HomeMy Public PortalAbout05 May 13, 2002 Technical Advisory059535
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA'
TIME:
DATE:
LOCATION:
RECORDS
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MEETING AGENDA*
10:00 A.M.
May 13, 2002
Banning City Hall
Civic Center, Large Conference Room
99 East Ramsey Street
Banning, CA
*By request, agenda and minutes may be available in alternative format; i.e. large print, tape.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Bill Bayne, City of Cathedral City
Tom Boyd, City of Riverside
Bill Brunet, City of Blythe
Dick Cromwell, SunLine Transit
Louis Flores, Caltrans District 08
Mike Gow, City of Hemet
Mark Greenwood, City of Palm Desert
Terry Hagen, City of Indio
Jerry Hanson, City of Desert Hot Springs
Bruce Harry, City of Rancho Mirage
Bill Hughes, City of Temecula
George Johnson, County
Elroy Kiepke, City of Calimesa
Eldon Lee, City of Coachella
Cis LeRoy, RTA
John Licata, City of Corona
Bob Mohler, City of Palm Springs
Habib Motlagh, Cities of Perris, San
Jacinto, Canyon Lake
Craig Neustaedter, City of Moreno Valley
Juan Perez, County
Ray 0' Donnell, City of Lake Elsinore
Kahono Oei, City of Banning
Joe Schenk, City of Norco
Ken Seumalo, City of Murrieta
Roy Stevenson, City of LaQuinta
Ruthanne Taylor Berger, WRCOG
Allyn Waggle, CVAG
Tim Wassil, City of Indian Wells
John Wilder, City of Beaumont
Cathy Bechtel, Director Transportation Planning & Policy Development
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda.
TIME: 10:00 A.M.
DATE: May 13, 2002
LOCATION: Banning City Hall
Civic Center, Large Conference Room
99 East Ramsey Street
Banning, CA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. SELF -INTRODUCTION
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — April 15, 2002
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS (This is for comments on items not listed on the agenda.
Comments relating to an item on the agenda will be taken when the item is before the
Committee.)
5. TEA 21 STP/CMAQ/TEA BALANCES
6. AVENUE 50 GRADE SEPARATION (Attachment)
7. ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST
8. CETAP UPDATE
9. STIP UPDATE
10. WRCOG TUMF UPDATE
11. TEA REPROGRAMMING — COMMISSION APPROVAL (Attachment)
12. OTHER BUSINESS
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
May 13, 2002
Page 2
13. RCTC MAY 8, 2002 COMMISSION MEETING
14. OTHER BUSINESS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
15. ADJOURNMENT (The next meeting will be June 17, 2002 in Riverside.)
MINUTES
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES
Monday, April 15, 2002
1. Call to Order
The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC)
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was called to order at 10:00 a.m., at
the Riverside County Transportation Commission, 3560 University Avenue,
Suite 100, Riverside, California 92501.
2. Self -Introductions
Members Present:
Others Present:
Bill Bayne, City of Cathedral City
Tom Boyd, City of Riverside
Louis Flores, Caltrans
Mike Gow, City of Hemet
Leslie Grosjean, SunLine
Terry Hagen, City of Indio
Bill Hughes, City of Temecula
Eldon Lee, City of Coachella
John Licata, City of Corona
Hank Mohle, City of Murrieta
Bob Mohler, City of Palm Springs
Craig Neustaedter, City of Moreno Valley
Ray O'Donnell, City of Lake Elsinore
Kahono Oei, City of Banning
Anne Palatino, RTA
Juan Perez, County of Riverside
Ken Seumalo, City of Murrieta
Tim Wassil, City of Indian Wells
Dale West, WRCOG
Fred Alamolhoda, Caltrans
Cathy Bechtel, RCTC
Shirley Gooding, RCTC
Ken Lobeck, RCTC
Shirley Medina, RCTC
Technical Advisory Committee Minutes
April 15, 2002
Page 2
3. Approval of Minutes
M/S/C (Wassil/Licata) approve the minutes dated March 18, 2002.
