021 Value Capture Strategies and Municipal Bonds and Debt April 14, 2021 Value Capture Strategies and Infrastructure Bank Programs May 12, 2021 Value Capture Strategies and Capital Improvement Plan – The Primer May 19, 2021 Value Capture Strategies and Public-Private Partnerships June 09, 2021 Value Capture Strategies: Tax Increment Financing – The Primer June 16, 2021 Value Capture Strategies: Transportation Reinvestment Zone – The Primer July 14, 2021 Value Capture Strategies: Developer Impact Fees -The Primer August 04, 2021 Value Capture Strategies: Special Assessment – The Primer August 25, 2021 Value Capture Strategies: Risk Assessment – The Primer September 15, 2021 Value Capture Strategies: Business Case – The Primer October 6, 2021 Virtual Utility Peer Exchange: Feb 16 The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) will be hosting a Virtual Utility Peer Ex- change for State and Local Department of Transportations on Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2021 from 1:00 pm – 3:30 pm eastern standard time. The agenda will include, among other things, a presentation on proper payments to utilities and As-Built Data Collection Meth- ods. If you would like to attend this peer exchange and/or would like to add additional items to the agenda to discuss with your peers, please email Julie.johnston@dot.gov prior to February 12. A&E Video Shorts The Architectural and Engineering (A&E) short video training series now includes the top- ic: ICE and Cost Analysis. Learn about what ICE and Cost Analysis are as defined in 23 CFR 172 and how to use the ICE and Cost Analysis tools. Also included is the profit/fee determination tool. You can use the profit/fee determina- tion tool separately or with the ICE tool. Learn more by visiting the A&E Consultant Selection and Procurement Webpage: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/guidance-and-oversight/ consultant-selection-procurement. INFRA WEBINAR SERIES TITLE DATES How to Compete for INFRA 2021 Grants February 22, 2021 Preparing a Benefit-Cost Anal- ysis for an INFRA Grant Appli- cation February 24, 2021 How to Compete for INFRA 2021 Grants March 1, 2021 70 COVENANTS FOUND IN YOUR AGENCY’S EXECUTED MASTER AGREEMENT AND PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT OF POSSIBLE SANCTIONS BY THE DISTRICT: *MASTER AGREEMENT ADMINISTERING AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT FOR FEDERAL- AID PROJECTS: ARTICLE IV - FISCAL PROVISIONS 4. ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees, as a minimum, to submit invoices at least once every six (6) months commencing after the funds are encumbered on either the project-specific PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT or through a project-specific finance letter approved by STATE. STATE reserves the right to suspend future authorizations/obligations, and invoice payments for any on-going or future federal-aid project by ADMINISTERING AGENCY if PROJECT costs have not been invoiced by ADMINISTERING AGENCY for a six (6) month period. **PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT AGREEMENT ADMINISTERING AGENCY-STATE AGREE- MENT FOR FEDERAL-AID PROJECTS: SPECIAL COVENANTS OR REMARKS 1(D). ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees, as a minimum, to submit in- voices at least once every six months commencing after the funds are encumbered for each phase by the execution of this Project Pro- gram Supplement Agreement, or by STATE's approval of an applica- ble Finance Letter. STATE reserves the right to suspend future authori- zations/obligations for Federal aid projects, or encumbrances for State funded projects, as well as to suspend invoice payments for any on-going or future project by ADMINISTERING AGENCY if PROJECT costs have not been invoiced by ADMINISTERING AGENCY for a six- month period. If no costs have been invoiced for a six-month period, ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees to submit for each phase a written explanation of the absence of PROJECT activity along with target billing date and target billing amount. ACTION REQUIRED INACTIVE PROJECTS FUTURE INACTIVE PROJECTS IMPORTANT: This report is summarized from the Inactive Project List Posting on the Local Assistance Website dated 02/19/2021. