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