4. Public Comments
Louis Flores, Caltrans, announced that a STIP Workshop will be held on
May 7, 2002, at Caltrans, Second Street, Transportation Annex Building,
from 9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. Mr. Flores handed out a flyer outlining the
workshop.
He further stated that the applications for the Safe Routes to School call
for projects third round will be due on May 31. He indicated that the one
change is that the projects can be either federal or state dollars. He also
indicated that the Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) applications are
due May 31 and that they need to be approved not only by individual
agencies but concurrence by RCTC is also needed, as well as an approved
CEQA document.
Cathy Bechtel, RCTC, reminded the TAC members that the BTA
applications need to be approved by the Plans and Programs Committee
and that RCTC needs to know now so that it can get on the May
Commission agenda. In order for applications to be approved by the
Commission by the May 315` deadline, they need to be submitted to RCTC
as soon as possible.
5. 2002 STIP ADOPTION
Cathy Bechtel announced that the California Transportation Commission
(CTC) did approve the 2002 STIP at their April 4, 2002 meeting. She
pointed out that the current TAC agenda includes the project listing that
was given to the CTC. She also pointed out that the spreadsheet for the
County of Riverside included some mistakes, namely the fourth year
projects were not shown as being approved in this cycle but on page nine
of the attachment. This was corrected at the CTC meeting. Ms. Bechtel
stated that there were a couple of projects that RCTC did not recommend
delaying and that the CTC moved them out a year. She further stated that
at the CTC meeting it was made very clear that some projects will receive
state only dollars but for the year 02/03, there are no state only dollars for
new projects. She said the state only dollars are only for planning,
programming and monitoring projects and for ridesharing projects. Cathy
Bechtel said that the CTC indicated that just because a project is approved
Technical Advisory Committee Minutes
April 15, 2002
Page 3
for state only does not mean that the project will receive state only funds
at the time of allocation.
Ms. Bechtel emphasized that there were a number of projects identified
that will be programmed later in the fiscal year since all the paperwork was
not ready yet. She further emphasized the need to get the projects
programmed as soon as possible because there are only small funds
available for STIP amendments, on a first -come, first -served basis. If they
are not programmed in the next few months, the money may not be
available until 06/07 or later.
Cathy Bechtel stated that this agenda includes information regarding AB
3090 and that the guidelines are old, approved in December, 1992. She
pointed out that draft amendments were handed out today. She said that
if an agency wants to apply AB 3090 and if a local agency wants to front
the money for the project, they can do that using a very specific process
that needs to be worked through with RCTC, the local district and Caltrans
headquarters and CTC.
Shirley Medina, RCTC, said that projects can be advanced or substituted
using the same amount of dollars and if the substitute project costs are
higher, that portion will have to be funded with local funds.
Louis Flores, Caltrans, stated that AB 3090 will be discussed at the May 7
STIP workshop.
Shirley Medina brought to the attention of the TAC the attachment to the
STIP agenda item entitled, "Draft Transportation Finance Bank Revolving
Loan Program Guidelines and Loan Application and Agreement Package,"
which outlines an opportunity to borrow funds to advance STIP projects.
She stated that there is only $3M available for this statewide, basically for
the rural counties. She said this is on the Caltrans website and although
this is an opportunity, it is a small amount and that the urban counties will
not apply for this.
6. SB 821 CALL FOR PROJECTS
Shirley Medina conveyed that the SB 821 Call for Projects (due May 31,
2002) was included in the April 10 Commission Agenda. Eldon Lee, City
of Coachella, and Dale West, WRCOG, and a Caltrans representative to be
determined volunteered for the rating committee.
Technical Advisory Committee Minutes
April 15, 2002
Page 4
Cathy Bechtel pointed out that the Call for Projects is expected to go out
the week of April 15, 2002.