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/projects/inactive-projects If you have recently submitted an invoice for your inactive project (s), please continue to work with your Local Assistance Area Engi- neer/Coordinator and the Inactive Coordinator to ensure the in- voice is processed. Please be reminded that simply submitting an invoice will not remove your project from the inactive list; a project will only be removed off the inactive list when the reimbursement has been fully processed. If your agency is not currently identified as having inactive or future inactive projects, please continue to submit invoices at least once every 6 months as agreed upon with the State (refer to your agency’s Master Agreement (MA)* and Program Supplement Agreements (PSA)**). AGENCY NO. OF PROJECTS TOTAL UNEXPENDED BALANCE Beaumont 1 $956,079 Calimesa 1 $373,355 Caltrans 2 $1,891,695 Coachella 2 $543,992 CVAG 2 $32,587,254 Corona 1 $582,588 Eastvale 1 $206,500 Hemet 1 $20,174 Jurupa Valley 1 $1,043,678 Lake Elsinore 2 $319,754 Moreno Valley 1 $1,132,180 Palm Springs 1 $568,840 Riverside 2 $268,191 Riverside County 5 $4,013,256 RCTC 3 $23,025,073 Temecula 3 $329,031 RIV Total 29 $67,861,639 Barstow 1 $5,780 Caltrans 2 $3,018,993 Colton 1 $153,261 Fontana 1 $191,000 Grand Terrace 1 $33,600 Hesperia 2 $577,587 Needles 1 $506,210 Ontario 2 $3,514,957 Rancho Cucamonga 1 $299,139 Redlands 2 $345,370 Rialto 2 $996,975 San Bernardino 4 $865,673 SANBAG 1 $78,167 San Bernardino County 6 $674,629 Twentynine Palms 1 $150,000 Victorville 1 $390,919 Yucaipa 2 $434,980 SBD Total 31 $12,237,240 GRAND TOTAL (60 PROJECTS): $80,098,879 AGENCY NO. OF PROJECTS TOTAL UNEXPENDED BALANCE Caltrans 1 $5,274,047 Indio 2 $659,347 La Quinta 2 $789,510 Lake Elsinore 1 $370,357 Menifee 1 $28,244 Moreno Valley 3 $3,827,139 Murrieta 1 $1,601,766 Palm Springs 1 $794,476 Riverside 3 $4,605,654 RCTC 2 $31,440,495 Temecula 1 $35,412 RIV Total 18 $49,426,447 Barstow 2 $6,800,577 Caltrans 2 $45,248 Chino 2 $3,344,849 Colton 3 $1,478,934 Fontana 1 $1,076,111 Highland 6 $4,438,022 Rancho Cucamonga 1 $2,139 Redlands 2 $127,101 San Bernardino 3 $2,195,522 San Bernardino County 3 $1,082,328 San Bernardino County Transportation Authority 1 $328,420 Twentynine Palms 1 $182,084 Victorville 1 $421,054 Yucaipa 1 $508,600 Yucca Valley 2 $1,001,190 SBD Total 31 $23,032,179 GRAND TOTAL (49 PROJECTS): $72,458,626 AS OF FEBRUARY 19, 2021 71 ACTION REQUIRED PED EXPIRED PED EXPIRING IN >3 MONTHS AGENCY NO. OF PROJECTS Calimesa 1 CVAG 1 Corona 1 Hemet 2 Indio 1 Menifee 1 Murrieta 1 Palm Springs 1 Perris 1 RCTC 1 San Jacinto 1 Temecula 3 RIV Total 15 AGENCY NO. OF PROJECTS Coachella 2 Corona 1 Menifee 1 Riverside 1 Riverside County 1 RIV Total 6 Chino Hills 1 Fontana 1 Highland 4 Needles 1 Ontario 1 Rancho Cucamonga 1 Redlands 1 San Bernardino County 6 Yucaipa 1 SBD Total 17 Colton 1 San Bernardino County 1 Twentynine Palms 1 Yucaipa 2 Yucca Valley 1 SBD Total 6 PED EXPIRING IN +6 MONTHS AGENCY NO. OF PROJECTS Indio 1 La Quinta 1 Rancho Mirage 2 RIV Total 4 Chino 1 Grand Terrace 1 Needles 1 Yucaipa 1 SBD Total 4 AS OF FEBRUARY 22, 2021 PED EXPIRING IN >6 MONTHS AGENCY NO. OF PROJECTS Lake Elsinore 1 Palm Springs 1 RIV Total 2 Apple Valley 1 Barstow 1 Colton 2 Hesperia 1 Highland 1 San Bernardino 2 San Bernardino County 2 Twentynine Palms 2 Victorville 2 Yucaipa 1 SBD Total 15 REVISING THE PED The Project End Date (PED) is the date that an agency must estimate in order to identify the end of the project's Period of P erformance and is established at the time of Authorization (LAPM 3-A). It is defined as the date after which no additional costs may be incurred for an authorized phase of work and coincides with when the agency submits it s complete and accurate Final Report of Expenditures (FROE) to the District Local Assis- tance Engineer (DLAE). Any costs incurred after this date will