7. TEA REPROGRAMMING
Shirley Medina stated that regarding the $572,000 in TEA funds that the
City of Palm Desert returned, it was agreed to equally spread that amount
among the funded projects to help lessen the local match amount. She
stated that approximately $24,000 was put back to the TEA programmed
amount. She noted two projects will be held to the 11.47% local match,
as required for federal TEA funds, and redistribute the rest.
M/S/C (Wassil/Bayne) to hold to the 11.47% local match and redistribute
the rest.
8. PROJECT SUMMARY LISTS
Ken Lobeck, RCTC, reviewed the Project Summary Tracking List, which
contains about ten years of CMAQ, DEMO, STIP, STP, TEA, and TCR-S
funded projects. He pointed out that for TEA, CMAQ, and STP he tracked
through funds expended. For STIP funds, he was able to track through
obligation only. He requested that the TAC members review the list
carefully and let him know if updates or changes are needed.
9. RCTC APRIL 10 COMMISSION MEETING
Cathy Bechtel reported the high
y p - g' points of the meeting regarding the
Measure A Plan that will go on the ballot in November, 2002. She
conveyed that the Commission did approve the expenditure plan and it is
going back to the Commission in May to include the actual ballot language.
Ms. Bechtel further stated that the plan will go to the Board of Supervisors
in the June timeframe.
Ms. Bechtel also reported that the Commission also approved the half
million dollar public information campaign on the current Measure A.
She announced that the Commission had also approved signing a lease
agreement with AMTRAK that will allow the Southwest Chief to stop at
the Downtown Riverside Station. She stated that there will be a kickoff on
April 29, in the evening, and a mailing going out inviting the local cities to
attend.
Technical Advisory Committee Minutes
April 15, 2002
Page 5
Cathy Bechtel reported additional Metrolink service from Riverside to
Fullerton to Los Angeles that will start on May 6, with a media event on
the morning of May 6 at the Corona Metrolink Station.
Shirley Medina stated that RCTC took forward the lntercounty Formula
Adjustment to the Commission on April 10, which the TAC had
recommended delaying until February, 2003, instead of February, 2002.
She further stated that regarding the State Route 91 Commuter Survey,
RCTC will work with OCTA and SCAG, as well as a consultant. They are
going to videotape over the 91 at Maple and at the ramps all the way to
the Green River Interchange, capturing license plate information. She said
that they hope to send out the surveys 5 days after videotaping and they
are expecting a 25% response rate. The videotaping is expected to occur
on May 7 and May 8.
10. OTHER BUSINESS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Cathy Bechtel referred to the TAC meeting handouts entitled, "Overview of
Riverside County CETAP Status — April 12, 2002" and "Frequently Asked
questions for CETAP." She encouraged the TAC to share information with
city councils and she said that it is hoped to have the environmental
document for the two internal corridors available for public view on July 1,
and it will be out for 2 months, during which there will be public meetings.
She stated that after the public comments have been reviewed, a preferred
alternative will be selected in September, 2002. She emphasized that the
schedule will be adhered to.
Ms. Bechtel answered questions regarding particular corridors, e.g. Cajalco
and Western Corona.
Shirley Medina said that next month information regarding TMC will be
brought forward. Craig Neustaedter, City of Moreno Valley requested that
RCTC staff review the Commission meeting notes and remind the TAC
specifically what they should review regarding the TMC.
Technical Advisory Committee Minutes
April 15, 2002
Page 6
11.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Technical Advisory
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:55 A.M. The next meeting is
scheduled for May 13, 2002, 10:00 a.m., at Banning City Hall, Civic
Center, Large Conference Room, 99 East Ramsey Street, Banning.
Respectfully submitted,
I Y L A
Shirley Me
Program Manager
AGENDA ITEM 6
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
DATE:
May 20, 2002
TO:
Plans and Programs Committee
FROM:
Stephanie Wiggins, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy
Development
SUBJECT:
City of Coachella Avenue 50 Grade Separation CPUC Section 190
10% Local Match Request
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is to seek Committee approval to:
1) Transfer $500,000 of uncommitted Surface Transportation Program
Funds to the Rail Program to facilitate the award of funding for the
Avenue 50 Grade Separation Project;
2) Allocate $500,000 in available Rail Local Transportation Funds to provide
a non-federal match to the City of Coachella for the Avenue 50 Grade
Separation Project; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At the September 10, 2001 meeting, the Commission approved the policy to
support successful California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Section 190 Grade
Separation projects that are included in the RCTC approved Alameda Corridor -East
(ACE) Grade Crossing Priority List by funding the 10% local share match
requirement of the CPUC, if funding sources are available.
The City of Coachella has submitted an application to RCTC for the 10% local
share of the Avenue 50 Grade Separation Project, located on the Union Pacific
Railroad's Yuma Main Line. The Avenue 50 Grade Separation Project does meet
RCTC's eligibility requirement of having been awarded CPUC funds and listed in
the RCTC approved ACE Grade Crossing Priority List (see attached). The CPUC
award is $5,000,000 so the RCTC staff recommendation is to award $500,000.
Transfer of Funding
The RCTC funding policy approved in September for grade separation projects is
subject to the availability of funds. RCTC Staff has identified $500,000 in
uncommitted federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds resulting from an
increase in actual receipts over original estimates. Eligible projects for STP funding
include, but are not limited to, safety construction activities, hazard elimination and
rail -highway crossings, and transportation enhancements.
The CPUC requires the "local match" be a non-federal funding source. In order to
facilitate the allocation, RCTC staff is recommending a "sw ap" of STP for rail LTF
funds by transferring $500,000 of STP to the Rail Program.
ATTACHMENT: City of Coachella Avenue 50 Grant Application, RCTC Approved
Grade Crossing Priority List
Administration
Animal Control
Building
1515 SIXTH STREET COACHELLA, CA 92236 City Clerk
City Council
Fax: (760) 398-8117 Code Enforcement 398-+1978
Economic Develop. 398-5110
Engineering 398-5744
Finance 398-3502
Fire 398-8895
February 8, 2002
Riverside County Transportation
Attn: Stephanie Wiggins
3560 University Avenue, Suite 100
Riverside, CA. 92501
RE: RCTC CPUC Sec. 190 10% Local Match Request
Dear Ladies & Gentlemen:
398-3502 Grants 398-5110
398-4978 Housing 398-5110
398-3002 Personnel 398-3502
398-3502 Planning 398-3102
391-5009 Public Works 398-5744
Recreation 398-3502
Riverside Sheriffs Office 863-8990
Sanitary 391-5008
Senior Svs. 398-0104
Utilities 398-2702
0 8398
112002
TRANN Tf lM! eoN
Da
Attached is the City of Coachella application for the 10% local share of the Avenue 50 Grade
Separation of the Union Pacific Railroad. The application includes the PUC Application,
Railroad Agreement, and State Grade Separation Fund Agreement. Also attached is the cost
estimate for the project.
The Avenue 50 Grade Separation project has received bids and the City will apply for
supplement allocation from the PUC funding to $5 million.
If you have any further questions, please contact me at (760) 398-5744.
Sincerely,
Director of Public Works
RCTC CPUC Sec 190 10% Local Match Request
Form
Purpose
Project
Types
Steps
r1Uspor1atfo,, kjommissiors
To support successful CPUC Section 190 Grade Separation projects that are included in
the RCTC approved ACE Grade Crossing Priority List by funding the 10% local share
match requirement of the CPUC, if funding sources are available. (This policy was
approved by RCTC on September 10. 2001.1
Eligible grade separation projects must:
1) Have received CPUC Section 190 funds; and
2) Be on the RCTC approved ACE Grade Crossing Priority List.
1. Complete this form.
Return this form and supporting documents to RCTC via fax or mail, attention
Stephanie Wiggins
- Include with this form the local agency's CPUC Nomination Application, and proof of
award of CPUC Section 190 funds, and proof of other funding commitments.