not be eligible for federal reimbursement. If the PED is revised after the authorized PED has past, any costs incurred between the expiration of the authorized PED and the revised PED are ineligible for reimbursement. The local agency is expected to monitor the progress of its project. If the need arises, the local agency may need to revise the PED to accurately reflect the amount of time needed to complete the project or phase of the project. This is readily done and documented as part of an agency's authorization request when the project progresses from one phase of work to the next, as the project's delivery schedule will be more refined. While working within a particular phase of work, however, to request a revision to the PED, the local agency must submit an updated LAPM 3-A and adequate justification to the District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE). Examples of situations which may justify a revision to the PED include, but are not limited to: litigation, major changes in design, environmental or permit issues, construction claims, differing site conditions, significant addi- tional work, area-wide material shortages, labor strikes, unusually severe weather, or other events which are outside the control of the local agency. This documentation must be submitted as a separate request to the DLAE. Revisions to the PED without Caltrans concurrence and FHWA approval may result in costs not being eligible for reimbursement. GRAND TOTAL : 32 PROJECTS GRAND TOTAL : 12 PROJECTS GRAND TOTAL : 17 PROJECTS GRAND TOTAL : 8 PROJECTS LINKS: • PROJECTS WITH EXPIRING PROJECT END DATE (PED) • LAPM, CHAPTER 3: SECTION 3: PED 72 INVOICING PROCEDURES Required wet signatures on invoice documents are being exempted during the COVID-19 outbreak. Until further notice, Districts will continue to accept scanned copies of invoices.  Include the phrase “COVID-19” in Section 1: Invoice  Submit invoices to D8.Local.Assistance@dot.ca.gov (CC: DLAE, and Local Assistance Area Coordinator) CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION GUIDANCE DURING COVID-19 GENERAL GUIDANCE ON POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CURRENT AND UPCOMING (AWARDED) PROJECTS The current and everchanging Coronavirus pandemic may affect current and upcoming construction projects. Understanding that each construction project will have its own unique set of circumstances, this guidance is intend- ed to address and set forth some general guidelines to local agencies. Key Points: • Construction on critical transportation infrastructure and most public works is designated an “essential service” by the U.S Department of Homeland Se- curity – so if agreeable by the Contractor and allowed by the local agency, the Contractor may work • However, if the pandemic affects the ability of the Contractor to perform work safely per CDC guidelines and/or efficiently (social distancing factors, lack of available workforce, delays in the materials supply chain, etc.), that Contractor should submit a written request with specific detail, and the local agency can be very flexible in granting non-working days or delaying the start of a project. • Upon receiving the Contractor’s written request, the local agency should respond in writing. This response letter should reiterate that while non-working days can be granted, the Contractor is generally not entitled to additional payment borne by the delay (resulting project/critical path delays, increased unit costs, additional overhead, etc.) • The local agency should diligently keep the Weekly Statement of Working Days (LAPM Exhibit 16-A) and submit to the Contractor on a weekly basis, us- ing the Remarks section of the form • Local agencies should be mindful of the specific project’s traffic control impacts and corresponding detours that may affect first responders or emer- gency vehicles’ access to hospitals or testing centers, and provide necessary communications with affected agencies and organizations as appropriate • Contractors are updating their Codes of Safe Practices and Injury/Illness