RCTC Fax (909) 787-7920
Section r . Pra'ect Title and Lead -A. enn information
Cate Submitted:
1. Project Lead Agency: City of Coachella
2a. Project Title: Avenue 50 Grade Separation
2b. Total Project Costs: $9,215,387
3
Project Limits:
(State cross streets. Please indicate whether the project proposes to construct an underpass,
overpass, or eliminate a current crossing)
Western terminus is Harrison Street to 900' east of existing Dates Lane.
The project is an overpass and will eliminate two existing grade crossings
(Ave. 50 and Fifth Street)
4a.
4
Section B: Project Funding Information
State amni_ints in (OOOs of dollars)
Fund Type
(City, CPUC, CMAQ etc.
City/RDA
CPUC
Specify
Year
Eng.
Cost
Cost
1996-2001
2001-2003
UPRR
RCTC
City/RDA
2002-2003
850
170
1900
Cons.
Cost
Fund
Total
2750
4830
5000
155
430
2001-2002
2001-2003
315
625
585
625
Fund Totals:
RCTC 10% local share
match of CPUC Sec 190
Requested
1495
1900
5885
9275
625
625
sent by: Lu KING;
COST SUMMARY 217102
CITY OF COACHELLA
50TH AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION
218102 11:10
RIGHT OF WAY ALLOWANCE:
TOTAL RIGHT OF WAY COST: $1,783,700
LESS CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS: $60,725
NET RIGHT OF WAY COST:
ENGINEERING COSTS:
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING: $850,000
RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION COSTS: 155,000
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING: 5455,000
TOTAL ENGINEERING COST:
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
WORK BY CONTRACTOR:
DRIDOC CONSTRUCTION: RZ,464,7ia
HIGHWAY APPROACHES & CONNECTIONS: 12,640,885
UTILITY RELOCATION: $606,265
TOTAL WORK BY CONTRACTOR
WORK BY OTHERS:
RAILROAD WORK
TOTAL WORK BY OTHERS:
5155,717
$5,601,541
$155,717
SUBTOTAL - CONSTRUCTION: 55,757,255
CONTINGENCIES: 10% 1575,700
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST:
TOTAL PROJECT COST:
$1,722,975
1,390,000
$6332,968
$9,445,933
ATTACHMENT A: RCTC ACE Trade Corridor Grade Crossing Priority List, March 2001
ii
Rail Line Cross Street
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) 3rd St
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Iowa Av
Jurisdiction
Riverside
Overall
Weighted
Score
4260
Priority Group
1
Riverside
3880
UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 48/ Dillon Rd
Indio/Coachella
3775
1
1
BNSF (SB SUB) McKinley St
BNSF (SB SUB) Magnolia Av
Corona
Riverside County
3600
3600
UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 50
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Chicago Av
Coachella
Riverside
3500
3440
UP (LA SUB) Streeter Av
Riverside
3000
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Spruce St
Riverside
3180
UP (LA SUB) Magnolia Av
UP (LA SUB) Riverside Av
NSF (60 SUB) Mary St
Riverside
Riverside
Riverside
3100
1
1
1
1'
1
1
3060
2
3320
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Columbia Av
Riverside
2940
BNSF & UP (RIV) Cridge St
UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 52
Riverside
2820
Coachella
2750
2'
2
2
BNSF (SB SUB) Auto Center Dr
Corona
UP (YUMA MAIN) Sunset Av
Banning
2738
2
2675
UP (LA SUB) Jurupa Rd
Riverside County
2650
BNSF (SB SUB) Washington St
Riverside
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Center St
Riverside County
2520
2500
2
2
2
3
UP (YUMA MAIN)
UP (LA SUB)
Hargrave St
Brockton Av
Banning
Riverside
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Kansas Av
BNSF (SB SUB) Tyler St
Riverside
Riverside
NSF (SB SUB) Adams St
Riverside
2500
2480
2480
3
2460
3
2400
BNSF (SB SUB) Madison St
Riverside
2240
3
3
UP (YUMA MAIN) San Timoteo Canyon Rd
UP (YUMA MAIN) Califomia Av
Calimesa
2225
Beaumont
2200
3
3
BNSF (SB SUB) Smith Av
Corona
2113
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) 7th St
Riverside
2000
BNSF (SB SUB) Railroad St
UP (YUMA MAIN) Broadway
Corona
1975
Riverside County
1950
BNSF (SB SUB) Pierce St
BNSF (SB SUB) Buchanan St
BNSF (SB SUB) Joy St
Riverside
1885
Riverside
1880
Corona
1850
UP (LA SUB) Palm Av
BNSF (SB SUB) Jackson St
Riverside
1820
Riverside
1755
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
UP (YUMA MAIN) 22nd St
Banning
Riverside
1750
BNSF (SB SUB) Harrison St
BNSF (SB SUB) Jefferson St
BNSF (SB SUB) Cote St
1740
Riverside
1740
4
4
4
Corona
1713
4
UP (LA SUB) Bellegrave Av
UP (LA SUB) Clay St
Riverside County
Riverside County
1700
4
1700
4
UP (YUMA MAIN) Pennsylvania Av
Beaumont
1667
UP (LA SUB) Rutile St
Riverside County
1650
4
4
UP (YUMA MAIN) San Gorgonio Av
UP (YUMA MAIN) Airport Road
Banning
1625
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Main St
BNSF (SB 81113) Gibson St
BNSF (SB SUB) Jane St
Riverside County
Riverside County
1450
1350
4
4
4
Riverside
1220
4
Riverside
UP (YUMA MAIN) Viele Av
Beaumont
1200
1133
4
4
BNSF (SB SUB) Sheridan St
Corona
1125
4
UP (LA SUB) Panorama Rd
Riverside
1060
4
BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Palmyrita Av
Riverside
1020
4
UP (LA SUB) Mountain View Av
Riverside
1000
5
UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 66
UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 54
UP (YUMA MAIN) Apache Trail
Riverside County
950
5
Coachella
825
5
Riverside County
800
5
BNSF (SB SUB) Radio Rd
Corona
563
5
= Per RCTRC March 2001
AGENDA ITEM 11
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
May 8, 2002
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Plans and Programs Committee
Shirley Medina, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Reprogramming of Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA)
Funds
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to approve reprogramming of TEA funds in the
amount of $572,000 by spreading the funds evenly amongst 23 projects approved
in the last TEA call for projects.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The City of Palm Desert has notified us that they are unable to construct a project
that was approved for TEA funding in the amount of $572,000 due to a much
larger capital project being planned at the same location. Therefore, staff brought
this item to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for discussion and
recommendation on how to reprogram the funds.
The TAC recommended reprogramming the $572,000 by spreading the amount
evenly amongst all of the projects that were funded in the last call for projects
approved by the Commission on January 12, 2000. Each of the local agencies
were required to provide additional local match for their approved TEA project as
part of the Commission's action to fund as many projects as possible. The
reprogramming will help decrease that additional local match requirement. In
addition, reprogramming the funds to current projects will help the delivery of
projects and meet AB 1012 "Use It or Lose It" requirements.