Prevention Plans to address current CDC direction. Direct the Contractor’s attention to Section VII (Safety: Accident Prevention) of Form FHWA-1273 For additional background and guidance, see https://dot.ca.gov/programs/ local-assistance/guidelines-and-procedures/-/media/ f83d97965986493191ceb14a41e49aa6.ashx This Guidance is prepared by Caltrans, Division of Local Assistance, Office of Guidance and Oversight. Comments or suggestions regarding this topic should be directed to Mike.Giuliano@dot.ca.gov 2020 INTERIM TIMELY USE OF FUNDS POLICY: RESOLUTION—G-20-84, AMENDING RESOLUTION G-20-56 Effective MAY 2020—JUNE 30, 2021 To address impacts to project delivery as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, this amendment extended the 2020 Interim Timely Use of Funds Policy’s expiration date to June 30, 2021.  FY 19/20 Project Allocation (Applicable to ATP, LPP, TCEP, SCCP) Projects programmed in FY 19/20 had a revised allocation deadline to the DEC 2020 CTC Meeting (action is automatic; no further action needed by agency)  Construction Contract Award (Applicable to STIP, ATP, LPP, TCEP, SCCP) Period to award for projects is extended to 12-months. Included projects that received an allocation in Oct 2019 through June 2021.  Time Extensions (Applicable to STIP, ATP, LPP, TCEP, SCCP) A maximum time extension for each of the following project’s delivery milestones is extended to 20-months (Project allocation, project expenditure, construction contract award, and project completion)  Time Extension Amendments A one-time time extension amendment will be considered for projects with an approved time extension that expires in May 2020 through June 2021 to extend the period of the time extension to up to 20-months. Projects that have already received a “one-time” amendment are not eligible for additional time. (Applicable to STIP, ATP, LPP, TCEP, SCCP) For a project with an approved 20-month time extension that expires in May 2020 through February 2021, and agency may request additional time beyond the 20 months if the need for additional time is directly attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic. (Applicable to ATP, LPP, TCEP, SCCP ONLY)  Final Invoice/ Final Close-Out For allocations with the 180-day deadline for final invoice expiring in May 2020 through December 2020, the deadline is extended for an additional 180 days. For programs with an approved close-out policy, the 2020 Interim Timely Use of Funds Policy shall apply as follows: TCIF – the interim policy applies only if a TCIF project has funds from other competitive programs covered under this policy. TCRP - the interim policy applies only for project completion and final expenditure milestones. https://catc.ca.gov/-/media/ctc-media/documents/programs/shopp/Amended-TUF-Policy GUIDANCE DURING COVID -19 ATRC NON-INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS (NI) Active Transportation Resource Center staff recognize that COVID-19 is impacting NI projects and programs all across the state. At this time, CTC is first recommending for agencies to look into filing for a time extension so that the same delivera- bles of the agency’s project is met, however, scope changes and modifications can be made if desired by the agency. If a time extension will not meet the needs of fulfilling the project scope, then non-infrastructure awardees may consider alternative activities or different was to meet deliverables (e.g. online format, delaying meetings/events/counts, etc.). Please email proposals to atp-ni@dot.ca.gov. Please notify your Caltrans District first if your agency intends to make any modi- fications to the project’s scope. For examples and resources for NI activities during COVID-19, please visit: http://caatpresources.org/includes/docs/ATRC_COVID-19_Updates_April_2020.pdf DBE/ACDBE SUPPLEMENTAL GUIDANCE EXTENDS COVID-19 PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS TO JUNE 30, 2021 The U.S. DOT Department Office of Civil Rights has extended guidance to June 30, 2021 for Disadvan- taged Business Enterprise and Airport Concession Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program require- ments and certification procedures during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Read about the March 24 guideline extension. Read about the April 1 guideline extension. 