Report Print Date
Tuesday, April 16, 2002
S ummary Information:
Total Numberof Projects: 23
RTIP Lump Sum PPNO#: RIV62046
2001 RTIP Sheet #: LOCAL 61
Lead
ID# Agency
Fti VJWI :. T_EAI
815 Blythe
819 Calimesa
809 Cathedral City
821
820
802
811
816
822
823
817
808 Norco
Co rona
Carona
Hemet
Indian Wells
Indio
Lake Elsinore
Mo reno Wiley
Murrieta
812 Palm Springs
813
Penis
803 Rancho Mira.e
814 Rancho Mirage
818 Riverside
824
806
810
804
807
Riverside
Rlverside
Riverside County
Riverside County
San Jacinto
825 Temecula
Total Number of TEA21 TEA Projects:
Project
Type
Local
Local
Local
Local
Local
Local
Local
Local
Local
Local
Lo cal
Local
Local
Local
Local
Local
Lo cal
Lo cal
Local
Project Summary Information
Project Description
E, Hobsonway Pedestrian Improvements
I--10 Fwy Landscaping, County Line Road - Singleton Road
Ramon Road Corridor Improvements
Landscape Beautification at SR91/Main Street IC Ramps
Main Street Scenic Corridor Beautification
State Street Multi -Use Bicycle & Pedestrian Path
Deep Canyon Channel Crossing Bicycle Bridge
Indio Boule vard Enhancements from Jeffers on St to SR 111 - Landscaping and Sidew alks
Outlet Channel Pedestrian & Bicycle Corridor (Graham Ave to S ummer Ave)
Aqueduct Bike Trail
Landscape/Bea utification Murrieta Hot Springs Rd (From Madison Ave to 1-215 IC)
Santa Ana River Tra il -M issing LlnklNorco
Gene Autry Trail/Ramo n Ro ad Median Islands Landscaping
Restoration of Historic Sante Fe Railroad Depot
H 111 Meanderin Blke•ath & La ncscapino
Hwy 111 Median Islands Landsca ping & Beautification
Historic Victoria Parkway Resoration Project
SR91 Fwy/Pierce Street IC Landscaping _
University Ave Sireetscape Enhancements
Local 1-10/Monterey & Washington IC Landscaping & Beautification
Local
Local
Local
23
SR60 & 1-15 IC Landscaping & Scenic Beautification
Sate Street Sidewa lk Improvements
Murrieta Creek Multi -Purpose Trail
T otal Programmed Amount: $13,383,995
Total Previ ous Adjusted
Project Programed Programed
Cost Amount Amo unt
472: art ... ti.. . 1: PT
8201,571
c atria Ourray
rrrurspo rtarian COMYWXSI4elt
$250,400
$300,000
$831.000
$380,000
$871,000
$798,000
6392,196
51.830,000
$527,800
$1,300,000
6659,040
5500,000
5629.000
$431,000
$510,600
$765,000
$1.000,000
5400,000
$1,100,000
$831,000
$2,574,000
$350,000
$1,500,000
$176,000
$253,000
5286,000
8265 ,590
$311,571
$314,000 5336,414
6638,000
8494,000
6312,000
51.455,000
6412.000
$663,571
$519,571
$337 571
51,480,571
6437,571
$1,000,000 $1,025,571
5555,000
$405,000
$496,000
$341,000
$316,000
$328,000
5486,000
$314,000
$476,000
$682,000
$1,595,000
$264,000
61,214 ,000
$580,571
$430.571
6521,571
$366.671
$341,571
$353,571
$511,571
8339,571
$501,571
$707,571
$1,620,571
$289,571
$1,239,571
$13,383,995
Adjusted
Match
Adj usted
Match
Y
$48,429 19.37%
$34,410 11,47 %
$519,429 62.51 %
543,586 11.47%
$207,429 23.82%
6278,429 34,89%
$54,625 13.93%
$349,429 19 .09%
$90,229 17.10%
$274,429 21.11%
678,469 11.91%
$69,429 13 .89 %,
17 .08%
107,429
$64,429 14:95%
$169,029
6411,429
$488,429
33.10 %.
53.78%
48.84%
$60,429 16 .11%
$598,429
$123,429
6953,429
54 .40 %
14 .85°,
37.04%
$60,429 17.27%
5260,429 17.36 %
Note: The adjusted programming amounts reflect the removal of Palm Desert's 1-10/Monterey Ave. TEA Project ($572,000) and distributed among all projects. Calimesa and Corona 91/Main Street kept at
11.47% match.