73 74 75 AGENDA ITEM 1 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Martha Masters, Senior Management Analyst SUBJECT: 2019 and 2021 Federal Transportation Improvement Program Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file an update on the 2019 and 2021 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The FTIP is a listing of multi-modal transportation projects proposed over a six-year period for the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region. The projects include highway improvements, transit, rail and bus facilities, high occupancy vehicles lanes, active transportation facilities and activities, signal synchronization, intersection improvements, freeway ramps, etc. SCAG produces a biennial FTIP update for the region on an even-year cycle. The FTIP update is an extensive process that adheres to state and federal requirements under the Clean Air Act and State Implementation Plan, requiring complete review of individual projects and cross-checking modeling details to ensure transportation conformity. DISCUSSION: 2019 FTIP The 2019 FTIP update (323 projects submitted from Riverside County) was officially adopted on December 17, 2018. As of today, SCAG has processed 13 formal amendments; one consistency amendment associated with the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) amendment; and 16 administrative modifications. All formal amendments have received the reviewing agencies’ conformity approvals; the consistency amendment has also been approved. Administrative modification approvals are delegated to SCAG and eight of the nine administrative modifications have been approved. There are no future amendments remaining for the 2019 FTIP. The current 2019 FTIP is available on SCAG’s website https://scag.ca.gov/2019-approved-ftip. 2021 FTIP In January 2020, Commission staff submitted 389 projects to SCAG for the 2021 FTIP update after working closely with local agencies. The proposed 2021 FTIP implements transportation projects in the RTP/SCS for fiscal years 2020/21 – 2025/26. The total project cost for all Riverside County projects submitted totaled approximately $12 billion dollars. Subsequently, staff submitted 72 projects to SCAG for the 2021 FTIP Amendment 1 (#21-01) in October 2020. The 2021 FTIP will replace the 2019 FTIP 76 after its full approval anticipated in mid-April with Amendment #21-01 to be approved sometime after. The proposed 2021 FTIP, along with Amendment #21-01, is available on SCAG’s website https://scag.ca.gov/ftip-whats-new for public review. The 2021 FTIP Amendment schedule is provided as Attachment 1. A formal amendment is due to SCAG on April 20, 2021 and due to RCTC on April 6, 2021. Commission Planning and Programming staff keeps track of needed changes for local agency projects to ensure obligation of funds or environmental clearance without any delays. Staff also urges local agencies to be familiar with the information currently programmed for their projects in the FTIP. Commission staff should be notified of any changes so they can properly be incorporated into the FTIP to avoid project delays, especially as it relates to federal funds that require programming in the FTIP for obligation. Planning and Programming staff can be contacted with questions about on-going projects that may require updates in the 2021 FTIP for federal approvals and/or federal obligations. Attachment: 2021 FTIP Amendment Schedule 77 Due Date (by Noon)Amendments Administrative Modifications Tuesday, October 20, 2020 Amendment #21-01* 2020 STIP, 2020 SHOPP, HBP and emergency type changes to address comments received on Draft 2021 FTIP only. Concurrent with 2021 FTIP base Tuesday, January 19, 2021 Administrative Modification #21-02* Friday, February 19, 2021 Modeling Consistency Amendment #21-97 to 2020 RTP A1** Tuesday, April 20, 2021 Amendment #21-03 Thursday, June 15, 2021 Administrative Modification #21-04 2021 FTIP AMENDMENT/ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION SCHEDULE Updated 1/06/21 *If any comments received during 2021 Public Comment period, we will reject projects for CTCs to address prior to finalizing the amendment. **This is for modeling changes to FTIP project to be submitted with FTIP Consistency Amendment (Amendment # TBD) to the 2020 RTP A1 ATTACHMENT 78 AGENDA ITEM 1 5 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Jillian Guizado, Planning and Programming Director SUBJECT: California Transportation Commission Meeting Highlights: December 2020 and January 2021 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file December 2020 and January 2021 California Transportation Commission (CTC) meeting highlights. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: December 2-3, 2020 CTC Meeting (Agenda) TAB 20 – Amendment to the 2020 Interim Timely Use of Funds Policy TAB 22 – 2020 Trade Corridor Enhancement Program Adoption – Program of Projects TAB 23 – 2020 Local Partnership Formulaic Program Adoption – Program of Projects TAB 24 – 2020 Local Partnership Competitive Program Adoption – Program of Projects TAB 25 – 2020 Solutions for Congested Corridors Program Adoption – Program of Projects January 27-28, 2021 CTC Meeting (Agenda) TAB 16 – Budget and Allocation Capacity TAB 26 – State Highway System Management Plan Overview: • Video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y3jAnpvsik&feature=youtu.be) • Project Book (http://projectbook.dot.ca.gov/) 79 AGENDA ITEM 1 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 15, 2021 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Jillian Guizado, Planning and Programming Director SUBJECT: RCTC Commission Meeting Highlights: December 2020 and January, February, and March 2021 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to receive and file December 2020 and January, February, and March 2021 Commission meeting highlights. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: December 2020 Commission Meeting (Agenda) Item 6H – City of Riverside Funding Request for Third Street Grade Separation Project The Commission approved programming $18,000,000 of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds for the city of Riverside’s (City) Third Street Grade Separation project as recommended by the Technical Advisory Committee. January 2021 Commission Meeting (Agenda) Item 6D – Riverside Transit Agency Reprogramming Request of CMAQ Funds as Programmed in the 2013 Multi-Funding Call for Projects The Commission approved reprogramming CMAQ funding from the RapidLink Service Project to the Route 1 Weekend Service Improvements Project in the amount of $466,130. Item 6E – Award of Project and Program Funding Database System Agreement to Netkinetix Inc. The Commission approved an agreement with Netkinetix Inc. to develop and maintain a project and program funding database system. Item 6F – Senate Bill 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Update 80 The Commission approved the revised Transportation Development Act Article 3, or Senate Bill 821, Program Policies, and Fiscal Year 2021/22 Call for Projects Guidelines, including the Evaluation Criteria and Application. Item 7 – Fiscal Year 2020/21 Mid-Year Revised Revenue Projections The Commission approved the mid-year Fiscal Year (FY) 2019/20 revenue projections of $195 million for Measure A revenues, $100 million for Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenues, and $11 million for Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues. Item 8 – Fiscal Year 2021/22 Revenue Projections The Commission approved: 1. The projection for Measure A revenues of $195 million for FY 2021/22; 2. The projection for LTF apportionment of $100 million for the Western Riverside County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley areas for FY 2021/22; and 3. The projection for TUMF revenues of $11 million for FY 2021/22. February 2021 Commission Meeting (Agenda) Nothing applicable to the Technical Advisory Committee to report. March 2021 Commission Meeting (Agenda) Item 8 – County of Riverside Request for Additional Funds for the Salt Creek Trail As of the writing of this agenda item, the Commission was anticipated to approve federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds in the additional amount of $160,000 for a total amount of $5,844,203 to fully fund construction of the Salt Creek Trail project. Item 9 – 15 Express Lanes Opening As of the writing of this agenda item, the Commission was anticipated to receive and file a presentation on the 15 Express Lanes opening. 81 TECHNICAL ADVISORY CO MMITTEE March 15, 2021 � ROLL CALL -- AGENCY TAC MEMBER ALTERNATE PRINT NAME SIGNATURE and EMAIL BANNING BEAUMONT BLYTHE CALIMESA CALTRANS CANYON LAKE APT VELA Acting Director of Public Works JEFF HART Director of Public Works/City Engineer DAN OJEDA MICHAEL THORNTON City Engineer ALBERT VERGEL DE DIOS Acting District Local Assistance Engineer BRAD BROPHY CATHEDRAL CITI? JOHN CORELLA City Engineer COACHELLA COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS CORONA DESERT HOT SPRINGS •3 SAVAT KHAMPHOU Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer DANIEL PORRAS Public Works Director/City Engineer Holly Stuart Public Works Analyst Robert Vestal Sean Yeung Acting District Local Assistance Engineer Mike Borja Administrative Services Manager Crystal Sandoval Assistant Engineer Maritza Martinez Interim Public Works Director Eric Cowie Transportation Program Manager Rosalva Ureno Senior Engineer Nick Haecker Public W orks Manager '1e-S:A-Q'- 3/15/2021 TECHNICAL ADVIS ORY COM MITTEE March 15, 2021 ROLL CALL AGENCY TAC MEMBER ALTERNATE PRINT NAME SIGNATURE and EMAIL EASTVALE / JIMMY CHUNG City Engineer HEMET STEVE LORISO City Engineer INDIAN WELLS KEN SEUMALO Public Works Director INDIO 9 TIMOTHY T. WASSIL Public Works Director JURUPA VALLEY PAUL TOOR Director of Public Works/City Engineer LA QUINTA j Q BRYAN MC KINNEY City Engineer LAKE ELSINORE 11 REMON HABIB Senior Civil Engineer MENIFEE i'• MORENO VALLEY MICHAEL W OLFE Public Works Director/City Engineer MURRIETA NORCO \ BOB MOEHLING / City Engineer CHAD BLAIS Public W orks Director Dahi Kim Nancy Beltran Management Assistant Tanya Williams Senior Management Analyst Eric Weck Principal Civil Engineer Rod Butler City Manager Julie Mignogna Management Analyst Yu Tagai Associate Engineer Carlos Geronimo Senior Engineer Michael Lloyd Engineering Division Manager/Assistant City Engineer Jeff Hitch Principal City Engineer Sam Nelson Deputy City Engineer/ Deputy Public W orks Director A) 6-6 3/15/2021 TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE March 15, 2021 ROLL CALL AGENCY TAC ME MBER ALTERNATE PRINT NA ME SIGNATURE and EMAIL PALM DESERT /Li PALM SPRINGSJOEL MONTALVO 13 PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY PERRIS Assistant Director of Engineering Services K. GEORGE COLANGELI Transit General Manager t RANCHO MIRAGE JESSE ECKENROTH ' 1 Public W orks Director RIVERSIDE "- FARSHID MOHAMMADI CHAIR Engineering Manager RIVERSIDE COUNTY MARK LANCASTER / 9 Director of Transportation RIVERSIDE KRISTIN WARSINSKI TRANSIT AGEN Director of Planning SAN JACINTO n t TRAVIS RANDEL Comm unity Development Director SUNLINE TRANSIT BRITTNEY B. SOWELL AGENCY /1. ? --Clerk of the Board/Special Assistant to the CEO TEMECULA PATRICK THOMAS ) Director of Public W orks Randy Bowman Sr . Project Engineer Marcus Fuller Assistant City Manager Dale Reynolds Brad Brophy Gilbert Hernandez Public W orks Department Mojahed Salama Deputy Director of Transportation ,Jennifer Nguyen Planning and Programming Specialist Brad Brophy Rc:han Kuruppu Amer Attar 3/15/2021 TECHNICAL ADVISORY CO MMITTEE March 15, 2021 ROLL CALL AGENCY TAC MEMBER ALTERNATE PRINT NAME SIGNATURE and EMAIL WESTERN CHRISTOPHER GRAY Chris Tzeng RIVERSIDE Director of Transportation Program Manager COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS WILDOMAR 76' AN YORK Assistant City ManagerlDirector of Public Works/City Engineer Cameron Luna 3/15/2021